Some people made it out of the question.

All right.

Call the meeting of the St.

Paul City Council to order.

Roll call, please.

Kim.

Here.

Yang.

Here.

Bowie.

Here.

Coleman.

Here, Johnson.

Here, Jose.

And Council President Naker.

Here.

That is seven present, none absent.

Welcome everyone, and thank you so much for joining us for our city council meeting today.

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

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God.

Indivisible liberty and justice for all.

Consent agenda items four through 23 are before you for your consideration.

I know we are pulling number 17 from consent.

Is there anything else to be taken from the consent agenda?

Seeing none, I'll take a motion from Vice President Yang for the balance of the consent agenda.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed?

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The consent agenda is adopted as amended.

Item 17, resolution 26-837, finding that the Class A Valet Inc.

violated St.

Paul Legislative Code, Chapter 224 and imposing restitution in the amount of 21,658 dollars.

And I wanted to pull this item off of consent because this is a really important action that the city is taking.

It's not one that often comes to the city council, normally because we have employers who are more responsive to our human rights and equal economic opportunity department.

And in this case, that did not happen.

So wanted to welcome folks from our uh human rights department to say a little bit more about uh what we are seeing here and why this is in front of us.

Thanks, Council President Andrea Ledger, uh, the interim director of the Hero Department, joined by our assistant city attorney, Libby uh Cantner, who's going to do the bulk of the presentation, but I'm happy to answer any policy questions that you have.

Welcome, Ms.

Kenner.

Thank you, Council President, Council members.

Uh, Libby Cantner, as uh Director Ledger said with the City Attorney's Office.

Um, so today we are bringing to you the first uh minimum wage violation that's been before the city council.

As you may know or remember, the minimum wage ordinance was adopted in 2018.

Um but the majority of the complaints that the department receives are resolved through predetermination settlement agreements with the employer.

Um these are agreements where the employer, hero and the complainants work together to correct their wage violations and issue back pay to employees.

They sometimes even enter into monitoring and compliance agreements with these employers to make sure that the employers continue following the rules going forward.

But in this case, we have a situation where the employer has not been willing to work with Hero, and we are hoping to bring this to a council vote today to increase uh procedural protections, transparency, and council oversight.

Uh, to be clear, the role of hero is to investigate the complaints and make findings on whether the ordinance was violated, and then the role of the city council is to adopt those findings or not, and impose or not impose the restitution amount.

So class A valet is the contracted valet parking services company that previously operated out with a restaurant in the city of St.

Paul.

They had a contract with the restaurant from February 2024 to March 2025.

In February of 2025, the department received a complaint alleging that class A had violated the minimum wage ordinance, specifically that they are underpaying their employees and failed to provide required notice of rights to employees.

The complainant, who was a former employee, submitted a pay stub to the department showing that he was only compensated $12 an hour during a two-week period in 2025, when the pay at that time for the business should have been $14 an hour at a minimum.

He also submitted screenshots of text message exchanges with the owner of Class A, where the employer lied to him about how much you'd be paying.

So on January 10th of 2025, the complainant texted the owner and said, Today is $14 an hour, right?

And the employer said yes.

But then after the complainant received his pay stub that showed $12 an hour, he sent that back to the employer along with a screenshot of the text exchange and said, This was my first shift at the restaurant.

You never told me it was $12 an hour.

The respondent said that's what it is.

Complainant says, How am I supposed to know that when you tell me it's $14?

Respondent said, sorry, that's the wage.

So not only was he paying below minimum wage, but he was kind of deceiving employees to think they might be getting a higher wage.

She did a great job dotting the I's and crossing the T's.

She collected documents from the complainant, interviewed complainant and witnesses, and spoke and emailed with the employer.

A big part of labor standards investigations is getting documentation, seeing how much was paid, how many hours were worked, and when Ms.

Ng made several attempts to get these documents from the employer.

She sent a notice of investigation.

She requested and scheduled two interviews, which she did not attend.

She called, emailed, and mailed the employer.

And then back in August, we took the extraordinary step of seeking an administrative search warrant to actually get the records from the employer.

The warrant was served on the employer and he still did not provide the records.

But although he didn't provide the records, he did admit in writing that he was violating the ordinance.

This is an excerpt from his email where he said, I received a letter about asking how much I was paying my people.

We were paying $12 an hour until I saw the rate was $14 an hour.

As I mentioned, this was approximately seven workers in the business, so it qualified as a small business under the ordinance, and the required minimum wage for small businesses during the time of the contract was either $13 an hour or $14 an hour, depending on what the date was.

Under the other allegation of failure to give notice, section 224.08 of the ordinance requires employers to give employees annual notice of the required minimum wage and their right to report violations.

Complainant alleged he was not given notice.

Employer did not provide Hero with any evidence either way.

That creates a rebuttable presumption of a violation, and the employer has not rebutted or contested either this or the other violation.

So working with the information that Ms.

Ng was able to collect during the investigation, we determined that about $10,000, $10,829 were owed in back pay to the employees for the term of the contract.

That's about seven employees and about $1,500 per employee.

And there's the option to impose liquidated damages as well, which is either the greater of the amount wages withheld from the employee or $250.

So in this case, it would be the exact same amount as the back pay.

And it's appropriate to impose liquidated damages when the employer has shown, has not shown that their violations were reasonable or done in good faith.

So the department is recommending that liquidated damages also be imposed for a total restitution of $21,658.

Today the department is asking that the city council find that Class A valet violated these sections of the ordinance and imposed the restitution amount of $21,658 dollars upon Class A Valet.

If the resolution is adopted by council, the city will issue a formal restitution order to the employer and the aggrieved employees can also use this order and this resolution to bring action in district court against the employer.

Great.

Thank you so much for the presentation.

Um a question.

I think the for the question is um is this a situation in which administrative citations would be useful.

I'm wondering what the city's recourse is when someone sort of continues to not just not give documents but ultimately not pay.

In this case, administrative citations would be helpful, probably on the negotiation front, uh, to signal to the employee that they are actually in violation and we can impose additional penalties beyond just the back pay and the liquidated damages.

So forcing them to the table, so to speak.

I will say this is an unusual situation.

Usually we have compliance as you noted um through our PDSA process, but um also allows potentially the city to have quote unquote skin in the game in terms of the um the monetary uh piece of this um right now as uh a city attorney uh Kintner uh said the engrieved employees at this point can now take this finding to court.

The employee at that point has a claim.

If the city were to impose administrative citations, the city would also have the additional claim against the employer.

Um well, I will just say I'm I'm very supportive of this action today.

Um, I see my colleagues uh have comments as well, and I'll just say I think it's really um it's critical that we are daylighting the fact that this is this company class A valet, which is no longer operating in St.

Paul but is operating in Minneapolis, um, is acting in this fashion.

I think it's really important to be to hold these companies accountable.

One of the ways we can do that is through this kind of transparency, this kind of forum.

Um, and as someone who is here when we pass the minimum wage, I remember we talked about how you pass the ordinance, and that's the moment when you get the headlines, but it's everything that happens after that that actually determines whether or not that ordinance protects people, and so it's the work that your department has been doing.

Um it's it's this sort of following through this kind of action and ultimately getting these damages and this restitution for the people who are owed it that that makes the ordinance meaningful.

So I just I really want to thank you for the hard work and for um bringing this to us today.

I saw I think Ms.

Joe and then Ms.

Coleman.

Uh thank you, Council President.

Uh thank you, uh Director Ledger and Miss Canner.

Um, I had a question.

So the liquidated damages being equal to the amount of back pay that was not or that was not paid.

Uh is that also like divided up amongst the those seven employees basically?

Yeah, correct.

Um, and then other question is so is there not an opportunity also for them to get like interest on the unpaid wages.

I don't think the ordinance provides for that.

I'll defer to you.

Yeah, I don't think that is in the ordinance.

I can I can look it up.

I would say that uh if they kind of brought a small claims court action and got a judgment interest as calculated from the new options to get judgment from the diamond center.

So, six, thank you, Miss Coleman.

Thank you.

Thank you both so much.

I just I don't have any questions, just really wanted to say huge congratulations to the hero team and CAO.

This is really there is such a crisis of workers' rights enforcement across the country, and so to see St.

Paul taking the lead in such an important way and really making sure that these workers who were meaningfully wronged and armed in a way that has I mean that's a lot of money, over a thousand dollars per employee.

That is that's rent, that's food, that's car payments, that's huge.

And so being able to take this action and to show other employers who would violate our laws that that's not going to fly in St.

Paul is I think it's a huge, huge, huge step, and something that I hope people feel really proud of.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Any other comments, Ms.

Bowie?

Thank you.

I just want to thank the council president, and I just want to echo what my colleagues had shared.

Um, I really am happy that we have passed administrative citations and we have this effective tool to actually, you know, protect people.

This is like uh uh example here.

I do have a question, particularly around understanding this is a contract service business.

Um, and like for example, like we know the results in terms of like the liquidation and the damages.

Um, but is there any other um violations or I guess kind of like what are the outcomes?

Like, is this uh company able to work in St.

Paul again?

If you could talk about what are some things that's beyond just like the financial um um fees and fines, but anything aside from that.

Um, so as council president Naker noted, they aren't currently operating in St.

Paul.

Um, and this is also in unique situation in that this is not a type of business that we license in the city.

Um, if it was a business that we licensed, there might be some more opportunities for us to maybe um withhold their act their license or take action against their license.

Um, but because um we don't control that here, we we can't um, but at this time, yes, Class A could come in and sign a contract with another restaurant or another business to to do um valet parking services there.

Okay.

I would add that more generally uh it's actually uh had us rethinking how we might explore other solutions, and one thing we've touched about is looking at the state licensing boards as well, which is why your action today is important for similar kind of contract businesses to the extent that these businesses are look licensed statewide, we can forward your finding on to them.

Thank you.

Any other questions or comments?

Otherwise, I will uh take a motion.

Oh, I miss Johnson.

Sorry, I wasn't gonna say something.

Then I was like, you know what?

Actually, I think it's really important to uplift the the work, and I thank you, President Council President, for pulling this from the agenda.

I think just with the thorough investigation and just some of some of the things that we've heard about.

Um this is a primary example of an option where the city's rollout around administrative citations will be really important moving forward, and so I do appreciate the questions to that because this is an example, right?

It's an example of of wage theft.

We have other ordinances like tenant protections, too, that also are looking to administrative citations to be even more effective than this step that we're taking today.

And so I'm looking forward to just kind of working and continuing to see that.

Uh, see the work group that's working on this implementation to take and prioritize examples like wage theft because we're acting on those things now to take and prioritize ordinances like tenant protections that are already in an effect because we could be doing even more than this.

Um I look forward to kind of seeing our hero department continue to be able to work on these items as well with the full staffing and backing of what I hope to be a director soon.

And so just really excited about the work that is gonna be going into these because to me, this is right, like for some people that see the difference between you know, oh, it's two dollars an hour, and it's like, but when you're taking a role that you're looking to have and expecting to actually make a certain wage, you should be able to do that here in our city.

So I just think that that's really important.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um, Ms.

Bowie.

Thank you, Council President.

And I just had a quick question, um, because I I'm also in full support of imposing this restitution, but after we take this action, can you walk us through for millions of viewers in terms of what does enforcement looks like?

Um, you know, I've seen time and time again, we're even in like the court um or housing court, um, our eviction court, uh, where a tenant was able to get their down payment, or excuse me, not the down payment, their um uh security deposit uh back, but they have been chasing you know that person in this case was like the enforcement mechanism, is it like the department of revenues involved or there are other entities to ensure that the back pay um is restored to those employees?

I'll defer to um uh Mr.

Staley or Ms.

Cantor in case I'm speaking out of turn here.

But right now the answer is that the complaints in this case will have this order from you that they can take then to small claims court, and that is their best avenue at this point for actually getting restitution.

Um what I would say is that I think one of the things we're exploring is in the case of administrative citations.

If we had been able to impose administrative citations here, we may have more avenues as the city to be able to also um have our own standing with that employer to be able to try to collect in a more um formal legal setting.

But again, I think we need to uh further explore that, but your action today will give the complaint's um evidence that they can take to small claims court.

Is that fair?

Yeah, and I would just add that we will also, you know, be doing everything we can to try and um collect on the restitution as well or collect for the employees.

Um, uh, like we talked about, um, if there was an instance where maybe they had a license in the city or something, we're trying to look at other creative solutions where we could um try and get compliance as well.

So um, not a ton of options in this specific instance, but small claims court is a great option for the employee.

All right, well, thank you again.

Thanks for the great questions and um clarification of what this ordinance does and doesn't do, and I'm really uh glad we're taking this action today.

I will take that as a motion for approval from Ms.

Bowie.

Any further discussion?

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed, seven in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

Um item 24, ordinance 25-4, amending title five of the administrative code to add chapter 92 titled Tree Preservation for City Sponsored Projects.

We moved it back up.

Oh, I'm sorry, we can try to.

Yes, right, right.

No, you're right.

There, yeah.

Um, okay, so this is uh this is before us for final adoption.

Um, I am going to move to lay it over till June 24th for actual final, well, for probably a public hearing and a lot of amendments from the last time we saw this.

I want to be really clear that this is not being laid over because of lack of action.

It is actually being laid over because there has been so much great action going on on this.

Um, there has been citywide work, especially between the departments of parks and rec and public works, which is important because those are the two departments that are gonna need to be working really closely together when this ordinance goes into effect.

So the process is actually kind of part of the goal here, and it's getting us to the outcome that we want just through the process.

There's been citywide work and engagement with um many district councils, almost all district councils across the city.

Um, our public input group continues to be really active, and we just we don't want to rush to get it done, we want to get it done right.

And um, and the other advantage here is that it will be ready to implement once it's passed.

We will not have a separate rule setting process or standard operating procedure process.

All of those details are being figured out in the midst of this ordinance process.

Um, so we're not gonna have to reverse engineer it, it's just gonna be ready to go on June 24th.

So I want to thank uh all the departments that are working hard on this, the public input group, and especially my legislative aide, Megan Jackett, who jokes that this is a part-time job, um, but it's not really a joke.

Um, and I appreciate my colleagues' forbearance because I know this is this is at least the third time that I have asked for um this to be laid over.

But it's gonna be great.

Any uh so I would move away over till June 24th.

Any discussion of that motion, Ms.

Kim.

Yeah, I think just to affirm exactly what you said.

I still appreciate the amount of time and attention that you're putting into this, and um, in the ward that has one of the worst tree equity scores in the city, I just like on behalf of Ward 5.

I'm so grateful that this is like something that um your office has been leading on, and I'm very supportive of the layover because of the amount of work and engagement that your office has been doing.

So really appreciate it.

Thank you.

Ms.

Bowie.

And I just want to echo that as well.

Council President, um, also Jackett ULA has done amazing work.

I was really impressed with getting all of the outreach, particularly through the district councils.

I know this is something that's really um top priority when it comes to Frogtown Neighborhood Association.

There's been endless conversations, and you know, one of the silver linings about um laying this over is get more input um from my constituents who have a lot of questions that I would love to also iron out uh with some of my colleagues and you who are who's leading on this ordinance.

So again, just you know, for those who are watching and listening, like please, you know, um provide feedback, provide input, and um just want to say thank you so much for your work.

Thank you, Ms.

Bowie.

Um, and there will uh this will actually go to the parks commission on June 11th, and it will be available for public viewing on June 4th, a week earlier than that.

So there will be lots of conversation.

I will make sure to be walking around, of course, with all of your offices, but also for the public's information, this will be publicly available significantly before it comes to us uh at council.

Um, so with that, um thank you for the kind comments.

Um all in favor of the layover, please say aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The ordinance is laid over to June 24th, 2026.

Item 25, resolution public hearing 26-81, amending the financing and spending plans in the Department of Public Works Capital Budget for the Wheelot Grotto Phase 2 street reconstruction project.

So this brings us to the public hearing section of our agenda.

If you are here to speak on any of the following items in the public hearing section, when your item is called, and I say this is a public hearing.

If you're here to speak, please come on up.

You would just come up, stand right in between those two microphones.

You don't need to touch them or adjust them, they'll pick you up just fine.

Um, you'll have two minutes to testify.

We ask that you start with your name and where you're coming from, and then you're you're free to speak on the subject.

After you're done testifying, um, there's a sign-in sheet on both sides, and we ask that you sign in.

Um, so with that, this is a public hearing on number 25.

If you're here to speak on this item, please come on up.

Seeing none, I will take a motion from Ms.

Kim to close the public hearing and approve.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed?

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

Item 26, resolution public hearing 26-82, accepting local road improvement funding from the state of Minnesota and amending the financing and spending plans in the department of public works capital budget to add this funding to public works pedestrian improvement projects.

This is a public hearing.

Is there anyone here to speak on this item?

Seeing none, I will take a motion from Ms.

Johnson to close the public hearing and approve.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

Item 27, resolution public hearing 26-106.

Establishing the financing and spending plans in the Department of Parks and Recreation and the amount of 100,000 to reflect funds received from the Minnesota twins to support youth baseball and softball.

This is a public hearing.

Is there anyone here to speak on this item?

Seeing none, I have two young Ward II constituents at home that would be very upset if I didn't say thank you to the Minnesota twins.

Um I will move approval.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed?

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

Item 28, resolution public hearing 26-107.

Amending the financing and spending plans in the Department of Public Works Capital Budget to transfer municipal state aid funding into projects.

This is a public hearing.

Is there anyone here to speak on this item?

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

Joes to close the public hearing and approve.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

Item 29, resolution public hearing 26-108.

Amending the financing and spending plans of the Department of Public Works Capital Budget for the 2026 recon sidewalk reconstruction program.

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?

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

Item 30, resolution public hearing 26-117.

Authorizing the execution of an MOU accepting 10,000 dollar gift and in-kind travel support from the cities for a financial empowerment fund and amending the spending and financing budget for the cities for financial empowerment grant.

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?

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

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

Legislative hearing consent items 31 through 38 are before you for your consideration.

Welcome, Ms.

Mormond.

Good afternoon, Council President.

I don't believe there's anyone here to testify on a legislative hearing item.

Okay.

So we will now hold a public hearing on all of our remaining items.

Items 31 to 38.

Is there anyone here to speak on any of those items?

All right, seeing none, I will take a motion from Vice President Yang to close the public hearing and approve the items with the amendations and recommendations of the legislative hearing officer.

All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

All opposed?

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The legislative hearing consent agenda is adopted as amended.

Before we go to news from the wards, we do have um a few young folks here in the chambers today who I think might be here from school.

And we always like to give you an opportunity if you're here on a school project to um come on up and stand in between the two microphones so that you're on all five cameras, also live on YouTube at this moment.

So your teacher knows you are here, and just tell us your name and what you like best about St.

Paul.

So if any of you in here meet that description, and feel moved, called.

There you go.

Come on up.

Come on up.

Come on, you can do it.

One of you can do it.

Absolutely.

You know you want to.

You know you want to.

Alright, we're gonna give you a minute to think about it while we share good news, and then we're gonna look back at you awkwardly for a long period of time.

And hope that you come up.

All right, news from the wards, Miss Kim.

The food truck Fridays are still on 907 Payne Avenue at the parking lot at the corner of Pain and York, 3 to 7 p.m.

every other Friday.

Uh, please join us there.

And a few weeks ago, I shared um the amazing good news of our soapbox derby.

Some of you have accepted my invitation.

Some of you I'm still waiting to hear, no pressure.

Um, but not next Tuesday, but the following Tuesday, we will be defending our title against Minneapolis in the soapbox derby at Hidden Falls.

Be there or miss out on the fun.

Um, soapbox builds are finishing this week.

So if you haven't had the chance to go out and to check in on your teams, I strongly encourage you to do it.

It's really fun.

Um, Chelsea Heights team had three kiddos when I was there and two broken arms in the midst.

So I really wonder who's driving, so like TBD.

Um, but please consider coming, it's a great prax and rec opportunity.

Um, and again, we gotta defend our title on home turf.

So, next next Tuesday, Hidden Falls, 5 uh to 7 p.m.

Awesome.

It sounds like it's gonna be a lot of fun.

Ms.

Coleman.

I just have a clarifying question.

Were the broken arms related to the Derby or separate?

You know, I great question, Councilmember Coleman.

I did not have a follow-up question for them.

Yes, but if six arms, two are broken.

Cool.

Okay.

Sounds fun.

And also scary.

Thanks, Council President.

I wanted to share about the Pain Failing Community Council's monthly meeting that they're having.

Um, it's on Tuesday May 26th from 6 p.m.

to 8 p.m.

at Arlington Hills Community Center.

They are gonna have Mayor Cully her there so that she can hear from residents about their thoughts, concerns, and ideas about Northern Iron, which is the foundry in the east side and ward six, and I will be there too.

So, wanted to let folks know about coming there.

Thanks, PP.

Other news, Ms.

Bowie.

I have a couple here.

Um, so all um coming from Parks and Rec, our amazing uh programs.

We have the Rondo Baseball Initiative that's hosted on Mondays and Wednesdays from 5:30 to 7 p.m.

So if you have the little kiddos in the Rondo neighborhood from age eight to eleven, they can join um the Rondo baseball um team.

We have also the stop the violence basketball event.

Um free vendors, uh, basketball games, music, guest speakers, it says celebrities.

I'm not sure who those celebrities are, but uh face painting.

Um that's gonna take place at Frogstown Community Center Saturday, May 30th.

And also on that same day, May 30th, we have the David Winfield um ceremony.

I'll give them more information, but you can find it all on social media.

Um, and last but not least, this is not from the ward, but it's inspired um by my ward.

I actually, when I was in college, um, was on the planning committee for the Malcolm X conference, and um the late great um mentor of mine's Mel Reeves, had and also um um elder Yusuf Imagini uh both led the Malcolm Minnesota Malcolm X conference.

Um we've had it in St.

Paul and in Minneapolis.

It's going to take place this Saturday, May 23rd.

Um, my good friend Tandy Seesway is carrying on the baton and asking for people to join as we're talking about just uh liberation politics and education.

Uh, it's gonna take place in the at the North Community High School.

Um, you can find it online from 9 a.m.

to 7 p.m.

Lots of discussion.

We'll have tons of elders there.

Uh, all free vegan food hosted by Tani Seesway, who is a vegan chef, vegan by nature, so please look it up.

Um, again, it's not in St.

Paul, but it is deeply rooted in our mission and community.

And I told her if I promote it this year, I will love to see it next year hosted in St.

Paul, so stay tuned.

Um, but yeah, it's uh taking place this Memorial Weekend.

Awesome.

That sounds like a lot of fun.

Um, especially appreciate the vegan food.

You don't have to.

Um, I will share just because it's actually not till after next week's meeting, but it is right after next week's meeting, and I want people to have time to plan and dress and mark their calendars.

Um, the St.

Paul Parks Conservancy is hosting its 2026 party for the parks at Harriet Island next Wednesday.

Um 5 30 to 8 30 p.m.

It is celebrating St.

Paul Parks and the people who make them great.

Um, and it is going to have a performance by Circus Juventus, food from Boca Chica, um, original music by Thomasina Petrus and Tom West, um, music dancing and vibes with DJ Glow.

Great vibes, not just vibes.

Um, so a lot of excitement.

So I really encourage people to come.

I will definitely be there.

Um, you know, which is another selling point of the event.

Any other uh news?

Anyone who wants to come talk to us.

Um, sorry, just the students.

Yep.

Okay, um, and with that, we are adjourned.

This is the flyer.

Smallly, that's funny.