City Council - Regular Meeting

Council to order. Roll call, please. Johnson? Here.

Jost? Here.

Kim? Here.

Yang? Here.

Bowie? Here. Coleman? Here. Council president Nager? Here. Severn present, non absent.

Welcome, everyone. Thank you so much for joining us at 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 to all.

Consent agenda items one through 13 are before you for your consideration.

I know that we are pulling item 13 for separate consideration. Is there anything else to come off of consent? All right. And because we do have one member, Councilmember Johnson, is joining us remotely today while still on maternity leave, Kudos to Councilmember Johnson, who has been participating. It's hard to believe you've been on maternity leave this whole time. We will be taking every vote as a roll call vote, and I will probably forget that a number of times. Since is there anything else to come off of consent? Seeing none, I'll take a motion from Ms. Yang to approve the balance of the consent agenda. Roll call, please.

Johnson?

Aye.

Jost? Aye. Kim? Aye. Yang? Aye. Bowie. Aye. Coleman. Aye.

Council president Aker. Aye. Seven in favor, none opposed. The consent agenda is adopted as amended. Item number 13 is resolution 26 dash three sixty five, electing the officers of the city council, council committees, and appointing council members to the audit Committee.

And I just wanted to pull this off of consent really to say thank you to all of my fellow council members for stepping up into leadership in so many different ways. We started something new last year, which was to share leadership much more broadly across our council, making sure that all or many of us have chairmanship, chairwomanships, vice chairwomanships of different boards and committees, spreading out the power, making sure we're building a pipeline of leadership, and really empowering all of us to to be part of so many different aspects of our work. We also started something new at the end of last year, which was to revisit at the end of every year whether or not we want to continue in the leadership roles we're in, whether we want to take on new leadership roles. Previously, that was something that was just fixed until major transitions happened, I think it's really important to have that opportunity to revisit every year. So I want to thank all of my colleagues who are stepping up.

I want to thank my colleagues for the honor of continuing to serve as council president. It's something I take very seriously. And I wanted to say a special thank you to council vice president Hwa Chan Kim, who is not going to be council vice president anymore as of this resolution, but who has been an incredible partner, leader through some unbelievably challenging times, and I've been so grateful for your partnership. So I will make the motion. Is there a discussion of the I will make the motion for version two. Is there a discussion of the motion? Ms. Yang?

Will yield. Vice President Kipp.

Thank you. Yes. I just had a few things to say. It's just been a profound honor to serve as council vice president over the last two years and not only in a council leadership capacity, but also as the vice chair of the budget committee. And as the interim budget committee chair, I established a new budget process with our budget officer, Khamud, one that was praised as the best one ever and requested to be replicated for the library in HRE.

Not only that but I found budget solutions for every single one of our council priorities, something that I'm profoundly proud of. And as I stepped down from this role, I do so with full confidence and support in council member Yang. She's one of our longest serving council members, leading the city on progressive legislation in her tenure and one of the hardest working colleagues who just gets the work done. Council member Yang is a tireless advocate and organizer who spent her career showing up for East Side residents and fighting for immigrant and working class families. As and I know I know chair Johnson is sort of like competing with this now, but as our as one of our youngest council members and the first Hmong American woman elected to this body, she represents exactly the kind of leadership our city needs to keep vulnerable residents at the center of every single decision that we make.

I've long held the belief that investing in the growth and leadership of every council member makes us a stronger, more effective body for Saint Paul and ultimately better serving the residents of our city. And this voluntary transition of leadership reflects that belief in action. I'm excited to support Councilmember Yang in this new capacity and I have no doubt that her voice, her roots and her vision will only elevate the work we do together on behalf of

our community. Thanks, Vice President. Asam as Yang.

Thank you, Council President. I know we still have to take the vote, I did want to make my comments. And thank you, Council Vice President Kim, for your very kind and encouraging words. I am excited to work alongside you, council president, as your council vice president. And it really is an honor to work alongside you.

I mean, when I first came onto the council five years ago, I was the newest council member. And now I'm the second most veteran and I never thought that it would be this way, but it has been such a beautiful journey for me to serve in a council that is an all woman city council for us to see history be made this year in electing our first Hmong American mayor, Hmong American woman mayor as well. And I have such deep respect for you. Like you are somebody who is so wise, so kind, and always willing to have a listening ear to everybody, like no matter what their thoughts and opinions are. And that's especially important for a leader to be someone who is open to listening to everyone and giving them that space, especially in government.

And so I'm very excited to work alongside you. And I want to say thank you, Council Vice President Kim, for your leadership. I have learned so much from you, I'm so inspired by you. I know that it was a lot of work, really, to even take on a Council Vice President role, I just want you to know that you did the work so seamlessly. You have a natural ability to lead and to connect with people and to really make an impact by always leading with your heart.

And that has been deeply felt in all of the work I've seen you done, even as aide during your time here prior to being a council member in the nonprofit that you lead every single day and in the role that you took as our council vice president and your willingness to even step in for me as the budget chair when I was on maternity leave. And you also did that very seamlessly. And I also want to echo the incredible, just the system, I would say, the beast that we created in the budget committee to really have a system where all council members are heard, they have an opportunity to really understand what is being presented to us, Also to make amendments and to offer their thoughts and opinions, which I just want to name that. When I came in as a new council member, it was always really hard to figure out like, how do I navigate such a big system? I don't I have to just insert myself in somewhere, you know, but it always is so much the transition is always better when we do build systems that actually are supporting council members who sit here at this table.

And I have such deep respect for you for your commitment to that work. And I will miss having you as our council vice president, but I know that you're just in office away from me. And I thank you for always opening up a space for me to be able to connect with you about our work and doing that in a judgment free zone and always being willing to be a sounding board. You really when I mentioned that you inspire me to lead and to show up powerfully in this role, you really do because I have learned deeply from you about you know, what I how I want to show up as a council vice president. And so, I want to know that your work is very, very meaningful and that you've made such a huge difference in leading our council here as council vice president.

I am very grateful to my colleagues here for your trust and just your confidence in me and my leadership and also my partnership. I am coming into this role committed to being a team player to be coachable and to learn from all of you because one thing that I know is that I never came into my role as accounts member here to know everything and to act as if I knew everything. I mean I ran for office when I was 23 years old and if anything, people always ask me, well, how are you gonna be a listener? How are you gonna know everything? And I'm like, actually I didn't run.

I'm not running to know everything, but I'm running because I know that there is such deep wisdom and that there's so many experts in our communities and that when we can bring all of them together, that's actually how we build this city that is strong, functioning, and consistent in itself. And I've always believed in that and led in all of that and shared that with everybody because I think it's very important for people to know that to be a council vice president, to be a council member, to be a leader, to do anything, we don't have to be perfect. We don't have to know everything. You just have to really lead with heart and courage. And that's what I'm excited to continue bringing with me in this role here.

Also, I'm excited and committed to being a listener to all of you, to be your sounding board, to make sure that we're moving along items in our council here that we care deeply about. And I know there's many of them. We've had retreats about them, many conversations about them. And so I'm ready for this year to be a year where we continue just really cruising through on that momentum and actually really building even more momentum to get more things done, especially really deep systemic changes in the council here. And most importantly, to be a strong steward for all of us.

I mean, these are all things that I've listed because when I in my role as an accounts member, these are all things that I would want from anybody in leadership roles on our council here, no matter what budget committee we're talking what committee we're talking about, or what role we're talking about. And so I'm very grateful to my colleagues here for your support. And I just want to name that when I came onto the council five years ago, I mean, have looked really different for me. During that time, I was not married, I didn't have children, but then now I am married. My husband, Kong, he is incredible, he's so supportive.

I also have three kids who are three and under, and one of my favorite questions is when people ask me, How do you do it? And honestly, it is survivor mode. Being a parent, we are always in survivor mode. But my heart and my will and just this willingness to always hustle and get things done and to most importantly be fighting for our ward six representatives residents and then also be a champion for you all and being a supporter and partner to you and your work too has always been at the center of my heart and I carry that with me. And I also wouldn't be able to even do my work as a council member without the village around me.

And so, in taking on the council vice president role, I just want to be really transparent that it's my village, my in laws, my parents, my husband who are taking care of my children that really make this possible. And so anything that we do, we always have to have that support network. And this is context that I share because it's something that I believe we all can relate to, not just even talking about the council vice president role here, but in our life. We need that support network, and we deserve to have that, you know, in our own lives. The people that we fight and represent every single day, they deserve to have that too.

And one thing that I am really holding deep in my heart is that no matter what our roles are, the hats that we wear as maybe a parent, or you know, being a professional in our field, a council member, like we have hopes and dreams that are worth fighting for too. And I know very clearly that this year that my calling is to be a council vice president, really ushering along the things that we care deeply about and being an advocate and a champion for us at the council here. So I want to say thank you again to all of you and I'm so excited to see every single person on a council here be taking on a leadership role, whether it's a chair role, a vice chair role, and that is significantly different from how things were when I was on the council five years ago. And so, I'm so proud of all of us, and I want to say thank you for your leadership in our city here and our council. And thanks to my staff as well in the ward's sex office because I know that in taking on this role, there's going be a huge heavy lifting for them, too.

But I have full confidence in their work, and they have shown up so strong. So, again, I'm really excited for the work ahead. Thank you

so much, Ms. Yang. I just want to note for our tech services folks that we seem to have lost visuals of council member Johnson, so I hope we can get that back. Again, council vice president Kim, to you, thank you so much on your way out of leadership. Council member Yang, to you, so excited to work with you.

You are a critical thinker, you care deeply, and you pay attention. And those three qualities don't always coexist in the same person. It's one of the reasons why I so enjoy working with you and why I'm really excited to continue doing that. You also said when we first talked about you coming into this role that you, as you just said, really want to help other council members advance their priorities. And that really resonated with me because that is so important and it's something that as the longest serving council members, it is strange to suddenly find yourself in a position where you are in that where you are the longest serving council members and where others are looking to you, but you're you're ready for it.

You're more than ready for it, and I'm really grateful that you're willing to give your time to help other people advance their work and to help all of us do better for our constituents. So thank you. And I really to again, to all of our colleagues, council member Johnson stepping up as budget chair in addition to HRA chair. That's gonna be a huge amount of work. Thank you for doing that and for continuing to lean in throughout your maternity leave and I know beyond.

Council member Bui for chairing our public safety committee now coming into its second year, a brand new committee that you started. Thank you for that. Council member Coleman becoming a vice chair just a few months into being a council member at all during some very tumultuous months as a council member, thank you for being willing to step up. And to council member Jost for serving as a chair of our HRA for the last few months, for attending our leadership team meetings for the last few months, and then for serving as library board chair into the future. It really is so important to have your voice, your thinking at the table and in leadership. So thank you. Any other discussion of the motion? Seeing none, roll call, please.

Johnson?

Aye. Jos?

Aye.

Kim?

Aye.

Yang? Aye. Bowie?

Aye.

Coleman? Aye.

Council president Aker? Aye. Seven in favor, not opposed. The resolution is adopted as amended. Item number 14 is final adoption of ordinance 26 dash nine, adopting the geothermal energy franchise by the Heights Community Energy Inc.

And as we move into the, ordinance section of our agenda, you'll notice that there are some items at different stages. We always have three readings of ordinances. We have a staff report at a first reading. We have a public hearing at our second reading. And then on the last, the third reading, have ordinances up for final adoption. So ordinances that you see in front of us in this section have already had at least two readings, including a public hearing. This item is before us for final adoption. I would look to Vice President Yang for a motion.

I'm very excited to support this. I mentioned in our in the first reading that there's been so much work put behind this from our community partners, our board as well. And I'm excited to move it forward. So I move approval of it.

That's a motion for approval. Any discussion of the motion? Seeing none, roll call please.

Johnson?

Aye. Joe?

Aye.

Kim? Aye. Yang? Aye. Bowie? Aye.

Coleman? Aye. Council President Nacre? Aye. Seven in favor, none opposed, the ordinance is adopted. Item number 15 is final adoption of ordinance 26 dash 11, granting authority to the port authority to issue and sell bonds in the principal amount of $6,000,000 and any bonds to refund such bonds, to secure such bonds with the pledge of the full faith credit and resources of the city, and to use the proceeds derived from the sale of such bonds to pay for cost and expenses necessary to be incurred by set port authority for a portion of the cost of the redevelopment of part of the Saint Joseph's Hospital site.

And although you might not have grasped that from the title of this item, this is a very, meaningful and exciting development for Downtown St. Paul. We are talking about $6,000,000 of public investment yielding roughly $60,000,000 of taxable value on a key opportunity site for downtown. Grateful to the Port Authority for their leadership and partnership on this. I would move approval. Is there any discussion of the motion? Seeing none, roll call please.

Johnson? Aye. Yost? Aye. Kim? Aye. Yang? Aye. Bowie? Aye. Coleman? Aye.

Council President Nacre? Aye. Seven in favor, none opposed. The ordinance is adopted. Item number 16 is final adoption of ordinance 20 six-twelve amending section 310.01 of the legislative code to create a new fee categories for associated license fees for transportation network companies.

This item is before us for final adoption. I would like to Vice President Yang for motion.

Yeah. I just want to make quick comments and say thank you again to our DSI staff. They worked so hard on this and engaged with many of our transportation network companies to put together these amendments in front of us. I also want to say thank you to the businesses that have stepped forward to share with our staff and really to many of us their just the challenges that they're facing. And I'm so excited and proud that with this change that we will be approving that we can ensure more business, especially our small transportation network companies can continue operating in the city of St. Paul. So with that, I move approval.

Great. Thanks, Vice President Yang. Is there a discussion of the motion? Ms. Bui?

Thank you, or Chair President Maker. I just want to say congratulations. I will be supporting this item, but you know it really was impressive just seeing how you navigated all departments and also bringing forth the business owner here and learning more about the business. I actually after that meeting had a chance to see him at a fundraiser and he was just so joyful about just like seeing how city councils just taking action. So, it's just really it's really incredible for people to see like the impact, right, and certain ideas coming through this council and actually get it to the finish line. Just wanted to say I appreciate your work on that.

Vice President Yang. Thank you, Council President. I thank you for that, Councilor Bui. I want to give a shout out to Marie from Move, the transportation company that came and presented to us during our policy committee. And I know that they will be so ecstatic upon seeing our approval for this. Great. Any other discussion of motion?

All right. Seeing none, roll call please.

Johnson? Aye. Joe? Aye. Kim? Aye. Yang? Aye. Bowie? Aye. Coleman?

Aye. Council President Nacre? Aye. Seven in favor, none opposed, the ordinance is adopted.

I take a motion from Ms. Kim to suspend the rules to consider Ordinance 20 six-eighteen about pre eviction notice. Roll call, please.

Johnson? Aye. Joe? Aye. Kim? Aye. Yang? Aye. Bowie? Aye. Coleman? Aye.

Council President Aker? Aye. Seven in favor, none opposed, the rules are suspended. Ordinance 20 six-eighteen amending Section 193.04 of the legislative code to temporarily extend the pre eviction notice period and Section 193.04 from thirty days to sixty days.

Ms. Kim? Awesome. All of our colleagues should have a copy with them at the table. I'm just going to read some brief comments that also are sort of a, dare we say, a tiny but mighty staff report.

So myself and Councilmember Coleman and Council Vice President Yang, we are bringing this item under suspension because the situation facing immigrant families in St. Paul right now does not afford us the luxury of a normal legislative time. I want to thank the Council President for also proving this and making this a priority to be brought forward in front of council. I also want to extend gratitude to our city attorney's office to look at the language and to help as I think most usually just be really great lawyers on this type of issue. This ordinance temporarily extends the pre eviction filing notice from thirty days to sixty days giving affected families a meaningful buffer to access rental assistance, mutual aid, and legal support before a landlord can initiate the formal eviction proceedings.

It automatically sunsets on 12/31/2026 at which point the thirty day notice requirement is restored without any further action by this body. We are responding to a crisis layered on top of a pre existing one. Before Operation Metro Surge, Ramsey County has been seeing higher and higher rates of eviction filings since the pandemic. We've already seen a higher number of filings in January and February than this time last year. Rental assistance programs across the Twin Cities are over prescribed and pale to meet the needs of renters at risk of eviction.

In St. Paul, the majority of these filings and the underlying housing crisis is being felt most acutely by residents of the East Side and the North End. We have yet to see the full impact of Operation Metro surge and the financial conditions driving evictions filings have only intensified. In January alone, five zero one evictions were filed in Ramsey County and we know that the majority of eviction filings are due to non payment of rent. Evictions have a long term have long term negative impacts on families including limiting their ability to find housing stability or even quality housing moving forward.

Last year, as part of the tenant protections package led by Chair Johnson and the council, we passed a thirty day pre eviction filing notice requirement for non payment of rent. The ordinance had an effective date of one year after passage, which is May 14. The council is also allocating funding in the budget for staff to help enforce the ordinance and recently under the incredible leadership of Church Johnson, we were adding additional funds to the Emergency Rental Assistance Fund. The city is on track to hire staff in those positions around the same time that this ordinance goes into effect. The timeline of this extension, if passed, would also follow that same timeline.

St. Paul residents have been asking for meaningful and material support for months as federal immigration agents descend on our city, and we've been working to meet the growing needs. Mutual aid funds for families are being organized and shared. Non profit partners and other local governments are reporting increased interest in rental assistance or financial assistance program. This council voted last week to increase funding in our emergency rental assistance programs by 1,420,000. Families also deserve enough time to access assistance or mutual aid resources without facing eviction. This is not an eviction moratorium. It does not cancel rent. It does not relieve tenants of their legal obligations. It doesn't change the eviction process or change our enforcement mechanisms.

Under state statute, an Intoler Tenant Protection Ordinance is in effect, landlords currently have to provide a fourteen day notice before filing an eviction of nonpayment for rent. This is not nearly enough time for a renter to find a program or mutual aid fund, apply and process the application and disperse funds within enough time to meet that deadline. An extended notice period provides a crucial buffer for residents to seek financial assistance. This is a targeted time limited response to an extraordinary crisis and I believe it's one of the most direct and meaningful things this body can do today to protect our neighbors.

Thank you, Ms. Kim. And thank you for giving the council member staff report. Are there questions for Ms. Kim? Ms. Bui.

Thank you, President Nager. Well, appreciate sponsoring this. I really see this as meaningful change. I just have a question, particularly because you were referencing the tenant protections or rent stabilization changes that we made last year. So, for this extension, someone would have to well, this will go into effect May 14.

This goes into effect thirty days from today?

Well, thirty days from from today but the rent the changes for the thirty day notice goes in effect May 14. Correct. Mhmm. So, would this be would the thirty day notice be or the sixty day notice be from today or not today, but like after this has passed or I'm just trying to understand if this is like kind of putting the carton before the horse. I'm just trying to because you referenced the rent stabilization change Yep. To the thirty day notice requirement that's already adopted in our ordinance.

Yep. So this would be enacted like essentially one month before that. And so communications moving forward to inform landlords would be that we have changed the designation for the next six months from 30 to sixty days. So, the timing part of it as well is that the staffing needed to enforce our tenant protections is also kind of co linearly being hired. So, it's to name that both our enforcement mechanism and our implementation date, we are on track to sort of meet both of those with this change.

So, it's to name there isn't any change to sort of like the flow of work, but what would need to change is the outreach and engagement to ensure that landlords understand that we are giving them until the end of this year the pre eviction extent the deadline to be changed from thirty to sixty days. That's a great question.

And just one point of clarification. We do have three readings at least for an ordinance before it's adopted. So the thirty days would begin as soon as it is adopted So and signed by the it would be a little bit after today. But, yes, thank you for the questions. I see Ms. Johnson and then Ms. Juste.

Thank you so much. Council Vice President Kim, I appreciate you for bringing forth this topic, you know, as the lead author of tenant protections as well so as, a council member who's been pretty dedicated towards relief for our renters. I you know, I am overall supportive of the the step to to respond to this urgency and going from thirty days to sixty days. I do wanna dig in a little bit further to that, to some of the points that councilman Bowie raised. I also had reached out just because I would have loved to have been a part of of this part just, I think, from a from a background in, we have a couple of things that we'll need to do before this third reading pass, the final adoption phase to ensure that the that we're actually looping in all the folks that need to.

But be beyond that, super supportive of this space, and making this step, I am curious if the current language reflects that. And I just wanna flag that I think we'll need to specify the change that you're anticipating because the thirty days won't be in effect by the time this passes. And so it'll be changing the fourteen day requirement currently to sixty days unless we align the tenant protections off. It's not currently in place. So that's one piece that I just saw when reviewing this. The language itself doesn't amend the current language. It amends the language that was passed for tenant protections, which is not currently in place until May 14.

Yeah. That's a great flag. We, I think, had intended obviously on bringing this forward much earlier, so that's a great flag and we can revisit that. I would consider that a friendly amendment if not a scruminer's error. So I appreciate that flag.

This

is No problem. Thank you.

This is before before it's for first reading. Obviously, of us can bring amendments at any point from now through the process. But I appreciate the questions for clarification. Ms. Jost?

I was just clarifying the three readings of thirty days of passage.

Just quickly, Ms. Yang, just to clarify, this would only apply to evictions for nonpayment of rent. The notice period for evictions because of major lease violations or things that compromise the safety of neighbors, things like that remain unchanged by this is my understanding.

Correct. Okay. Vice President Yang. Thank you, Council President. I am excited to hear more from our residents during the public hearing. I do want to name that this is a change that I'm very supportive of. I want to thank you, Council Vice President. I'm going keep calling you Council Vice President. Hopefully, that's Okay. Council Vice President, your leadership in leading this.

I also want to give a shout out to council member Minneapolis council member member Robin Wunsley who had reached out to both of our offices with and asked for partnership for us to move this along with customer Coleman's office to move this in St. Paul here. And they're doing the same in Minneapolis too. So this week they're having their final vote on this. And I just really wanted to uplift that how that partnership is really creating just such deep progress in our communities.

I mean, now there are so many families who are living in fear during Operation Metro Surge. And I know there's news about how we're seeing less and less activity. But the truth is that there's families, again, still living in fear. And families who have not had an income earner come back to their home yet, who is detained right now. Like there are families I'm in touch with right now who are still waiting for their loved one to come back. And we don't know when they are coming back. And so this is so serious and so relevant. And I'm excited for this

to move forward. Thanks, Vice President Yang. Ms. Coleman.

Thank you, President Naecker. I will keep this very short and just thank council member Kim for your leadership on this. That is going to take a long time to get used to. And I think the only thing that I wanna say today is that what we have heard time and time again from from everybody in our community is that the most important thing that we can be doing is getting money out the door to support those who have been impacted by Operation Metro Surge. I shared this stat last week, but I don't think it can be repeated often enough.

We have had over $100,000,000 in lost wages in The Twin Cities in just the last few months alone. Think every single person in this room knows somebody who has been unable to work, somebody, a family where a primary breadwinner was taken and hasn't returned, people who are still in hiding. We had tens of thousands of families that were in hiding in this region. We know that many of those folks are not yet feeling safe to go back to life as usual. This is a crisis that is incredibly unique.

And just I will say over and over again, the most important thing that we can be doing is getting cash into the hands of people who have been impacted. And so I think the most important step that we have taken as a council under Chair Johnson's leadership is to increase our funding available in our emergency rental assistance program. I know that we are not alone in doing that, that other government entities are doing that, that the philanthropic sector is doing that. Although, I hope to see them doing more of it. That mutual aid is flowing in for those purposes to Minnesota from across the country. But what is challenging is that it takes time to get that money out the door. It takes time as we have had this conversation about our emergency rental assistance program. It just it isn't something that we can do overnight to move millions of dollars. It is challenging. It takes time.

And I think what is so important about this ordinance is that it is a compliment to that effort. It's not like Councilmember Kim said in, you know, what we are not doing is saying that rent isn't owed. What we are not doing, this is not an eviction moratorium. Rent will need to be paid. We are committed to getting funds in the hands of folks who need assistance in paying rent, and this just gives us more time to

make that possible. Thanks, Ms. Coleman. Any further discussion? Otherwise, this will lay over until next week for a public hearing.

The item is laid over to March 11 for second reading public hearing. Item number 17 is ordinance 26 dash 16, granting the application of Xcel Energy to rezone property at 325 Commercial Street from H 1 Residential to I 1 Light Industrial and amending chapter 60 of the legislative code pertaining to the zoning map.

And because this is a first reading, we will have a staff report. Welcome up, mister from our Planning and Development Department.

Thank you, Council President and Council Members. Excuse me.

You get set up, it's going to be very confusing, a couple of items here based on what I said about first reading and then public hearing the next week. In this case, there was actually a slight error and there was a public hearing noticed for this week. So even though this is the first reading, we will have a staff report. We will also hold a public hearing because a public hearing was noticed. And then we will still have another public hearing. We will continue the public hearing to next week's second reading to kind of keep with our traditional cadence, but be a little bit untraditional to have a public hearing for the first reading. Welcome up. Yes.

Thank you for your flexibility working through those issues. Okay. So this zoning application p e d res zero zero zero two four two twenty twenty five is an application to rezone property from H 1 residential to I 1 Light industrial at 325 Commercial Street. The property proposed to be rezoned is located at 325 Commercial Street in the Dayton's Bluff neighborhood and Ward 7 east of downtown and beneath the I 94 Overpass. Land use and zoning in the area is highway, the Interstate 94 to the north, zoned h one.

Industrial use to the East, zone I one. Park use to the South, zone h one. And railroad uses to the West, Zone I 1. Some images of the surrounding properties. And, as stated before, the application is to rezone property from h one residential to I one light industrial.

The applicant intends to expand the Dayton's Bluff electric substation that they own and operate adjacent to the parcel. There are two findings that we evaluate for rezonings. In this case, the proposed I 1 zoning is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The 2040 comprehensive plan designates the future land use of the parcel as industrial and transportation, and the uses allowed in the proposed I-one zoning district are compatible with the future land use designation. And the rezoning contributes to orderly and predictable development.

The uses allowed in the I 1 Zoning District, including industrial, utilities, transportation, and park uses are complementary to the uses in the surrounding area. The staff recommendation was approval of the rezoning of property from h one residential to I one light industrial. The zoning committee recommended approval five zero, and planning commission recommended approval to the council unanimously. The District four Planning Council did not submit a letter of recommendation and there were no letters of support or opposition. Happy to answer any questions.

Great. Thank you so much for the presentation. Are there any questions? Not seeing any. All right. You so And even though, again, this is a first reading because we had a public hearing notice, we will hold a public hearing on this item. So for this and all of our public hearings, when I call the public hearing, if you're here to testify on that item, we ask that you come to the front, stand in between the two microphones. You don't need to adjust them or lean towards them. They should pick you up just fine as is. You'll have two minutes to testify.

We ask that you start by saying your name and where you're coming from. Bless you. And when you're done, please sign in on either of the two sign in sheets on either side. Two minutes do go by quickly, and my job is to keep everyone to the two minutes, which isn't a lot of fun. But there is a timer right in front of you so we ask that you try to keep yourself to two minutes. And then there's lots of other ways to give us testimony including in writing if you do run out of time. So this is a public hearing on this item. If you're here to testify on this item, please come on up. Seeing none, I'll take a motion from Ms. Johnson to continue the public hearing and lay the matter over until March 11. Roll call,

Johnson?

Aye.

Joe?

Aye.

Kim? Aye. Yang? Aye. Bowie? Aye. Coleman? Aye.

Council President Aker? Aye. Seven in favor, none opposed. The public hearing is continued to March 11. Item number 18 is second reading public hearing of ordinance 24 dash 26 amending chapter sixty five and sixty six of the legislative code pertaining to drive through sales and services and walk up service windows. This item has had three readings and is able to be adopted today.

And it is in our public hearing section, again, sort of contradicting everything I've said about how we do our ordinances because sometimes we amend an ordinance during the process. And if we do that, if it's a significant amendment, we have another public hearing. So in this case, we did have an amendment last week from Ms. Jost. And so we are holding a public hearing, and then we have the opportunity to amend it further or to adopt it. So unless Ms. Jost has any comments beforehand, I'm just gonna just open up the public hearing.

Yeah. I don't have any comments beforehand.

Alright. So this is a public hearing. Is there anyone here to speak on this item? Item? Seeing none, I'll take a motion from Ms. Jost to close the public hearing. Roll

call, please.

Johnson? Aye. Jost? Aye. Kim? Aye. Yang? Aye. Bowie?

Aye.

Coleman.

Aye.

Council President Nacre. Aye. Seven in favor, none opposed. The public hearing is closed.

So I'll look to Ms. Jost for motion and comments and then we'll have discussion of the motion.

Thanks. Well, I want to thank everyone for all of their work on this. This process began a few years ago. I think that what we've landed on is kind of a balance between what our counsel is hearing from all of our different stakeholders in our community. And I really appreciate Mr. Dermody's work on this and being able to provide us with all the information along the way. I don't have any further amendments to bring at this time. And so I would be moving approval of this item.

Thanks so much, Ms. Jostas. Vice President Yang. Thanks, Council President. I am excited to support this. And I want to say thank you, Councilor Burgils, for taking the lead and really bringing forward the amendments the first package of amendments and letting us review it and also offer amendments as well. It was what really helped bring this to the finish line. And I also want to say thank you to Bill Dermody for being with us since day one and doing such a fantastic job giving us updates along the way and filtering our questions too. Thanks Vice President. Mr. Staley.

Was this version that hasn't been on file at the clerk's office for a week?

Yeah, so I didn't bring forth any other versions. This is the same version from last week.

And I will also support the motion. I think we did land, as Mr. O said, on a good balance between allowing drive throughs, recognizing that there is they do fill a need for many in our community and that they really should be limited to specific areas of our city and specifically not allowing them near high frequency transit, not allowing them downtown, requiring that if they're in our highest density areas, our T3 and T4 zones, that they'd be part of a high density at least four story, 40,000 square foot development. And then also through the traditional neighborhood zoning study that we did, making sure that they always have a pedestrian safe way of accessing the building, even if there is a drive through, which is also really important. I know that there were some folks at our public hearing last week who brought up some specific questions about stacking.

And I think Ms. Dost might be able to speak to these as well. Ms. Dost.

Thank you, Councilperson. I forgot to mention that. So we did a couple of things I'll just share that we did look into in this last week were comments about where how the stacking is measured and if it was worth providing a clarification on where that stacking was measured from. And so with all the work that's done so far, I personally didn't see that as being something that needed to be added at this time as we're thinking about just being able to get this in place and move this forward. Guess I can Mr.

Dermody, I'm going to put you on the spot. If you could come up and just probably explain better than I could. There was a question about, you know, is the stacking measured from the ordering window versus the drive through window and how that would currently be handled based on the language that we have right now. Welcome, Mr. Germany.

Thank you. Bill Dermody, Steps with Planning and Economic Development. Thank you, Council President and Council Member. It's actually kind of a question for the zoning administrator, Mr. Diata, but my understanding is that we currently measure stacking spaces from the final window where you pick up goods and then backwards linearly on the site to get to the minimum stacking distance. Right. That's how we do it today. So, I don't think that needs to be into the code. That's is how we measure it today.

Yes. Thank you. I appreciate that.

Thank you both. And, I do think given that a lot of the questions had to do with not necessarily things that needed to be code changes to your point, Ms. Jost, but business owners just wanting clarity, I would hope that we can make some of that language clear online so it's easy for folks to find those answers. Great. Any other discussion of the motion? Ms. Coleman.

I'll just echo what Council President and Council Member Yang said. First of all, thanking Council Member Jost and the Ward 3 office for leading on this. This is a matter that predates my time on the council. And I know it is something that we've heard from a whole range of folks about with a whole bunch of considerations, equity considerations, transportation, environmental considerations, business development, land use. Mean, just it has been one issue that has touched on so much about how we build our city and I think taking the time to get this right and to really think about how are we thinking comprehensively and intentionally, how are we making policies better over time and how are we meeting the needs of our residents right now while moving towards the city that we want to be is a big challenge.

But I think that this gets it bright and I'm excited to support this today.

Thank you. All right, Ms. Bui.

I'll just add to that as well. Just really appreciate the work that went forth for this language and it's really not only just doing it quickly but just doing it right and right fitting the outcomes that we want. I see this as yet another policy decision that's been community driven and really give and take and have received a lot of input not only from our staff who's been working on this for several years, but also really the community giving and taking particularly around what is the best way for us to have policy that's clear and also addressing the need. So, here particularly in Ward 1 understanding that though part of the problem or one of the examples, right, was the Snelling Starbucks drive through and how that was literally a train wreck in many ways, but it's really important that we take these decisions really importantly in terms of creating solutions for those problems.

Thank you, Ms. Bui. All right, looks like we're ready for a vote. I will just once again echo my colleagues thanks to you and your team, Ms. Jost, for picking up a very heavy and very static ball and moving into the finish line. Thank you for doing that. All right. Motion on the tables for approval. Roll call, please.

Johnson. Johnson.

Aye.

Just.

Aye.

Kim. Aye. Yang. Aye. Bowie. Aye. Coleman. Aye.

Council President Aker. Aye. Seven in favor, none opposed. The ordinance is adopted. Item number 19 is resolution public hearing twenty six dash twenty five, accepting grant funds authorizing execution of a grant agreement and amending the operating budget with respect to the city sponsorship of a Metropolitan Council TBRA grant application for the benefit of face to face at 1170 North Arcade Street.

This is a public hearing. Is there anyone here to speak on this item? Seeing none, I'll take a motion from Vice President Yang to close the public hearing and approve. All in favor, roll call,

Johnson?

Aye. Joe's?

Here. Aye. Kim?

Aye. Yang? Aye.

Bowie? Aye. Coleman? Aye.

Council President Nacre? Here

and aye.

Seven in favor, none opposed, the resolution is adopted. Item number 20 is resolution public hearing 26 dash 64, transmitting the city support for bronze line locally preferred alternative to the Metropolitan Council in Ramsey County.

And sometimes on public hearings, we also have a staff report just to give a little bit of additional to what's going on. So I believe Mr. Dermody is coming back to talk to us about the Bronze Line. Welcome back.

Yes. Actually for this one, we will have a presentation from Metro Transit staff. Liz Jones is going to present some background on this before you vote. Welcome

up, Ms. Jones.

There we go.

Good evening, everybody. My name is Liz Jones. I'm the engagement lead for the Metro Bronze Line project. I'm here today to continue conversations with folks and just give a very high level overview knowing that we've had a lot of conversations about this project, formerly the Purple Line, as we work to officially receive resolutions of support from our partners for the Metro Bronze Line. So on the screen here is the new Metro Bronze Line route.

And so really, again, this is a community responsive version of the former Purple Line project through four plus years and a lot of work with our agency and community partners. It's really we're in a place now where this project is a collaboration between the Met Council, Ramsey County, St. Paul, and Maplewood to be in a really good place in consideration of our community input and feedback to move forward with this project. And so this project is still planning to go from Downtown St. Paul through the East Side Phalen, Maryland, and White Bear Avenue corridors up to up through Maplewood to the Maplewood Mall Transit Center.

This is a 10 mile route, again, between Union Depot downtown Saint Paul and Maplewood Mall Transit Center. We will be utilizing 22 stations. This project will include about five miles of bus only lanes and then two new bridges as well. I will also note that in this past December, on December 11, the Purple Line project had a corridor management committee meeting. So it's a body made up of policymakers from throughout all of the stakeholder communities throughout the Bronze Line where Councilmember Yang sits on as well.

That corridor management committee did take three actions to support advancing the Metro Bronze Line project, and so that was in support of implementing our station locations, bus lanes, and bridges, and the planned locations in St. Paul and Maplewood. So confirming this new scope, what we call the locally preferred alternative for the Bronze Line, formerly known as the Purple Line. Also recommending that the cities of St. Paul and Maplewood, as well as Ramsey County adopt resolutions of support for the new bronze line locally preferred alternative and then also recommended that the Metropolitan Council amend the new bronze line into the region's transportation policy plan.

Although this project has taken many forms throughout the years, it still serves key communities in the East Side and East Metro. We have over 60% of BIPOC folks, folks who are zero car households and utilize transit, a lot of folks with lower incomes, older folks, younger folks. We have over thirteen percent of folks who have a various disability, and around eighteen percent of folks with limited English proficiency, connecting folks to key community destinations like education centers, health care centers, and essential community spaces and jobs as well. Although the project has taken many forms, we're still serving the key folks on the East Side. This is a very high level image of some of the community engagement we've completed over the last few years, certainly not comprehensive of everything over the last four years, but focusing really on what we called our route modification study, which was our initiative to figure out what is this new project, what is the scope, and talking to a lot of folks in the St.

Paul and Maplewood communities, over 6,000 residents. We had just so many stakeholder meetings, community presentations. We really worked hard to meet folks where they are at in community, so hosting a lot of pop ups in community spaces, holding events. We did a lot of door knocking, particularly with the business community on the East Side, and meeting folks and talking to folks right at their businesses. Worked with a lot of community organizations and business organizations throughout the corridor as well.

A little bit more specifics about the design of the project in Saint Paul and also kind of where the project is at. So the southern half of the project in Saint Paul, South Of Maryland, is at almost a 30% level of design, whereas the northern half of the project is at about a 1% level of design. We'll be working later this year. We are working on readministering the project and getting everything back up and running to bring both kind of designs forward and advance those project designs. We will also be having this is a rendering of the Arcade Street Station, And so confirming, I mentioned there's two bridges in this project.

This is one of them. And so this bridge actually brings the project station at Arcade up to the Arcade level opposed at the Phelan Boulevard level, which is what the community preference was, to be closer to those businesses and community spaces up at the Arcade And Knight Intersection. We'll also be moving the Bruce Vento Trail up at grade as well as making space for the daylighting of the Phelan Creek project by Wakan Tipi Awanyakapi. This is a high level rendering that we will work to refine later this year, but this is a rendering of the bridge that will be running over Johnson Parkway near the project's Cook Avenue station. This bridge will be for buses only, but will also have pedestrian facilities as well.

And then just a note, the project design on Maryland And White Avenue, we will be having bus only lanes in St. Paul and Maryland and White Bear Avenue. These lanes will be on the side, so next to each curb. So there will be side running. We did look at center running bus lanes as well.

We will be moving forward with side running. We'll have stations at Clarence, Hazelwood, the intersection of White Bear in Maryland, as well as Arlington and Idaho. In these lanes, Maryland and White Bear will include the ability for vehicles to turn through the lanes knowing that there's a number of residents and businesses in this area. So, vehicles everywhere will still be access will be able to be maintained. This will also include a full roadway reconstruction of Maryland and White Bear, so essentially back of sidewalk to back of sidewalk, which will include new sidewalks, new boulevards, new roadway, new curb and gutter, new medians, and new pavement as well.

High level rendering of the existing condition on both Maryland And White Bear Avenue, and then the proposed with the Brompton project showing those bus only lanes on the sides of the roadway in red. Talk a little bit about our timelines. So right now, we're in early twenty twenty six. We are working on restructuring our project. So from the end of the year through the beginning to middle of this year, we've been working on reintroducing the project as the bronze line.

And we are currently going to be procuring new design and engagement consultant contracts. We had our CMC action in December and we are currently, as you can see, we're going through the resolutions of support process with our partners. We will also be going through we are currently also going through the Met Council's TPP amendment process that mentioned before. That process will commence at about later this summer. And some of those dates for those in part of our next steps, the Ramsey County Regional Rail Board of Commissioners will be meeting on March 17 to provide their resolution of support for the project, and then the Maplewood City Council on March 23.

And then I mentioned the Met Council's TPP process has a series of meetings within that, but then should commence by about the August. Higher level or longer out with the schedule, are looking to begin construction around the 2030 timeline with opening day around 2032 to be refined as we get back into the design and engagement advancement of this With that, that is all that I have for

you. Great.

Thank you so much. Are there any questions?

Vice President Yang. Thank you, Council President. I don't have questions, but I want to say, Liz, thank you for your very wonderful presentation And also to our other Metro Transit staff who are here. Steven, you're the other familiar face I see in the room here. It's been such a great experience working with you all on the bronze line here.

And for me personally, you all set such a high bar when it comes to community engagement and just how communicative you are to other stakeholders. A part of me is like, for other projects I'm in with other transit entities, I'm like, I wonder if they can just replicate what you all do, your community engagement team. And the work really speaks for itself. I mean, the slide around the data on who this project is serving, it really conveys how committed you are to really understanding who we're serving and the needs of the community. So I want to say thank you again for your work in that.

I'm very supportive of what was proposed here to you all for the Browns line. There was a very stellar unveiling that happened back in December. The mayor Melvin Carter was speaking in support of this project, also the Maplewood mayor too. And I'm just very thrilled that we are in a place where we are ready to get back to work and make this transit project happen. It's in our city here bringing in more investments for transit has always been important to this council, I know, and for me personally too.

In the East Side to it's my vision for us to have robust transportation and the browns line here is a part of that vision and it's a very important puzzle piece to it. So, with that I ask for my colleagues your full support for this and excited to hear back from you all in the coming months.

Thanks so much, Vice President Yang and thank you so much for the presentation.

Thank you very much.

We will hold a public hearing now and then we'll take a motion from Ms. Yang. So 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. Is there any discussion of the motion? I will just say I echo your support. Ms. Yang, thank you for your leadership on this project. I think we were ready for the purple line. We're ready for the bronze line. We've been ready. And I think some of us, all of us wish we were already here and the work is already underway. But the city of St. Paul is strongly in support of this project and excited for it. So with that, we'll take a roll call vote.

Johnson? Aye. Ghost? Aye. Kim? Aye. Yang? Aye. Bowie? Aye. Coleman? Aye.

Council President Aker? Aye. Seven in favor, non opposed, the resolution is adopted. Item number 21 is a b z a 26 dash two. Considering the appeal of a decision by the board of zoning appeals denying a variance request to convert an existing lit freestanding sign to a dynamic display at 1305 7th Street West.

Welcome, mister Diata.

Let's get a PowerPoint going.

And once again, on a public hearing, we're gonna have a staff report first. This is a day full of exceptions.

Good afternoon members of

the council.

I am here with my colleague, Peng. I am the zoning administrator. Peng just got promoted to a DSI Inspector three, so she will be dealing with variances going forward. Previously she was processing permits, so it's only fitting that she's studying with a sign variance appeal.

Yep, we got them.

So the subject property commercial property to Zone B2. That's the property that you see here surrounded by various residential districts, an H2 to the North and then RMs to the West and then to the East we have also RMs and then to the South we have a T2 traditional zoning district. So it's a commercial district that's mostly surrounded by residential uses district. So the proximity to residential district is why the applicant kicks in the standard for dynamic display signs. But if you look at the sign I will show in the pictures of Ford that I will show later, that it is really oriented towards 2nd Street which is commercial, not so much towards residential.

So the zoning code sort of forces certain locations that are so close to residential to adhere to certain standards on how the site can operate and how close it can be to residential districts. That's why the various have been requested. You can move on to the next one. So this code section here is what sort of dictate how science should be administered when they're located in close proximity to our residential districts. Can we move to the next one?

So the sign that you're looking at right now is the existing sign. So the project really is an overall reduction of the sign. Currently the sign stands at 80 square feet. They're reducing it to 58 square feet and only a portion of it that is about 32 square feet will be digital. That's moving to the next one. So this was proposed. The top part will still remain static sign and the bottom part will be digital. So it will only be changing every twenty minutes and will be turned off between eleven p. M. And seven a.

M. With the regulations. Staff did review the application against the six findings and found that the request meets all the findings. However, at the border zoning appeals, there were discussion about finding three and finding six not being met. So subsequently a vote was taken to recommend denial.

That vote failed because we didn't get the four votes required. So three voted against staff recommendation and one board member voted for staff recommendation so that failed. Subsequently, another motion was made for approval to go along with staff recommendation that did not get seconded so that died. Under Minnesota statute, a failure of a motion to approve results in a denial and the denial is before you on appeal. With that, we are ready for any questions you may have.

Thanks Mr. Diata. Are there any questions? Ms. Coleman.

I have one quick question. Thank you, Mr. President. If we could put back the criteria really quickly. I don't know if there's a way for OTC to pop the slide that's back up. But I'm curious about the one the criteria that said that it would be challenging for the business to comply.

I

think so of the two elements of the six that the BCA said were not met or that the majority of the commissioners said was not met, there's one that was specific to the difficulty of compliance. Is that correct? So number three, the applicant demonstrated practical difficulties in complying with the provision. I was wondering if you could say a little bit more about that and sort of why staff feels that it was met or what the discussion might have been at BCA. Council

Member Koren, can you please repeat the question?

Yeah, so there were six required findings that had to be met by staff, right, in order to recommend the variance. And it looks like the Board of Zoning Appeals said that numbers three and number six weren't met. And I'm just curious about number three specifically, the requirement that the applicant demonstrate practical difficulties in complying with the provision with the understanding that economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. I would just be curious to know a little bit more about why staff felt that recommendation was or that request.

Mr. President Nacre and Councilmember Coleman. So, when you look at, as I was explaining earlier, the location of the business being a commercial business surrounded almost by residential is what staff deemed as being a practical difficulty for them to be able to operate the sign. Typically, if you're looking at if we had something like a church for example, church allowed in residential and they can have digital signs. They're not required to have any separation. But the nature of the business as a commercial view surrounded by residential is what staff deem as being a challenge for the business to be able to convert the existing signs partially into digital sign.

Thanks Mr. Diata and thanks for the question Ms. Coleman. I think the and I listened to the BZA meeting about this and I think it's easy to misunderstand provision three because the way that the BZA was interpreting it I think is incorrect, which is that there's practical difficulties in just staying the way you are. So in other words, the questioning the line of questioning was, well, can't you just keep your current sign?

What is the necessary reason why you have to change? And that's not actually what finding three means. The finding three means for the change you wanna make, is there some reason why you can't stay within the code? And in this case, the change they wanna make is moving to the dynamic display and they can't stay within the code because of the way that their property is located. You don't have to have sort of an existential reason to make the change in order for it to cons in order for that finding to be met. And I think that that was a misunderstanding on the part of BZA in this case and sometimes in other cases too. So I really appreciate the question. Also a misunderstanding on

my part, so thank you both, and sometimes on my part.

Other questions? All right. Oh, Ms. Bouie.

Just to get clarity, so is this sign already grandfathered in and now we're reviewing it, the distinguishment that you made, particularly not that it's a new sign, but does it actually meet the needs or the findings?

I'll turn to Mr. Diata. It is a new sign replacing an existing sign and it's a dynamic display which is the change, but Mr. Diata.

Council President, Council Member Bowie, so the sign currently is a sort of normal sign, it's lit and you go manually to change the message on the sign. That's why we see that the gentleman up there trying to change it. So what they're proposing is to reduce the overall size of the sign from 80 square feet to 58 square feet. The bottom portion is going to be 32 square feet, which is going to be digital. So it's a new sign in the sense that electronic portion is new, but the sign as a standard sign is an allowed sign to be there.

Today they can put up a brand new sign without any digital, without having to go through a variance.

Thank you. All right, so I think we will hear from the appellant if they're here.

I'm sorry to be

The appellant. Yep, property owner. And you'll actually have five minutes for this particular kind of public hearing. So welcome up. And make sure to start with your name and where you're coming from.

Hi. My name is Matt Duffy, and I am the sign company helping Joe Bennett on this and and the sign permit. I don't know if you have questions for me. I would just and Joe apologizes for not being able to be here today. I would just point to those two points.

One on the practical difficulty, which the planning group hit on, which is, right, given the property and where they're located, there's just no place to put the sign that would be, within the setback requirements for being near a residential property. And the other one was the, essential character of the surrounding area. I would just point to the letter that the Fort Road Federation wrote. I thought it was a great letter and I thought they framed the issues really well. And I would just add that we spent I spent personally a significant amount of time with them reviewing what we wanted to do, answering their questions about concerns about light spill and how would it affect the neighbors surrounding properties.

And all the a number of the aspects of the sign kinda hit at that. The fact that it'll be a monochrome sign, dark backgrounds, light text, already kinda minimizing light. I think at night, we probably will produce less light than the current sign produces. The ID portion, which will have internal LED lights, is much smaller than the current 80 square feet. And the 32 square foot dynamic sign, which will have a dark background and light text, will not produce that much light spill.

It auto dims at night, so it's operating at about 10% of its daytime brightness at night. And then the twenty minute change time in terms of messages and then I think from eleven to seven or something it's turned off. So before they wrote this letter, they wanted to make sure that we were able to answer all those questions. So we obviously answered their questions and concerns to a degree that they felt comfortable sending this letter in.

Thank you so much for your testimony. Make sure to sign in. Is there anyone else here to speak on this item? If so, you would have two minutes. All right. I will make a motion to close the public hearing. Roll call, please.

Johnson. Aye. Joe? Aye. Kim? Aye. Yang? Aye. Bowie? Aye. Coleman? Aye.

Council President Nager? Aye. Seven in favor of none opposed, the public hearing is closed.

Well, thank you so much for coming out to testify, and thanks again to staff for your helpful description of this item. Just one note to my colleagues, often when we're seeing an appeal of another body's decision, we have to find error in fact finding a procedure of the previous body. In this case, as you heard Mr. Diata say, the BCA actually didn't take any action. They had two motions, both of which failed. They failed to approve and they failed to deny. And a failure to approve constitutes a denial, so it's here with us as a denial. But as a result, we're actually looking at this as though it's a brand new case. We don't actually have to find fault in what they did because they actually didn't take any action. Both of those actions technically failed.

So I'm not going be pointing out errors in anything that they did, except maybe my slight point earlier to Ms. Coleman. All the other errors I wrote down before I found out that we're looking at this brand new, will not say. But I think just looking at this on its face, you know, is something that seems like it is a business enhancement that is good for the neighborhood and that meets the findings. I think it's notable that staff recommended approval.

The Fort Road Federation, the district council is in support, as we just heard, after extensive engagement with the applicant. We don't have any opposition. I think it's also notable the new sign will be smaller than the existing sign. It will be less lit as we heard. It can actually be light can be adjusted which isn't the case now.

It only changes every twenty minutes. And then I I think the two issues that the BZA raised in terms of practical difficulties, I think it's clear to me that there's no place else on the lot to put a sign, so it's possible to be 75 feet away from a residence because of how close this business is located to residences. And that's unique to the property not created by the landowner and not economic. And then to say that this will change the essential character of the area when it will be less light and less big than the current sign and when the district council is in support also seems to me to not make sense. So I am going to support make a motion to approve the appeal for those reasons.

So that's my motion. Is there a discussion? Seeing none,

roll call please.

Johnson?

Aye.

Joe? Aye. Kim? Aye. Yang? Aye. Bowie? Aye. Coleman? Aye.

Vice President Aker. Aye. Seven in favor not opposed. The motion of intent is the appeal is granted. Item number 22 is public hearing 20 six-four, public hearing on grievances about federal immigration operations.

And this is our standing public hearing on federal immigration operations. If you're here to testify on this item, please come on up. Seeing no one here to testify, I will take a motion from Ms. Kim to continue the public hearing to March 11. Please.

Johnson?

Aye.

Joe?

Aye.

Kim? Aye. Yang? Aye. Bowie? Aye. Coleman?

Aye. Council President Nacre? Aye. Seven in favor, none opposed, the public hearing is continued to March 11.

This brings us to the legislative hearing portion of our agenda. Welcome up, miss Mormont.

Legislative hearing consent agenda items 23 through 38 are before you for your consideration.

Miss Mormont. Council president, if item number 35 could be read into the record, please.

Item number 35, RLHSAO26Dash11. Second making finding on the appealed nuisance abatement ordered for 1079 Western Avenue North in council file RLHSAO25Dash71.

Miss Mormont.

Council president, this is the third time this particular case has been in front of you. The council originally heard an appeal of the summary abatement order itself to clean up the property. That happened in December. In January, was the first hearing to have the council make a finding about whether or not the nuisance had been abated. It had not, but the council granted a further extension.

Today is the second time the council is making a finding about whether the nuisance has been abated. Primary item in front of you would be that, yes, the tires have been abated. No, the pallets, when I saw the photos last week, were not abated. I believe I have current photos. Sorry.

So, on the overhead camera, I can show you that the palettes my forget forgiveness.

You need the voice activated over here.

Voice activated, of course. Here, in the middle of the backyard, you can see this is the area where the blue pallets continued to be in existence there. They had not been removed at the time of the hearing. We did discuss a number of options that were available, and also, I believe Board five has also had those conversations. So my recommendation is to make a finding that the nuisance has not abated and authorize the Department of Safety and Inspections to abate.

Thanks, Ms. Mormon. Any questions before we hold the public hearing? Ms. Bouie.

Thank you, Council President. Hearing Officer Marcia, I just have a quick question. So, in this just as I'm jogging my memory on this case, there are several items that needed to be removed. So, everything else was removed, but it sounds like that just the pallets that we that is the condition on or your recommendation as voting on this being a, I guess, nuisance abatement or abating the just the pallets, not the other items. I wanted to make sure the record's clear, particularly around what items we're talking about, because there's multiple in the original findings.

Yeah, there are actually three deadlines that I recommended for the abatement of various items in the yard. So, one deadline was around the tires and the pallets. There was another deadline around items on the front porch, for example. And so, this is the one that's in front of you now. And in hearing, we did discuss other items, but today, it's this.

I'm just trying to so, is there going to be other days for other items, or this is just only about the pallets? The things that were on the porch was cleared or not found to be there?

For further extent, different deadlines are recommended for those items. Okay.

Okay. Thank you for the clarifying questions. All right, we will go to the public hearing. This is a public hearing. If you're here for this item, please come on up, and you'll have two minutes. Welcome. Oh, you can sign in when you're done. Welcome.

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

The pallets have been removed.

Sorry, can you just start with your name and where you're coming from?

My name is Miguel Neely. I live at 1079 Western Avenue North. And, I did have the pallets removed. I don't know when she was creeping around taking pictures, but it was before I removed them, but I did remove the pallets.

Okay. Is there anything else you want to say with your time?

They had requested that there were items that were on my porch that they wanted removed. I have some speaker boxes. Those had also been removed already. There were some pictures of something that they thought was something that should have been removed, but I wanted to argue that it's not because they're outdoor toys for my granddaughter.

Okay. Great. Thank you very much. You can sign in now and we'll have some conversation about Is this there anyone else here to testify on this item? Seeing none, I'll take a motion from Ms. Kim to close the public hearing. Roll call, please.

Johnson.

Aye.

Joseph.

Aye.

Kim. Aye. Yang. Aye. Bowie. Aye. Coleman. Aye.

Council President Nacre. Aye. Seven in favor, none opposed, the public hearing is closed.

Ms. Kim. Great. Thank you.

I'm very appreciative to hear that that work was done. We had contacted made several attempts to contact you and even hand dropped off a letter to your house hoping to coordinate with you. So the public hearing is closed, sorry. So it's just to name. It's really good to hear that the pallets were abated. I'm wondering then, Marsha, so let's I'm going to take that as truth. Let's say we send out our folks for abatement and there's nothing to be abated. Are there any costs associated with that? Right. So, if we go and as it turns out, by the time we go to do that, it's completed, what does that look like?

I don't know why I'm not

So, if we go out and the pallets are gone and we don't have to do any abatement, are there costs to the property owner?

No, the department would want to confirm that. They would go check before they determine not to issue a work order to have them removed. Just for the record, I don't go to properties, I don't creep around properties. That's something that inspectors go to document the conditions, and they do that on the exterior, and that was addressed in the legislative hearing.

Great. So, just to focus on process, the next step, let's say I motion to approve, the next step would be that a work order would be submitted and someone would go look at the property ahead of time to review whether or not an abatement is still needed. And if an abatement is no longer needed, are there any costs accrued to the property owner?

In all likelihood, there would be an excess consumption of code enforcement services if it was done, but accrued did not need to be dispatched. And so, you missed the deadline. We had to check it again, and so you would be charged for the trip.

And how much does that usually cost?

I believe the bill and I could be wrong it's between 125 and 130 with fees attached in process, that becomes 169.

Okay. And how can that be paid?

When that comes forward, a bill is mailed with a thirty day deadline, and if that fails, then another bill would be issued with a fifteen day deadline, same thing, and failing that processed as an assessment.

Okay. And can you just confirm what the deadline was and when inspectors went out to go review the property?

The original deadline that I recommended to the council was January 21. The council in January made an extension to February 20. That's right. And I had the follow-up hearing on the twenty fourth. The original orders went out on 11/12/2025.

Okay. So, we had extended that deadline to February 20. I appreciate the background. And inspectors went out on the twenty fourth and it was not cleared by that deadline?

Correct. Okay. When checked and discussed last Tuesday.

Okay. That makes sense. Yeah. So your recommendation, if I approve your recommendation, it doesn't it still changes whether or not inspectors go out to review the property and whether or not the abatement was completed. Okay. I'm going to go on your word of trust. I'm going to move the recommendation of the hearing officer and we'll make sure that we have a work permit issued and that folks will come out to make sure that it was done in time. But the fee for us to go check that out at this point is not something that I'm willing to waive.

Not willing to waive the fee?

No. So this is a public this is no

Please longer a public take a seat. This isn't a public hearing.

So I think I don't know if your staff are here or available to answer further questions, but you can take a seat, sir. Thank you. We're going to take a vote on the motion now. So, the motion is to approve legislative hearing officers' recommendation. Any further discussion of that motion? Seeing none, roll call please.

Johnson?

Aye.

Ghost? Aye. Kim?

Aye. Yang? Aye. Bowie? No. Coleman?

Aye. Council President Nacre? Aye. Six in favor, one opposed, that being Council Member Bowie, the resolution is adopted.

Ms. Mormon, is there anything else for separate consideration?

I'm not aware of anyone else here to testify.

All right. Then we will hold a balance a public hearing on all of the other legislative hearing items. If you're here for any other legislative hearing item, now is your public hearing.

Come on up. Could

we pull item number 27 from the agenda to be read into the record?

Item number 27, RLHTA twenty five-four twenty, ratifying the appealed special tax assessment at 692 Hamlin Avenue North, aka 1339 Van Buren Avenue.

Ms. Mormont. I'll give a

staff report, and then you can testify. Okay. Okay. This is a case where we're looking at a vacant building fee. The vacant building fee covers the time period of let me go to the minutes here. March 2024 through February 2025. It entered the vacant building program in February '3. It had major water damage. So February '3, first fee paid. This is the second fee.

It covers 'twenty four'twenty five, and the third fee would cover 'twenty, 'twenty five'twenty six. And because of DSI's processing of these we don't have those fees forward yet, so we just dealt with the year one, paid year two, today. With this situation, the property owner, because of the length of time it's taken to get through the insurance process, and they filed the claim, they would like additional consideration and not being charged the vacant building fee. Additionally, they indicated in the hearing process that there were no services of the city used. The vacant building fee, as you know, is calculated based on the cost of running the vacant building program divided by the number of buildings in the vacant building program, evenly charged across all.

Some cases, we do have people who use more services than others, but the billing process is not a la carte. It's uniform. And I think that's the nature of it, I think I'll let her speak more.

Questions from Ms. Mormon before we open up the public hearing? Not seeing any. Alright. This is a public hearing. Welcome up. Make sure to start with your name and where you're coming from. You'll have two minutes.

Thank you. My name is Beth Jackson. Thanks for making the time in your agenda for this plea. I'm asking for forgiveness for an additional vacant building fee at $13.39 Van Buren. In 2003, to fulfill a dream I had of opening a childcare, my husband and I purchased 1339 Van Buren, a rundown vacant property down the alley from us.

That spring, we dumped tens of thousands of dollars into it to re side, re roof, and the interior to open said childcare. For over eighteen years, I helped to raise over a 150 neighborhood kids in that house, and it became a treasured part of the community story. I closed that childcare in 2021, and we rented the home to our youngest daughter and some of her teammates from nearby Concordia University. After graduating, the roommates had moved on, and my daughter was out of town, and we had plans of renting it to a new tenant. Fate had other plans, however, and on 02/22/2024, I received an ominous text from my neighbor saying that there was water coming out of our rental.

Long story short, a small valve failed on our toilet supply line. And because my daughter was out of town, it ran consistently for days and days. The result was a full insurance loss. Ceilings caved in. The whole house seeped and drenched with water, and water even penetrated the soil behind the eighteen ninety five Limestone Foundation, which ultimately caved in under the pressure, at which time the city of Saint Paul justifiably condemned the building.

That day began a two year kinda nightmare for us. I don't blame the city or any of its departments or employees or fine schedules, but rather ask for a little financial mercy. We've been through three contractors. We're now one photograph away from getting out of condemnation. We have updated the property consistently over the past twenty three years. It's frustrating for us to see dozens of vacant properties all over the neighborhood and the burden of the cost that we are told are we share with kind of not present landlords. And I just I'm begging for a little financial mercy. And by the way, if you know anybody who needs to rent a three bedroom, one bathroom house, we have it for you.

Thank you very much. Make sure to sign in. Anyone else here to testify on this item? Seeing none, I'll take a motion from Ms. Coleman to close the public hearing. Roll call, please.

Johnson?

Aye.

Joe? Aye. Kim?

Aye.

Yang? Aye. Bowie? Aye. Coleman? Aye.

Council President Aker? Aye. Seven in favor, none opposed, the public hearing is closed.

Ms. Coleman? I have a

couple of additional questions for Ms. Mormon, if that's all right. And thank you, Ms. Jackson, for being here. I'm trying get my head around the timeline because I don't know that I have that totally right. So because it sounds like maybe between when the building was initially vacant and now there was for some period of time it was occupied by Ms. Jackson's daughter and then it was after that. Anyway, I'm confused. Sure.

If you could go through the family, would

be great.

Entered the vacant building program in February 2023. At that point, it was not a habitable structure. It had had the water damage, and it was sent to the vacant building program. It has been in the vacant building program for three years, and I believe when we spoke, it was 95% done. So, it's completely done now. So, it was almost to the day, three years in the program. So, and this is the fee for the year two. Got it.

Okay. So, that predated its entrance into the vacant buildings program. Thank you. I appreciate that. So, I owe a motion to approve the legislative hearing officer's recommendation. And, I want to say, Ms. Jackson, I really appreciate you being here and the care for our neighborhood and the work to get this building into compliance and habitable and to be, you know, a thriving part of our neighborhood. I think that the I I hear the concerns about how our vacant building program works and how it is that oh, sorry, is there an addition?

Five years, if you want. I just consulted with the appellant and if the council is going to approve, I would ask that you approve and make payments over a period of five years.

Great. So, do we need to maybe do I need to motion to amend the recommendation? So, I'll make a motion to amend the recommendation to require that the assessment be paid but over a period of five years.

Okay. Did you want to continue with your comments?

And will continue with my comments, is that I appreciate the work that has gone into this and I appreciate the concerns about sort of the wide array of buildings that fall into our vacant buildings program and how that can include everything from a real nuisance property that is not cared for, that is not in the process of being updated, kind of restored to functionality and what's being described here. That said, I think that that's a policy change that we need to talk about and it is a policy change that has been discussed many times even in the short while that I've been on this council about how we are properly accounting for the costs. That said, we have the policies that we have in place now and I do think it's important to follow them equitably while thinking about, you know, while we're sitting in this role, the quasi judicial role, and that to me is a separate question from whether or not this policy needs modifications. So, will move the amended recommendation. Thank you, Ms.

Coleman. And I will support your recommendation.

And I agree. I know that our vacant building policy is on our policy committee agenda, I believe, for this year to be looked at. And in the moment, the policy that we have really is intended and designed to encourage bringing these properties out of the vacant building status and into productive use. And so it is purposely intended to be an encouragement to do that. And I know that that does bring a burden in many cases.

And to your point, I would also support an exploration of whether our policy can be more fine tuned to recognize work that has gone into the property and how close a property might be to completion. I do think it's worth also in support of your motion that this is about not this year's vacant building, but actually last year's vacant building program. And I'm not sure how close the property was to completion at that point, but I would imagine it was not 99% in year two. So any further discussion of the motion? Seeing none, roll call please.

Johnson? Aye. Jost? Aye. Kim? Aye. Yang? Aye. Bowie? Aye. Coleman? Aye.

Council President Aker? Aye. Seven in favor, none opposed, the resolution is adopted as amended.

Is there anything else anyone else here to testify on a different legislative hearing item? Seeing none, I'll take a motion from Ms. Bui for the balance of the legislative hearing agenda with all of the amendations and recommendations of the legislative hearing officer. Roll call, please.

Johnson? Aye. Joe? Aye. Kim? Aye. Yang? Aye. Bowie? Aye. Coleman? Aye.

Council President Nacre?

Aye.

Seven in favor, none opposed, the legislative hearing consent agenda is adopted as amended.

That brings us to the end

of our agenda. Is there any news from the wards? Ms. Coleman? Thank you. I have news to share that transitions from this conversation about vacant buildings. I know many of you have followed and many of our viewers at home have followed the saga of the CBS on Stellingen University, which was ordered to be demolished by this council back in November. At the time, I have told people we were talking weeks before it'd be demolished. That was incorrect and I apologize for that. I was overly enthusiastic, but it is now looking like it will be on track to be demolished this week or I'm sorry, this upcoming Monday.

I do want to say it with all the caveats that that's not a guarantee. That's based on conversations with the contractor. We believe that is when it will be coming down or at least when work will start, but weather and other factors could change it. But fingers crossed, Monday, a couple of things that I want to note is it will sort of work can start at any point between 7AM and 10PM. So, just for any neighbors or folks who commute through the Selling And University Corridor, you know, be prepared.

There is there could be construction starting early and going late. We don't anticipate any sidewalk closures. We don't anticipate, you know, any impact to BRT or light rail travel. If you do have any questions or concerns, our office has put out a frequently asked questions document to sort of talk about what happens next, who to raise any concerns with. That's also been shared with our district councils, Union Park District Council, Hamlin Midway Coalition, as well as the Midway Chamber of Commerce.

So lots of folks in the community should have answers to any questions that come up. I know that there are a whole host of different celebrations planned, So, encourage people to pick up one of our small businesses on Snellingham University, check out all the progress that is happening at United Village, all the construction that is happening there. It's a really Oh my god. Stop by and see Sorry. This is a really long bit of good news.

But, I'm never brag about selling a university, so I'm taking my time. Stop by and see the construction that's happening on the Hamlin Midway Library that is slated to be opened later this year. There is just a lot of progress happening and somebody said it recently, but you know sometimes progress looks like putting up a building and sometimes it looks like taking down a building. And in this case, taking down a building is a big, big step. So, go to Stellingham University.

Thank you, Ms. Coleman. I think that was the amount of time you spent on that was warranted. Ms. Johnson.

Thank you, council president. I'm not sure of the the good news or whether it's it's, constructive news, but MnDOT is returning, to East 7th And Arcade this season for construction, and they actually are hosting, an in person public meeting now. But if people are, unable to make it today, there's also gonna be a virtual public meeting on the project on Tuesday, March 10, from five to 06:30. They're gonna be talking about the East 7th, reconstruction between Minnehaha and Olive Street as they're gonna be reducing it down to one lane lane of traffic, and then also the Arcade Street between Need and East 7th as well, is going to close. And so I do want folks to know about it and be able to get their input.

They're currently in right now Mississippi market, but if folks didn't see that, the virtual option too will be there, and they'll have interpreters in Spanish, Somali, Hmong, and Karen.

Great. Thanks so much, Ms. Johnson. Other news from

the wards. Ms. Yang. Thanks, council president. We heard really great news at our library board meeting about the Hayden Heights Library renovation starting pretty soon here.

It will be closed temporarily starting March 24 and will reopen in the 2027. So, with that I wanted to share about a project update and community conversation that my office is doing in partnership with the St. Paul Public Libraries and the Greater Eastside Community Council. It'll be next Tuesday, March 10 from 6PM to 07:30PM at the Hayden Heights Library. And it'll be an opportunity for people to get an update about the renovation of the library and to highlight any, to ask any sort of questions and share about what sort of library services they're hoping to see occur during this temporary closure. So that feedback and input from community is very important. We'll also have refreshments available too. Great.

Thank you, Vice President. Other news from awards. Ms. Jost.

Two things. I shared this in the library board meeting. The Read Brave event is tomorrow night at the Arlington Hills Library. The book this year is Lobizona. And so there will be a panel with some of our young people and the mayor facilitated by our library director. And the author will also be there, so it's 05:30 to eight tomorrow at the Arlington Hills Library, and there will be dinner and dessert and just really great conversation, so hope folks can join us. And then I also just wanted to share past good news. The Skyway five k was on Saturday. Council President Maker and myself and our staff from Wards 2 And 4 participated. It was so fun.

Haven't experienced anything like that before, and there were probably maybe almost a thousand runners at that point that participated and then even more spectators watching. So really great event. I want to thank Anderson Race Management and everyone that participated in making that happen. A lot of really great event to just highlight downtown and our

Skyway system. Thanks, Ms. Jess.

It was a lot of fun.

Ms. Kim. We have

our Rice Larpenter Annual Gathering tomorrow in person at the Community School of Excellence. We'll be celebrating businesses and organizations that have helped sort of bolster the corridor. And then, course, just previewing, we have our annual Spring Clean Cleanup. I don't know why I'm having such a hard time. April 18, where we just walk around, kind of divide into groups, but we clean up the rice lavender area. But tomorrow, please join us for our annual celebration. We'll be at the Community School of Excellence starting at 05:30.

Thank you. Any other news from awards? I will just share it is fish fry season. I think I am stealing maybe several awards, thunders here that are not mine, well, including mine. But Isaba is having their fish fry coming up on Friday from 04:30 to seven at the Arcade Failing American Legion. Always a great time. Encourage folks to come. And then St. Matt's Church on the West Side is having their fish fry and a folk dance band at from six to 8PM. The folk dance starts at 06:30. And in case you're wondering if you can go to two fish fries in one night, the answer is absolutely. I, for example, will be at both

of those.

So I hope you can come. All right. With that, if there's no other good news, that brings us to the end of our agenda. Thanks for a great day. We are adjourned.