Call the meeting of the St.

Paul City Council to order.

Roll call, please.

Coleman.

Here.

Johnson.

Joast.

Here.

Kim.

Here.

Yang.

Here.

Bowie.

Here.

Council President Naker.

Here.

Six present one absent, that being Councilmember Johnson, and she is excused.

Want to take a moment to welcome everyone to our city council meeting today.

Thank you all so much for coming.

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.

Consent agenda items four through 14 are before you for your consideration.

And my understanding is that item 14 is being pulled for separate consideration.

Is there anything else to be taken off of consent?

Not seeing anything, I'll take a motion from Vice President Kim for the balance of the consent agenda.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

Six in favor, none opposed, the resolution or the consent agenda is adopted as amended.

Item number 14 is resolution 26-215, defending the U.S.

Constitution and the rule of law.

Councilmember Yang.

Thank you, Council President.

I'm going to move to the podium.

Hi, everybody.

Along with members of Common Common Cause Minnesota and Indivisible Twin Cities.

So come on up and join me here.

Paul City Council acknowledges the unconstitutional consolidation of power in the executive branch by executive orders and willful misdeeds such as, but not limited to the revocation of birthright citizenship, freezing of federal spending approved by Congress, rescission of appropriated funds, shattering of federal agencies, demonstrating a pattern of usurping the duties of the legislative branch, violating due process rights of the persons of the United States, interfering with and threatening free enterprise and academic freedom, infringing upon and revoking civil service protections for federal employees, threatening individuals with deportation, investigation andor prosecution based on political views, detaining individuals based on racial or ethnic criteria alone, ignoring or disobeying judicial mandates, politicizing law enforcement and the military, and violating the Possi Comitatis Act, imposing import taxes, and engaging in trade agreements without congressional authorization, apprehending members of the press, and generally exhibiting contempt for the separation of powers, freedom of speech, and equal justice under the law, and whereas the Minnesota Attorney General's office has filed multiple lawsuits against specific executive orders and other abuses of power, and whereas each member of the St.

Paul City Council swears on an oath to the U.S.

Constitution and thus has a duty to support, protect, and defend the U.S.

Constitution and the rights of residents within their jurisdiction that are being harmed by violations of the U.S.

Constitution, therefore, be it resolved that we, the St.

Paul City Council, declare our support for the role of the United States Congress as a co-equal partner of three in our constitutional federal republic, support and encourage the congressional delegation of Minnesota to lead our colleagues to stand up and reclaim their constitutional duty to be an equal partner in the administration of the U.S.

government to work hand in hand with the judicial branch to ensure that the U.S.

Constitution is not violated by the executive branch and to ensure that illegal or unconstitutional actions that have occurred are overturned, and also that we direct that this resolution be forwarded to the office of each member of the Minnesota congressional delegation, and that will be something that my office takes care of.

And so with that, I would like to hand over the mic to Gary and Rebecca.

Welcome up.

Thank you.

Council President Naker, Vice President Kim, Council members.

My name is Gary Feifield.

I'm a constituent of Ward 3.

I want to thank Council members Yang and Johnson for authoring this important resolution.

The second paragraph of our Declaration of Independence states, quote, governments are instituted among men, deriving their powers from the consent of the governed.

Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it.

We have no desire to abolish our government, but we surely wish to alter its behavior.

The declaration goes on to list abuses and usurpations, including keeping among us in times of peace, standing armies, protecting them from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states, cutting off our trade with all parts of the world, imposing taxes on us without our consent, exciting domestic insurrections amongst us.

These abuses and others mirror those in the resolution before you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Welcome.

Thank you.

Thank you for inviting us here today.

My name is Rebecca Larson.

I am one of the co-leaders of Indivisible Twin Cities, a volunteer-led chapter of the pro-democracy and anti-authoritarian movement that is called Indivisible.

Until a year ago, I was a resident of St.

Paul, but I made the brave move to cross the river into Minneapolis.

So I'm speaking today as a leader of the pro-democracy movement.

Indivisible Twin Cities has been employing a variety of tactics during this time of occupation by ICE in our communities, but also over the past year, especially, as Trump and his regime have escalated their brutal and cruel tactics.

All that we do is in the interest of saving what is left of our fledgling democracy.

This means organizing protests such as No Kings, inviting people to be civically engaged, and trying when it's necessary to send the word to our elected officials at all levels that when they stand up for our democracy and against the authoritarians running our federal government, that we the people will stand with you.

Some tactics will be labeled performative.

People question whether protests matter, whether strongly worded letters matter, or sit-ins at target, for example.

But our firmly held belief is that nonviolent peaceful movements sustained for as long as it takes are the only way to overturn authoritarian governments as we have seen throughout history and around the world.

We believe every time an elected official shows courage and resolve, and people see it, it gives them courage and resolve.

And right now, courage and resolve are what we all need.

So thank you for considering this proposal to stand up for our democracy and our constitution.

Thank you for your consideration.

Thank you very much.

Can I just add one thing?

Um, another supporting organization for this is Common Cause Minnesota.

Anastasia Belladona Carrera was planning to be here to speak, but she's tied up at the Capitol with negotiations that our national organization asked her to participate in around the Metro surge and election issues.

So she sends her regrets and support for this resolution.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you both so much.

And um, with that, I will close by saying that Gary and Rebecca was very moved by what you both said that yes, these are words on paper, but these are also values, and that this is a body that can convey to other government entities about where we stand in fighting fascism and protecting our communities.

And I still remember how it feels to sit in in where you are now on the benches in the council chambers here when I wasn't somebody who was a decision maker at the table.

And it mattered to me what my leaders believed in and where they stand.

And so to me, I just um want people to know that those of you who are so brave, who um are putting in time to be out there in the streets in fighting against ICE and standing up for our communities.

I see you.

I'm here in solidarity with you.

Gosh, I feel like every single time we have a council meeting now.

My tears are always falling.

Um, because this is something that is so personal to me.

Um, and if any of you have resolutions that you want to bring forward, please know that the doors to my office are open, and I'm open to always reading them and consider and bringing them forward to the council here because our collective work to collective work together is how we will be fascism, and I believe that we will prevail.

Thank you.

Thank you so much, Ms.

Yang, for your powerful words and also to our speakers.

Really appreciate you being here and bring this forward.

Um, I'll take that as a motion in support uh to approve.

Is there any further discussion of the motion?

Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

Six in favor, non-opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

Item number 15 is resolution 25-1914 outlining the city's 2026 legislative agenda.

This was laid over from January 21st.

All right, so we have had this presented to us at policy committee a number of times, and uh according to our schedule laid out in ordinance.

We want to make sure we adopt our legislative agenda ahead of the start of the legislative session, which begins next Tuesday.

Um, so welcome uh Ms.

O'Rourke, day, I don't know, five and a half, whatever it is, um, to uh share our legislative agenda, which I think has had some changes and some input since last week, which is what we were hoping for.

Uh thank you, Council President, and Council members.

My name is Jennifer Rurk.

I'm the director of government relations here at the city, and you write it as day six, I think.

Um you have before you the 2026 legislative top priorities uh summary and document along with the support items.

You've seen similar uh versions like we talked about, or you described, I believe uh assistant mayors Nick Stu Molanger and then Nucle Vang presented at the council on the 21st.

We have made some additions from the discussion of last week and then some input from both the mayor and your office.

I'll go through those quickly.

Uh we updated the federal disruption and impacts language to uh just make some more additions and some clarifications.

It's longer.

Minneapolis had adopted something similar last week, so we thought it would make sense to move in that direction.

We added two additions to the public safety section, both to uh extend look for securing additional funding for programming that already exists within the police department, one around non-fatal shooting, and one around uh juvenile trades program that the police department runs.

And then finally, we made an addition, excuse me, two finals.

Uh one coming from your office, Council President, dealing with um, I'll just read it, supporting state allocations to provide mitigation funds to businesses, nonprofits, and other community serving entities adversely impacted by transportation and min dot street reconstruction projects.

Um in last legislative session, there was something done on the east side.

I think it was Payne Avenue, and uh I know Robert Street is one that you highlighted for our office, but if nothing else, this sends a good message to MINDAT to move the projects along and to account for all of the just added pressures that is on community and businesses.

And then finally, uh we did make an addition around the land value tax uh for um the discussion we had last week with you, council um council member Coleman.

Thanks so much.

And Ms.

O'Wark, I know there had been a question about our bonding priorities and the the dollar amounts, which I think were not on the last version.

Have those been added, or is there more detail you can provide?

That's right, madam chair.

We will have that in our final document when we take it to print.

Um I can read those off to you as they were.

I went and looked at uh the legislation that was introduced in 2025.

So uh it could be that there are some uh increases as project costs go up and whatnot, but I'll read them off quickly.

Uh for the Mississippi River Learning Center, that project comes in at 10 million dollars.

They are asking of of the state.

For Comozo Big Cat exhibit renovation, uh, that is 20 million.

Randolph Avenue Bridge reconstruction is 3.5 million.

The Saints Ball Park Stadium upgrades and improvements is 8 million.

And um we do not have a number yet on the historic walnut steps off of Summit Avenue and the Kellogg Avenue Bridge reconstruction.

That legislation was introduced with a blank appropriation, which means uh we'd be presenting that if we get a hearing.

Great.

Thanks so much, Ms.

Rourke.

Looking to my colleagues to see if there are any questions or comments.

Um, Vice President Kim and then Vice President Kim.

It was a it was a hair, not a hand.

Well um, I really appreciate this document.

I think it's really clear what our council what the priorities of the city are, and I see you know, priorities across the city as well.

I guess my ask to you as our new IGR director is how can we help?

Uh thank you for the question, uh, council member.

At the last organization meeting, we talked about ways to connect with your offices about what your priorities and obviously you know projects in your district are.

I think that's it's best suited for the city if we're able to use all of our legislative relationships up there with the delegations.

So I'll be reaching out uh tomorrow and working to set up time with all of you if phone call if nothing else, and uh just figure out ways to plug more of you in at the Capitol.

Thank you for that.

Thanks for the question, Vice President.

We did talk a little bit about how being strategically involved at the outset rather than kind of last minute hearing that there's a hearing is really helpful, and we want to be there to support the administration and our whole city on this.

So thank you for the question.

Any other uh comments?

Otherwise, I will take a motion from Ms.

Bowie to approve.

All right, all in favor say aye.

Aye, all opposed.

Six in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

Item number six.

I get them.

Oh sorry.

Okay.

Item number sixteen is resolution 26-58, amending appendix A2 of the administrative code relating to council committees.

This was laid over from January 28th.

And I believe we have a brief staff report from Mr.

Greenfield, our chief policy officer.

Welcome up.

Thank you, Council President.

Let me just pull this up and get started.

It's already up.

I I pulled it up for you.

Oh, yeah, it looks like it's okay.

So I'm here today to talk about um, I believe there's a version two, so maybe we should move the version two first, put that before the orange.

Can you just give a brief what's in the version?

Maybe just tell us what's in version.

That's fine.

Okay.

Uh resolution 25-58 is there is a version two posted, and so I'm just gonna walk through kind of um the intent behind the changes and kind of um describe briefly um what uh section um is attempting to do.

That what this uh resolution is doing is amending an appendix to the administrative code that pertains to our city council committees.

Um it's inherent in our council's legislative authority to uh establish these committees and um use these committees as is provided in the existing appendix to allow for the efficient operation of the legislative branch of the city government.

Um we intend to you know make these changes to allow for more structured space to focus our policy discussions, allow for stakeholder engagement and expert input.

Um the changes also um made into the appendix are also technical in nature and reflect current practices of city council committees.

And so I would just want to uh you know specially thank uh Greg Wiener for his appreciation for his work on um you know giving feedback about legislatar practices and specific um ways that you know the city council has evolved its operations to then put this into rules.

So I just wanted to highlight that contribution there.

Uh section one of 25-58 in the appendix pertains to the council committees that are named.

Um so the purpose of these changes to is to reflect current council practices, separate the operations committee and the policy committee, which is actually known as the organizational committee and legistar, and to allow for better consistency in public materials.

So if you look at the current text of the A2 appendix, you'll see the following listed committees in italics.

Uh we have finance and budget, city operations, community and economic development, audit committee, and public safety and community wellness committee.

Um so the proposed changes and nomenclature are to the budget council operations, which will be newly created, but have the past practices of council of the organizational committee, policy committee, audit committee, and public safety committee.

Section one paragraph B pertains to the president of the council's uh authority related to council committees.

Um the proposed language is to empower the president of the council with the authority to schedule the dates and times for regular committee meetings, eliminate or consolidate committees with the consent of majority of council, which also can happen via amendment to this appendix.

Ensure effective operation of committee meetings, which includes the preparation of an agenda to outline all matters for consideration, applying and enforcing the rules of city council as far as they are applicable internal to those meetings, and providing authorization to a committee chair to hold a meeting outside of the city council chamber or regularly scheduled meeting place or incur any expense related to a committee meeting.

Section two makes mostly technical changes to committee membership to provide that every member of the city council shall serve as a member of every standing committee unless otherwise specified by resolution.

Um that last clause applies to the audit committee.

More uh technical changes in sections three, four, and six of the A2 appendix.

Um outdated language regarding referral and recommendation process is stricken from the A2 appendix.

Um this is kind of a vestigial function of when committees existed to take up specific legislative action and make recommendations on them.

We don't have the capacity in legislatar, nor do we take official action on ordinances or anything that would require full council authority in our committees.

So the stricken language, thanks to Greg's help and the new language is intended to reflect the the operating principle that currently exists for the city council, which is that committees serve as working groups and develop proposals, but they themselves are not responsible for referral and recommendation of items by themselves.

This doesn't apply to HRA, this doesn't apply to you know those, you know, that that that domain where HRA items then come before council.

This is specific to the standing committees that we've established as the city council.

Section four and six are mostly technical changes.

Um the process remains the same regarding amendments to the A2 appendix and a technical change to incorporate um the director of council operations.

Section five specifies the committee functions in particular.

Um I'm not gonna go into detail what these lists are, but the budget committee functions are specified, the policy uh committee functions are specified, um, and again, this is meant to identify that we're reviewing and developing legislation to move forward as a city council, not um taking in specific items and uh attaching a referral of whether it should be passed or not passed or anything like a state legislative process.

Finally, um, while it has existed in other domains and under other names, we are creating a council operations committee.

Um this was previously held under the description of the policy committee duties and has been titled in Legistar as the organizational committee.

Um so instead we are creating a separate committee known as council operations or you know, J dates, and that would allow for essentially the council's operations to be separated from policy development so that if you know the director wants to provide quarterly updates or if other members wants to provide updates on the other work that they are doing, that can be centralized and focused on that committee.

And then that way with adopting this appendix, we can then reflect that practice with our publicly noticed materials.

And then finally, technical changes to the audit committee and public safety.

Any questions?

Thanks so much, Mr.

Greenfield.

Appreciate the uh staff report questions for my colleagues.

Not seeing any.

Thank you so much.

Um and this is just a resolution, so it's before us for uh approval.

Uh sorry, I would move version two.

Um, so that's one we'll be taking a vote on.

Is there any discussion of the motion?

See none, all in favor say aye.

Hi, all opposed.

Six in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted as amended.

Item number 17 is resolution public hearing 26-37, establishing the festivals and events security credit, and the public hearing was closed and it was laid over on February 4th.

So this is not a public hearing.

No.

Okay.

Um, so uh I would look to Ms.

Bowie to uh to start this conversation.

We began this discussion last week with the description of um a version two, which is in Legistar.

Um, and I know Councilmember Bowie has been doing some work on another version.

So thank you so much, Council President.

And yes, I um I believe the procedure would be for me to motion to bring forth a version three.

Um so I will motion for us to bring forth a version three so then I can talk about it.

So it was if I just to clarify, you'd be moving approval of version three.

So you can move and then I would say have discussion and then the vote, like you can discuss it before the vote, and then the vote is to say yes or no to it.

Thank you.

Okay.

Perfect.

So um I will be moving uh a version three.

I know some of you all had a chance to discuss it with me.

Um, I'm just going to also read it and just give some framework for it for people who have questions.

We do have um interim director Melanie McMahon and also economic development director, Jimmy Lloyd.

Um, I believe I also invited um SPPD here if there's any questions from the council um for those two departments.

Uh, but essentially with version three, uh the the distinction I want to make before I even read the resolution is that this is a resolution to actually advance a policy vision to support and stabilize our community events and festivals.

Um, also to promote our events that bring vitality to our city.

Um, and also the goal of this resolution is to streamline and create a centralized billing system to make it easier for our event organizers to do business and host festivals here in St.

Paul.

We know we've talked about this early on, um, and these are these are evolving conversations.

Uh, but this policy particularly is just authorizing and um determining which department is more appropriate um to be able to advance not only our policy goals but also administer these funds.

Um, I also just want to say I really do appreciate all the work that has gone into it.

Um, Council President Neaker, I know the versions, both the version one and version two, your staff and me, and you have um put a lot of work with trying to figure out a solution, and we heard loud and clear from community members that security costs has been the largest barrier for them to actually scale um their festivals, and we're even hearing um from event festivals this year that can no longer operate um and have to take a pause.

Um, so we do know the economic challenges.

Um, I do want to say the clear contrast um between these versions um two and three is uh solely just which department is authorized to reduce the fees, which which departments authorized to create this reimbursement function.

And when I think about whose role it is to actually implement our policy goals and to support the stabilization of these free and open community festivals, it's really crystal clear to me that this is the appropriate that planning and economic development is appropriate, um, will house for it.

They are a department that already administers um tens of millions of dollars um to not only businesses, but they've also our experience with um um delivering funds to events and festivals that we have seen through our STAR grant, um, and they can actually treat this uh treat our our partners and event organizers as the small business that they are.

And as we are aware, um our festivals generate uh incredible amount of revenue for our city and serve as a cultural attraction for um our neighborhoods and attract visitors, thousands of visitors all across the country.

And we see that as revenue loss.

And also not only as revenue, but really a decline in our cultural identity and community belonging.

And you know, for someone who grew up in Rondo and remember the experience of going to a Rondo Days parade or being in a Rondo Days parade and going to Ronda Days, and that was like the highlight of my summer.

You know, I think it's incredible and urgent for us to make sure that we're investing in our departments are investing into it.

So I'm going to just read the resolution just because you know I do think for the public, it will be important for them to know.

So the title will still remain as events and festivals, but whereas, in response to concerns from event organizers about rising security costs, the St.

Paul City Council allocated 155,000 in the 2026 budget to support public safety services for a limited number of festivals and events.

Whereas community festivals and events play a vital role in strengthening social bonds by bringing residents together across diverse backgrounds while also contributing to the local economy by attracting visitors, supporting small businesses, and creating temporary employment opportunities.

Whereas such events serve as an important expression of cultural heritage, celebrating the unique traditions and identities within communities, while fostering civic pride and enhancing the city's reputation by showcasing its showcasing its creativity, diversity, and community spirit.

Whereas the St.

Paul City Council recognize both the benefits and associated costs of activating public spaces through festivals and events and seeks to eliminate security costs for a limited number of eligible organizers by funding such services through a dedicated allocation, now therefore it be resolved that the city council hereby takes the following action.

So there is about seven actions that we are directing in this resolution.

The first action is transferring the allocated 155,000 to the planning and economic development department.

We have received their accounting numbers.

So if there are questions, particularly around like the financial note, I do want to say we do have that information.

That 155K will be directed to eligible city service costs associated with festivals and events.

The second direction in this resolution is to authorize the PED to administer a reduction to city department expenses through reimbursement of eligible city expenses, an amount to not exceed 7,000.

So we're still going to keep that maximum reimbursement per event at 7,000, so that we remains the same.

And it reads first come, first serve, and is subject to fund availability.

So once the funds run out, that's it.

The third thing we're intending to do with this policy is to establish that reimbursements shall apply only to city departments' build expenses.

So this will not be a direct payout or a check directly to the organization that we see that in the city that this is a public service cost.

We want to use these funds to reduce the eternal funds that exist throughout the department.

And we list the departments in the resolution as police, security costs, parks and rec, public works, department of safety inspection, and even fire and any other eligible city department related costs.

This also excludes any permit application fees.

So like for people who may be wondering, when you apply for a traffic control permit and for a community festival, you pay 200.

And then you get your bill from SPPD in terms of what that cost is related to police.

So this will just reimburse that that cost that extends from the application.

So you still will be paying, you still will be required to pay that application, but that would not be reimbursed.

The fourth thing this will do is uh limit the eligibility for reimbursements to festivals, meeting based off the criteria that we talked about last year, uh, which includes hosting organizations or organizations to be hosted and based in St.

Paul.

Um it must take place in city limits.

The festival must be free and open to the public and free of all participants.

The festival event must be held in St.

Paul for at least five years or take place in the area of concentrated poverty.

And that was really important for us because we do want to set precedence to where for festivals that you know are successful and carrying on, we want them to be eligible for these funds as well.

And the last two things, um, last but not least is uh directing um PED or the design in this case would be the economic development director team uh to require event organizers to submit documentation of city invoices.

So this requirement basically spells out that our verification process will um uh require for the event festival organizers to basically send their invoices.

So all city related expenses needs to be sent to this department.

The other requirement that we are asking from um PED is to provide an annual written report to council.

Um this is different than what we had asked from SPPD, which the version two was a quarterly.

This one is just a one-time annual report.

It includes the number of festivals that receive their reimbursement, so we'll just have validation of that.

And then also the total amount that's been reimbursed, the total amount of expenses that's been billed to those events, as well as a categorization of costs.

So we can just have a clear picture of what costs that each department um bills, and then uh the remaining balance um for all of those accounts.

And so the last um bullet point is really just authorizing and directing PED to you know develop this internal administrative procedure.

Um, you know, as policymakers, I'm very clear about my role is not I'm not operator, I don't create programs.

Um, you know, in my before I was in the council, I worked in nonprofits.

I love creating programs, but in this um in this um policy go here, it's important that you know we uh are in conversation and collaboration with that department and really you know have strong confidence in the staff, particularly to you know help them whether it's policy or budget-wise to make sure that they can get this done.

So if people have other questions, you know, obviously in terms of uh PED's capacity, I think those questions should be directed to our director.

So thanks so much, Ms.

Bowie, for that helpful um description of the proposal.

Um is there any discussion of the motion or any questions from my colleagues?

Ms.

Jost.

I just have a few comments.

Um thank you, Councilman Bowie and to Council President Naker for your work on this.

I think I just wanted to point out a few things that are different between the version that you brought forth in this version, um, and that I have some questions and just some concerns about the I think the language around, I mean, what we're trying to do here is provide money for events and festivals, um, especially to be able to help alleviate the security costs, which is their largest cost.

You know, I think Grandle Day, for example, is like a $90,000 security cost.

And so the way that this was intended to function originally was as a credit to that cost because that's the largest cost that we have.

You know what the the permits I can't imagine are quite that expensive, and so this is a simple way to do that.

Um, the only like kind of questions or concerns I have are around some of the language around seeking to eliminate police security costs.

I just don't want our events and festival organizers to get the idea that we're gonna be eliminating security costs because those are tens of thousands of dollars.

We only have 155,000 dollars and are aiming to give this to 20 or so events and festivals.

Um, I think the difference here too is the difference between what would be a security credit and the language used here is a dedicated allocation.

And so to me, before this was gonna just you know, credit their bill so that they don't have to pay the $7,000.

It seemed to be a little bit more simple administratively, but if we're now talking about certain eligible city service costs, which are listed here, um, does that what does that look like?

Does that mean then that when you know events and festival organizers apply for this that they'll have to, you know, submit some approved costs uh or approved um services?

Does that have to go through, you know, or you know, be that would have to require more coordination with other departments depending on what service that department's coming from.

I'm just it's not clear to me exactly what the administrative work would look like for that.

It seems to be more than the um original proposal of the uh of the credit, and then just you know, having to develop an internal procedure in PED to do this.

Um, I think I'd want a little bit more clarity about what that would look like or if that's possible.

Um so I'm generally uh supportive of us trying to find a way to administer this that's easy for the people that are applying for it, easy for our departments.

Um I just don't know that we're quite there yet with everything that's in front of us, but again, I appreciate the the work that's going forward.

But I um just have those questions, and so I don't know if Director McMahon can help answer any of those.

Yeah, welcome up, Director.

Thanks for being here.

Of course, Council President, Councilmember Joe.

Um, just wanting to start by acknowledging that we all have a shared value and appreciation for our events and festivals and for everything they do in our community as community building events and within our within our neighborhoods.

Um specifically, Councilmember Joseph, I'm understanding your question.

It was on what it would take administratively within the department to do this.

Okay.

Um, well, currently, this is not something that was in PED as part of the 2026 budget, right?

So we've got our 2026 budget, we have our economic development team, and we've got our plans, programs, and priorities for the year.

So we would be diverting some economic development staff in order to create and administer this fund.

Um, a few different ways of administering the fund.

This um this envisions it as something in working with other city departments, as I understand for like a credit, um a credit down as to what those city departments would bill out.

Um, I think uh PED's newer to this conversation on the logistics of trying to operationalize it.

Um, and so I think we'd really have to do some work and work across and within other city departments to determine exactly just even from a technical perspective how that would work.

If it's a first come first serve basis on the applications, but the bills go out in a different order than the applications come in and so on.

What does that mean?

How do you reconcile that?

And then even within the billing system of if the money's in PED and then we are literally just transferring it to other city departments.

How does that how does that work logistically?

Is that the most efficient way, etc.?

That is something we would have to do some more work into it, looking and trying to figure out how we would operationalize this.

Okay.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Um, I think I'll just say the I'd be curious to like I don't know if Councilmember Wear, Councilmember Naker know anything about this, but uh, you know, what are the folks that are putting on these events and festivals?

Like, what is their feedback back on?

I mean, a process that isn't fully developed yet.

What is their feedback on that process?

If that's going to be easier for them, um, because that's I mean, that's another big goal.

We want this to be as easy as possible for for them to be able to navigate.

Um, thanks, Ms.

Jost.

I don't know that we have I don't know the I don't have that feedback.

I guess I to follow up on your questions.

I think director, it would be helpful to understand the process by which what would what would actually happen for an applicant applying for this um this fund if it were to be administered through PED.

How how would it work?

Sure.

Council President, Council members.

So we would establish an application and an application process, and we work internally to determine what that looks like.

We have different programs and they have different applications and application process depending on the unique needs of that program.

So we'd really look at the unique needs of this program, try and work with organizers to determine what their goals are and what their needs are, and develop an application and application process based off of that.

Um, our programs typically, and again, for the funds being public funds and needing to meet that public purpose, also wanting to ensure financial oversight and that the funds are used for the intended purpose.

A few different ways typically we work on a reimbursement basis.

And so they incur the cost, submit documentation of that, and we impurse based off of the costs, determining the eligible actual expenses within that.

Um, this is set up a little differently, right?

For a credit to the bill, and so we'd have to work, we'd have to work with finance, we'd have to work with the departments that send out those bills to understand when the bills are sent, when we get the credit to them, and again, the application process we'd want to ensure is distributed in equitable manner, that we're not picking winners and losers amongst event festivals, that we're not making a subjective decision and determination as to who gets the money.

And so, again, trying to reconcile the the application process with the actual disbursement process and any conflict that might occur then.

That might not, I apologize if that didn't answer your question.

I'm happy to provide follow-up.

Well, it it's just super quickly, Ms.

Bui.

So it sounds like there's you would be you would be essentially developing how this would work.

You would be creating the application and then developing the plan for how organizations would get whether they get reimbursed, whether the department gets reimbursed, you need to figure out those steps.

Council President, Council members, yes, we would have to this would be a new fund within PED.

So it's it similar to creating a new program, creating a new fund within PED.

So we'd have to establish it as such.

And again, um it not being part of the original 26 budget for us.

We would be working within the constraints of um what we have currently in the 26 budget to create and administer the fund.

Thank you, Ms.

Bowie.

Yeah, I I do appreciate the the questions.

I don't have any further questions.

I think it's really important that you know the what's before us is just basically a policy intention in terms of we frame the framework is this is our intention, this is the requirement, this is our goals.

Um a lot of these questions can also be figured out as they are building it.

If you know council decides to move forward and authorize these funds, I think this is also we're just seeing the foundation of like good government building and structure building to actually sustain art.

Um I think this is a step in the right direction to where you know if we're able to build the ship, maybe will um on how to actually stabilize our communities, then this is also the the building blocks for us in the the conversation for the 2027 budget around how we can expand and scale.

Um so I do think it's really important that we just don't get like stuck into the weeds because I do think and it is important to think about how we can get this money out the door because that is the urgent um point of this, but in terms of how our staff and how the PED team will actually create, you know, the the system to to get this money, you know, to write down the cost.

Um I have faith and confidence in it.

And if there is issues, then that is opportunities for the director to come back to either the commission or come back to the council, particularly around what policies are supports that they may need.

Um but I do know when I think about you know how much this is important to our event organizers, it's really important that we demonstrate that our city leaders are willing to take up the task and like help our community event organizers get you know lower their bills.

Um and I hear you, council um member Joast that you know this policy right here is not to eliminate um totally um um um police calls.

I do have policy and resolutions, um, particularly and have heard from um event organizers that that is the ass that they want that that is what they want council to do.

Um I think given the fact that you know this is just a very limited amount of funds, like we just need to be able to put intentions in place, um place uh uh policy direction and clarity around these dollars.

So um if we don't decide that it's PED and we want to go in a different route, I think we heard last council meeting loud and clear from um event organizers that they it has not been successful, you know, um working with police that they want to have a more centralized um partner at the city to work with.

So I do think it's most appropriate.

Um I do appreciate your transparency and your um um interim director McMahon in terms of you know trying to come up with some scenarios to make this work, but I really do think I think we could make this happen.

Um I would also like to just call on the vote um, you know, for it if people feel for feel comfortable moving forward, um, or if there is if there is um if people do have you know some considerations or are not prepared to vote for it, you know, we can ask for a one-week layover.

Okay.

Um thanks, Ms.

Bowie.

I see Ms.

Jose, Vice President Kim, and Ms.

Coleman.

Okay, I'll just say quick, thank you, Councilmore Bowie.

And I I I think that um, you know, a lot of a lot of progress was made between last week and this week, and I agree with like your intention around what you're trying to do, and I think there's potential for PED to administer this.

I just think at this point in time that there's still um, you know, there are details, but there is like a significant amount of work to figure out and a plan and um to be able to make sure that this is going to work, and I just don't think it's there yet.

Um, you know, as Director McMahon mentioned, this was we've already uh you've already established the budget for 2026.

You know, there's a question of is the administration of this program gonna be an additional cost to the PED department that hasn't been answered yet.

Um, and just wanting to understand more about how this how this would uh work exactly.

And so I think it needs a little more time.

So I wouldn't be supportive of this yet today, but I think it's moving in the right direction, and I would support laying it over for another week.

Thanks, Ms.

Jose.

So vice president.

Uh yeah, I appreciate it.

I think for me, I really appreciate sort of the values that they are being centered with this version three.

The thing that I heard loud and clear from the public testimony was that they didn't want it to sit in the police department and that crediting the police department for their own costs instead of going directly to community organizations.

Um I heard that loud and clear.

I think this resolution does that.

This version three does that.

And if they're um if the the lead um author of the amendment is interested in answering a few more questions for a layer, I would support it, but I'm also prepared to support the version three today.

So I'll defer defer to the lead author.

Thanks, Vice President.

I saw Ms.

Coleman.

Thank you.

Yeah, I I think I'm sitting where Councilmember Joost is, which is feeling like there's been, you know, I think we're a lot further along than we were at this point last week.

It's was helpful to hear from Director McMahon.

I do have a whole array of additional questions based on what was shared today that I don't think need to be answered right now.

If there's a motion to lay this over for a week, I think that that would be appropriate to get more answers, make sure that this is fully ready to go.

I think the shared priority as you said, Councilmember Bowie is to get the funds out the door as quickly as possible.

So make sure we're ready to do that as soon as we as soon as we vote yes on whatever the final resolution is.

Um I'd be supportive of the one week layover.

I do have questions for clarity because you know I think the one week layover, I just want to be intentional about like what are we, what are the expectations we're setting with the one-week layover and what are we expecting to hear or what you know uh clear improvements they want you want to see in this language to feel comfortable moving forward with it because I don't want to um I I think this is clear for on my part, um, and since we have like the interim director here, that if there are some if we need to see more concrete plans, I think it's on the council members who are having hesitation, particularly our reservations, to share what that is for them to get to the yes, because I just wouldn't want to kick the can down the road and we have the same conversation and the Neo, these funds are still stalled, and then we're back at square one.

Thanks, Ms.

Bowie, but seems just yeah, I mean I think that for me the some of the the things that Director McMahon raised is that you know we would need to develop you know an internal procedure, we would need to, there's still things probably to iron out with OFS.

Um there are still things that you know, budget questions that we might have.

Um, you know, how does this process work?

How do people apply?

She said they need to develop an application, and not to say that I you know have confidence that PED can do those things, but I just think that a more formalized plan about what that looks like is required work that needs to be done before this resolution is ready to go.

And so that's what I see the work being.

You know, this is uh I guess you and mostly you at this point um and council president maker that are working on that.

So I guess that would be my expectation that um for me to be supportive of this that you would put in the the work that I think is still needed with the director McMahon and her staff to figure that out.

So thanks, Ms.

Joe, Ms.

Bowie, and then I'll insert myself after you for sure.

Okay, I'm getting in line, yes.

Okay, okay.

Um thank you for that clarity because it's I wrote down you said it's a request to um develop a plan in the website in the process.

Um I just want to be very crystal clear that work that is not the council members' work to create.

We could put that in a language if you want that to be in the resolution authorizing that PED comes up with the plan, comes up with the a process, uh, because this is this will essentially be a program that would be in their department, and it's their it's their responsibility to design what that program looks like.

It would be inappropriate and actually not part of our role for us to design what that program looks like for them.

Yeah, and I'm not saying that we should design that program.

I'm saying that that at this point, all we've done is talk about these things and say what these things are.

PED hasn't put in work and and it's not even a hundred percent clear to me it seems feasible, but just making sure that they are far enough in development of the program to make sure that it is feasible.

Um, and also like again, the question of is there a budget implication for this by directing the department to do something that was not in the original budget, um, and the council doesn't generally direct departments to do things either when they're not part of a budget program.

So I just think that it needs for me needs to be brought a little bit further to make sure that we know this is something that um is feasible within the resources we have for this year.

Um, with you know, maybe it's an initial plan.

Again, this isn't my thing, so I don't want to be telling Director McMahon what I think she should do, but I'm just saying that that is what I would like to see.

I need more um information to know that this plan's ready to go from PED from OFS from you know um SPPD since they're still gonna have security costs, and also probably from our events and festivals folks.

Um that's just what I would need to see.

I don't know where other council members stand, but that's kind of what I my opinion is.

Thanks, Councilmember Jost.

Um, and just to put in my two cents here, first of all, Councilmember Bowie, I really appreciate your leadership on this and the conversations that we've had over the last week about this, and I think um other people have said it, but we we all around this table share the same goals.

We want to get these dollars out the door, we want to provide the relief that our community event organizers have been asking for.

We want to provide the relief that our community event organizers have been asking for.

And I also want to acknowledge, I I uh share your goal of discussing ways to waive security costs completely, because I know you've talked about that as being a priority, and I think um we've talked about having that be part of a public safety committee or policy committee discussion this year, so we can find a way to do that, and that would ultimately be um I think what everyone's looking for, because what everyone also seems to recognize in my conversations with community members is 155,000 is great.

It's not nearly enough as we all know to cover these costs.

I um I said last week at the table, and I I want to be consistent in this that I I really want to, I don't want to set up false expectations on the part of community members.

So I want to be really transparent in what we're doing here, and when we um when we pass this resolution, I want to pass it when the funds are ready to be dispersed.

I don't want to pass a resolution and then have an indeterminate amount of time after which the program will be ready because I think when we pass the resolution, people are going to expect that this is ready to go unless we have a clear timeline associated with it in the resolution.

So if we can say, you know, this program will be ready to go on this date or in this number of weeks, um, I feel more comfortable about that.

But in the moment, um I don't get the sense that PED has a timeline or a plan or a staffing plan.

Um I don't fully understand how the reimbursement works and to whom it goes.

Um and I I just I really want to make sure that we understand that before we say this is ready to go.

So I also would be supportive of the one-week layover to give PED time to present that to us.

I think then we're considering two options a version two and a version three, um, that we can make a decision about based on some some actual accurate timelines and staffing plans.

Other discussion of so currently the motion is for adoption.

Um I guess I'm looking to my colleagues to see if there's the motion was just for approval of version three, not to necessarily adopt a version.

Sorry, the motion was for approval of version three, not to adopt.

Okay.

Um so Ms.

Yang.

Thank you, Council President.

I'll just leave that for me.

I'm supportive of version three, so if we're approving that, I will support it.

Um I like the plan that council member uh council member Bowie put together about this um being a process that is housed within um within our planning and economic development department, and I'm also supportive of a layover too if that means um that questions from council members can get answered, and so um I just wanted to name that.

So I think we should take a vote on putting version three on the table, and then we take should take a vote on we should take a have a motion to lay over and then take a vote on that.

So there's a motion on the table for version three, all in favor of putting version three up for consideration, not adoption.

Say aye.

Aye all opposed.

Six in favor, what are we voting for?

Just considering version three as being the version that we're talking about.

This is about approval of version, not considering version three.

No, I think.

But we are also talking about approval of the version.

Right.

So I mean version three can let's say for instance, version three were to like if version three were to fail, it could get edited and then be re-offered next week.

Or um if it passes, it can be changed back to version two next week.

It can there can be a version four added next week.

Okay.

So if we wish to not adopt a any version until we have had a week layover, then we would vote against approving version three right now.

Yes, it might also another option is just to move a layover without moving our new version.

Ms.

Bowie.

I think we should even just look for a layover or move to approve it.

I mean what we have to consider uh okay, right.

Sorry for the confusion on my point.

Just for reality purposes and capacity purposes, if we can initially when I brought forth this um or last week, you know, my intent was to get this ready by the 25th, so we can actually have a two-week layover because I don't want us to be in this kind of same position and having to sprint and put a lot of stress, you know, when we are already gonna be covering a lot of different ordinances and so if we can have a two-week layover um to the 25th.

Do you want to withdraw your motion and make the motion for the two-week layover?

Thank you.

Yes, I withdraw my motion for a one-week layover, and I'm bringing forth uh a motion for a two-week layover to have this um reviewed on the February 25th.

Thank you, Ms.

Bowie.

And I will support that motion.

And again, I think we're I think we're real close.

Um I think the two weeks will hopefully give us the time to get there.

Um any further discussion of the motion.

Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

Six in favor, none opposed, of the item is laid over to February 25th.

Item number 18 is resolution 26-267 denouncing the Trump administration's attack on gender affirming care for youth.

Vice President Kim.

Thank you, Chris.

Perfect.

Thank you, everyone.

Um, so I am going to do the um maybe annoying thing, but the important thing, which is to read this resolution into record because I think it's really important that we all hear why this resolution is so important.

So today, I'm bringing forward a resolution that denounces the Trump administration's attack on gender affirming care for youth.

Whereas trans transgender, non-binary, and two-spirit youth and adults are valued and celebrated as residents in the city of St.

Paul.

And whereas the Trump administration is engaged in a campaign of undermining the rights of transgender, non-binary, and two-spirit individuals, including targeting medical care providers who offer legal, appropriate, and protected services in the state of Minnesota.

Whereas Trump signed an executive order on January 28th, 2025, directing the health and human services to ban hospitals from performing gender-affirming care, and has engaged in numerous steps to end this care nationwide through unilateral authority to withhold federal funding in an attempt to end safe, legal, and appropriate care.

Whereas the Attorney General Keith Ellising, along with 18 other states in Washington, DC, has sued um HS HHS Secretary Robert F.

Kennedy Jr.

over his declaration falsely claiming gender affirming care as unsafe and ineffective and threatening critical federal and threatening critical federal funding.

And whereas Children's Minnesota is a prominent provider of essential care services for youth, including gender affirming care in Minnesota, and it has announced it will pause for prescribing puberty suppressing medications and puberty hormones, which included a notice sharing a suicide hotline resources to the children and families currently receiving care.

Whereas Children's Minnesota will temporarily pause providing prescribed medications to youth on February 27, 2026, due to the threat of the administration, including the pursuit of investigations of providers that specifically named children's, threats of cuts to Medicaid funding, and the ongoing reality of targeted harassment and threats towards medical providers from individual actors.

And whereas Minnesota established itself as a trans refuge state in 2023, and with that made a promise that Minnesota will protect families, patients, and providers pursuing essential health care in the state, and these actions are already having significant and widespread impacts on current patients and will limit the availability of gender affirming care for all Minnesotans.

And whereas the attack from the federal government threatens health care providers and their ability to provide legal appropriate and medically necessary and life-saving health care in partnership with in partnership with families, and whereas gender affirming care takes many forms, is evidence-based and supported by peer-reviewed science and the lived experiences of trans and gender-expensive people.

And where other youth receive identical treatments for hormone care for their precocious puberties, thyroid issues, family planning, and other conditions without barrier.

And whereas gender affirming care has been provided to be evidence-based, medically necessary, and life-saving by the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Endocrine Society, the American Psychic Psychiatric Association, the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, and many, many more institutions.

And whereas actions to limit access to care, legal recognition, and the civil protections are part of a system and a collodial eradication of transgender, non-binary, and two-spirit use in adults from public life.

Now, therefore, be it resolved, the St.

Paul City Clint Council denounces the attack on gender affirming care for youth and celebrates the supports and of and supports the rights of all of our residents to access health care they need to make these personal choices for themselves and their families free from political interference.

So I'm going to have two speakers here, and I'll speak briefly at the end.

I think the first one we can invite up is the executive director of out for Minnesota, Cavrone.

Welcome.

Thank you.

My name is Cat Roan.

I'm the executive director of Outfront Minnesota, our state's largest LGBTQ advocacy organization.

I'm also proud to live and work here in the city of St.

Paul.

Gender diverse people are here and have always been a part of our communities long before the formal boundaries of Minnesota or the city existed.

In 1885, St.

Paul police arrested Cecilia Regina Gonzaga for violating the city's then prohibition on wearing clothing of the opposite gender before being released on the condition that she quote dress as either a man or a woman, but not both.

She left St.

Paul for good the next day.

I fear this to note that our stories are not new, nor are attempts to limit our ability to live freely and openly as ourselves.

But over the past couple of years, there's been a widespread effort to curtail LGBTQ rights and in particular access to gender-affirming care for youth.

Care that states like Minnesota have established as safe, legal, and protected.

Since January of last year, the federal government has sought to pressure our state and its care providers into curtailing that care using executive orders, investigations, declarations, and other administrative actions that target not only the care, but the basic legal rights and recognition of transgender youth and adults.

These actions stand in contrast to the scientific and medical consensus, and they inject politics into deeply personal care decisions that are best made by families and the expert medical care providers working with them.

The rights of LGBTQ people, including our access to medical care, shouldn't be a partisan issue.

And yet, only yesterday, the federal government took down the pride flag at Stonewall National Monument in New York City.

A small but deeply symbolic gesture that sends a message to LGBTQ people, especially our youth, that our stories and our experiences are not a welcome part of the story of this country.

No one should hear that.

Least of all our youth.

Now more than ever, I think it's important for us to speak up for the safety and belonging of all those who call St.

Paul in Minnesota home.

And I'm grateful to the authors and the city for considering this resolution, rejecting the continued politicized attacks on health care, and making a clear statement that LGBTQ residents are welcome and celebrated members of this community.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Welcome.

Thank you.

I'm Noah Parish.

I live here in St.

Paul in Ward 3, and I'm the communications director at gender justice.

We're a nonprofit, also based in St.

Paul, that works to advance gender equity under the law.

I'm here today to voice our strong support of this resolution denouncing attacks on gender affirming care for youth.

We want to be crystal clear.

Denying trans youth access to this care is illegal under Minnesota law.

But the Trump administration is trying to end that access anyway by threatening hospitals' federal funding.

Last week, families were told that their child's care at children's would be paused, not because of any change in medical guidance, but because of political threats.

Parents are scrambling.

They're asking if they need to travel out of state, if their children need to go without the care they need, or if they need to leave the country entirely.

And trans youth who are experiencing the ease and the confidence and the stability that gender affirming care provides are being thrown into limbo.

In 2023, Minnesota made a promise to be a trans refuge state.

It wasn't a symbolic gesture, it's state law.

And this resolution helps reinform it, reinforce that promise.

It tells trans youth in St.

Paul that you belong here.

It tells families that you are not alone.

And it tells healthcare providers we have your back.

I think importantly, we should remind folks that these attacks on trans people right now are not isolated.

They are part of a broader authoritarian playbook playing out right now in our community and throughout our country.

From the ICE raids in our neighborhoods to these types of attacks on trans lives, the goal is the same to drive certain people out of public life.

So I want to thank you all for taking a stand today and sending a clear message that St.

Paul will always stand up for its neighbors.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

I'm just gonna have some brief comments as well.

I think a lot of it has been summed up, but I think it's um this is a very heartbreaking and difficult moment for trans families and trans youth in Minnesota.

And it's because children's Minnesota has just been a beacon of hope and joy, providing compassionate evidence-based care rooted in dignity, bodily autonomy, and belonging.

I don't know how to articulate articulate that to say that gender affirming care saves lives.

It's a wide umbrella from social support to self-expression, and in some cases, reversible puberty delaying medications that just give young people the time and space to breathe and just decide for their future who they want to be.

This care saves Anna Firm's lives.

And as someone who has a family member, my family is a trans family.

I can say firsthand that this care is necessary, and the instability that this law is providing these families to scramble together, the costs and the access to care is unconscionable.

And I just want to emphasize to all of the families and all the trans kids in St.

Paul that you belong and you are loved here in St.

Paul.

We have to thank you.

So shame shame on this administration for wagering the lives of our nation's youth for political gain.

When children tell us who they are, we must listen, love and support them.

Gender affirming care remains legal here in Minnesota.

Alerts are strong, our values are clear, our commitment is unshakable, and we'll fight to the better end.

So with that, I move a motion to approve, and I look forward to the support of my colleagues.

Thank you very much, Vice President, and thank you again so much to our speakers today for your very eloquent and moving words.

Thank you.

Is there any or approval?

Is there any discussion of the motion?

Ms.

Coleman.

Thank you, Council President, and thank you so much, Council Vice President, for bringing this resolution forward.

I just want to echo the thanks to our two speakers for their words and also for the incredible work that Outfront Minnesota and gender justice do every single day to make Minnesota state that doesn't just say the right words when it comes to supporting gender affirming care, supporting trans youth, supporting people regardless of their gender identity, but to actually make that something real for people to make sure that our legal structures, that our policies, that everything that we are doing as a state is actually supporting the communities that we purport to care about.

So thank you so very much for being here today.

That I deeply wish was not necessary.

Thank you.

Ms.

Yang.

Thank you, Council President.

Well, I want to say thank you to you, Council Vice President, and also to the speakers, the organizational partners.

Monica, I see you here with us.

Thank you for your work.

I have friends and family members who are LGBTQ, many of them who are much younger than me.

And for me to be able to see them access gender for me, care it brings me so much joy, and it brings me joy knowing that my own children are able to live in a world where there is more equity and where our young people are able to talk about openly about their gender, their sexuality.

But I also recognize how right now we are we are moving backwards and how that is so dangerous.

But I'm so deeply proud and grateful for the front for the folks at the front lines that we have who continue fighting for this.

And so I want to say keep up the amazing work, and I'm here in solidarity with you.

Thank you, Ms.

Yang, Ms.

Jost, and then Ms.

Bowie.

Um Thank you, Council President.

Thank you, Council Vice President, for bringing this forward.

I also want to um echo my appreciation to outfront Minnesota and gender justice.

Um we know that gender affirming care is health care, it is life-saving care, it is critical, especially to our youth.

Um, and I'm really grateful that we live in a um a community and in a state that that that's a value that we have that our youth deserve to be them to be themselves and to be able to have access to that care um so that they can thrive and they can grow.

Uh also add that you know, for for my family, um, someone very close to me in my family works in insurance for gender affirming care and is also facing kind of um on the front lines of being able to make sure that we can continue to provide this this care in our state, and so I I expect this fully to pass, but I'm just want to share I'm very supportive of it.

Thank you, Ms.

Dost.

Ms.

Bowie.

Thank you, Council President.

I just want to say thank you, Vice President Kim, for bringing this resolution.

I just was in awe just seeing the amazing leaders and the speakers and some people who are here today in our in our chambers who didn't get this chance to speak, but just getting a chance to just really affirm them and thank you so much for just leading with love, legislating with love.

Um, I know sometimes with these resolutions, you know, it feels like it's just words, but it just the opportunity to be able to have these leaders come into the room and hear what their stance are, particularly in all the work that they're doing and investment in the critical care really helps us become better leaders too because we all are connected to someone who either is trans or part of the LGBTQIA community, and we have amazing leaders that we could connect them with.

So again, thank you.

Um, I'm just in the spirit of just like the bad bunny halftime show where the you know the powerful thing, or let me not misquote this, let me get this quote right.

The only thing more powerful than hate is love.

And you know, I was in tears when you had um made a commitment and a stance by vocalizing that trans kids are loved, and that we need to hear more and more again leaders that we love our neighbors, we love our kids, we love our trans kids, we love our black kids, we love all of our kids in it.

There's not enough love that can go around.

Um, and as we are, you know, uh bringing resolutions and and also recognizing some of the great leaders, I just want to say thank you so much.

Um, and I'm excited to support this, and I'm also excited to continue, you know, um leading on your leadership on more ways that the council can be supportive of this community.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember Bowie.

I echo all of my colleagues' powerful words, and again, thank you so much, Vice President, for bringing this forward.

Um, I think we should take a vote.

All in favor, say aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

Six in favor, non opposed, the resolution is adopted.

Uh take a motion from Ms.

Yang to suspend the rules.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

Six in favor, non opposed, the rules are suspended.

Uh, Ms.

Vice President Kim or Ms.

Yang, Ms.

Yang.

Okay.

Go on.

Both Vice President Kim and Ms.

Yang.

Um, we also have guests from Sunrise Movement, so I ask that you join me at the podium.

All right.

Well, um, thank you so much for the council council support on suspending the rules so that we can bring forward this resolution urging hotels to not house federal immigration agents.

I want to say thank you to our leaders from Sunrise Movement who have been at the front lines of protesting hotels and really conveying to them their clear values about why hotels should not be housing federal immigration agents and sharing with them the harm that this perpetuates in our communities.

I want to say thank you, Council Vice President Kim, because you um are the person that um had the vision for this resolution here, and I'm so proud to work um in partnership with you, and also I want to say thank you to our legislator aides, Sarah and Abdi Hamid, who did the um the hard work of putting together this very eloquent resolution.

And I just want to name like for me, um, it was really important to bring this forward because I have been hearing from community members about what they are seeing in the hotels and just the violence that we see happen whenever there isn't anything done about this.

And I just want to be really clear that as a council, there isn't any action we can take that could require hotels to refuse service to federal agents, but we can do what we are doing now, which is putting forward a resolution that conveys what I said earlier, where we stand in fighting fascism, we want ice out.

Um, and to send a message about how this is impacting our communities and how we as council members are having to respond to community members about their concerns regarding hotels, housing federal immigration agents.

And as a council member who people go to when they're in despair, need help, or just want to share an idea with us to improve their community neighborhood, especially during these uncertain times.

I especially want hotels to know that when they're housing ice agents, they are a part of the problem.

We need them to do better and to be a part of stabilizing and building safety for their staff, customers, and the neighborhood.

So again, this is a resolution urging hotels to not house federal immigration agents.

Whereas the city of St.

Paul is a welcoming and inclusive city that values and supports immigrants and refugees, and whereas the city of St.

Paul recognizes the strength, diversity, and economic vitality that immigrants and refugees contribute to the community, whereas the city of St.

Paul has demonstrated its commitment to protecting immigrant communities through policies and investments that promote safety, inclusion, and trust.

And whereas federal immigration enforcement practices, including large-scale enforcement operations, have generated widespread fear and disruption in communities across the nation.

And whereas the state of Minnesota has experienced an unusually large deployment of federal immigration agents from the US Department of Homeland Security, including immigration and customs enforcement, homeland security investigations, and customs and border protection.

Whereas the presence of these federal personnel housed in local hotels has caused significant concern among residents, workers, and business owners in the city of St.

Paul.

Now, therefore, be it resolved that the city of St.

Paul of the St.

Paul City Council strongly urges hotel operation hotels operating within the city of St.

Paul to refrain from housing federal immigration agents.

And be it further resolved that a copy of this resolution will be transmitted to relevant city departments and hotel industry stakeholders for awareness.

And I believe we have two, potentially two speakers here, but I'll give my brief comments.

I think if you haven't found a space to plug in, um, this is a not even a tiny and mighty, but a fun and mighty way to fight back against fascism and to get loud, um, have fun while you're at it, but also draw the line in the sand.

And it's um one of the better ways to participate, but also um I think a lot of folks can identify, you know, the the hospital the hotels that are housing some of these agents.

And so if you want names named, just look up Sunrise Twin Cities and you will find where you may not want to spend any of your money at.

So I will invite our two speakers to come forward.

Thank you, Vice President.

Welcome.

Okay.

Um hi, my name is Maggie.

I am the communications lead for my college's chapter of Sunrise.

Um, which means that recently I have been getting a lot of messages asking for help.

People are scared.

People in St.

Paul, their partners work at hotels with men with loaded guns.

They see their neighbors going missing, they see their friends going missing, they don't know where they are, their friends are in danger.

I am also a second year student at McAllister College.

I love my college.

I love going to college, and I love my college because it is an incredible community, because it is diverse, because it is a place where I encounter people that I would never have encountered if I hadn't gone to this college.

And I love that about my college, but recently I have seen that become a reason to be afraid and a reason to be constantly vigilant, to a reason to be sending messages to be suspicious of every single SUV because we know that they haven't come for our friends yet, but they will.

Our college is 14% international students, that is 14% of my peers, and they should not have to live in fear for going to college.

That is important.

They should get to love their college experience, um, and they should be able to do that without constantly looking over their shoulder.

I am also aware that we are not the only students who are at risk.

The schools in St.

Paul are not safe.

The homes in St.

Paul are not safe.

The public parks and public spaces in St.

Paul are not safe, and they should be.

And it is the reason that they are not safe is because of armed federal agents who are on all of this property, who are endangering children, who are endangering community members, who are making this community unsafe, and it is, I believe, the city council's responsibility to make sure that it is very clear that the safety of our community members, the safety of our students, the safety of our children is our priority, and that federal agents will not prevent that from being the priority.

And I think that this resolution is important for sending that message.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Welcome.

Thank you.

Thank you.

My name is Kate Giny.

I'm a resident of uh St.

Paul and a member of Sunrise Twin Cities.

We're the local chapter of the national youth movement fighting for good livable futures for all.

And we cannot stand by as federal immigration agents, terrorize our cities and threaten that future for our community members.

Everybody I know is exhausted, stressed, and afraid.

But what's more important to me is that I have friends in hiding, friends who have fled the cities who are fully legal citizens, most of whom were born here.

They're not just experiencing racial profiling, they are being haunted.

Federal agencies aren't carrying out this campaign of terror alone.

Hotel companies in St.

Paul are actively supporting ICE operations by allowing them to stay at their hotels, endangering their staff, other patrons, and the greater community.

Sunrise has confirmed that at least six hotels in St.

Paul are actively housing ICE, in addition to many more in the surrounding area.

There have been reports of them recklessly leaving loaded firearms in their rooms that staff have come across.

The Star Tribune has reported in December, an agent fired a weapon in their hotel room.

It went through a wall and into the headboard of the adjoining room.

Another agent has been charged with driving under the influence in the cities, and the hotels they are staying at currently hold liquor licenses that facilitate this dangerous behavior.

And the hotels they're staying at currently hold liquor licenses that facilitate this dangerous behavior.

Sunrise has been peacefully protesting these hotels to urge them to stop housing ice.

And we've been receiving constant messages from hotel staff and neighbors asking us to come and protest at new locations to try and get them to leave.

Far more than we have capacity to respond to.

As a St.

Paul resident who cares deeply for my community, I ask you to support this resolution.

Energy Hotels stop housing federal immigration agents.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Thank you to our speakers.

I I will close with for me, it is deeply unsettling.

Just thinking about the the corporations, the companies, companies that are profiting off of our suffering, our pain.

I mean, this is a resolution about hotels, but don't even get me started about car rental companies.

That that the hundreds and hundreds of cars that have gotten that have been rented to carry out the actions that we're seeing from mice.

It is unacceptable.

And so I can look I can go on about who is a part of that list.

But I I asked the council for your support and this resolution here.

We have community members out there fighting to make sure that for them that they're holding a hotels accountable, that hotels are answering to the community.

And this is a part of an effort for us to uplift and support them.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms.

Yang.

Thank you so much, Vice President Kim, and thank you to our speakers again.

I'll take that as a motion for approval.

Is there any discussion of the motion?

Yes.

Just again, I wanted to say thank you so much for council, Vice President Kim and Chair Yang for your leadership in bringing this forth and responding, being responsive to community leadership.

Also, thank you, Sunrise Movement, the speakers here and the youth leaders here.

And how we have been seeing young leaders show up in an incredible way in the face of just tyranny and and fascism and just total dictatorship.

The bravery and the courage is just, you know, I I just amend, you know, not excuse me, admire all of that.

I just wanted to say particularly I do appreciate Chair Yang, you mentioning the rental companies.

I also appreciate uh, and when I look at the language, it we don't list any of the hotels there, but I just wanted to share, you know, as someone who serves on the board for visit St.

Paul, this is a conversation that we have had, particularly around the hotels and the hospitality industry that has been impacted.

Um, from my awareness, um, I believe there are two hotels in St.

Paul, downtown St.

Paul that has closed our doors, um, have been impacted and decided to not rent to anyone just because of the evasiveness that um this entire industry is experiencing.

Um, you know, as someone who like seen federal agents at my door and had to, you know, witness my husband being arrested.

Uh, when I looked at all the license plates of the nine vehicles that was on my street, they were all Minnesota license plates.

They were all cars that look like regular cars.

I mean, there wasn't even like black squad cars or the typical military vehicles.

These just look like your regular mom and pop vehicles.

So we are starting to see that um these federal immigration agents are being more sophisticated and cunning, particularly around how they are just camouflaging in our own neighborhoods.

Um, I do think, you know, also I just want to share on record as well, just because since we are having this public discussion, um, the letter that we have saw from I believe the 60 or 80 um businesses across Minnesota.

Uh, I felt did not deliver the message in the the commitment that community wants to see from businesses that this is an opportunity for businesses to choose people over profit and that the people is your profit base.

And if you are not catering to the safety and the care of your of your consumer base, which is St.

Paul and a residence, um, then you know what does that say about your overall values?

So thank you for making a statement.

I am in support of this.

Um I do think you know, I'm I'm also in support of you know going beyond and being more um having more urgency, particularly around language that we want to see in the future.

So thank you again.

Thanks, Ms.

Bowie.

Ms.

Jost.

Um thanks, Council President.

I I just uh wanted to thank Sunrise Twin Cities for being here today, and especially um to uh the student from McAllister for being here.

Um my ward is home to uh two colleges, McAllister and St.

Kate's, uh both of which have you know um very diverse populations and a lot of people that are from uh all around the country, all around the world.

And I just wanted to echo that you know, our our city is welcoming to everyone, and we especially appreciate uh students coming here choosing choosing St.

Paul to pursue their education and to hopefully pursue the rest of their future.

And so that's very important to me.

And um, I just really want to make sure that um folks understand just the impact that this federal occupation is having on our city and the future of our city.

Um I'll I'll also add that uh you know the discussion about hotels and car rental um businesses that you know it's important.

I uh that our everyone in our community uh stands up against ice.

Uh as long as there's you know one business or one group or or one uh industry that is still allowing ice or to supporting them, that means that ICE is gonna still continue to have the resources to be here.

So any and all uh avenues that we can you know make more difficult for them to be supportive is gonna be really important in order to get ICE out of Minnesota.

Thanks, Ms.

Joast.

Ms.

Coleman.

Thank you.

And I will be the one of many voices just to thank you, say thank you to our speakers to Sunrise Movement, to everybody who is leading so much incredible organizing across our city, who is doing the hard work of engaging community business leaders, um consumers and consumer boycotts and economic activity that is so essential to the holistic strategy that will be required in order to overcome what our region is experiencing in this moment, what our country is experiencing.

We wouldn't be able to do it without people like our leaders in Sunrise, um, like everybody who is out there finding new ways to show up for their community every single day.

So look forward to supporting this resolution and thank you again to everybody who is doing all this work um day in and day out.

Thank you, Ms.

Coleman.

Uh thanks again to my colleagues for bringing this forward, and thank you so much to our speakers.

Uh, we love seeing young people here in our chambers.

We hope this won't be your last city council meeting, uh either in person or one of our millions of viewers at home.

And thank you for all that you're doing.

Uh with that, we have a motion on the table.

All in favor say aye.

Hi.

All opposed.

Six in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

Item number 19 is final adoption of ordinance 26-6.

I think chapter 2688, the legislative code to require law enforcement officers performing law enforcement duties to visibly display identification on the outermost layer of their uniform.

So this brings us to the ordinance section of our agenda.

Uh, some folks have been here multiple times now, so this will sound familiar, but for those who are new, um, all of our ordinances have three readings.

So you'll see final adoption is the last reading.

That means that we've already had a first reading and a staff report.

We've had a second reading and a public hearing, and this is now before us for final adoption.

So these are major policies, and they seem like if you're just tuning in, that they're just being adopted in one fell swoop, but they're actually the product of several weeks at least of deliberation and discussion and information.

Uh so this is um just one of many ordinances that we have adopted to try to rein in the federal assault in our community.

Um, this one requiring law enforcement officers to visibly display identification, including agency badge number and or name on the outermost layer of their uniform.

And it is before us for final adoption.

So I would move approval.

Um, is there any discussion of that motion?

Vice President.

Kim.

Yep, I'll be very quick.

Um, St.

Paul residents have the right to be aware of an officer's identity and agency affiliation in order to just understand and know their rights and understand the lawful authority of that officer.

As different law enforcement officers operating in the city have different levels of authority and have make arrests and enter certain spaces.

So it's just that distinguishing piece is super important for us as we continue to say know your rights, but it's also to know what your rights look like depending on which officer you're engaging with.

Without knowledge of a law law enforcement officers agency, there's just no way for people to report or hold officers accountable for unprofessional behavior or misconduct and even in instances of violence or illegal activity.

And so again, I think this is um just one one of the many things that we're trying to pass in terms of a comprehensive and sort of sequential rollout of the ordinances that are part of the council's priorities in terms of how do we tighten up not just a separation ordinance, but how we look across um all the different avenues that we have.

And um I'm just always extending gratitude to my colleagues, um, Councilmember Coleman and Councilmember Yang for just all the work that we're putting in, the last minute calls and last-minute meetings that folks are throwing on just to make this happen.

So really deep gratitude for my colleagues and their partnerships.

Thanks, Vice President.

Ms.

Yang.

Thank you, Council President.

While I echo everything that you said, Council Vice President, this is about accountability and transparency.

So let's get this approved.

Let's do it.

Any other discussion, Ms.

Coleman and then Ms.

Bowie.

I will similarly keep this very brief, although we're not quite as brief as Councilmember Yang.

Um record.

A brief award.

Um I just want to say two things.

One, you know this week we have heard conversation about is a drawdown imminent.

Are we about to be on the other side of this?

And I think it is so important.

And as our work, I hope will continue to show that we recognize that we are not going to get to the other side of this anytime soon.

While we hope desperately that our community will see some relief from some of the attacks in the near future, we know that every single city that ICE has made a target continues to see heightened ICE activity months and months and months after the initial surge.

This unfortunately is not going away.

And so this work that we are doing here, the continued efforts to force accountability, move towards public safety, is absolutely essential.

I think that this is an important step in moving us to a place where we will be able to have the reckoning that is needed with the ICE agents who are harming our community.

The one other thing that I wanted to say, because I have been obsessed with this this week, as folks know from conversations we've had at this table and related to this ordinance, are um the one that we'll have the public hearing on later today and other items.

You know, this is an area where states and cities are working to innovate in real time as we think about what is the appropriate legal response, what measures can states and cities take in response to a federal government that is turning against the people.

And um, we had a decision come out of the District of California this week that looked at their efforts to require federal agents to wear visible IDs like this resolution or this ordinance of ours does and prohibits them from wearing um face coverings and in an effort to mask their identities.

And I just would really point people to that ruling.

I think it was a really important statement showing that not only our elected leaders, um, you know, executives, whether mayors or governors and legislative bodies, councils, state legislatures in support of this type of work, but it is something that is is legal, it is constitutional, it is something that judges have looked at and said it's an appropriate exercise of our authority.

I think that is really important to remember, and I think it is a reminder to all of us to continue to push and to think differently to innovate and to do whatever we possibly can to alleviate the um pain and suffering that our residents are experiencing.

Thank you, Ms.

Coleman.

Ms.

Bowie.

Thank you.

I kind of wish I went um before Councilmember Coleman, um, because I think that was really important to get that legal context.

Um, I'm just here to just share, you know, values and just also um appreciation to take this vote.

Um, I think when I when I think about this vote, you know, this was the first ordinance that we had heard from Mayor Her and her first minutes um of being um um elected uh uh mayor um calling for the council to bring this this ordinance to her to sign.

Um so I think this is you know a really a great day for justice for the for the council.

Um, you know, in perspective, you know, in the face of lawlessness, it's really important that we as a council demonstrate our respect and our firm um dedication and commitment to passing laws.

And I do want to say I appreciate the incredible work that um council member Coleman, you did to make sure that we are within the legal context, but also acting in urgency and like in the way that we phase this out, um, I think was really important to that process.

Um, and like everyone else said, this this ordinance is just the baseline.

I see this as this is just a professional um standard of operations of what we should expect from law enforcement across the board, uh, keeping in mind these are our taxpayers, these are taxpaying dollars that's going to this operation.

And uh when we think about just even what is the expectations for us to identify our role as council members, I think about you know being cautious of wearing a lapel pan, right?

That's just a baseline in terms of how we as professionals um distinguish ourselves.

So I think I see this as a way to not only build trust, but ensure that there's safety not only for community members to identify, but even um on the law enforcement side, it's safer a law enforcement or agent to be able to identify who they are.

Um so if they are interacting with people, like there is there's a set of you know expectations in terms of um how to maneuver that situation.

So I'm happy that we were able to bring this to Mayor Hur's um des for her to sign it.

Um, and I look forward to the you know, the the long marathon um of more ordinances that we'll be bringing forth through this um through this body.

Thank you, Miss Bowie.

Um, and to that excellent point, there are so many different levers that we are trying to pull at once to try to respond again to this federal assault on our community.

And we have heard loud and clear from many folks, some of whom are in this room, um, that we need to do a better job communicating about that and giving it a name and ideally even making a graphic representation of the different things that we are doing, um, so that it's clear all the different ways in which we're trying to fight back.

Um, I can assure you that we are working on that uh as we speak, and we hope to be able to have that name and that illustration.

Sometimes in St.

Paul we just focus so much on doing the work that we don't do a good job talking about it.

Um, and we know that in this case it is important to be talking about everything that we're doing as well.

So that is that is on its way.

Um, and you'll see that soon.

So with that, uh, I think we're ready to take a vote.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

Six in favor, none opposed.

The ordinance is adopted.

Item number 20 is ordinance is public hearing of ordinance 26.

Item number 20 is public hear uh second reading public hearing of ordinance 26-8, amending section 86.01A of the St.

Paul Administrative Code to authorize up a three assistance to the mayor to execute certain contracts made in the name of the city of St.

Paul and authorized by the city's council and further amending section 86.01A to increase the dollar value amount for contracts executed by designees.

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

So if you're here to testify on an item when that item is read, what we'll ask is for you to come up to the front lineup on both sides.

Um, when it's your turn, come to the front, uh stand between the two microphones.

You don't need to move them or lean over to them.

They will pick you up just fine.

Um, everyone has two minutes to testify.

The two minutes do go by extremely quickly, and it's my unenviable job to keep everybody to the two minutes.

So please help me help you help us by paying attention to the clock that's right in front of you as you're speaking.

And if you do run out of time and you have written testimony you want to share with us here or via email later, we are happy to accept that as well.

Lots of ways to communicate with us.

Um, and then make sure to sign in on either side when you're done testifying.

Uh so and we do ask you to start with your name and where you're coming from when you begin your testimony.

So, with that, this is a public hearing on number 20, item 20.

If you're here for that item, uh, this is your public hearing.

Please come on up.

All right.

Uh I'll take a motion from Ms.

Coleman to close the public hearing, and this matter will lay over till February 18th for final adoption.

All in favor, say aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

Six in favor, none opposed.

The public hearing is closed, and the ordinance is laid over to February 18th for final adoption.

Item number 21 is ordinance 26-7, adding chapter 268 B to the legislative code to require law enforcement officers conduct law enforcement operations without a mask or facial covering, unless certain exceptions apply.

This is a public hearing.

Is there anyone here to speak to this item?

There's a version two that needs to happen first.

Oh, uh, I will take a motion from Ms.

Joe's for version two.

All in favor, say aye.

Aye.

All opposed?

Six in favor, non opposed.

The amendment is approved.

That's just an amendment.

All right, uh, come on up.

And we'll just kind of alternate sides.

So hi, I'm John Cole.

I live in ward five, I think.

Um, as you can see, I wear an N95 respirator out in public most times to avoid uh the transmission of respiratory illnesses.

Uh, this protects me and also protects my community.

Um ICE agents demonstrably not protect my community.

Indeed, there's that outbreak of measles in ICE detention centers in Texas.

Um, so I support this resolution and urge you to do the same for any ICE officers who are concerned about public health, urge you to quit your jobs.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

My name is Megan Unrow.

I live in Ward 1.

I'm very concerned about the exceptions laid out in this ordinance, specifically the exemption for SWAT operations.

The violence that we've seen perpetrated by ICE during this occupation has been extreme and horrific, but it is not new.

It is the same violence that has always been carried out by law enforcement on our black and brown neighbors in this state and this city.

Almost one year ago, on February 18th, 2025, an SPPD SWAT operation was carried out on my neighbors across the street.

I emailed council member Bowie and I never heard back.

I will read from that email now.

At 6 a.m.

when the air temp was 13 below, SPPD SWAT blared out their threat to my neighbors across the street.

At first they said they were executing a search warrant and demanded everyone come out with their hands up.

Then on the last order said it was an arrest warrant.

One of my neighbors came out first in a sweatshirt and pants.

They handcuffed him and led him to an unmarked van halfway down the block.

At some point, he lost one shoe and was forced to hop most of the way down a snow covered street.

I watched as the rest of the household came out.

One other adult and three young children that were forced out into that dangerous cold in their pajamas, towards screaming cops wearing tactical armor and carrying massive guns, a helicopter hovering overhead.

Councilmember Bowie, now that you know the pain and terror of armed masked law enforcement arresting your loved one at 6 a.m.

on a cold winter day, would you still ignore my email?

This moment demands so much from all of us, but you all asked for this power.

Use it for good.

We should not be carving out exceptions like this.

Though many elected officials are trying desperately to draw distinctions between federal and local law enforcement, there are none.

They are diseased trees born from the same poisonous fruit.

And if you don't close the loopholes in this ordinance, all levels of law enforcement will continue to exploit them to harm us.

Please make this stronger.

Please close the loopholes.

Thank you very much.

Make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

Hello.

My name is Tony.

I'm in Ward One and also a member of Neighbors Protecting Neighbors.

And it's a little ironic, as the uh speaker earlier said that I'm here to support and to testify on an ordinance supporting uh an ordinance that limits the use of masking by uh law enforcement and ICE in particular.

Um but you know there are a lot of reasons for wearing masks, as the other person indicated.

One is health.

Um I'm immunocompromised.

I have to wear this, I'm getting cancer treatment as I speak, um, and so I need to protect myself.

Um there are other reasons, and one is to um intimidate and to cause fear.

And that is um, and also to prevent being identified and seen.

And that is ice.

Um, some people who have defended ICE wearing masks have said, well, that's because they're worried about getting doxxed.

Well, I'll tell you what, um, getting 12 pizzas delivered to your home is a far cry from the trauma that's being experienced by people on the street, um, by masked agents who are causing uh who are attacking neighbors on the street and within their homes.

Um, that type of masking is only about creating fear.

More likely though, I think that ice gate ice agents and other federal agents who mask simply don't want people to know who they are and what they're doing.

Well, I have to ask if you're really proud of what you're doing, and you think it's legal, then why hide it?

You don't need to hide behind a mask.

Take it off and be accountable for your own behaviors.

I've also heard some rumors that there are some city leaders who are opposed to this ordinance because of their fear it will be it will produce costly litigation to the city.

To that I have to say, you need to talk to your neighbors.

You need to have face-to-face real-time conversations with people who are going to experience the trauma that comes from having masked agents barge into their homes, shatter their car windows, kidnapping them from the streets, and much worse.

Thank you so much.

That is time.

I'll need you to stop there.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

Hello, I'm Celeste Finn, Ward One.

I testify today in remembrance of Renee Good.

Poet and activist Amanda Gorman wrote, we respond in every strife and struggle because every child is phenomenal.

And to every child, we are responsible.

If say if St.

Paul needs to become bankrupt from lawsuits to protect children and the most vulnerable, so be it.

Authoritarianism isn't just pounding on our front door.

He is flipping over our living room couch, sleeping in our bed, and throwing food across the kitchen.

He must know unequivocally that his presence will not be tolerated.

If this ordinance is going to be more than just words on paper, we need to be able to enforce them.

To enforce it, we cannot act like anything is business as usual.

All pretext is gone.

All sense of safety is gone.

Act with the radical courage this moment calls for.

Our city council is unprecedented in the history of this country.

You are all woman.

Who better than you to lead us in this courageous charge to preserve our democracy and throw out fascism?

You do not need the mayor's approval to be courageous.

You do not need SPPD to pass city law.

We just need you, seven to speak on behalf of us with one voice.

We need safe zones, police accountability, emergency housing funding, intercity solidarity.

You can't fight fascism alone.

To every child, we are responsible.

And they deserve to know what democracy feels like.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

I'd say my voice matters, but you clowns clearly are favoritizing the uh clown show and transgenders.

But uh can you start with your name and where you're coming from, please?

What was that?

Your name and where you're coming from before you begin.

Yeah, my name is Zach X.

I'm coming from St.

Cloud, Minnesota.

I've been assaulted several times in this county.

The police do nothing.

Um they should wear masks because they're dealing.

Okay, please let everyone be.

Let me have my time.

I let everybody else talk.

Anyway, as I was saying, these people deserve to wear masks because these are fucking freak shows that are after them.

And it is very concerning that you guys are supporting them.

You're an embracing psychos to attack police.

Get in the inner interfere to docs, please.

Have you ever been docs?

Because my name in my car is on a picture right now, all over the Whipple Center right now.

Have you ever had that happen to you?

You hear this?

You guys are supporting the freak shows that are destroying this county in this fucking state.

And it's so sad to watch it fall apart, but it's all in your power.

Especially you over there, Miss criticize everything.

You got like your just freaking Queen Latifa.

Oh, thank you.

I appreciate the conflict.

Sir, we're gonna not have the personal attacks.

Do you get take away my first amendment?

That's all that ever happens around here.

40 seconds left.

Transgender freaks.

Okay.

Thanks so much, sir.

Make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

I'll wait for the next opening.

Bye bye.

Hi there.

Emily Harakas.

Um I don't have anything prepared.

All I can say is we need accountability.

You say they deserve to be masked.

We have evidence that on a regular basis, they are violating our first, second, fourth, and 10th commandment rights.

You know, we are being attacked as we assemble.

I know I have had tear gas thrown at me, flashbang grenades thrown at me, um, and rubber bullet guns aimed at me, all while nonviolently protesting on 26th in Nicolette on the day that Pretty was executed and shot what, 10, 11 times?

He stepped in to try to protect a woman who had been shoved and pupper sprayed, and they called them a domestic terrorist trying to inflict maximum damage.

It's it leaves me speechless sometimes that they lie so blatantly, and they know if they were doing what was truly right, they wouldn't have to hide their faces.

And so I just think we need to have accountability for the people who are terrorizing our neighbors because CBS News let out the poll that in 2025, out of all of the people who were detained by ICE, 14% had any sort of criminal record, and over half had none, like no violent crime.

Um out of that 14%, I think it was only less than two percent who were had any alleged gang affiliations.

Is this actually, you know, targeting criminals, or is this about terrorizing BIPOC communities?

Is this the culmination of white supremacy that we have seen throughout the history of our country?

We call ICE the Gestapo, but then you know Nazi Germany was inspired by American practices of colonization, genocide, and slavery.

And we need to fight against that with everything we have.

Thank you very much.

Make sure to sign in and welcome up.

Hi.

Um, I'm gonna wait to say more until the public grievance about ice at the end, but I just want to say that behavior was fucking despicable.

GI fucking repressed homo over there.

Get the fuck out of here.

Get the fuck out of here.

Nobody wants you here.

I'm sorry you had to endure a fucking stupid racist comment.

But uh can I ask everyone to please keep the expletives to a minimum and avoid personal attacks in this entire chamber?

Thank you.

Please can okay.

All right, is there anyone else to here to speak on this item?

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

Jost to close the public hearing, and this item will lay over until February 18th for final adoption.

All in favor say aye.

All right, all opposed.

Five in favor, none opposed.

The public hearing is closed, and the ordinance is laid over to February 18th for final adoption.

Item number 22 is resolution public hearing 26-41, authorizing the Department of Parks and Recreation to accept a grant funding in the amount of 275,000 dollars from the state of Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to invest in forestry planning and management of the tree can be throughout the chain poll.

This is a public hearing.

Is there anyone here to speak on this item?

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

Yang to close the public hearing and approve.

All in favor say aye.

All opposed.

Five in favor, none opposed.

Six in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

Item number 23 is resolution public hearing 26-6.

Approving the application of JR Max for a sound level variant in order to present amplified sound for the St.

Patrick's Day tent event on March 14th and March 17th, 2026 at 1427th Street West JR Max.

This is a public hearing.

Is there anyone here to speak on this item?

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

Bowie to close the public hearing and approve.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

Six in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

Item number 24 is resolution public hearing 26-32.

Approving the application of burger modes for sound level variants in order to present amplified sound for the St.

Patrick's Day Lucky Palooza event on March 14th, 2026 at 242 7th Street West Burger Mose parking lot.

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 say aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

Six in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

Item number 25 is resolution public hearing 26-36.

Approving the application of Patrick McGovern's pub for a sound level variance in order to present amplified sound for the St.

Patrick's Day Lucky Palooza events on March 14th and 17th at 225 7th Street West, Patrick McCovern's pub parking lot.

This is a public hearing.

Is there anyone here to speak on this item?

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

Joseph to close the public hearing and approve.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

Six in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

Item number 26 is being withdrawn as a duplicate to item number 23.

Item number 27 is ABZA 26-1.

Considering the appeal of Minnesota Department of Administration to the Board of Zoning Appeals, lack of an approval of a zoning variance to permit a 10-foot tall fence between the surface parking lot at Phalan Boulevard and Barkley Street.

And for this we have a staff report.

Welcome up, Mr.

Ed.

Hi, Council President Acre comes.

Oh, sorry.

And those who are here to speak on this item, feel free to stand.

You can also take a seat.

We're gonna have a brief staff report for the Uh Hi, Council President Naker, Council members.

David Ider with the Department of Safety and Inspections.

I was staffing the Board of Zoning Appeals when this application, the initial zoning variance application was submitted, and the appeal and uh both applications are by this the appellant and the applicant are the same here.

So it's the Minnesota.

Oh, I'm not speaking on amending council committees.

All right.

All right.

Uh David I with the Department of Safety Inspections.

Uh this is ABZA 26-1.

So it's the first appeal from the uh Board of Zoning Appeals to City Council, and it's at the address is 1430 Maryland Avenue East.

Uh why is this in front of the city council today?

Uh the city council has the power to hear and decide upon appeals where it's alleged by the appellant that there's an error in any fact finding or procedure made by the Board of Zoning Appeals, and then in this instance, the initial applicant is the appellant, and they um disagree with the Board of Zoning Appeals uh declining to approve a zoning variance request.

So the property in question, it's the existing uh Bureau of Criminal Apprehension Headquarters that's on the east side of St.

Paul, Maryland and Phelan Boulevard.

It's a 6.75-acre parcel.

Uh the surrounding land uses and zoning to the we have T2 to the west, north, and east.

Uh that is residential.

There's a bank to the north and a clinic to the west.

Uh RM1 zoning to the east, which is uh South America or South of Maryland, uh, which is the multiple family dwellings.

RM2, which is to the south, uh multiple family dwellings.

The building opened in 2003.

Um the request stems from the uh department administration is proposing they're looking at their security on the site and proposing to replace fencing and add new fencing.

And these uh the variance that's requested only applies between the off-street parking facilities.

So I will have the map up.

I wanted to show it's only along Barclay and Phelan that this variance request applies.

So they're allowed to have a fence around the other sides, and they don't need a variance for that.

Uh to the height they want.

So the zoning code section that the applicant requested a variance from was 63 314, which is a screening landscape requirement.

So subnote B states that in all district except industrial screenings shall be provided, consisting of a maestro and wall or decorative fence that does not include chain link uh supplemented with landscape material.

And this is the next part that uh the requesting variants from.

There's a minimum and maximum height of uh minimum three feet four and a half max, and the applicant wants to exceed the four and a half height foot height limit.

Um, so I just wanted to show some examples of what the screening landscape requirement looks like in the city.

So this is a bank that's located to the north of the subject property, and that black fence with the landscaping behind it is what that looks like, the screening landscape.

And then here's an example uh at a uh retail use to the west of the property.

And then this is the zoomed-in map of the applicant's plans.

Uh the boxes show where the zoning variance requirement applied or zone zoning variance is requested.

Um I would note that the left box should go up a little bit higher because they have a drop-off zone that I missed when I was making this, so that you can see that uh applicant bubble drew a bubble up there, and they would apply along that side.

Uh, to the right is what type of fence is proposed.

Um, so there were two zoning variance cases, and the initial case is not in front of you, but I thought it was important to have the context.

Uh for that application, they were proposing 10 feet along Phalan Boulevard, eight feet along Barclay Street.

And the reason why now it's 10 on each side is that they didn't they found that there wasn't enough room on along Barclay.

So the their retaining wall is quite close to the property line.

There wasn't enough room to site the fence next to that, like an eight-foot-tall fence, so they moved it on top of the retaining wall, and that's why it increased to 10 feet.

Uh so we had a public hearing on September 15th.

Uh, staff recommended approval of the requested variants.

We received a letter from the Greater East Side Community Council opposing the request, but that was received after the hearing.

We had one person that spoke in support of the request at the hearing.

Uh the the Board of Zoning Appeals ended up there, there nothing passed because we need four votes in any direction to make a decision at the Board of Zoning Appeals.

So there was a motion for denial based upon findings two, six, and two, and six, uh, because there's six findings that need to be found true to grant a zoning variance request.

It failed in a vote of three to two, like I said, you need four votes to make any decision.

And then there was a second motion to approve in alignment with the staff recommendation, but there wasn't a second, so that failed.

Uh, the department administration did not appeal this request.

So then the um next we'll get into 1599 and um when a properly made vote on a resolution uh when a properly made motion to approve fails for any reason, the failure shall constitute a denial of the request, provided that those voting against the motion stated on the record, the reasons why they oppose the request.

So as part of this uh the board members, they spoke about it that the findings two and six weren't met, although the board didn't end up passing anything at the meeting.

Um but 5099 says that it is denied.

They could have appealed it, but they elected not to, so it it stopped there and it was denied.

Uh then the uh department administration applied again, this time 10 feet along uh Phalan and 10 feet along Barclay.

We had a public hearing on January 5th, 2026.

Staff did not change the recommendation recommending approval.

Uh I contacted the Greater East Side Community Council director, and they reaffirmed that their or they affirmed that their application their letter uh speaking against it still stands.

At that hearing, we uh didn't have anyone speak in support.

We received one letter in support, and two people spoke in opposition.

We received two letters uh against the proposal.

At this meeting, uh, there was a motion to deny based upon findings one, two, and six that was moved and seconded, and it there was a vote of three to two, so that one didn't pass because we didn't have four votes in any direction.

And then there was a motion of approval along with the staff recommendation, which is moved and seconded, but that one also failed.

And like I said, Minnesota statutes 1599.

Uh there was a vote to approve that failed, and the folks that voted uh against approval stated why they disagreed.

So ultimately, that's I think what is that quite the question today is that uh they failed to approve it, and then these are the three findings that the individuals that were speaking against the approval found were not met.

So I want to elaborate on those.

Finding number one that the variants must be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning code.

So then this finding uh means that you can't grant the zoning variance unless it generally aligns with the overall intent of the zoning code.

Um, so the some of the things that the board member that uh spoke against it, and this is all in your materials.

They provided this to us.

They stated that the fence was not in harmony with the general purpose's intent, as it's not in line with 6 60.103, which is state uh one of the parts of that it states to protect all areas of the city from harm harmful encroachment by incompatible uses and it's inconsistent with the land use is adjacent, whether they be commercial or residential in a mixed-use area, and they disagreed with the staff finding that it was a decorative fence.

Finding two right in the comp plan.

Uh the board members that voted against it uh stated that it was contrary to LU9, which promotes high quality urban design, and contrary to LE 24 that prioritize prioritizes infrastructure and private investments that maintain and improve the public realm.

As the they pointed out that the fence is very close to the sidewalk, particularly along Phalan.

And then finding six, uh, the intent of this is that the request will not negatively affect the surrounding area.

Uh staff thought that it would not negatively affect the surrounding area, but uh board members that voted against approval stated that staff erred in this finding as this is a mixed residential commercial neighborhood.

Um this mil they said that this military grade high security fence enclosure of the BCAA building in its entire parking lot does not and maintain and improve the public realm and does not protect all areas of the city from harmful encroachment by incompatible uses.

Uh so that next steps uh the city, like I said at the beginning of the presentation, the city council uh has the power to uh hear and decide upon appeals where it's alleged by that appellant that there's an error in fact finding a procedure.

And what this means for you is that granting the appeal would mean that the property owner could establish the 10-foot-tall fence between the parking off-street parking facility and the streets, denying it, the property owner would be limited to four and a half feet tall.

And I think the applicant or the appellant and applicant are here to elaborate on uh their rationale here.

Thanks so much, Mr.

Rider.

Are there any questions for staff before we open up the public hearing?

Ms.

Yang.

Thank you, Council President.

I can you just go back to that last line.

Thank you for your presentation.

Um, I let me see the last slide with the extension to April.

Okay, Keen, you just clarify, is that the date for the final vote for this then?

Uh uh Chairacre, Councilmember, that would be so it's fit with 5099.

It would have run out next Tuesday.

It's essentially they refresh the decision, so now it's up to you because the board, if they wouldn't appeal it, it would be denied at the BZA per 5099 because there was a motion to approve that failed.

But they essentially now brought it to city council.

So now it's up to you and potentially the mayor if they sign.

So this is just saying that you you have enough time to make a decision and that yeah, does that make sense?

Okay.

Like the city has till April 18th.

Okay, okay, that that makes sense.

I and I do just want to let you know that the the um notice to me about that extension until April 18th.

Like I got that very last minute, and so I'm from right now um a bit confused about um basically like today.

If we were ready, are we able to take the the final vote on this?

Or if I have the option to lay it over, does that mean I have that that option?

So can you just clarify that?

Council member, I apologize.

I sent that letter out yesterday extending it.

You do have time uh until theoretically April 18th, 2026 to make this decision.

So you could lay it, you could lay it over, is my understanding.

Okay, but if we wanted to make a decision today and we're ready to do that, we could do that too.

Correct.

Okay, that's helpful to know.

Thank you.

I don't have any other questions.

Great.

Thank you, Ms.

Yang.

Other questions for staff before we open up the public hearing?

Doesn't look like it.

Okay, um, this is a little bit of a different public hearing.

We give the appellant five minutes in this case to make the case, um, and then we will open it up to others who wish to uh comment.

So uh the appellant can start.

Welcome up.

Uh my name is Ryan Allen from the Minnesota Department of Administration as the appellant applicant, and thank you, Council President Ecker and Council members to consider the appeal decision of the BCA to permit a 10-foot tall fence between the surface park parking lot with Phalan Boulevard and Barclay Street for the Minnesota Department of Administration that will allow this fence to proceed for the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension.

I'm here with the BCA superintendent Evans, who will speak next, that will describe the service of the BCA.

That will describe the service of the BCA.

And then Eric Daniels, the architect that will show slides of the proposed fence.

Some of them you've seen already, but we have a slightly different slideshow prepared here.

And I think we're all set here.

So with that, I'll turn it over to Superintendent Evans.

Good afternoon, Council President, members of City Council.

My name is Drew Evans, and I'm the superintendent of the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension.

I thank you for your consideration of this variance request for our facility.

This was designed out of security assessments that we've been undergoing.

Our mission is to prevent investigate and solve crimes in collaboration with our criminal justice partners.

We're your state's criminal investigative agency providing investigative assistance, uh, the bulk of all forensic testing for the state, and then we provide all of the records for criminal justice across the state.

Our Maryland facility, we're uh glad to be in your city and be uh a community member and neighbor uh in that process.

But with that building, there's a number of significant security concerns with highly sensitive systems.

This fence would allow us to ensure that we're able to protect that property while still being a member uh of the community.

The gates and pedestrian gates have been placed strategically so that we'd be open to the public throughout the day.

Uh and it would only be closed when a security need arises or after hours to protect this facility.

In a public forum, it's difficult to go into all the sensitivities, but I assure you there's a number of very sensitive systems that don't just service the BCA, they service the City of St.

Paul Police Department and all law enforcement agencies across the state of Minnesota.

And so I'm in the interest of time, because I know we're up on it.

We're gonna turn this over to go through a few more pieces with this.

But what we're really asking at the end of the day is the same fence that just went up around your police department, is the same fence that's being contemplated here today with this variance request.

Eric Daniels, uh senior project manager of Clyde McCarthy Architects.

Um we were brought on after some studies were done uh to design this fence.

And on the picture here is an example of another type of security fence that you might find around uh military installations and prisons.

It's a chain link fence with razor wire on top of it.

This is not the type of fence that we are contemplating, it is a more ornamental style security fence.

And this was recently installed around the the joint campus of the City of St.

Paul Police Department and the Ramsey County Sheriff's Office.

And then in our case, uh what we have is we have some interesting site that was planned well before a lot of the new security features that happen on government facilities that you find today.

And our fence will be for the most part in a lot of places behind landscaping.

So it will be concealed, the best that that existing landscape can provide us.

Um here's some renderings of what the fence will look like around the facility.

So this is at the Maryland and Phalan intersection.

This is down further uh on Phalan by the uh employee entrance and the truck uh access points.

As you can see, it's pulled way far from the street that we can get it and away from the sidewalk, and all the existing landscape there will uh hide it the best that we can.

And then this is the view on Barclay with the uh the fence going on top of that existing retaining wall that we have today that we're working around.

Um, so with that, we stand uh for any questions that you may have of the superintendent or the state.

Okay.

Um thanks so much.

We will first conclude the public hearing, um, and then we may have questions for you.

Uh is there anyone else here to testify on this item?

Right.

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

Ang to close public hearing.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All opposed?

Six in favor, none opposed.

The public hearing is closed.

Ms.

Yang.

Thank you, Council President.

I appreciate the speak um the speakers here today or the appellants for coming and speaking.

I um I was I actually understood like the that email about the extension differently, so I just want to name I'm not ready to make a final vote today, but I would like to lay this over next week.

So the motion is for a one-week layover.

Any discussion of the motion?

Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye, aye.

All opposed?

Six in favor, none opposed.

The public or the public hearing was already closed.

It's laid over to February 18th.

Uh yeah.

Item number 28 is public hearing 26-4.

Public hearing on grievances about federal immigration operations.

All right, this is a public hearing.

As we begin this public hearing, I just want to remind folks that uh we uh welcome all points of view here.

We do not welcome racist, sexist, hateful language.

Um, and we ask folks to refrain from profanity.

This is something that can be viewed by people of all ages, uh, live and online.

Um, so hope folks can express their opinions uh freely, but within those guidelines.

Um we are now holding a public hearing on uh grievances with federal immigration operations generally, and as always, um, two minutes, it's hard to keep you to that.

Um, so help me help you.

Uh welcome up.

Hello, um, my name is Ashley Van Duzarts.

I'm a resident of St.

Paul Ward 3.

Um, and I am here to represent our community uh affected today by the abduction and car crash caused by an ICE agent's pursuit of a resident on Western and Selby by Nina's Cafe.

I want to acknowledge and um thank Council Vice President Kim for coming out to support the community being on scene there today.

We call on uh the council to designate these, these are two um motions basically.

I'd like you to consider.

One is uh I'd urge you to designate hospitals and ambulances as sanctuary sites where ICE is prohibited from conducting enforcement actions.

Furthermore, that a social worker should be assigned or social justice partner should be assigned to provide protection for residents targeted by ICE in their stay at the hospital where their injury was a result of uh ICE's actions.

Health care should be a safe space for all residents, regardless of immigration status, allowing ICE agents deters vulnerable communities from seeking emergency care endangering public health.

And secondly, the second motion uh we call on the city council to mandate immediate comprehensive de-escalation training for all um St.

Paul police officers that would be specifically tailored to scenarios involving federal immigration enforcement operations.

This must include clear protocols for communicating the department's role and intent at the scene.

Officers should emphasize their duty to maintain public safety and include how they are going to do this.

Officers must be trained to verbally and visibly clarify their presence to the public, prevent confusion, and avoid complicity in federal actions that undermine community trust.

Furthermore, we demand that the St.

Paul Police Department establish a publicly accountable process to address harm caused by its actions during these past events, such as today, including medical emotional and civil rights impacts through transparency.

Thank you very much.

That is appreciate it.

Make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

Hello, my name is Peter Sender.

I'm a Ward II resident and member of a local St.

Paul neighborhood community organization, neighbors protecting neighbors.

Uh if I lived in the city's official press releases or on the city council's freshly minted Instagram page, I would think that we are making incredible momentous progress with each council meeting.

I might even think that we are a few more meetings away from Operation Metro Surge being a thing of the past.

Unfortunately, I don't live in a St.

Paul press release.

I live in the real St.

Paul.

And in the real St.

Paul, things are not getting any better.

They are getting worse with each passing day.

I spent my morning talking with my friends who live in the Blair House condominiums at the corner of Selby and Western, who have had their sense of safety and peace of mind stripped from them violently by the reckless and dangerous actions perpetrated by ICE on our city's residents.

Every day, the physical, emotional, and financial costs of this federal occupation mount and compound.

So far, all I've seen from this council are relatively empty symbolic victories.

I I appreciate the sentiment, but we must pass resolutions for eviction more.

You pass resolutions for eviction moratoriums, but they languish on the governor's desk.

We pass piecemeal ordinances but have no way to realistically enforce them.

Our residents need real relief.

Relief like the $1 million in rental assistance.

We have also proposed increasing the required notice of eviction from 30 to 60 days.

These are real intangible measures that would help our most vulnerable residents stay housed and stay safe.

Why is this not been discussed here?

You can't say it's not feasible because it's already been done across the river.

I get it, there might be some differences, but it is politically feasible.

And you can't say we don't have money for this because we're spending 146 million dollars on police whose only job seems to be tear gassing and running interference for ice.

I asking you, please get creative, get the money.

We need tangible help.

Thank you very much.

Make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

Megan Unrow, Ward 1 resident.

I came here this afternoon straight after spending hours standing on the corner of Selvian Western, where the car crash happened this morning.

Thank you, Councilmember Kim, for showing up there.

I wish I had seen evidence that more of you had been there today.

Resolutions and ordinances that take three weeks to move through council and another 30 days to go into effect are not enough.

It was late November when St.

Paul police assisted ICE after a raid using chemical irritants and munitions against protesters and observers.

It is mid-February, and what material relief do we have here?

My credit card bill this month is over six thousand dollars because of all of the GoFundMe donations I have made and grocery runs I am doing on behalf of neighbors.

I do this because I can, but my resources are finite.

We need the government to step in here.

Again, Minneapolis passed emergency funding for rent relief.

Where is that energy from you all?

Real solutions that are helping St.

Paulites.

That is what we need.

I don't want to see Mayor Her sharing press about a GoFundMe supporting local businesses.

I want you all to step up and support our residents with money, with material relief.

The resolutions passed today are meaningful, but they are not enough to keep people housed, to keep them fed while we are under occupation.

Please get creative.

Do more.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

My name's Zach X from St.

Cloud, but not supporting ice.

You are enabling a lot of mentally ill Trump derangement syndrome having lunatics to run wild.

These lunatics need to be evaluated for delusion.

Minneapolis.

Excuse me.

Minneapolis and St.

Paul has endorsed and encouraged protesting and violence, essentially, because these wild animals are not peaceful.

Our governor, mayor, and attorney general, quite frankly, are retards with no balls.

There's people standing on corners watching to alert for ice, you're traitors to America.

People uploading plates for ice agents, doxing them, you're traitors.

This is very concerning that we are allowing this and we are encouraging this against our own Americans.

Everybody in fearing interfering with already hard arrests and making ice agents fear for their personal lives and their family lives.

It's not okay.

Bad words on streets all over, kill ice here, fuck ice there.

I'm only saying when I'm seeing that you guys are allowing these kids to see on these streets.

Think it's pretty sad.

Um people are obsessing about hating people who love America.

Doesn't that seem odd?

Why don't you just leave?

Um, what country doesn't have borders?

If there's bad processes, they need to be addressed, but if illegal aliens just left peacefully, then we wouldn't have ice.

It's our problem.

Previous presidents created, and uh Trump has to deal with it now.

All I'm seeing is Hennepin County and any blue cities left, they're going to run this country in the ground and look like George Floyd Square.

It's disgusting.

Shame on all of you who sleep peacefully picking illegal criminals and aliens over its own vets and homeless, especially.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

Hi, my name is Benjamin Goodman.

I live in Ward 3.

Um, I'm here today to make you all aware of maybe something that you're not aware of, which is that there are evictions still going on with our unhoused folks in this city.

Uh, there's one scheduled for tomorrow in Ward 5.

It's a problem when we are asking Governor Walls to have an eviction moratorium that we are still busy evicting our most vulnerable, historically most abused population in the city.

Uh I have there's not enough time for me to get into the history of abuses on house residents have faced in the city, but I would ask you to consider authoring a resolution to stop DSI from proceeding with evictions and encampment demolitions, at least while Operation Metro Surge is going on.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

Hi, I'm Stephanie.

I live here in St.

Paul.

Um, I guess I just more so in general want to um just say that since January 7th, the day that Renee could got shot.

I was only a block and a half away from her, and at 10 a.m., so before I even know what was going on, I had ICE agents approach me with a mask and dark sunglasses on, um, police ice, all of that on his thing, and for a second it tricked me because they are using manipulation tactics to specifically invoke fear, especially on those who have already lived in some way, shape or form abuse from either close loved ones or the system or whatever.

Um so since then I have.

I have remembered every single second of every single day that that could have been me.

Renee Good could have been me.

Um Alex Pretty could have been me.

And I don't know.

No one should have to live in fear.

Um because here's the thing.

Borders didn't exist before.

Um, no one is illegal on Turtle Island and on stolen land.

Um, and I just want my neighbors and myself and my coworkers to be able to live like normally again.

Um, so honestly, I say just abolish ice.

Just get rid of them.

Um, because again, no one's is illegal on stolen land.

That's all.

Thank you very much.

Make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

Hi, Emily Harakas.

I have somebody giving their time to me right now.

I'm gonna try to go fast.

Um, since the launch of Operation Metro Surge, ICE and CBP agents have conducted warrantless raids and detentions based on racial and linguistic profiling, used excessive force on civilians and residential neighborhoods, targeted sensitive locations such as schools, places of worship, and medical facilities, and violated first, second, fourth, and tenth amendment rights.

Neighbors protecting neighbors demand that the St.

Paul City Council take action.

Specifically, we demand that you adopt legislation incorporating the establishment of public schools, hospitals, and child care centers as safe zones in which federal agents are prohibited from entering.

Prior to January of 2025, these public areas were already deemed sensitive.

ICE agents were to avoid them.

There's already a precedent for the protection of safe zones, and it's recommended by the National Education Association.

Also, I have these.

Thank you.

Minnesota residents are delaying medical care out of fear, expecting parents are afraid to go to their appointments and reconsidering birth and medical centers, which can increase the risk of mortality and complications.

Children are being detained at school and on their way home.

Daycares are being targeted.

What crimes have these children committed?

If this was about criminals being targeted, was that actually just an excuse to terrorize BIPOC communities?

The gov the Supreme Court in Prince versus United States, 1997, ruled that the federal government cannot compel state or local officials to enforce federal law.

Education and public health are state and city responsibilities, not uh delegated to the federal government.

This anti-commandeering principle supports St.

Paul and their right to limit cooperation with ICE and CPP.

According to the Tenth Amendment, powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively or to the people.

And in Federalist 28, Alexander Hamilton stated that the state's governments will, in all possible contingencies, afford complete security against invasions of the public liberty by the national authority.

We are at a turning point.

We have a fascist regime terrorizing our residents, and we need to take action.

One of the agenda items today is to pass the city's top priorities for legislative session.

It includes state funding for reimbursement to support families, community organizations, business, and local governments for the cost incurred during the federal immigration surge.

This needs to be the top priority.

Right now, legislative priorities are only asking for money from the state.

It's not asking the state for a more robust, cohesive plan to protect residents and Minnesotan values.

I think legislative goals this season should be stronger, more robust, strategic, cohesive, with a response at state and across local levels for ICE, including the establishment of safe zones.

I understand that in some ways your hands are tied.

I can understand being concerned about budgets and litigation, but I think that this is an important risk we need to take.

Even better if we can connect with other cities in and out of Minnesota to establish the same type of regulations.

If we stand in solidarity with other cities and set a precedent that we will not accept abuse of executive power, that is how we make real change.

And I wanted to add some definitions here.

Fascism is a system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, a capitalist economy subject to stringent government control, violent suppression of the opposition, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.

Sounds pretty familiar right now.

Concentration camps, a place where large numbers of people, such as prisoners of war, refugees, members of ethnic or religious minorities are detained under armed guard, often without like trial or legal process.

It sounds very familiar to things that we have experienced in the past, and we need to do everything we can.

Now is not the time to be silent.

I get there are risks, but we have to deal with that after this.

We can't set the precedent that we're gonna be complicit in the face of a fascist takeover.

That's it, thank you.

Thank you very much.

Make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

And while you're coming up, I'm just gonna do kind of a last call.

If you're here to speak on this item, we'd appreciate it if you could line up now just so we have a sense of how many folks are left.

Welcome.

Thank you.

I am Teresa Reagan.

I am from Ward One.

I'm back again this week as part of a group that I belong to that's called Neighbors Protecting Neighbors.

Uh we are meeting weekly.

We are talking throughout the week about how we can continue to be courageous and support our neighbors.

I'm here today to encourage you again to be as creative as you can to step up now to help us protect our neighbors.

I listened to you today talk about how you're going to be more forward about what you're doing.

It has to happen.

Today, we watch secret police chase down a man in the Selby Western area.

It's horrifying.

I have never seen a crash site cleaned up so quickly.

There was not the normal surveillance you do to see who caused what.

Quickly, the police came in, the city came in, they cleaned up debris.

I walked by less than 90 minutes later.

No evidence that anything had happened.

No evidence that three cars had been damaged, that a man had been injured and taken away, abducted.

It's horrifying that right now I can live in my neighborhood, three blocks away, know this is going on and walk by.

Now you need to later, and it looks like nothing has happened.

I want you to work with other cities to do whatever you can for safe zones, eviction relief.

We need people to feel safe.

We need to know that they're not gonna be on the street.

And finally, I ask if you are not to please back Ramsey County in not agreeing to 287.

Gee.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

I'll yield my time to my neighbor.

I'm John from Ward 5.

Thank you.

Um hi, I'm Aaron from also Ward 5.

Uh, good afternoon, counsel.

I'm here to testify testify in support of safe zones and um ever stronger separation policies between SPD, um SPPD, and ICE.

I am also going to reference the car crash that happened earlier today because it's too perfect an example.

I'm part of the parent patrol at the Rondo Education Building on Rondo between Dale and McCubbin.

We stand outside our building, which houses three public schools, an early childhood education center, and early intervention offices.

We stand there in an organized invisible way during multiple drop-offs and pickups, given how many different uh student bodies are in the building every single day.

This morning, approximately 10 minutes after drop-off ended, our parent patrol observers witnessed a red Prius being chased at high speed by an unmarked vehicle with lights and no sirens.

They were driving at a very high speed down Rondo, the same street that had been lined with cars dropping off children just 10 minutes earlier.

This chase ended less than half a mile away in a multi-car crash at Selby and Western that injured at least two people.

The speed limit in front of the school is 20 miles per hour.

At the intersection where the crash happened, it's 25.

According to the Minnesota reformer, Council Vice President Kim was at the scene, and she asked the question that we are all asking.

They're going on car chases, going 80 down residential streets to do what?

This is not a hypothetical danger.

ICE engaged in a high speed chase, passed our school building minutes, minutes after hundreds of children had been dropped off on that exact street.

Less than half a mile later caused a multi-car crash.

At least two public schools and a daycare went into lockdown.

And those are only the ones I happen to be aware of.

We cannot have this kind of quote enforcement where it could hurt or kill children.

And where was SPPD?

According to witnesses, they were walking ICE agents to their vehicles.

Well, those agents had tear gas canisters out.

They were staging 15 police vehicles in the cathedral parking lot.

They were insulting bystanders for being concerned about federal agents endangering their community.

And then they left the crash scene so dirty that neighbors had to clean up glass with their own household brooms.

St.

Paul police department commander Joshua Lego has requested videos, photographs, and statements from witnesses, which I find encouraging, and I hope this is the beginning of a full investigation.

Not all of the police department employees are aiding and abetting ice, but some are.

And the public does not feel safe.

These separation ordinances are essential.

And I am grateful to the council for the work that I have seen happen in these last few weeks.

Especially to those of you who are out there metaphorically and literally on the streets with us.

However, these ordinances mean nothing without enforcement.

Right now we're not enforcing even basic traffic laws for the ICE agents.

And I am very worried that that means that these things that you guys are passing, as wonderful as they are, will do nothing.

ICE is causing chaos and putting our children at risk.

Please hold the police department accountable when they fail to act for us.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

Hi again.

Uh Dustin Beisel, Award II, also with Neighbors Protecting Neighbors.

There are so many things I'd like to address today, but with two minutes available, I'll limit my topics to solidarity and accountability.

At the previous session, I acknowledge that I acknowledge the city's reticence to hold the Department of Homeland Security legally accountable due to a fear of litigation.

I also pointed out that other cities are pledging to do this despite the potential for a lawsuit.

I urge the city council to reach out to the DAs of those cities.

Fascism is at our doorstep.

This is no time to live in fear of arbitration.

The consequence of inaction will prove to be far worse.

Acting as a collective will be crucial to our success and the success of future targets of this regime.

Additionally, as you've already heard today, um, ICE agents were involved in a serious vehicle collision at the intersection of Selby and Western and Cathedral Hill.

SPPD showed up at the scene, not assisting ICE, mind you, but performing some cloud crowd control and often being heard telling observers to mind their own business.

I'd like to assert that it is our business.

If we don't keep records of these things, who will?

We know that St.

Paul does not retain its video data for more than a few days.

Observers feel a duty to document these incidents for our own safety.

Some of us come from position of distrust of our local PD to handle this incident appropriately, especially since November's events on Row Street.

Thank you.

And they have not been publicly acknowledged or even commented on by them.

Cataloging this footage should absolutely be mandatory for future investigation as evidence to be used against these thugs and our police.

Also, I apologize for having to endure Zach X.

He's just butthurt about a court date that's coming up on March 19th, so don't worry about him.

Cool.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

Hi.

But you know, if you're not angry right now, you're not you're not witnessing what's going on.

And you guys have all mentioned, you know, you've done a lot of good work today.

I've never been to a city council meeting, I've never spoken at a city council meeting.

But what I saw you guys do at the beginning of this meeting was very positive, right?

But a lot of you have also alluded to that it's just words, right?

It's not direct action.

Um, I'm not a guy that goes out and protests and is involved with any organization directly, but I have been buying meals and delivering meals to people that can't leave their homes, right?

I don't know anything that the city's done that I'm aware of.

It could be a communication issue, like you alluded to also, that the city has directly done to you know help people that can't leave their homes to you know help them with rent, you know, costs or whatever.

And I don't even know what I can do.

I I just know I live three blocks from where the car crash happened this morning.

I'm in Ward one, and my immediate reaction was just like I'm over it now.

Like this is this can't keep happening.

You know, as soon as I I thought the guy was dead right away because it was a pretty ridiculous looking crash.

And like the other lady mentioned earlier, they cleaned it up right away.

And you know, I know there's a no collaboration supposed agreement with St.

Paul Police and ICE, which is fine uh on paper, but regardless, like if they commit a crime and then the police show up and they don't arrest somebody that committed that crime.

Like if I crashed into three cars and fled the scene, they wouldn't run cover for me.

They'd arrest me, right?

If I shot somebody ten times, I'd be arrested.

Thank you.

Um I just think it's like what's the point of all these words and ordinances if people still can't leave their homes, crimes are still being committed, nothing changes, and every day it's a nightmare.

It's a nightmare just trying to go live a life, go to work, come home, and it's just a chaos all the time.

And I don't know if it's a disconnect here or what, but yeah, thank you, and hopefully something changes soon.

Thank you very much.

Make sure to sign in.

All right.

Last but not least, welcome up.

Hello, my name is Will.

Um, I'd like to just start off by thanking you all for your commitment to um supporting trans Minnesotans.

It means a lot.

Um, and I would also like to thank Councilmember Bowie for all the good work she does, and she doesn't deserve to be um to endure verbal abuse like what happened earlier.

Um I'm here to ask for uh police accountability.

Um just kind of the laundry list of um what neighbors uh defending neighbors has asked for or protecting neighbors.

Um housing assistance, like Minneapolis has for people who are struggling right now and who are not safe in this city.

Um intercity collaboration and solidarity.

I think there's a lot that can be done to help each other and maybe share the load around because you guys are doing a lot of work right now.

Um it's very important that we get some sort of safe zones for schools, hospitals, and child care centers.

It's really awful to hear that people are afraid to receive care, that they are not safe in hospitals or ambulances, that they can't go with their family members who are injured by ice, that ice forces them out of the hospital.

And I just like to say that I'd like to see every single council member bringing ordinances right now relating to ice and protecting Minnesotans.

I think that that's just the most urgent thing right now, and it will save the most lives.

And I just know that there's a lot of worry about um like litigation and all that, but I just wonder who looking back on their actions under like rising fascism would have said, I wish I had done less, or that I had followed procedure more exactly.

Fascism doesn't stop for bureaucracy, and we need action now.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Make sure to sign uh take a motion from Vice President Kim to close the public hearing and then we'll have some discussion.

All in favor, or sorry, to continue the public hearing until next week.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

Six in favor, none opposed.

The public hearing is continued to February 18th.

Um, I I just want to take a moment again to thank everyone so much for coming out and speaking.

Um we we hear the demand for urgency, we hear the demand for action for the emergency rent assistance for the safe zones.

Um, I know Councilmember Yang had an opportunity and I had an opportunity to um speak with neighbors protecting neighbors last week, and um both of us have been talking about whether whether and how we can advance many of the demands that you made.

Um so just know that these are all going into our running list of things that we want to take action on and move forward.

Um I look to my colleagues to see if there are additional specific comments that folks want to make um at this point.

Ms.

Yang.

Council President.

Well, I want to say thank you to everybody who came and testified.

I see so many faces, familiar faces, folks who have Dustin, you being one of them who have come back week after week.

And it it really means a lot that you're here for yourself, your your loved ones, your community, and I look forward to seeing you all come back and continuing to bring people along.

Very different.

I do recognize that we are living in a time where it is Trump's second presidency, but also like the rise of neoliberalism, fascism is literally here at our front doorsteps.

And so we probably will continue to see that, but we are the ones who are fighting back, and we must always speak up for our values, for our beliefs, our and the world and that the future that we know we deserve to live in, which is rooted in dignity and justice for all people and equity as well.

And so I want to say thank you for for what you're doing.

I have you know, like there's been very few times in the chambers here where I feel unsafe.

I um want to be clear that in terms of times when I feel unsafe.

It's not when I'm sitting next to somebody who looks different from me, not when I'm sitting next to somebody who is not a citizen, but it is when I'm in spaces with people who spiel that rhetoric deeply filled with hate, and that that was not welcomed at all.

It was very unacceptable.

And um that Council Rubue, you did not deserve that at all.

It was unacceptable for that person to say that about you as very racist.

And also, Council Vice President Kim, it was unacceptable for that person to say what they said and to be attacking our trans community.

And that I want to continue having this plea be a place where it is safe and welcoming to all people, and that you know that is something I'm very committed to.

And so I just want you all to know that I I care deeply about preserving and protecting that, and also that this is our space.

It's our people, you know, this is the people's home, the people's space.

And so thank you for everything you're doing.

We gotta keep fighting back, and I look forward to seeing um folks come back next week.

Thank you, Ms.

Yang.

I saw Vice President Kim.

Yeah, I appreciate it.

I just um wanted to share with folks that the person from the Selby Western Institute this morning was brought to the hospital.

They were stable, is the last thing that I can share about them.

I, you know, I think there's a lot of great networks that will provide aftercare, and there are a lot of great resources for that person.

So we are doing our best to contact their family and to make sure that they've got the full support of community behind them.

And I know that looks like all of you that came today, so I really appreciate it.

Um stay out there.

I know, like, you know, what council member Coleman said earlier, right?

Like Metro Surge isn't over.

This the drawback doesn't matter because the the point that I know that you all understand, but just to name it for all of us, is that it doesn't matter if ICE isn't harming us in Minnesota, it matters if they're harming anyone.

So we need to abolish ICE.

And I and I will take a moment to to name, I just appreciate the council president to hold the quorum.

The only thing that we witnessed today, or that I witness, I'll speak for myself, was hate speech inside of these chambers.

And as I look around the room and see the representation of the multitude of cultures and beings that are here that's not allowed.

It's not only, it's not only not allowed, it's not covered by the First Amendment.

You cannot, that's it's just like that's it.

Sorry, Loris, you should tell me if I'm wrong.

So I thank all of you for being here, but also standing by the communities that fascism is is attacking.

And if they come for one of us, they come for all of us.

Full stop.

And you know, if you've been linked up in a line, if they push someone back, we need someone to step forward and take their place.

And so the moment that we show weakness, that they're willing to come after trans kids, that they're willing to racist have throw racist attack against our own council member and our own chambers.

The moment that we allow them to do that is the moment that they start to gain ground.

So hold steady, do not accept that this is the reality and keep dreaming on what's possible.

But I just like I said my love to you, Councilmember Bowie, and I see um, or I thought I saw your lovely partner here, your lovely partner here.

Um, but I just want to make it very, very clear that that racist attack against you is completely unacceptable.

It is not something that we stand for here in St.

Paul, and you've got my full support behind you for that.

And I'm so sorry that you had to experience that today.

Thank you, Vice President.

Ms.

Jost.

Yeah, I'll just say really quick.

Thank you, everyone, for coming out today.

I too was uh just want to comment on the the person that was in here earlier.

I also have never felt unsafe in these chambers, and we've had to recess multiple times.

We've had protests, never once did I feel unsafe until that person got up and said the things that they did that were racist, they were homophobic in a space that is supposed to be safe for everyone.

Um this is a sacred space, so I take it very seriously.

I want everyone to feel comfortable coming in here.

And I've also never heard someone come in here and directly attack one of our council members, and that's unacceptable.

Um, and that to me is an attack on all of us.

And so um I just want to make sure everyone knows that that's not welcome here, and I also um stand against that and making sure that this space remains welcoming for everyone.

Thank you, Ms.

Just.

Any other uh comments?

Ms.

Bowie.

Thank you, Council President.

I I really appreciate uh all of my council members, you know, my colleagues, you know, in my time as council member, I've never thought that I would experience that singling out.

Um I think all of us have been very courageous and bold, and we're doing everything in our powers as elected officials and as council members to really show up and affirm people's First Amendment's rights and also encourage and um support and protect people as they are standing up against hate.

And I will never tolerate any racist or sexist or homophobic or any xenophobic um remarks.

Um I know particularly what my job is here.

Um no, I don't think I am Queen Latifa, but I have a lot of respect for Queen Latifa.

And I think if if Queen Latifa, if Queen Latifa can see herself in me, and if I can see myself in Queen Latifa, the the rapper and the artist who who coined the UNITY song, if I can use my power on a council to make sure that we are unifying our city and unifying our state, you know, that is my role.

I think I am a council member, and I think I do that really firmly and really strongly and confidently, and I think it's important that we show up for each other.

And I just want to say it does mean a lot to check in with me.

Thank you so much, Councilmember Vice, um, Vice President Kim for ensuring that we have a safety plan.

Thank you so much, um, Council President Naker for not tolerating um that behavior and for all my colleagues who checked in with me.

Um it is very scary, and I also experienced the fear.

Um, but I do know that in my position, I have a responsibility to work beyond that fear, and that actually what was meant to be painful and what was meant to hurt me is actually that feel to be resilient to ensure that we're showing up more than ever.

I come from a community who literally their own freedom and their own autonomy for their body was a crime.

And we were I come from a community that have outworked that and have overcame, and I am literally using all of my experience, all my expertise, leaning forward into my creativity.

Uh, we have been asked to be more innovative.

All of you are always know I'm always pushing the envelope and trying to be ambitious.

Um, that's not going to stop.

Um, just like we're not going to see the hate stopping.

Just like every single day we wake up, we hear another ICE incident, another ice raid and knock on wood.

I pray to God, honestly, that we do not ever experience a murder from the hands of ice or a murder in the hands from any law enforcement here in the city of St.

Paul.

We work very hard as a chair of the public safety committee.

We work very hard to ensure that public safety is protected and that the state of the law is ensuring that we are professionalizing our law enforcement.

Here in St.

Paul, we have to be the model of what good law enforcement looks like because our what we're seeing from our federal government right now is not law enforcement.

We're just seeing completely recklessness.

Uh, like we have heard today, particularly in the incident that took place on Um Selby and Western Avenue.

Uh, what is I see as good governance and good response and ensuring that we have communication.

I did get a chance as soon as I um found out the news, had a chance to talk with our assistant mayor.

I do want I have not had a chance to talk directly with our mayor, but I was made aware that she was physically there or drove by, um, that there was an order for that space to be um cleaned up.

Um, I can I'm welcome more information from my residents, um, particularly about that situation.

I did a video and posted it on Facebook.

I'm not saying that is enough, but I think what is important is to ensure that we are fact-checking.

We did see rumors out there that um um um witnesses um um assumed or thought that someone was deceased.

Uh, it's really important that we, you know, fact check that.

It's really important that we, you know, fact-check that.

And from the information that I received that the person who was detained, I'm very clear to not call them a detainee, because we need to humanize people as we're under the surge.

But the person who was detained had actually asked for that blanket to be over them.

I think it's really critical to understand that, you know, as people are getting arrested, and we have seen that Trump is literally staging TV productions, you know, in the midst of these arrests that we also are thinking through around what privacy looks like.

I know that feels like a very oxymoron concept, especially since we, you know, we heard um in our last public safety um committee meeting how our data is just, you know, just the pervasiveness of access to our data and what that means.

Um I want to land a plane, and I know we I want to just also affirm what uh the purpose of these public hearings are for.

These are for vehicles for us to actually get policy input.

Um I know it's framed as a public hearing, and you know, I also know like initially we were not going to do public hearings because we didn't want to open up a public without having action.

But I think we could we can you know walk and chew gum at the same time.

Um I'm also what I'm hearing, particularly uh from um from the public is that we need to have laws that really identify and name that this behavior is technically a nuisance to our city.

Um looking at our ordinances, um that's something I'm committed to, um, particularly around how can we use our nuisance um um ordinances to actually identify when something is a safety hazard to our neighborhoods.

Uh we have seen even this morning uh damage to our property.

Like that is not a bill that the city should continue paying.

That bill needs to go to our federal government.

Um I also encourage people who are documenting, getting photos and videos.

Um, I encourage you to submit it into the attorney general's evidence portal.

I cannot stress that enough.

Uh this is not a city issue.

This is a state issue, and our attorney general have created a portal for people to submit all this documentation.

All of this, I know right now in real time, we're not able to act, you know, but our legal systems will be able to use everything that is submitted to make the case on why the federal government should be paying for this.

Um and last but not least, because the conversation around our legislative agenda came up, uh, the the agenda that we adopted today is not final, it's not in concrete.

Uh, as council members, I'm really active with having conversations with my um constituents, particularly around how our state leaders can strengthen our not only our sovereignty laws, but strengthen our public works laws and use or excuse me, public um safety laws and use infrastructure and budgetary powers to ensure that these organizations that are standing up, these organizations that are showing up in our community have the resources.

We know that we're up against a uh a federal government that's using lies and hate to to suppress our resources.

They're trying to starve us to be able to even take care of the basics.

Um it's important that we make sure that we're keeping track of like what we are dishing out, what are we, what are the resources that we're using and being really fiscally smart around making sure that we can invest into a future to be able to continue operating our city.

And last but not least, um I heard from I don't know if um Megan is still here, but I as someone who is really serious on being responsive.

Um I want to say, Megan, you know, my apologies.

I did read, I did look at your email from last year.

Um if you are still here or you want to continue getting more information about that terrible incident that took place in your neighborhood, you know, I am here.

Uh I really am intentional of being accessible as much as possible.

Uh I you know want to ensure that any questions that people have related to whether it's federal immigration um agents or even SPPD, I believe in this case it was a SWAT um a SWAT team that um rated her neighbors uh that we get those questions answered.

I do want to say too, on record, it does look like SPPD had a chance to respond, but that is really important.

Now, you know, of course, everyone can use these hearings as ways to talk directly with their council members, but I just want to send the invitation.

If you have not heard back from me, or if you even have some more pressing questions, please set up a time when my office, my executive aide is Polly Hints.

You can always set up times on Thursdays and Fridays.

I'm always in community and welcome to have coffee or even virtual conversations.

So again, you know, I will not tolerate this hate, um, especially in uh in the midst of Black History Month.

Um I think uh being called uh Queen Latipa is probably the uh the the nicest insult I can um get um so and uh and hey we we don't tolerate it, but at the same time I'm someone who have turned pain into power for change at every single incident, every single um um pathway.

So thank you again for for the solidarity in this moment.

Thank you for your thank you for your powerful words, Ms.

Bowie, and I want to thank all of my colleagues for um talking about what occurred here today.

I think that that's really important.

Um, and I just want to reaffirm that this is the people's house.

This is a place for ideas, for innovation, for creativity.

Um, it's a place for disagreement, it's a place for different ideas to be aired and vetted because that's healthy, that's constructive, that's how we get to the right way forward.

It is not a space for hate, it is not a space for personal attacks, and it's not a space for violence.

And as long as I'm council president, and long after that, we will be holding the line against anything like that in these chambers and outside of our chambers as well.

So um, thank you everyone for reaffirming that.

I'm always proud to be part of this council.

And again, um, I don't want to give too much credence to the one person who spoke tonight.

I want to give a lot of credence to everyone else uh who spoke tonight and the things that you have left us with.

So again, uh thank you all very much.

We're gonna move on to our legislative hearing consent agenda now, which is a hard pivot.

Um, but welcome to stay, but thank you again.

We're moving on.

Legislative hearing consent agenda items 29 through 38 are before you for your consideration.

Ms.

Mormon.

Anyone here to testify?

All right, then we will hold a public hearing if you're here on items 29 through 38.

Any of those items, this is your public hearing.

Please come on up.

Not seeing anybody, I'll take a motion from Ms.

Bowie to close the public hearing and approve the items with the amendations and changes from and recommendations of the legislative hearing officer.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

Six in favor, none oppose the legislative hearing consent agenda is adopted as amended.

This does bring us to the end of our meeting.

I would look to Vice President Kim for some immediate news from the wards.

I do have actually immediate news.

Um, hot off the press potentially.

Um, I am sharing good news from Ward 7 from Council Member Johnson, Chair Johnson and permission.

Yes, with permission.

And um uh first baby of Ward 7, Isaiah.

Uh Chair Johnson would like to uh would like for community to know that we have heard a demand for additional rental assistance for our St.

Paul families.

She was vital to secure 2.38 million for rental assistance so far in 2025 and 2026 here in the city of St.

Paul.

She's currently working with PED staff to get an additional 1.48 million allocated to our St.

Paul Emergency Rental Assistance Program in order to ensure that we can have the staffing needs to get money out the door to support um and support that meets um the need at this time, which is huge news.

As we know, um stabilizing families right now is really important.

And she also has a um a message for you, Councilmember Bowie.

Councilmember Bowie, we know that Queen Latifah is never an insult.

Racism has no place in St.

Paul.

The next time someone wants to spew racism and hate in our chambers, we will and have to shut that down immediately.

This is Black History Month.

This Black History Month is our centennial.

Ignorance is a choice, racism is deadly, and Anika Sis continue to shine UNITY.

And that is from Chair Johnson.

Yes, yes.

Um, and the last thought I just want to offer, and I know that my colleagues um the sentiment is is present, but I just want to be really explicit that the attacks today, um, albeit like racist, um, also transphobic.

So let's be very clear, right?

Like what we are talking about, because there is a very systemic attempt to erase um non-binary two spirit and trans people from public life right now.

So homophobic, yes, and most importantly, transphobic.

So let's let's name the thing as well.

And I really appreciate the way that everyone has shown up today.

Um, and um, yeah, and thank you for the leading the meet the difficult meetings today, Council President.

Thank you, Vice President.

Other news from the wards.

Not news, but just happy Valentine's Day and happy Galantheim's Day to all woman council.

So almost forgot about that.

Thank you.

All right, I think that's a good note to end on.

So thank you all very much.

We are adjourned.

Oh, that was so sweet.