OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Saint Paul HRA Board Meeting: June 3, 2026 – EDA Opt-In, Executive Director Appointment, TIF & Property Acquisitions

City CouncilWednesday, June 3, 2026
BodySt Paul, Minnesota
SessionCity Council
DateWednesday, June 3, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 58:53
Transcript — Verbatim
1:54

So we're going to go through the middle of the little books that we've done.

2:30

So I don't think we've got to go to the record, but we'll several people over the report for the number of the public, but those reports are the reports, and then the record, though.

3:42

Jost.

3:44

Kim.

3:44

Here.

3:45

Here.

3:46

Yang.

3:47

Here.

3:47

Chair Johnson.

3:48

Here.

3:50

Seven present, zero absent.

3:52

And item number one is approval of the minutes.

3:55

M IN twenty six-eighteen.

3:57

Approval of the May HRA meeting minutes.

4:01

Our reading, I trust that everyone had a chance to to review these.

4:04

I'll take a motion from Vice Chair Joseph approve all those in favor.

4:09

I all those opposed.

4:12

Seven in favors, you're opposed.

4:13

The minutes are adopted.

4:15

Item number two is discussion item REST-six-eight eight nine.

4:21

Resolution of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, HRA of the City of St.

4:26

Paul exercising the HRA's authority to opt in to and support the Ramsey County Economic Development Authority, EDA.

4:36

All right, so there it was several uh several different communication and discussion points last week.

4:41

We laid this over, so it's back in front of us.

4:44

Um I'm just going to look through my colleagues if there's any discussion on the item.

4:49

Council President.

4:50

I'm sorry, Commissioner Naker.

4:51

Thanks, Chair Johnson.

4:52

Um I I want to say that I really um first of all appreciate the time and attention that all of us have taken with this matter.

4:59

Um, grateful to the county and uh particularly to HRA Chair Zhang for the attention and the time that we've taken over the last week.

5:08

Um, something that's really important to me is that as we make this decision about a million dollars going towards economic development rather than to affordable housing, that we have a good sense and feel good about where those dollars are going.

5:19

Um, and I feel a lot more confident after the discussion that we had over the last week that um not just staff but also policymakers will be able to weigh into that and and help um guide those decisions.

5:30

So um grateful for the time and happy to support version two.

5:36

Thank you, Commissioner Naker.

5:38

I also just want to echo this and the appreciation for the extra time that was given, especially when there's questions or things that are uh arise last minute.

5:48

It's important for us to be able to take those concerns into consideration and also to be able to have a meeting to talk about that.

5:54

And so we were able to do that.

5:56

I think one of the things that's really important as well, and I appreciated the clarification from our attorney's office, too, is that right, not only are we opting in, but we're opting in for five years.

6:05

And I think being able to clarify that, you know, in this vote and this piece and what that means is just because by state statute, we actually will be able to to um revisit this conversation five years from now.

6:18

But just so people are clear on why that maybe was important to take another time pause and also to make sure that folks are on the same page because this is a million dollars for economic development, potentially roughly around there, um, within the city of St.

6:32

Paul, but it also is something that has not been done before and something that we would be doing for the next uh four consecutive years after this.

6:40

And so just something that I think is really important about the significance of this item for people who are looking and wondering, like what exactly this is and what it means.

6:48

Um, with that, we do have a version two in place, which is kind of talked about last week.

6:54

The discussion really primarily stemmed from the beat resolve clause that has now been removed in the version two.

7:00

So, with that, I will move the motion forward for version two of this item.

7:04

Uh, any further discussion or any questions?

7:07

Commissioner Bowie.

7:08

Chair Johnson, I just want to say I really applause how you know how transparent you have been about just the changes and also um the responsiveness in terms of making sure no um you know both parties are in agreement.

7:22

I just have a question particularly around understanding that we are removing that clause.

7:26

What does uh continue conversation around the spending plan and how the dollars are used and how the dollars will be allocated, um, which I think understanding these are two separate bodies, right?

7:37

The HRA, Ramsey County, and St.

7:39

Paul, you know, would we know is there understanding that they're they're invested in that collaboration, but I'm just wondering um what does that look like operationally?

7:50

Yeah, I think um I really appreciate the question, Commissioner Bowie, and I do see um deputy county manager Collins and County Commissioner Shong here as well.

8:01

And I think it's important for the county to be able to answer that with us too.

8:04

So I'm gonna invite them up at this time, um, because this was also something that we talked about.

8:09

As I mentioned during the discussion, one of the requests that we had was at the time was around maybe mutually beneficial language.

8:15

The resolve on the language front was that there wasn't necessarily a willingness to have different language in it.

8:21

Um it was really just an ask to remove the clause altogether.

8:24

But we did talk about some of that partnership pieces, but I think it's important for the county to reiterate to this body how you envision working directly with us with us as policymakers, and I think we even talked about in the meeting the difference between how the county runs and this body and why that was even put in in the first place, and also for my uh commissioner's awareness.

8:43

Um, we did also send this to send just the updates and the rationale behind the edits to Commissioner Ortega, Moran, Zhang, and McMurtry.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Economic Development█████████████████████████████████████████████71%
Affordable Housing███████11%
Procedural███████11%
Community Engagement███5%
Land Use Regulation1%
Housing1%
Summary of Proceedings

Saint Paul Housing and Redevelopment Authority Board Meeting – June 3, 2026

The Saint Paul Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) Board met on Wednesday, June 3, 2026, at 2:03 PM in Council Chambers, City Hall. All seven commissioners were present. The meeting covered approval of prior minutes, two discussion resolutions, and three staff reports, with no public testimony. Key actions included opting into the Ramsey County Economic Development Authority (EDA) with a five-year commitment, appointing Melanie McMahon as Executive Director, and receiving updates on the Galtier Plaza TIF district, acquisition of 259 University Ave W, and Highland Bridge development.

Consent Calendar

  • Approval of Minutes (Min 26-18): The board unanimously approved the minutes from the May 6, May 13, and May 27 HRA meetings. Motion by Commissioner Jost, carried 7-0.

Discussion Items

  • RES 26-889 – Opt-In to Ramsey County EDA: The board discussed and adopted (as amended, version two) a resolution to opt into and support the Ramsey County Economic Development Authority for five years. Commissioner Noecker expressed confidence after additional discussions, noting that $1 million of HRA funds would be directed to economic development rather than affordable housing, but that policymakers would have input on spending. Chair Johnson clarified that opting in is a five-year commitment by state statute, with a revisit after that period. The amended version removed a disputed clause. Presentations from Deputy County Manager Kari Collins and Ramsey County HRA Chair Mai Chong Xiong outlined five core spending areas, a collaborative framework, and a quarterly economic development summit for municipal input. The resolution passed 7-0.
  • RES 26-792 – Appointment of Executive Director: The board adopted (as amended, version two) a resolution appointing Melanie McMahon as Executive Director of the Saint Paul HRA. Chair Johnson highlighted the importance of partnership with the current Planning and Economic Development Director. No further discussion; passed 7-0.

Staff Reports

  • SR 26-111 – Galtier Plaza TIF, District 17, Ward 2: Debt Administrator Jenny Wolfe presented an introduction to the proposed Galtier Plaza TIF district at 175 5th Street East. The project involves converting vacant office space into 166 market-rate rental units (29 studios, 82 one-bedrooms, 55 two-bedrooms) with initial rents affordable to households at 60%–100% AMI. The building, on the National Register of Historic Places, has significant code deficiencies qualifying as substandard. Total development cost exceeds $56 million, with HRA assistance including a $4.56 million pay-as-you-go TIF note (65% of increment pledged) and a $650,000 spending plan forgivable loan for permits and public improvements (skyway level). The developer is Bigos Galtier LLC. The TIF district will be created within the existing Seventh Place project area, with parcels removed from the Minnesota Event TIF district. At least 25% of increment will be pooled for affordable housing. The board received and filed the report; action is scheduled for June 10, 2026.
  • SR 26-112 – Acquisition of 259 University Ave W, Ward 1: Principal Project Manager Jonathan Reisetter introduced an acquisition (for $700,000 from Community Development Block Grant funds) of 259 University Ave W to create a contiguous redevelopment site adjacent to six HRA-owned parcels (acquired 2006–2009) known as the Saxon Ford site. The building at 259 is occupied (over 100 years old). The other parcels have vacant structures (two are category two condemned) or are vacant lots. CDBG also reserves $100,000 for demolition. After acquisition, the city will conduct environmental investigation, demolish buildings, and solicit redevelopment. Commissioner Bowie emphasized the need for community input and expedited redevelopment after long HRA ownership. The board received and filed the report; action is scheduled for June 10, 2026.
  • SR 26-113 – Highland Bridge Update: Sean Ryan, Director of Real Estate Development at Ryan Companies, provided an annual progress update on the Highland Bridge site. Key highlights:
    • The Albert (formerly Gateway Apartments): 97 market-rate units with 24,000 sq ft retail along Ford Parkway. Construction ahead of schedule, leasing began May 2026, August turnover expected. A second retail block (13,000 sq ft) will be turned over to Tier and Cantata at month-end. Four signed LOIs for retail tenants are pending.
    • Civic Square (Block B): A park owned by the Master Association, featuring a central sculpture using two large freezes from the old Ford plant. Construction started this week.
    • M/I Row Homes: M/I Homes will take down property at end of June/early July for a second phase of row homes (three-bedroom, two-and-a-half bath), construction start July 2026.
    • Widener Apartment Homes: After the passing of owner Dean Widener, the project was delayed but now forecasts a September 1 start. Permitting is underway. Commissioners expressed appreciation for the progress and condolences to the Widener team. The board received and filed the report.

Key Outcomes

  • RES 26-889 adopted (7-0) – Opt into Ramsey County EDA for five years, with a commitment to ongoing collaboration through quarterly summits and defined spending buckets.
  • RES 26-792 adopted (7-0) – Melanie McMahon appointed as HRA Executive Director.
  • Galtier Plaza TIF introduction received and filed; formal action (TIF plan adoption, development agreement) scheduled for June 10, 2026.
  • Acquisition of 259 University Ave W introduced and filed; purchase agreement and CDBG spending approval expected June 10, 2026 City Council meeting, with closing as early as June 11.
  • Highland Bridge update received as informational; next update anticipated in one year.
  • Next regular HRA meeting: June 10, 2026. Meeting adjourned at 2:59 PM.

Meeting Transcript

So we're going to go through the middle of the little books that we've done. So I don't think we've got to go to the record, but we'll several people over the report for the number of the public, but those reports are the reports, and then the record, though. Jost. Kim. Here. Here. Yang. Here. Chair Johnson. Here. Seven present, zero absent. And item number one is approval of the minutes. M IN twenty six-eighteen. Approval of the May HRA meeting minutes. Our reading, I trust that everyone had a chance to to review these. I'll take a motion from Vice Chair Joseph approve all those in favor. I all those opposed. Seven in favors, you're opposed. The minutes are adopted. Item number two is discussion item REST-six-eight eight nine. Resolution of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, HRA of the City of St. Paul exercising the HRA's authority to opt in to and support the Ramsey County Economic Development Authority, EDA. All right, so there it was several uh several different communication and discussion points last week. We laid this over, so it's back in front of us. Um I'm just going to look through my colleagues if there's any discussion on the item. Council President. I'm sorry, Commissioner Naker. Thanks, Chair Johnson. Um I I want to say that I really um first of all appreciate the time and attention that all of us have taken with this matter. Um, grateful to the county and uh particularly to HRA Chair Zhang for the attention and the time that we've taken over the last week. Um, something that's really important to me is that as we make this decision about a million dollars going towards economic development rather than to affordable housing, that we have a good sense and feel good about where those dollars are going. Um, and I feel a lot more confident after the discussion that we had over the last week that um not just staff but also policymakers will be able to weigh into that and and help um guide those decisions. So um grateful for the time and happy to support version two. Thank you, Commissioner Naker. I also just want to echo this and the appreciation for the extra time that was given, especially when there's questions or things that are uh arise last minute. It's important for us to be able to take those concerns into consideration and also to be able to have a meeting to talk about that. And so we were able to do that. I think one of the things that's really important as well, and I appreciated the clarification from our attorney's office, too, is that right, not only are we opting in, but we're opting in for five years. And I think being able to clarify that, you know, in this vote and this piece and what that means is just because by state statute, we actually will be able to to um revisit this conversation five years from now. But just so people are clear on why that maybe was important to take another time pause and also to make sure that folks are on the same page because this is a million dollars for economic development, potentially roughly around there, um, within the city of St. Paul, but it also is something that has not been done before and something that we would be doing for the next uh four consecutive years after this. And so just something that I think is really important about the significance of this item for people who are looking and wondering, like what exactly this is and what it means. Um, with that, we do have a version two in place, which is kind of talked about last week. The discussion really primarily stemmed from the beat resolve clause that has now been removed in the version two. So, with that, I will move the motion forward for version two of this item. Uh, any further discussion or any questions? Commissioner Bowie. Chair Johnson, I just want to say I really applause how you know how transparent you have been about just the changes and also um the responsiveness in terms of making sure no um you know both parties are in agreement. I just have a question particularly around understanding that we are removing that clause. What does uh continue conversation around the spending plan and how the dollars are used and how the dollars will be allocated, um, which I think understanding these are two separate bodies, right?

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com