City Council - Regular Meeting

Good morning, everyone. My name is Elliott Payne. I'm the president of Minneapolis City Council. Before we convene our meeting, we have the presentation of one honorary resolution recognizing Disability Pride Month. I'll invite Councilmember Whiting to give that presentation.

Thank you. And then I will invite our honored guests to come on up as well. Thank you.

Perfect. Yeah. Actually, I can scoot over a little bit.

Perfect. Awesome. Thank you. I'll take a little, I'll read through our resolution and then pass it over to you three. Wonderful. Thank you all for being here. Wrote a resolution here for the 2026 Disability Pride Month. So whereas Disability Pride Month is celebrated in July to acknowledge that the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, ADA, was signed into law on July 26, 1990, and whereas thousands of Minneapolis residents who have disabilities live, work, learn, and play in the city of Minneapolis, And whereas people with disabilities are valued and essential members of the city of Minneapolis, contributing to its economy, arts, and sports communities, and whereas people with disabilities have intersectional identities that improve communities, enhance cultures through their lived experiences, and whereas the city of Minneapolis acknowledges the long history of discrimination against Minneapolis residents with disabilities, and recognizes the decades of activism and advocacy by the disability community, including the Minneapolis Advisory Committee on People with Disabilities, which was established in 1976, and whereas the city of Minneapolis acknowledges that the lives of people with disabilities are worth celebrating this month and every month, and that protections under the ADA must be preserved for generations to come. Now, therefore, be it resolved that the mayor and city council do hereby recognize and celebrate July 26 or 2026 as Disability Pride Month in the city of Minneapolis. Thank you. And I will pass it over to our guests here. We have an honored guest, Ken, who is our chair of our Minneapolis Advisory Committee on Disabilities. And so we'll pass it over to you to kind of say a few notes. Thank you, Ken.

Thank you.

Thank you and first of all I'd like to extend greetings from all of my committee members that serve on the Minneapolis Advisory Committee on People with Disabilities and I'm really happy to report that as of last year with the redesign of city advisory boards and commissions We for the first time in a very, very, very long time had full membership with a member representing each of our seats. And we expect the same thing to continue this year. So that's not done alone. That was done by everyone and especially council members being really attentive to this important work. I want to just say just a couple of words about people that live with disabilities and the value that they bring. I don't need to share with you, you guys all know that, but it's really important that we recognize and uphold our values in ways that go beyond just our daily work and what we each represent individually. Resolution sounds really simple, right? Words get made, put on the paper, and they're really nice words, but the importance is what those words mean. It codifies what we believe as a city and as an entity, a municipality that represents citizens of all stripes and sizes and conditions. And for many, many, many years, people with disabilities were not visible. We were kept separate. We were kept behind the scenes. It was shameful. There was a lot of negativity attached to living with a disability, especially a visible disability. But life has changed and we have emerged as our rights have been restored and focused on to make life as equal as possible for everybody. And because of that, we are independent today. We're out and about. I doubt you go through your day without seeing somebody with a disability in the community, just in your daily work. We're visible, we're proud, and this resolution puts all of that together and adds the city of Minneapolis, the council members and the mayors, value of what people with disabilities bring to all of our work it makes our city better it makes us better as human beings and i'm so proud to be representing the minneapolis advisory committee on people with disabilities which by the way celebrates its 50th year of existence and as mayor fry shared with us last night at our at our council meeting We're probably one of the oldest and longest standing disability advisory committees in a municipality in the US. This is 50 years of accumulated work. So I thank you, because we can't do this alone. We can't make anybody do anything. We're here to advise. And thank you for putting the spotlight on people with disabilities, with lived experience of disability, to help us all be a better city and a better council and better serve our citizens. I really appreciate being here and your work and want to lift that up. Thank you.

Thank you. I couldn't say it better myself. So Guthrie or Anthony, if you have anything. Otherwise, we can take a picture over here, Zoe. And Zoe, if you could just note, too, where you're at, that would be perfect.

If you move, let me know. Okay. Okay.

Thank you everyone at this time I'm gonna call this regular meeting of the City Council for July 16th to order the clerk will call the roll

Council Member Chavez. Present. Council Member Warren.

Present.

Council Member Schaffer. Present. Council Member Wansley is absent. Council Member Shabtai is absent. Council Member Whiting. Present. Council Member Chaudhry.

Present.

Council Member Stevenson. Present. Council Member Rainville. Present. Council Member Vita.

Present.

Council Member Palmisano.

Present.

Vice President Osman is absent. President Payne. Present. There are 10 members present.

Let the record reflect that we have a quorum. Before we begin the meeting, let me remind all members and staff that this meeting is broadcast live to enable greater public participation. The broadcast includes real-time captioning as a means to increase the accessibility of our proceedings to the community. Therefore, all speakers need to be mindful of the rate of their speech so our captioners can capture and transcribe all comments for the broadcast. We ask all speakers to moderate the speed and clarity of their comments. I'll also note that we've been joined by Council Members Wansley and Vice President Osman. With that, the agenda for today's meeting is before us. Are there any amendments to the agenda? May I have a motion to adopt the agenda? So moved. Second. The Clerk will call the roll.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

That carries, and the agenda is adopted. The next item is acceptance of the minutes from our regular meeting of June 25th. May I have a motion to accept those minutes? So moved. Second. The clerk will call the roll.

Councilmember Chavez. Aye. Councilmember Warren. Aye. Councilmember Schaffer. Aye. Councilmember Wansley. Aye. Councilmember Whiting. Aye. Councilmember Chowdhury.

Aye.

Councilmember Stevenson. Aye. Councilmember Rainville. Aye. Councilmember Vita. Aye. Aye. Councilmember Pomsano. Aye. Vice President Osman. Aye. President Payne. Aye. There are 12 ayes.

That carries, and the minutes have been accepted. Finally, we have the referral of petitions, communications, and reports to proper committees. May I have that motion, please? So moved. Second. The clerk will call the roll.

Councilmember Chavez. Aye. Councilmember Warren. Aye. Councilmember Schaefer. Aye. Councilmember Wansley. Aye. Councilmember Whiting. Aye. Councilmember Chaudhry. Aye.

aye council member stevenson aye council member rainbow aye council member veto aye council member pomisano aye vice president austin aye president payne all right there are 12 eyes that carries and those matters have been referred the next order of business is the presentation of reports from our standing committees which are taken in alphabetical order we will begin with the report of our budget committee given by that committee's vice chair council member shaver

Thank you, Mr. President. The Budget Committee is bringing forward one item. Item one accepts the Byrne Discretionary Community Project Funding Grants Program for evaluation of problem nature codes and approves appropriation of funds to the Office of Community Safety. I'll move approval of this item.

Council Member Schaffer has moved approval of the committee report. Is there any discussion? Seeing none, I'll ask the clerk to call the roll.

Councilmember Chavez. Aye. Councilmember Warren. Aye. Councilmember Schaffer. Aye. Councilmember Walmsley. Aye. Councilmember Whiting. Aye. Councilmember Chowdhury.

Aye.

Councilmember Stevenson. Aye. Councilmember Rainville. Aye. Councilmember Vita. Aye. Councilmember Pomasano. Aye. Vice President Osman. Aye. President Payne. Aye. There are 12 ayes.

That carries and the report is adopted. Next we have the report of our business housing and zoning committee given by that committee's chair, Vice President Osman.

Thank you, Mr. President. The Business, Housing, and Zoning Committee will be bringing 17 items forward today. Item 1 approves a liquor with limited entertainment license for Bill's Bait Shop. Item 2 approves an extension of premises and a street cafe license for Brian Lake Bowl. Item 3 approves a wine and a strong beer with no entertainment license for T. Joe's. Item 4 approves a The financing for the green exchange conversion project is item item 5 is a variance appeal. For the property at 4710 humble Avenue North this was sent forward without recommendation. Item 6 approves. A 6 lick licker license item 7 approves a 24 licker license renewals. Item 8 approves 2 gambling license. Item 9 approves amended business license operation condition for breakfast bar of Minnesota. Item 10 accepts a bid for snow removal at the convention center. Item 11 authorized restricted loan for Giga Giga business center. Item 12, authorizes financing agreement for Minneapolis Homes Rehab Project. Item 13, authorize revision to the alternative financing program. Item 14, approves the land deposition and financial assistance for Hennepin County. Item 15, authorize a loan contract with Metro CONSORTIUM OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPERS. ITEM 16 APPROVES TWO STREET VACATION NORTH OF FRANKLIN AVENUE WEST. AND LASTLY, ITEM 17 IS A LOCAL HISTORICAL LANDMARK DESIGNATION FOR THE LAKE SHORE ARMS APARTMENT. THIS WAS SENT FORWARD WITHOUT RECOMMENDATION. WITH THAT, I'LL MOVE ALL ITEMS FOR APPROVAL EXCEPT ITEM 5, 15, AND 17. THANK YOU.

VICE PRESIDENT OSBUN HAS MOVED APPROVAL OF THE COMMITTEE APPROVAL OF THE COMMITTEE APPROVAL OF THE COMMITTEE REPORT MINUS ITEMS 5 AND 15. REPORT MINUS ITEMS 5 AND 15. REPORT MINUS ITEMS 5 AND 15. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE REMAINDER OF THE REPORT, REMAINDER OF THE REPORT, REMAINDER OF THE REPORT, COUNCILMEMBER WHITING?

COUNCILMEMBER WHITING? COUNCILMEMBER WHITING? THANK YOU, PRESIDENT PAIN. THANK YOU, PRESIDENT PAIN. THANK YOU, PRESIDENT PAIN.

JUST HAVE TO NOTE THAT I WILL JUST HAVE TO NOTE THAT I WILL JUST HAVE TO NOTE THAT I WILL HAVE TO RECUSE MYSELF FROM ITEM

Thank you, President Payne. I just wanted to take a second to highlight item number one. It's a really big deal for this restaurant to come into the 12th Ward. This corner used to have Chicago's Taste Authority, which provided a lot of Activation in the area walkable area for community members to come and walk in the neighborhood and so to have Bill's bait shop, which is a woman owned local business to come into the neighborhood and to provide a bar and Karaoke and all of these activations is something that's really spread across the 12th Ward people want more places where they can walk at a night to go grab a drink or hang out with friends and I have never seen so many emails and calls and texts in support of this business and any type of business coming in so that just kind of highlights how exciting it is and how dynamic it will be for the neighborhood so I I just wanted to thank the business owner for coming into our committee, and I also wanted to take some time to thank the neighbors who reached out to my office in support of this and just shared what they're hoping for here in this location.

Seeing no one else left in queue, I will ask the clerk to call the roll on the committee report minus items 5, 15, and 17.

Council Member Chavez. Aye. Council Member Warren. Aye. Council Member Schaffer.

Aye.

Council Member Wansley is absent. Council Member Whiting. Aye. Council Member Chowdhury.

Aye.

Council Member Stevenson. Aye. Council Member Randolph. Aye. Council Member Vittal.

Aye.

Council Member Palmesano. Aye. Vice President Osman. Aye. President Payne. Aye. There are 11 ayes.

Those items carry. Next, we will take item number five, and I will recognize Council Member Vittal.

Thank you, President Payne. I would just like to move to grant the appeal submitted by Wayne Carlson on behalf of Horner Carlson Family Partnership LLP regarding the decision of the Zoning Board of Adjustment denying the application for the variance from the screening requirements for refuse and recycling containers on the property located at 4710 Humboldt Avenue North based on the findings, you should have it in front of you. So I'd like to make that motion.

Second.

That's been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Seeing none, I'll ask the clerk to call the roll.

Councilmember Chavez. Aye. Councilmember Warren.

Aye.

Councilmember Schaffer.

Aye.

Councilmember Whiting. Aye. Councilmember Chaudhry.

Aye.

Councilmember Stephenson. Aye. Councilmember Randolph. Aye. Councilmember Vita. Aye. Councilmember Pomisano. Aye. Vice President Osmond. Aye. President Payne. Aye. There are 11 ayes.

That carries. Next, we will take up item number 15. Is there any further discussion on this item? Seeing none, I'll ask the clerk to call the roll.

Council Member Chavez. Aye. Council Member Warren. Aye. Council Member Schaffer.

Aye.

Council Member Whiting. Abstain. Council Member Chaudhry.

Aye.

Council Member Stevenson. Aye. Council Member Rainbow. Aye. Council Member Vita. Aye. Council Member Palmesano. Aye. Vice President Osman. Aye. President Payne. Aye. There are ten ayes and one abstention.

That carries. Next we will take up item number 17 and I'll recognize Council Member Schaffer.

Thank you, President Payne. I'm making a motion to deny this designation for several reasons. I'll take a few minutes to outline that. Well, historic preservation is very important to me, and it should be to everyone. This is a marginal nomination of a property that's not remotely unique. IT HAPPENS TO BE LOCATED ALSO IN A TRANSIT CORRIDOR SURROUNDED BY MORE DENSE MULTIUNIT HOUSING. THIS AREA IS GROWING FAST. AND WHILE THE CURRENT OWNER SAYS THEY HAVE NO PLANS CURRENTLY TO REDEVELOP THE PROPERTY, GRANTING THIS DESIGNATION WOULD FOREVER FORECLOSE THE POSSIBILITY IN AN AREA THAT'S RAPIDLY GROWING, TWO BLOCKS FROM THE SOUTHWEST LIGHT RAIL AND IS ONE OF THE CITY'S BRIGHT HOUSING SPOTS. out of seven significant criteria only one was found in the staff report in limbs it purportedly embodies the spanish eclectic style of the early twentieth century nothing of historical note happened here and it's not a unique resource The staff report alone documents 17 other properties throughout the city by the same architect, C.J. Bard, in the exact same style, Spanish Eclectic, from the exact same period, the 1930s. It is not a unique resource. The problem with this nomination is that in order to, quote, embody this style, it is not enough to be simply one of an example. But embodiment means it should be a very good to exceptional example. A quick review of the staff report here shows that is not the case. Look at the Moorish Mansion, for example. This is an average to below building on the docket here today in an environment where many other better candidates exist. If there is truly a need to preserve an example of Spanish Eclectic, we should find the best example we can set and find that sets the standard or embodies this particular style. This isn't it. another important difference between this property in the other dozen and a half of cj bars spanish eclectic apartments those other properties are largely located in residential areas that are not on major transit routes and aren't growing by leaps and bounds while the area surrounding these properties look largely like they did in the nineteen thirties the lakeshore arms does not it is bounded by lake point condos to the east roughly twenty to twenty five stories and several mid-rise apartment buildings five or six stories to the west it's on a major transit route already and designating historical significance to this particular building will permanently foreclose the preferred development designated for the area under the 2040 plan While I appreciate the urge to preserve our history, this particular nomination creates more problems than it solves. These apartments in this style are abundant. This isn't close to the best example. And its setting on Lake Street has changed and modernized drastically in the intervening 90 years. And this can be expected to continue for the foreseeable future. If we want to preserve the feel of Spanish eclectic in the 1930s, there are many better places to do it in our city than here. So I respectfully request that my colleagues join with me to deny the historic designation for this Ward 7 property.

Is there a second?

Second.

Council Member Stevenson.

Yes, thank you. I spoke with Councilmember Schaffer yesterday and asked this, but I wanted to ask it again. Is there any way that we could delay this and have staff think about it more? I think that you told me that this is a strong case and that you think staff is somewhat behind it. And so I would be interested in supporting staff and supporting you at the same time. So I'm wondering if we can make that happen.

No, we're going to move this forward today just because of the work that I've already put into this in writing the fact-finding and working with staff behind the scenes and bringing forward the arguments that we feel are most pertinent to this decision.

Council Member Chavez. Thank you, President Payne. Is staff here to answer a few questions? So what was, Director, can you just walk us through the original item, which is item number 17, that was brought forward to council and what was staff recommendation?

President Payne, members of the council, my name is Eric Hanson. I am the director of CPED. And I just walked in, so I'm not exactly sure what item we're talking about. I think it's the historic designation of the building on Lake Street, okay. All right, if I could get some assistance from President Mayne, could we delay this and I could get staff from? Oh, there we go. I was just about to go get him. All right, Rob.

Welcome, and if you could introduce yourself.

Defer to Mr. Scalecki for the information.

Thank you, Eric. Thank you, Council President Payne. I believe Council Member Chavez had a question, is that correct? Would you be able to repeat that, Council Member?

Yeah, what is item number 17 so the public understands, and what was the recommendation from staff? And if you could just start by introducing yourself.

Sure, my name's Rob Scalecki. I'm a senior city planner in the historic preservation team in planning. The item that we're considering today is the landmark designation of Lakeshore Arms Apartments, located at 3026 Lake Street West. This was considered by the Minneapolis HPC I'M AT THEIR MEETING IN JUNE AND THIS WENT IN FRONT OF BUSINESS HOUSING AND ZONING COMMITTEE AT THE LAST MEETING STAFF WERE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL BASED ON A STUDY THAT WAS CONDUCTED OVER THE PAST YEAR FOLLOWING THIS BUILDING'S NOMINATION BACK IN AUGUST OF LAST YEAR SO CITY STAFF WAS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION VOTED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND BUSINESS HOUSING AND ZONING COMMITTEE WAS FORWARDED TO COUNCIL OF COURSE WITHOUT RECOMMENDATION SO THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT NOW. THIS IS AGAIN CONSIDERING THE LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF LAKE SHORT ARMS APARTMENTS.

THANK YOU. YEAH, I JUST HAD A QUESTION BECAUSE THAT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING IN THE BUSINESS HOUSING AND ZONING COMMITTEE AND IT'S PART OF WHY I'M UNDERSIDED ON WHAT TO DO WITH THIS PARTICULAR ITEM. I THINK STAFF HAS DONE THEIR WORK, HAS DONE THEIR OWN FINDINGS AND THEN THE OTHER COMPONENT THAT I AM CONCERNED ABOUT IS THE VARIETY OF OTHER BUILDINGS THAT COULD BE DESIGNATED FOR HERITAGE PRESERVATION IN THE FUTURE AND WHAT IMPACT THAT WOULD HAVE IF WE WERE TO THEN MOVE FORWARD WITH ALL THESE OTHER BUILDINGS AND WHAT IT WOULD DO TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOUSING ACROSS OUR CITY. HOWEVER, THOSE ARE CASE-BY-CASE SCENARIOS, SO THAT IS NOT A DECISION THAT WE HAVE TO DO. I don't know if I'm ready to support the motion brought forward by Council Member Schaffer today, just because I need to have more information in front of me, given that staff has a different position on this. So I would appreciate a delay so I can have more time, but either that, if we don't have more time, then I guess I have to make a decision by what I have in front of me. Council Member Chaudhry.

Hey, thank you, President Payne. I think it was, wise for us to forward this without recommendation in the committee i think one thing in just my observation as we take up historic preservation items is this council needs to develop its ability to discern these items when they're before us and that's not to cast blame on any of us it's a very wonky type of item and I think it's a skill set that we need to grow in the way that we have needed to grow on our quasi-judicial items. I had a question for Mr. Skalecki, and this is really based in our process. The way that we're taking this up now where it's coming before us as a city council and we're voting on it, is this related to the ordinance change that we took up last term?

Council President Payne, Council Member Chowdhury, This is very similar to how landmarks were considered under the previous ordinance. So there's always two parts to considering a landmark. The first is the nomination, and that's what happens in order to initiate that study process. The second is the designation, which is being considered now. So that comes with the resolution that would formally designate a property to be a landmark. So that process hasn't, it's changed in some ways, but the way that landmarks are designated is very similar to how it was under the previous ordinance.

And if this was any landmark preservation item in the future or this one, if it were to move through, how does it then go to the HPC? Is there a time in which it goes before them and then they begin work? I'm trying to better understand kind of what comes out of that. our vote here if it was an affirmative vote. Clearly, if it was a vote in the negative, it would just halt altogether, but that would be helpful to know.

Sure. So if a landmark is approved for designation, then that is essentially a decision that lasts in perpetuity. That means that any changes to the property would come forward for staff review or Heritage Preservation Commission review, depending on the scope of work that's being proposed there. And we would review changes to make sure they meet the National Park Service's Secretary of the Interior standards for rehabilitation, which are used throughout the country to evaluate changes to historic properties. If a landmark designation is denied, and this is different from the previous ordinance, there is no language in the current ordinance to guide what could happen in the future. So if it is denied today or if a decision is not made, there is a possibility that it could come back in three years to be reconsidered with additional information.

Okay, and then how many landmark designations have we taken in the last, I'll just say like two or three years?

it's generally about one to one and a half a year on average if we're doing averages that we bring forward for landmark properties.

Yeah, thank you. I really appreciate it. I think the place where I'm sitting, and I really appreciate Council Member Schaffer's work on this, absolutely. I'll note, I feel like, let me know if I miss anything. I didn't get any information on the findings ahead of time, which I think would have been valuable to sit with ahead of this meeting. I do think it's not atypical for us to take our time on historic preservation discussions and Landmark designation discussions. I think the John Cook house was a really great example of needing to take time for discernment The thing that gives me pause is not being able to take time with the current findings not being able to have enough time to dig in with staff and the fact that staff did put this up for an approval under one criterion, which is what's required I'm not opposed to voting voting this down and i'm not opposed to voting this up but i don't feel like we have the proper discernment on this item and so if we're not going to delay i don't feel comfortable um one i don't feel comfortable taking on a vote on this today i think is my bottom line and i think based off of that i'll have to make a decision if we're going to vote on this But a delay, I think, would be appreciated. I don't think it's atypical for us to take our time on this, even if it's just one cycle. I think we've got to build our muscle on this topic, because there are going to be more items like this come before us. And then under our ordinance change, now council members, in partnership with community members, can bring up items for historic preservation designation in the future. And that's a new change that we also have to better understand.

vice president osmond um thank you council president i i just want to remind the members uh council members here this was a public hearing we we had the opportunity to of course hear from the staff but also hear from the owner of the building um that is against the designation here uh actually had a wonderful presentation where he kind of compare SIMILAR APARTMENTS OUT THERE IN OUR CITY, SAME TYPE OF APARTMENT, 1720, AND I THINK MAYBE ALL OF THEM WERE NOT DESIGNATED AND HE EXPLAINED TO US THE UNIQUENESS OF THIS APARTMENT AND HE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT. BUT ALSO WE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR FROM HIM BOTH SIDES, NOT JUST THE COMMISSION HERE, BUT ALSO FROM THE OF THE APARTMENT. AND WE HAD A REALLY LENGTH CONVERSATION. I DON'T SEE THE POINT OF KIND OF DELAYING WHAT WE DELAYED FOR. WE DO HAVE THE STAFF TO ANSWER THE QUESTIONS. AND WE ALSO HAVE ON THE DIAS HERE OF THE OWNER OF THE APARTMENT. IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS FOR THOSE FOLKS THAT ARE ACTUALLY KNOW A LOT ABOUT THIS ITEM, WE CAN ASK. AND I THINK WE SHOULD MAKE A DECISION AND MOVE FORWARD FROM HERE. THANK YOU.

Councilmember Stevenson.

Okay, I guess we're not going to get more time to get staff to maybe change their minds on this. So while you're here, can I just ask you, there's a case that's been brought up about why this maybe isn't the best example of this type of architecture. Do you see validity in that case?

Council President Payne, Councilmember Stevenson. Staff, the way that the finding is written is that a property would embody that specific style of architecture. So we do look at every single property that we have the availability to look at in the studies to see what the comparisons are and deciding if a property really merits landmark status for being considered in this situation. An example of a style of architecture and through the study, staff believed so. UNDERSTANDING COUNCILMEMBER SCHAEFER'S COMMENTS ON IT AND THERE IS THE ABILITY TO IN THE FINDINGS TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION ANY PUBLIC COMMENT THAT'S BEEN RECEIVED AND WITH PUBLIC COMMENT THAT'S BEEN RECEIVED, I UNDERSTAND THAT COUNCILMEMBER SCHAEFER DISAGREES WITH SAF'S FINDINGS WITH THE ADDITIONAL RESEARCH THAT HAS BEEN PROVIDED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER.

OKAY. I GUESS WHAT I'M ASKING IS If this building were to get destroyed, would the city of Minneapolis really be losing something special, or are there others that are equal or better in this style?

Council President Payne, Council Member Stevenson, there's It's not, there's no, we have no knowledge of it being destroyed in the future, plans for it to be demolished, and we look at properties as they exist and as it exists. Staff did recommend approval for landmark designation under that criterion four as an example of the Spanish eclectic architectural style. Okay, thank you.

Is there any further discussion on this item? Seeing none, I'll ask the clerk to call the roll on the motion to deny historical designation.

Council Member Chavez.

Maybe you want to clarify the vote direction because what was stated is different than what we have listed.

The motion in front of you is what was distributed by Council Member Schaffer and moved and seconded, which would deny the local historic landmark designation for Lake Shark Arms Apartments.

So an aye vote would deny.

The clerk will call the roll. I don't want to deny. This is so confusing. Sorry, I'm back on cue. Councilmember Chavez. Microphone. If I don't want to deny the preservation here any more time, obviously, am I an aye then? You would be a nay. Okay, it's just the whole thing is, okay, no.

Okay, the clerk will call the roll.

Council Member Chavez? No. Council Member Warren?

Aye.

Council Member Schaffer?

Aye.

Council Member Whiting. Aye. Council Member Chowdhury.

No.

Council Member Stevenson. Aye. Council Member Rainville. Aye. Council Member Vita.

Aye.

Council Member Palmisano. Aye. Vice President Osmond. Aye. President Payne.

Aye.

There are nine ayes and two nays.

THAT CARRIES, AND THAT COMPLETES THE BIS REPORT. THE NEXT REPORT IS FROM OUR CLIMATE AND INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE, WHICH WILL BE PRESENTED BY THAT COMMITTEE'S CHAIR, COUNCILMEMBER WANSLEY. AND BEFORE WE MOVE ON, WOULD YOU LIKE TO BE RECOGNIZED FOR THE CONSENT ITEMS ON THE BIS AGENDA?

I ON CONSENT, AND THEN WE DID NOT TAKE UP THE HISTORIC DESIGNATION. WE DID?

WE JUST DID.

OKAY. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO BE RECORDED. I WAS AFFIRMATIVE IN SUPPORTING THE HISTORIC DESIGNATION OR NAY?

NAY. CLERKS, DID YOU GET THAT? ALL RIGHT. NOW I WILL RECOGNIZE COUNCIL MEMBER WANSLEY TO GIVE THE CLIMATE AND INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT.

THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO HAND THAT OVER TO VICE CHAIR STEVENSON WHO CHAIRED THAT MEETING.

Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Mr. President. The Climate and Infrastructure Committee has nine items to bring forward. One, considering the Lindale-Avery construction project. Two, resolution for a gift acceptance for Equivolve. Three, resolution for a gift acceptance for Brookings Transportation Initiative. Four, resolution for a gift acceptance for Minneapolis Foundation. Five, resolutions for support for the Minnesota Department of Transportation Highway 280 project. Six, resolution for land sale of Wedge Point Park to Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board. Seven, authorizing grant applications to Minnesota Department of Transportation for 2026 Federal Highway Safety Improvement Program. Eight, accepting the low bid for West River Road phase two project. Nine, approving a legislative directive proposed closure of the Hennepin Energy Recovery Center. I'll move approval of the report except for item one for discussion and separate vote.

Councilmember Stevenson has moved approval of the report minus item number one. Is there any discussion on the remainder of the report? Councilmember Schaffer.

Yeah, I just wanted to stop a moment and pause for the little victories that we are helping for the Park Board in this selling of the Wedge Point Park parcels in the Lowry Hill East neighborhood is something that I have been tracking for the last four years. And so I just wanted to acknowledge and thank city staff for their work and seeing this through to completion and i'm really happy for the neighborhood and i know council member chugtai would share those same sentiments if she were here this is a win for the neighborhood council member stevenson

Sorry, I think I was trying to get in first in line for the discussion on the next item.

Gotcha. Seeing no one else left in queue, I'll ask the clerk to call the roll on the climate and infrastructure report minus item one.

Council Member Chavez. Aye. Council Member Warren. Aye. Council Member Schaffer. Aye. Council Member Whiting. Aye. Council Member Chowdhury.

Aye.

Council Member Stevenson. Aye. Council Member Rando. Aye. Council Member Vita. Aye. Council Member Pomsano.

Aye.

Council Member Wansley on items two through nine of the C&I report.

Aye.

Vice President Osmond. Aye. President Payne. Aye. There are 12 ayes.

THOSE ITEMS CARRY. NEXT WE WILL TAKE UP ITEM NUMBER ONE AND I WILL RECOGNIZE COUNCIL MEMBER STEPHENSON.

THANK YOU. I AM GOING TO MOVE TO AMEND ITEM. THE AMENDMENT IS IN FRONT OF YOU. IT IS CNI NUMBER ONE BY STEPHENSON. THESE AMENDMENTS HAVE BEEN DONE IN CLOSE CONSIDERATION WITH DIRECTOR SEXTON AND WARD 10 OFFICE AND WARD 7 OFFICE, COUNCILMEMBER SCHAEFER. SO WE HAVE DONE OUR BEST TO take all these voices into account and make sure that this approval of the uh... municipal consent goes through smoothly and is taking everyone's a voice into account so i will note that as folks can see livable lindale is here and they have uh... delivered to us literally thousands of postcards and support of this plan and more uh... in terms of safety and pedestrian and bike and bus improvements and we have heard from PROBABLY HUNDREDS OF FOLKS, MANY FROM THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY WHO ARE AGAINST. SO GIVEN THAT THERE IS LARGE CONTESTATION OVER THIS ITEM, I THINK IT IS RIGHT THAT WE ARE STRIKING A COMPROMISE. THIS COMPROMISE DOES NOT GET EVERYTHING THAT I WANT BY ANY others who may disagree with me everything they want by any means at all. But what this does do is this is approving of a design and the way we have written our resolution is approving a resolution that has really taken everybody's voice into account. We have listened and we have listened and we have listened. And given that this street is over 90 years old, it is time to be rebuilt. And this is the compromise that is the right compromise to do that. Construction is difficult for businesses, and I believe we'll be considering another amendment soon to help alleviate that somewhat and I think this body and maybe the county and the state should also consider different ways to support businesses through construction. But I would ask my colleagues to please approve this because This is the compromise that I think is right and that I think works for everybody. And so I'm going to quick read my amendments. And I'm going to read all the amendments that have happened in the last two weeks, some of them mine, some of them not. So one is prioritize the preservation of existing, healthy, mature trees along Lindale Avenue. The second one is we're striking with consent from Director Sexton design modifications to the proposed medians to ensure driveway access and business operational needs. This is something that he's talked about they're going to do anyways to make sure that deliveries can happen. in a safe and legal matter. Number three, work with city staff and corridor stakeholders to determine a construction phasing plan that minimizes disruption to businesses and ensures access during construction to the extent possible. And then lastly, or almost lastly, prioritize shortening the ultimate duration of the project that may include extended construction work hours as permitted by the Minneapolis Health Department. And then later, whereas the city of Minneapolis supports the county in accessing the federal funds for the project and the timeline that is required to get those funds. So I will move this amendment for approval.

Second.

Councilmember Stevenson has moved item one for approval as amended. Well, we can take these amendments up. So Councilmember Stevenson has moved to amend item number one. That's been seconded. I'll recognize Councilmember Schaffer.

Thank you, President Payne. I'll just share my thoughts here. First of all, number one, I really appreciate the discussion and problem solving that has been happening both in my dialogue with the Ward 10 office and Council Member Stevenson in the last few days, really throwing out the idea of trying to get some language for extended hours actually specified in some of the amendments which did not uh... happen uh... but i want to say that i really appreciate all the feedback that i've been get given on this on topic and really trying to see and and recognize the effort that people are making to try to bridge the i'd the divine that being said i simply cannot support the proposed design concept due to the impact on our small businesses the business community has opposed the plan at every turn for specific and good reasons with the experience of having new hennepin avenue fresh in their minds my ward seven residents oppose it for some of the same reasons that they opposed hennepin avenue they didn't like the design there when it was first proposed and they don't like the reality now that it is finished and they don't want to see the same mistakes happen on lyndale What are the problems? From this perspective, here are a few examples. There's been no meaningful specific protections built in for the Lyndale businesses. While rudimentary physical access will be maintained, reaching these businesses will still be a challenge for customers, and there's no meaningful financial support for them. That proved devastating to the businesses along Hennepin, and there's every reason to believe this dynamic will repeat itself on Lyndale. This isn't just for a week or a month, it's two to three years. We can anticipate that some of the businesses that currently exist on Lindale will not be there when this project is over. SECONDLY, AS THE CURRENT COUNCIL MEMBER REPRESENTATIVE ON THE MINNEAPOLIS TREE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, I STAND WITH THIS COMMITTEE IN THEIR OPPOSITION TO THE PLAN DUE TO TREE REMOVAL CONCERNS. I WAS A PARK COMMISSIONER DURING THE ORIGINAL HENEPIN AVENUE RECONSTRUCTION WHERE DESIGNS PLANNED TO REMOVE APPROXIMATELY 120 PLUS TREES AND WAS ABLE TO WORK WITH COMMUNITY EXPERT STAFF AT THE PARK BOARD AND THE CITY AND COUNTY AND HELP SAVE APPROXIMATELY 60 MATURE TREES IN THAT PROJECT. The frequency with which public infrastructure projects do the continual removal and replanting cycle is really part of the problem that we are facing in aging our urban canopy and creating a greater carbon footprint. Once this project is over, a different set of problems will take over. As with Hennepin, travel will be largely constrained to one lane in each direction, with left-hand turns very difficult to impossible. Commercial loading and unloading will be impractical in some locations. Parking will become more limited and parking lanes will become more narrow, reverting back to the nine feet that we had in the old four-lane configuration, which actually resulted in a fatality not too long ago. BOTTOM LINE, THE BUSINESSES THAT MANAGED TO SURVIVE THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS WILL FACE CONTINUED HEADWINDS FROM THE END PRODUCT. THIS CITY IN ITS BUDGET ENVIRONMENT CURRENTLY CAN'T AFFORD TO GIVE UP THE ECONOMIC DRIVERS THAT WE DO HAVE. LASTLY, THE COMPLETED HENNEPIN AVENUE HAS NOT RESULTED IN A RENAISSANCE YET FOR OUR AREA OR STREET. MUCH THE CONTRARY. WE STILL HAVE VACANT STOREFRONTS. THE SIDEWALKS AREN'T BUSY. TRAFFIC IS BACKED UP CREATING MUCH IDLING IN THE CORRIDOR AND OUR OFFICE IS CURRENTLY HEARING REPORTS OF RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS EXPERIENCING GREATER TRAFFIC CONCERNS AS FOLKS ARE AVOIDING HENNEPIN COMING FROM THE WEST AND SOUTH AND FINDING ALTERNATIVE ROUTES OTHER THAN HENNEPIN AVENUE. UNFORTUNATELY THE RESIDENTIAL STREETS AROUND LYNNDALE ARE EVEN NARROWER THAN AROUND HENNEPIN AND MAY EXPERIENCE THE SAME OUTCOME. This was a set of problems predicted by many before the Hennepin redo. People's lived experience after completion has borne it out, and I simply can't support the strategy of making the exact same choices and hoping for a different result. This is gonna be Hennepin part two. MY CONSTITUENTS ARE OVERWHELMINGLY OPPOSED, THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY IS OVERWHELMINGLY OPPOSED, AND I FEEL OBLIGATED TO SUPPORT THEM WITH MY VOTE GIVING THE CLEAR COMMUNITY PREFERENCE IN WARD SEVEN. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

VICE PRESIDENT OSMAN.

THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO KNOW IF THE PUBLIC WORKS STAFF IS HERE JUST TO ANSWER SOME QUESTIONS. I DON'T SEE THEM. I THINK THE POINT MADE IS VERY VALID. THE BUSINESSES DO STRUGGLE A LOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONS. THEY ALREADY ARE DIFFICULT SURVIVING WHAT'S BEEN HAPPENING, THE COVID, THE ICE SITUATION. I SEE THE DIRECTOR HERE. WELCOME, SIR. THE CHALLENGES IS THERE FOR THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY, AND WE GOT TO HAVE A BETTER PLAN ADDRESSING THE BUSINESSES THAT ARE SMALL BUSINESSES THAT ARE ACTUALLY MIGHT NOT COME BACK ON WHERE THEY ARE HAVING BUSINESSES NOW, WHICH IS LINDELL. SO THE PROJECT HAS EFFECTS OF SMALL BUSINESSES. THAT IS A FACT. YES, THE ROAD IS OVER SEVEN YEARS OLD. I THINK HAVING A BETTER DESIGN IS BETTER FOR THE FUTURE AND FOR THE FUTURE OF OUR CITY, FOR SAFETY-WISE, FOR IT'S REALLY GOOD TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WE CAN SAY NO TO THAT, I UNDERSTAND. BUT I REALLY WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT WHAT I'M HEARING FROM PEOPLE, I WANT PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND THIS IS NOT A CITY PROJECT. THIS IS THE COUNTY PROJECT. So my question to the director is, if we voted down on this plan, does that mean the project stops and it's no longer gonna continue, or is it just the county will just continue with their plan?

Yeah, through the Chair, Council Vice President, Tim Sexton, Public Works Director. Our current interpretation based on the city attorneys, and I will look to them maybe first if they would like to respond, but I can share my understanding of the legal interpretation thus far is that if we do not approve this, the county cannot proceed with the work. They do need our permission to do this work within the city.

Madam City Attorney, is that accurate?

THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING AS WELL.

OKAY.

I ASK THAT QUESTION BECAUSE I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER THE WHOLE BLUE LINE SITUATION WHERE THEY ALSO CAME FOR THE TRAIN FOR THE CONSENT. AND WHAT I HEARD BACK THEN WAS IF WE VOTED DOWN, THEY'RE STILL GOING TO CONTINUE TO HAVE THE TRAIN MOVE FORWARD. SO IT'S A DIFFERENT INTERPRETATION THE WAY I SEE IT. YOU DON'T HAVE TO COMMENT. WELL, THAT KIND OF CHANGES THINGS FOR ME, YOU KNOW? AND I REALLY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE NOT VOTING FOR THIS UNTIL WE HAVE A BETTER PLAN FOR BUSINESSES. AND I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY PLAN. CAN YOU TALK ABOUT IF THERE'S ANY PLAN? IS THERE A RECOVERY WAY OF HELPING THESE BUSINESSES? AND I DON'T THINK WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THAT. I'm gonna have to think about this. I do appreciate the money that's coming in our city and having the safe roads, bike lanes, and all that great things, but we gotta think about the small businesses and think about how that will affect them. AND MY QUESTION IS THIS IF WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PROJECT ALSO I LIKE TO SEE IS THAT A WAY TO GET THE CONSTRUCTION DONE WITHOUT CLOSING THE STREET I KNOW THEY CAN'T THERE'S ALWAYS CREATIVE WAY OF GETTING THINGS DONE BUT I'LL LEAVE IT THERE THANK YOU COUNCIL MEMBER CHALDRY

Thank you, President Payne. I just wanted to take some time to speak in favor of the resolution of support for Lindell Avenue reconstruction. I think a vote for this is a vote for progress for our city. One thing that I just wanna really hammer home for my colleagues and anyone that's listening in the community is this is a 100-year-old street. This is 100 years old. and streets have an end of life. There is a point in which they are no longer working for the community and our communities deserve nice things and Lyndale is far due for reconstruction and reconstruction of our streets is a fact life in a busy city like the city of Minneapolis especially Lindale Avenue which has thousands of people using it thousands of thousands of people using it each and every day I also want to hammer home whether we had bike lanes or no bike lanes or any of the amenities that we're providing for pedestrians if we took all that off that same impact would still happen with construction for the improvements that are needed in the streets. So what we are voting for is not just for 2028 or 2029, it's for 2128. And I think that gives us a very valuable perspective. I also want to speak to the fact that I hear from residents and constituents in my own word that travel to Lindale Avenue, from residents and constituents that are on Lindale Avenue, as someone that lived off of Ridgewood, right off of Lindale, in my time as a resident in the city of Minneapolis. This is a very hostile, very hostile street for all of those that experience walking, biking, driving, using transit. Lynn Lake is the highest injury intersection in the city of Minneapolis. We have a responsibility as local government to our constituents and our communities to make updates to ensure that one, we're addressing aging infrastructure. Two, we're making sure that our streets are welcoming for all and that people can get around. we have responsibility to ensure that we are reducing crashes and saving lives. And what I'm really excited about is seeing a project before us that really brings into the fold the considerations of those that bike, those that use transit, and also improvements that will just make it a better and safer place for people to drive as well as if that's what they choose. I also wanna acknowledge that this was a compromise overall. There were several things that community members that don't prefer to drive wanted and did not receive. There were several things that people who are a part of the business community or are predominantly drivers wanted and got or wanted and didn't get. And I think the really big sword of Damocles that hangs over our head is the fact that 45% of the funding that we need to make this project happen comes from the federal government. And I think we all know the federal government isn't coming to save us anytime soon. So we might as well take this funding that we have, be able to do this reconstruction project and move forward. Or otherwise we might not be guaranteed the funding that we need to address a street that's been aging for 100 years. And I also hear the concern about construction being a death note to a neighborhood and its vibrancy. And that's why I'm bringing forward a motion, an amendment to the resolution. And I'd like to read it aloud to you. I call it my bringing whimsy to street reconstruction amendment. Whereas the city encourages collaboration with the county to minimize disruption by increasing activation during street closures, by supporting development of programming, such as but not limited to daytime events and activities, performances, seating areas, food stalls, interim plazas, and similar uses. And whereas this approach is recommended by the National Association of City Transportation Officials for temporary street closures, allowing cities to make better use of their roadways, particularly during off-peak hours and weekends and creating opportunities to draw attention to neighborhood businesses and destinations while increasing foot traffic on designated corridors. we can make street reconstruction something that brings community members into the corridor we do it every time we close down lindale avenue for open streets so let's do beers and bulldozers let's have interim plazas let's create a place for our kids to play and let's have the city and the county chip in commissioner marian green highlighted in an interview that she did recently that this is something that she's interested in collaborating on HECK, LET'S BRING THE DANCING PENCILS FROM LAKE OF THE ISLES INTO LINDELL AVENUE TO BRING SOME OF THAT WHIMSY. I DON'T THINK IT NEEDS TO BE A DEATH NOTE FOR THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY. I THINK IT CAN BE A HUGE BOON AND WE CAN REPLACE 100-YEAR-OLD INFRASTRUCTURE AND BUILD FOR THE FUTURE.

um thank you council president i just thought i would formally answer the question and then i said what my understanding was so um uh director sexton is correct that um that that the process requires uh approval of the governing body of the city which as we have always interpreted it is this body and the mayor There is a dispute resolution procedure set forth in the statute that if we fail to approve, then the county may request the appointment of a dispute resolution board consisting of one county commissioner, one county engineer, one city council member. or city mayor, one city engineer, and one representative of the Department of Transportation to review the proposal and make recommendations. Notwithstanding any other law, the commissioner may approve the establishment, construction, reconstruction, or improvement recommended by the board. Essentially, the answer is you have to approve it, but there is a process. I wouldn't want anyone to be surprised if you did not approve it that there could be this dispute resolution process. So hopefully that answers questions.

Council Member Wansley.

Thank you, President Payne. First, I do want to just say thank you to all the residents who have came forward and advocated and organized across our city to ensure that all government agencies that are involved with this project are being held accountable to the commitments we've made to improve transportation access and to expand multimodal options for getting around Minneapolis safely. Although the Lindell project is county led as been established, our residents have been engaging the city council on this proposal for nearly two years because they understand that these decisions have lasting consequences for our city. Minneapolis specifically also understand the significance of this because we set the ambitious goal of ensuring that Three out of every five trips are made without a car by 2030. And that deadline is less than four years away. So if we are serious about meeting that commitment, then we must take every opportunity available to move closer to that goal. But unfortunately, projects like this have reinforced a troubling reality for many residents, indicating that adopting bold transportation plans is one thing. But then when it comes to actually delivering the infrastructure necessary to achieve them becomes a whole other situation that's becoming over politicized in many ways and threatens our ability to meet those goals. And time and time again, we've seen that meaningful improvements for people who walk, bike, roll, or rely on transits are not guaranteed when we do these massive road or resurfacing projects. And they often only happen because residents stay engaged, they speak up, and refuse to let important design elements be quietly stripped away. And I do not want to continue normalizing the practice of moving goalposts on what a safe, complete street should look like. I am particularly troubled with the level of opposition to incorporating green infrastructure and other proven safety improvements into our roadways. And while I understand and genuinely sympathize with the disruption that construction can create for businesses, the notion that we should abandon or indefinitely delay a reconstruction project on a corridor that is widely recognized as unsafe is simply not responsible leadership. And deferring necessary improvements will only prolong unsafe conditions for everyone who uses that corridor. And as elected officials, we should be clear with the public, failing to maximize opportunities to improve walking, biking, and transit infrastructure is not only poor governance, it's also inconsistent with the transportation policies and climate commitments that this body and the city has made towards our residents. And at the same time, I agree that the agencies undertaking these projects of scale should have the responsibility to support small businesses affected by construction. And I think those intentions are reflected in the amendments being brought forward by Councilmember Chowdhury and Stevenson. We also should expect from our partners that you know, the things that we're asking of them, we should be modeling ourselves. And that's exactly why two years ago, I supported Councilmember Chuck's eyes amendment to create a pilot program providing financial assistance to businesses impacted by major transit construction. And that proposal was made using feedback from our residents, from business owners in her ward, and gave Minneapolis the opportunity to lead by example on how to address this challenge that we're repeatedly running into. But unfortunately, that nearly $1 million used to address that very real challenge was redirected because of MPD's budget overruns, and thus the pilot was never implemented. But had that program been carried out, I believe Minneapolis would be in a much stronger position to ask Hennepin County to provide similar support to businesses impacted by the Lindale construction or reconstruction. But my hope is the county will continue to work with business owners to minimize construction impacts while preserving the critical design elements that will provide lasting benefits for again for our residents who walk, who bike, who use transit or otherwise travel without a car. I also again just want to say thank you to the hundreds of residents who participated in this process who reached out to my office and council members for the past several weeks. Again, your advocacy changed the course of this project. You pushed back on an inadequate design. You demanded something better. And you helped bring forward a proposal that hopefully this body can move forward and support today. And I just want to say thank you all for your leadership and your persistence for holding us accountable to the commitments that we made. Thanks.

And then I know that council member Chowdhury introduced an amendment. We have the Stevenson amendment in front of us, but without objection, I think we should take this as amended with both amendments. Is that okay, Mr. Clerk?

If there's no objection from the body, we have an amendment in front of us. We have a second amendment, it was read, but- It was not seconded.

So without objection, can we get a second to the Chowdhury amendment and take them both up?

Mr. President to be clear. We had an amendment offered by Stevenson No second then in her speaking comments council member Chowdhury and mentioned she had an amendment and read it But I'm we didn't sign it the first order.

I'm in queue to talk about this Okay, so Councilmember Stevenson did have a second for his amendment.

I seconded it. We didn't catch it, but that'd be great Yeah

Okay, we'll get through the rest of this conversation and then we will deal with how we'll package that.

Council Member Chavez. Council President Payne. Hi, staff. Welcome. I have one question. Can you please outline the risk of delays or the risk of not approving this today?

Welcome, and if you could just introduce yourself.

Council President, Council Member Travis, my name is Fontaine Burris. I'm a senior transportation planner with Public Works. The county's deadline for federal authorization, which means we need to have full final plan sets, is June of 2027. Risk of delay would risk the federal funding for the project.

And would you please outline how much money that is? My understanding is that it could lose $9 million in federal funding.

That is correct.

And my understanding is that by delaying or voting against this, we could then add increased costs to this project, is this correct?

Council President, Council Member Chavez, there would be a funding gap if the federal funding is lost. That is about 45% of the total cost that would need additional funding.

Great, thank you so much. I am proud to support this today. I do not want to be in a position to throw away over $9 million in federal funding. I also want to say that projects like this also help bring business to the area, customers to the area. And as I take this vote today, I think about the kids and families who deserve safe streets in our community. They don't deserve infrastructure that is unsafe in the area which it currently is. So I at least wanted to flag that. I think it is important to vote for this because I think that if we are going to be delaying this or not approving this, throwing away millions of dollars, it's just not in the best interest of the city and our residents. I also understand the concerns that folks have when it comes to construction. And since there was comparisons made to Hennepin Avenue, I think it is important to talk about the lessons learned from that. I was proud to support a budget amendment led by Council Member Chuck Tai for $900,000 for small business construction and hardship fund for Hennepin Avenue and other areas in our city. And while the city council helped fund this, it was never implemented by the mayor's administration. So I hope the county ends up putting some funding into supporting these small businesses and I hope that it gets implemented and I hope THAT IT DOES GET IMPLEMENTED BECAUSE IF WHAT HAPPENS WHEN IT CAME TO HAMPTON AVENUE THAT IT WAS NOT IMPLEMENTED WHEN THE CITY COUNCIL FUNDED IT WE SAW MASSIVE IMPLICATIONS FOR OUR SMALL BUSINESSES BUT THERE ARE LESSONS LEARNED AND I HOPE THAT'S ONE OF THEM.

Thanks, President Payne. I just wanted to make, I don't think it's making a motion, but it is asking that we, if Council Member Stevenson would be all right if I had my amendment attached to the one that's before us. I believe we can take that up as like a friendly addition to his amendment, no? What is the process, City Clerk, for packaging these things together then?

That's a vote of the body. If there's no objection, certainly the body can say we want to take it up. But if any member objects, then it has to be done by an amendment process. So the first question would be, is there any objection to merging the two amendments that are on the dais?

Any objection from the body? Not seeing any. So let's take this up as a package. Is that good, Councilmember?

That works for me. It looks like it works for Councilmember Stevenson.

Sounds good. Council Member Schaffer.

Yes, I'm wondering if council could reiterate for me one more time. If we were to deny it, you mentioned there was another council that was set up. Could you please repeat that?

Madam City Attorney.

Council President, Council Member Schaffer, so the statute provides that if the city's governing body does not approve, then the county board may by resolution request a dispute resolution body that would gather together again with many different players from the different entities that would gather together and REVIEW THE RECOMMENDATION AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

THAT'S REALLY HELPFUL. THAT'S REALLY HELPFUL. THAT'S REALLY HELPFUL. I WANT TO BE CLEAR. I WANT TO BE CLEAR. I WANT TO BE CLEAR. I DON'T WANT TO PAUSE ON THIS I DON'T WANT TO PAUSE ON THIS I DON'T WANT TO PAUSE ON THIS PROJECT. PROJECT. PROJECT. I DON'T WANT TO LOSE FEDERAL I DON'T WANT TO LOSE FEDERAL I DON'T WANT TO LOSE FEDERAL I SUPPORT A LOT OF THE ELEMENTS OF THE DESIGN. TO ME, THE MOST PRIMARY THING THAT WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY BEFORE US AS A BOARD TO DO AT THIS MOMENT IN TIME IS TAKE A DIFFERENT APPROACH TO HOW WE HANDLE INFRASTRUCTURE OVERLAPPING WITH BUSINESSES IN A VERY STRONG COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR. TAKE THE TIME WITH A MEDIATING BODY TO SIT DOWN AND SAY HEY IT'S NOT X Y AND Z THAT'S THE PROBLEM IT'S THE PROBLEM OF HOW WE'VE HANDLED INFRASTRUCTURE IN PROTECTING OUR CITY REVENUE WHEN WE GO THROUGH MULTI-YEAR PROJECTS THAT REALLY WE NEED AND WANT SO MY IDEA IS THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD TRUST CURRENTLY, I THINK WE AS A PUBLIC AND OUR RESIDENTS HERE, COUNTY STAFF, CITY STAFF, COUNTY COMMISSIONER STAFF, COUNCILMEMBER STAFF, YES, WE HEAR THOSE CONCERNS. WE KNOW THAT YOU DON'T THINK YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THE BANDWIDTH TO BE ABLE TO GET THROUGH THIS SHUTDOWN. YOUR BUSINESS MIGHT CLOSE, ET CETERA, ET CETERA. ALL THE THINGS THAT WE'VE BEEN HEARING, THE FEAR, REAL FEAR THAT WE'VE BEEN HEARING FROM SMALL FAMILY MEMBERS THAT RUN SMALL BUSINESSES ON THIS CORRIDOR. But we say, yes, we hear it all, and we'll take it into consideration in general additions to our amendments, like we'll try to save more trees, or we'll try to make up the timeline go faster. But unfortunately, there's nothing specific. SO TO ME, I SEE THIS AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE IT DOWN AND SAY NOT A BAD DESIGN, NOT GOING TO LOSE THE FEDERAL FUNDS, BUT LET'S TAKE ONE CORE PIECE OF THIS DISCUSSION AND HYPERFOCUS IT ON HOW WE CAN DO THINGS DIFFERENTLY AND HAVE SPECIFIC LANGUAGES, LANGUAGE FOR OUR BUSINESS THAT DOESN'T GET THE CITY OR THE COUNTY DOING MORE THAN THEY SHOULD FOR BUSINESSES. BUT HAVE SOMETHING SPECIFIC FOR THEM TO HANG THEIR HAT ON AND SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT? THE CITY AND THE COUNTY LISTENED. I REALLY APPRECIATE HEARING ABOUT COUNCIL MEMBER CHAVEZ AND COUNCIL MEMBER WANSLEY BRINGING UP THIS PILOT PROGRAM OF THE $900,000 THAT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED TO IT, WENT AWAY. THIS IS WHAT I'M ASKING MY COLLEAGUES TO CONSIDER AGAIN. LET'S GO BACK TO THE TABLE. I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE WOULD FIND THE MONEY, BUT WE CAN START WITH JUST LANGUAGE AROUND EXTENDED HOURS THAT LAYS OUT CLEARLY WHERE WE'RE HEADED WITH CONSTRUCTION TIMELINES ONCE WE GET THE PHASING. SO WE HAVE TIME. WE HAVE TIME, IT SOUNDS LIKE, UNTIL, FORGIVE ME IF I'M WRONG, JUNE 1, 2027. I'M SORRY. OBVIOUSLY WE WOULD WANT TO BE DONE BEFORE THEN. OTHERWISE IT WILL PUSH. WE DON'T WANT TO PUSH THE PROJECT PAST 2028 START. So that's my plea. I understand that's a little outside the box, but I think we are a body that's willing to think outside the box. And so thank you for your consideration of not pausing, not saying this is a bad design, not completely saying we're voting to lose our federal funding, but voting to say no in this moment that we can do better to the county and let's put our heads together to make something really exciting to be a roadmap for future multi-jurisdictional, multi-year infrastructure projects. Thank you.

Councilmember Whiting. Thank you, President Payne. Just a point of clarification maybe for the clerks here. I know we have two different amendments in front of us, and they don't necessarily match. How, with the merger of these, like I'm just, I know we don't, this isn't normal that we kind of do amendments from the dais, but trying to figure out How these, are we accepting the deletions and acceptance of one, merging them all over? Just kind of confused here of how these are actually going to merge together. Mr. Clerk?

Mr. President, exactly as Council Member Stevenson said. The motion pending now is a combination of the amendment offered by Councilmember Stevenson and the amendment offered by Councilmember Chowdhury, which means you'd have to look at both of the documents in front of you and accept all of the strikethroughs and all of the underlined additions as one single document. My best advice in terms of clarity on a vote so that the record is correct and people know what they're voting on is that we set this aside, let the clerks go prepare one document that merges all of these things. We're legislating in real time. That makes it difficult for all of us at the dais. And I know there's a lot of energy around this right now. I think I would recommend the body give us 10 minutes to go merge those so that there's a clear single document in front of you. Certainly we could either move on to other business or if you want to just, if the body wishes to take a recess to allow the clerks to produce that single combined document, either of those I think would be a better process for us so that there's clarity for everyone on the dais what's in front of you.

That would be helpful for me, but again, it's the will of the body.

We can, I would recommend tabling this and then revisiting it once the clerks come back prepared and we can move on to the next committee report. Does that sound? Yeah, just a note, I think I'll pass it over to the city attorney. Madam City Attorney.

Council President, sorry. Just for point of clarification, because I'm betting I'm going to be helping with this too. It's easy to add things. What I'm really confused about in terms of our coordination of these two is that in one version, the bullet point that says design modifications to the proposed meetings to ensure driveway access and business operational needs, one is struck in one version. And in the other motion, it is not struck. So in terms of the clerk and I trying to come to one document, should we be striking that bullet point or not?

Correct.

Can I make a point of order and potentially a suggestion for us how to handle it? So thank you, President Payne. If it makes it easier for the body, what we could do is... there is no objection obviously anyone object if there is we could take up my motion first which the only change is my addition and it keeps the integrity of what we did in cni and then we take up the stevenson amendment would that work mr clerk i think that was a question for the body It was largely a question for the clerks and the city attorney in terms of your clarity.

I think if you're asking the clerks their opinion, I think that Mr. Daler and the attorney could prepare a document. I think the clarity is on the item that's either in or stricken. What does the body want? Do they want the design modifications to the proposed medians to ensure driveway access and business operational needs to be in or out of the combined version of the resolution?

Got it. And as the author of the second amendment, it's my intention for it to be in alignment with Council Member Stevenson's amendment.

Which is the direction, I think, Council President, you said. Council Member Stevenson's was to strike that out of the resolution, so that clarifies that one issue. If that's the direction of the body, then I think that people can go draft that very quickly. Okay.

Okay, let's have that happen, and then we will move on to the Committee of the Whole until we hear back from the clerks, and that committee report will be given by its chair, Councilmember Chaudhry.

Thank you, President Payne. The committee of the whole will be bringing three items forward to today's council meeting. Item number one is a resolution expressing solidarity with workers at Target Field. Item number two is an amplified sound permit and block event permit for the Aquatennial Festival. Lastly, item number three is the allocation of funds from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund to be given to Heritage Park for repairs. This was sent forward without recommendation. With that, I'll move all items for approval and leave item three for a separate vote and discussion.

Councilmember Chaudhry has moved approval of the committee report separating out item number three. Is there any discussion on the remainder of the report? Councilmember Rainville.

Thank you. I would just like to speak briefly to item number one. In support of this, as a past member of Local 17, I served on the executive committee for a number of years as a shop steward and as a picket captain. I would be out on the strike line if I was still doing that for a living instead of being up here on the dais. So I think we all should support those workers as they engage in their fight, especially for the healthcare portion.

Seeing no one else left in queue, I'll ask the clerk to call the roll on items one and two.

Council Member Chavez. Aye. Council Member Warren. Aye. Council Member Schaffer. Aye. Council Member Wansley. Aye. Council Member Whiting. Aye. Council Member Chowdhury.

Aye.

Council Member Stevenson. Aye. Council Member Rainville. Aye. Council Member Vita.

Aye.

Council Member Ponsanto.

Aye.

Vice President Osman. Aye. President Payne. Aye. There are 12 ayes.

Those items carry. Next, we will take up item number three, and I'll recognize Council Member Warren.

Thank you, Council President Payne. It is my pleasure today to have before you a request for the $2.5 million from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund to support the residents at Heritage Park. I'm pleased to work with the City of Minneapolis Director Rachel Sayers on the relocation plans for the resident of Heritage Park. This has been an ongoing experience that they have had there and I am just glad to be able to be getting some relief FOR THE RESIDENTS AND I WANT TO KEEP THE FOCUS ON THE RESIDENTS AT HERITAGE PARK SO I WANT TO FIRST THANK YOU AT AT THIS TIME FOR THAT THERE IS A MOTION THAT IS BEFORE YOU THAT IS JUST ASKING IN THIS PROCESS BECAUSE WE KNOW IT IS SUCH A DELICATE DANCE THAT IS ASKING AN AMENDMENT TO THIS THAT IS ASKING THAT WE MOVE THE FOLLOWING LEGISLATIVE DIRECTIVE RELATED TO THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND FOR HERITAGE PARK THAT WE ARE ASKING FOR REGULAR SCHEDULED REPORTING FOR THE PROGRESS OF WHAT IS HAPPENING, PROGRESS FOR THE RELOCATION OF THE RESIDENTS AND INFORMATION RELATED TO THE DISTRIBUTED FUNDS FOR REHABILITATION, BUT I BELIEVE THAT WE, AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, YES, ERIC HANSEN, DIRECTOR HANSEN, PLEASE FORGIVE ME. they're not gonna be funds distributed of this specifically for rehabilitation, correct?

Director? President Payne, Council Member Warren, the authority that we are seeking allows for us to put funding into both relocation and emergency life safety repairs within the building. As I mentioned at the Committee of the Whole on Tuesday, I'll repeat for those who didn't watch that, we are focused on the relocation efforts. We need the ability for us to do potential repair work. in the event that while people are seeking relocation services, we can address immediate needs. So that's the reason why we want that authority.

Okay, thank you so much for that, Director Hanson. I honor that. There is a third piece to this motion that is... basically directing that the city attorney's legal analysis of pathways for availability for the city to recoup the funds i'm really not interested in that right now i think that's something that can be taken up at another time and i am just specifically focused on the residents the relocation plan and ensuring the stabilization of the residents at heritage park Anything that has to do with any financial recouping can be taken up some other time. That's not my concern at this time. My concern is the residents, and I thank you for your due diligence in that.

Council Member Wansley.

Thank you, President Payne. I do want to just first, as I did on Tuesday, give kudos to Councilmember Warren for her leadership on this issue. We've been clear across this board that inhumane conditions are not something that we should be normalizing and it's devastating that your residents have had to endure that that said i know on tuesday um we all have robust conversations around one wanting to support this 2.5 million dollar allocation and i think there will be um UNANIMOUS SUPPORT OF MOVING THAT ITEM FORWARD. WHERE WE ALSO WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS SOME CONTINUED CONVERSATION AMONGST THIS BIDEN BECAUSE WE WERE ASKED TO APPROVE $2.5 MILLION WITHIN 48 HOURS OF CONSIDERATION IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE REGULAR REPORTING FROM THE ADMINISTRATION ON how the relocation process is proceeding forward, how the stabilization plans that this contract or the RCA that we're considering gives Director Hanson the ability to figure out in partnership with all the relevant entities and stakeholders, essentially come back to this body and give us reporting on how that process is moving forward because we don't want to be in another situation where we might have to move additional dollars and have no information about what took place with the first allocation. That said, that segues into the second motion that's before you where it does request the city attorney to present counsel with a client privilege memo. So essentially this is pretty standard process where the city attorney will tell us what ways in which they can recoup the $2.5 million. We have robust conversations about that on Tuesday as well around why aren't we moving through the city's existing tenant relocation program that would allow us to recoup costs, especially when the whole overarching thing of this debate has been the partner's the property owners, the receivers, there has been so many failures of agencies who have been charged with holding responsibility over Heritage Park and ensuring dignified living conditions for those tenants and have failed to meet those standards. If we're going to give those partners $2.5 million, we need to make sure that this is not just a freebie. We have mechanisms to hold a property owner that has received not only market rates income because there are market rate units here, so they're receiving income, but they have received massive subsidies from government agencies as well. And we just do not want to make sure that we're rewarding a problem property owner with $2.5 million and not have any means to try to recoup those costs, especially since we're taking this from the Affordable Housing Trust. That We've made significant cuts to already. So I think in a financial predicament where we're at as a city, where we're already $30 million in a deficit, we want to make sure that we're able to recoup costs by any means. And if that entails the city attorney writing us a four, five, six page memo articulating their plans to do so, that's not a heavy lift and I think that's worth our due diligence. So with that, I will actually make the motion to move all items as amended for approval and ask for a second.

Second.

And with that, I'm so excited to support this comprehensive packet.

Okay, Council Member Wansley moved all items for approval. It's been seconded, so let me just clarify what we have in front of us. We have the underlying motion, which we took up in COW, and it has three sub-bullets under it. The motion that Council Member Wansley made was to add a sub-bullet 3.4, which is the legislative directive on reporting. and 3.5, which is a staff direction to the city attorney's office around recoup, a motion to the city attorney to bring forward a privilege memo on how we might recoup expenses. And I see Council Member Warren raising a question.

Correct. I would like a separate vote on 3.5 because, as I stated before, this is not about that. And if we want to make it about that, then we'll have to ask Abdi Warsami to bring his happy body to the table, which he has neglected to do so. because the majority of the residents who are there at Heritage Park are participants of Minneapolis Public Housing Authority. And until Abdi Warsami does his damn job, there is no questions to be asked to anybody about absolutely anything. and what he needs to do is then start issuing people not only back whatever it was that was lost but their section 8 vouchers housing vouchers and everything else for retail and my residents and the city office we're working with our emergency management system we're working with our systems we're taking the lead because we are leaders of this city these are our residents The end of that. That's how that's going to be handled. We're not putting any extra slide and signal on whatever else that's happening. I don't want to hear anything more about it. That's the end of it. So the second vote on that 3.5 or whatever with respect to the 2.5 that is being utilized to serve my underserved residents in Ward 5 in Heritage Park on that is a no. The end.

So what I'm gonna recommend, based on that feedback, council member, is that we take up each of these as separate votes, so we will vote on 3.4, we will vote on 3.5, and then based on the outcome of that, we will take the final vote on the full package. Does that make sense to everyone?

I have a question. I see council member Warren is listed as an author on the motion, and if she is withdrawing her motion, is it? I am not an author. Oh, your name is on there. Well, I'm not anymore. Okay, all right.

The end. All right, thank you.

Okay, so we are taking up right now item 3.4, which is the legislative directive on reporting. That will be the vote that we take. The queue is for the underlying motion. I say we keep the queue, but once we go to roll call, we will take up item 3.4, and I will recognize Councilmember Chaudhry.

Thank you, President Payne. Really appreciate it. I'll just say with the different motions that we have, I feel like just giving grace to everybody here that's on the body. I don't think anyone's trying to step on anyone's toes. I think things are just shifting really quickly. like we had one motion with legislative directive and then under the direction of the city attorney, we weren't able to have a piece of it in the legislative directive and so it then generated into a third motion and that's kind of where we are and that's why the authorship has remained the same. So just wanted to provide that clarity up front and just give everyone a lot of grace here. One of the things that I wanted to ask about in respect to the conversations with Council Member Warren and her office and the concern for the people at Heritage Park is really regarding the relocation of people and the 2.5 that will contribute to it. I wanted to get an understanding, one, what's the division of that money for rehabilitation of the building and then how much is going to relocation and then I also see that we have emergency management director Sayre here with us. I wanted to see what kind of steps your department is going to take to help the people relocate. I'm really concerned about having a dignified process, especially right now in this very poor air quality situation and heat wave. I'm also wondering if we're going to need to get additional support from partners like the Red Cross and just kind of what that looks like, because moving 686 people all at once seems like a really huge feat. And I imagine there's going to be a lot of steps to that.

Director Hansen, did you want to answer the first part of the question?

We can start with directors.

That's all right Good morning council president paying councilmember Chowdhury Director Hansen just asked me to communicate on the split of funding. That is something that will be termed through the process that we're running. I So I'll just speak a little bit about this process, just noting that Council Member Warren, I absolutely wanna work through this entire thing with you, and I know we just haven't had time to connect in person since I came into this yesterday. So I look forward to that. So let me just talk a little bit about how this process works. yesterday we stood up something called a heritage park coordination group that will consist of operational staff across city departments as well as partners we've already pulled in for calls like red cross it also includes coordination with mpha and certus we are using our national incident management system protocols as the basis for the structure What that means is it brings into place regular meetings, regular coordination calls, and regular reporting. So you will see all of that start to come through in the next few days as we second staff from city departments to be dedicated to this effort. So our first objective is meeting urgent needs of residents. So this is absolutely something I want to sit down with Council Member Warren and understand immediate needs that have already been communicated to her and her team. My team is already working on options for meeting urgent needs, what those could look like, while we work on potential plans for relocation. So the plans for relocation, council member, as you mentioned, this is very large scale. It is beyond the capacity of any one agency to do. So absolutely, the county is a huge partner in this as well, as well as many other agencies that we're pulling in. So there's a lot more to come, but just to note that our immediate focus is on these urgent needs.

Thank you, Director Sayre, really appreciate it. see how the conversation continues on this item uh i do believe 100 this is about the residents here and supporting the fourth ward i'll just share the reason apologies fifth ward SUPPORTING THE FIFTH WARD AND HERITAGE PARK. THE REASON WHY I'M INTERESTED IN FURTHERING THE DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION FOR REQUEST FOR INFORMATION IS I JUST FEEL LIKE IT'S A GREAT INJUSTICE FOR A VERY WEALTHY PROPERTY OWNER TO LAY SO MUCH NEGLIGENCE ONTO THIS COMMUNITY. continue to take the taxpayer dollars from this community because they pay taxes and we all pay taxes and not have recourse to say, you know, you do owe back people money and a lot more. I think that's a part of what this motion gets at, but I'm interested in continuing the conversation, but just kind of wanted to give my thought in real time as the discussion is evolving and with respect to your comments, Council Member Warren as well.

Councilmember Chavez, I think your president pain ever question for clerks and the city attorney's office who has the power of the purse Madam City Attorney Council president sounds like a leading good attorney leading question.

The City Council has the power of the purse Thank you.

Does the individual council member have the power of the purse? I

Again, no. It's the council as a body. Thank you.

So as a body, we have the power of the person, not individual council member. Council Member Chowdhury or Council Member Wanzi, can you please explain your motion? My understanding is that, and I'll read it for the public, it's requesting the city attorney's office for a legal analysis of what pathways may be, may, not will, may be available for the city of Minneapolis to recoup. from the appropriate entities, the city's cost related to this. So this is not a requirement saying it's just a memo that we're asking for, correct?

That is correct, and it's been reviewed with the city attorney. Again, we've done this before when we're asking, or when we're expending funding and wanting to know how we can recoup those dollars back.

Thank you, I was just asking for a memo. There's nothing serious happening here. Budget Director DeCenza, can you please let us know what our current budget deficit is heading into the next year? Director?

Chair Payne, Councilmember Chavez, Deputy CFO Jane DeCenza, not the budget director any longer, but the deficit that you're referring to I believe is the current service level estimate that we presented on in June. We gave a range with current expenses and re-estimated revenues about 28 to 33 million.

Thank you. Who is getting this $2.5 million?

Through the chair council I'm not sure if that's a question for me or for anybody.

Anybody cancer who's getting this 2.5 million dollars.

I believe the way it's written and I haven't been here for all the changes that have happened in the last few minutes. It's addressed to the financial receiver or other parties that may be needed to assist with the relocation.

Director Henson.

PRESIDENT PAIN, COUNCILMEMBER CHAVEZ, DEPUTY CFO DESCENZA, NEIL, IT IS FOR THE RELOCATION SERVICES, IT WILL BE RELOCATION FUNDERS. SO WE'LL BE WORKING THROUGH THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PROCESS THAT DIRECTOR SAYRE JUST MENTIONED, PROVIDING RESOURCES FOR RELOCATION, SO THAT COULD BE ANY ORGANIZATIONS LIKE the MPHA, Red Cross, Hennepin County, other agencies that help with relocation and the costs that are associated with relocation. So if there's movers that are needed, that sort of thing. Other public health elements for the families. As I mentioned at the Committee of the Whole meeting last Tuesday, we are focused on the needs of the individual households. So we'll be making that determination as we go. As far as if there is any renovations that are needed related to that relocation, that would be Certus Financial. They're the receiver acting as the owner for the property at this point in time.

Okay, thank you. Yeah. So the motion at least since I want to talk about everything because this is so many votes happening, but at least the motion I'm requesting a memo from the city attorney's office seems very pragmatic makes sense to ask for a memo on how we could potentially be potentially not required to potentially recoup the cost if it's going to the receiver who has issues and has really made a big impact to the residents in North Minneapolis at Heritage Park. So I think we can, if we're going to be giving away $2.5 million to maybe the receiver or those who have harmed the residents in Northside, I think it makes sense to at least get a memo and see how we could possibly recoup the cost. It's not required to. I think it makes sense given the budget deficit that we're talking about. If it was rental assistance or the money is going directly to the residents, and cash is going to the residents to help them with their anti-displacement or funding to move into a different place, that's a different conversation. I would not be interested in recouping the cost. But if it's going to the receiver, I think it's important that we at least get this information to see how we can recoup some of that cost if it's going to those who have harmed the residents. Thank you. Vice President Osmond.

THANK YOU. I WANT TO SAY THAT THERE'S NO AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT CAN REALLY HELP OUR RESIDENTS WHO ARE REALLY STRUGGLING IN THESE CONDITIONS. WE'VE ALL SEEN THE VIDEO. COUNCIL MEMBER WARREN POSTED, I FEEL LIKE THIS IS A, I WASN'T HERE TUESDAY, MY APOLOGIES, BUT MY COMMENT IS THAT THE CITY DEPARTMENT WHO OVERSIGHTS CITY RENTAL LICENSE HAS TO DO BETTER. WE HAVE THE 311. AND IF WE ARE LETTING THIS GO ON, AND THIS IS WHAT WE END UP WITH, YOU KNOW, FIGURE OUT A WAY TO HELP THESE PEOPLE RIGHT NOW. IT'S COSTING US $2.5 MILLION. I'M GOING TO TELL YOU, THERE'S MORE APARTMENTS LIKE THIS IN OUR CITY. THERE HAS TO BE A BETTER PROCESS THAT THE VIOLATIONS THAT HAVE GONE AND ADDRESSED. HAS TO HAVE A BETTER PROCESS. IF YOU NEED MORE STAFF TO DO REGULATORY SERVICES TO MAKE SURE THAT FIRE INSPECTORS GO IN THERE, CHECKING OUT ALL THE BOXES THAT'S NECESSARY FOR HUMAN BEING TO BE IN THAT CONDITION, LET US KNOW DURING THE BUDGET. REQUEST THOSE STAFFS. WE WILL HAPPILY ADD THOSE STAFFS. BUT THIS IS A FAILURE ON THE CITY DEPARTMENT IN MY OPINION. They gotta do better. We have to be aggressive on landlords who are abusing our residents. We talked about the tier three properties that come, come front of the council. The reason we even did that was for them to get their act together. IF YOU ARE COMING FOR A LICENSE AND YOU WANT TO RENT MINNEAPOLIS AND DO A BUSINESS WITH THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS, WE EXPECT THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT FOR PEOPLE TO LIVE IN A BASIC LEAVABLE CONDITION. But this is what we're paying for. This is something we gotta do better to be more enforcing the policies we have in the books and not just ignore it or not just document it. 311 has to have a meaning. The complaint has to have a meaning. There has to be some consequences. The city has to take some action, whatever that looks like. I'm not telling you to take this action. Whatever that looks like. And what I know so far that MPHA does, INSPECTIONS AND, YOU KNOW, AND IN THAT ITSELF, TOO, I'M KIND OF SURPRISED WE MISSED THAT MARK AND NOT REALLY SURE IF INSPECTIONS EVER TAKEN PLACE. YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE PAYING THE FAUTURE OR THE RENT OF A UNIT, YOU SHOULD ACTUALLY CHECK IT OUT WHAT UNIT YOU'RE PAYING FOR. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, RESIDENTS ARE THE ONES THAT HAVE THE LEAST VOICE HERE. WE ARE THE RESPONSIBLE OVERSIGHT GOVERNMENT FOR THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS, AND WE JUST HAVE TO DO BETTER. AS A COUNCIL MEMBER, I'M GLADLY HAPPY TO THE BUDGET ITEMS THAT YOU NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT LANDLOADS THAT ARE NOT GETTING AWAY AND BOOTING PEOPLE'S LIFE AND RISK. AND I APPRECIATE AGAIN COUNCIL MEMBER WARREN'S LEADERSHIP IN BRINGING THIS FORWARD. I'LL TELL YOU THIS MIGHT NOT BE THE ONLY ONE BECAUSE I DO HAVE SOME, YOU KNOW, COLLECTIONS OF APARTMENTS THAT HAVE HEALTH AND AID VIOLATIONS IN MY WARD BUT THANKS A LOT.

Seeing no one else in queue, I'll remind folks what we're going to do as far as mapping out these votes. We're going to first take up the legislative directive. I'm labeling that item 3.4. After that, we will take up the motion to the attorney's office for a privilege memo. I'm going to label that item 3.5. After we complete those votes, finish a vote of the full package. So with that, I will ask the clerk to call the roll on item 3.4, the legislative directive asking for regular reporting.

Aye. Councilmember Warren. Aye. Councilmember Schaffer.

Aye.

Councilmember Walmsley. Aye. Councilmember Whiting. Aye. Councilmember Chowdhury. Aye. Councilmember Stephenson. Aye. Councilmember Rainville. Aye. Councilmember Betaw. Aye. Councilmember Palmisano. Aye. Vice President Osman. Aye. President Haynes? Aye. There are 12 ayes.

That carries. Next, we will take up item 3.5, which is requesting a legal memo from the city attorney. I will ask the clerk to call the roll.

Councilmember Chavez? Aye. Councilmember Warren? No. Councilmember Schaffer? No. Councilmember Wansley? Aye. Councilmember Whiting? Aye. Councilmember Chowdhury?

Aye.

Councilmember Stevenson? Aye. Councilmember Rainville? No. Councilmember Vita? No. Councilmember Palmisano? No. Vice President Osman? Aye. President Payne? Aye. There are seven ayes and five nays.

That carries. And then now we will take up the package as a whole. Item number three for Heritage Park. And I will ask the clerk to call the roll.

Councilmember Chavez? I have a question.

Go ahead. Staff here to talk about what the plan is for the money after.

We're in the middle of a vote, Mr. President. He's in queue. It's a reasonable question.

We have the authority to ask questions. Director Hanson, can you talk about what would be the plan after the funding is distributed?

President Payne, Council Member Chavez will be working under the direction of Director Sayre and the team she's assembled, and they'll identify needs, and then we will work through an administrative process to designate those funds for those needs. Perfect. Thank you.

Did you say me?

Mm-hmm.

Oh, thank you. I'm just wondering about the motion that we're at now. Was this made by Councilmember Warren?

Mr. President, what's in front of the body now is what came out of committee. So the motion that was on the Committee of the Whole report included three subparts. Number one, the delegation of the authority, then the approval of the $2.5 million from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund to fund that activity as already discussed, and then also an authorization for the execution of any necessary documents to implement that decision.

Okay, so by Councilmember Warren, and seconded by whom?

It was moved for approval during the committee report.

Okay, all right, thank you.

Councilmember Whiting?

Yeah, just reading kind of our definition here, is this, are we taking a vote on three as it fits one, two, three, four, and five subparts as a whole, or just one through three?

Mr. President, I think we're voting on the item that came out of Cal, parts one, two, three. We dealt with four and five already. Okay.

Yep, I figured. Thank you.

Okay. Seeing no one else in queue, do we all know what we're voting on? The clerk will call the roll.

Council Member Chavez. Aye. Council Member Warren. Aye. Council Member Schaffer.

Aye.

Council Member Wansley. Aye. Councilmember Whiting. Aye. Councilmember Chowdhury.

Aye.

Councilmember Stephenson. Aye. Councilmember Rainville. Aye. Councilmember Vita.

Aye.

Councilmember Pomisano.

Aye.

Vice President Osman. Aye. President Payne. Aye. There are 12 ayes.

That carries and that completes the Committee of the Whole report. We have the amended resolution for item number one from CNI that the clerks have diligently put together and we can revisit this. Is there any discussion, remaining discussion on item number one from the CNI report, Lindale reconstruction? Seeing none.

Do we need to move it?

Does this need to be moved, Mr. Clerk? It's been moved.

The standing motion that we were working on amending was already offered by Stevenson on behalf of the committee. So I assume we still have the motion in place from Councilmember Stevenson?

Okay, so we will be voting on item number one as amended by Councilmember Stevenson and Chaudhry.

Correct, which is marked revised and yellow highlighting.

see oh council member warren what is the plan that keeps lyndale avenue the way it is right now what is that is that is that this or what what is happening here i am so confused by all of the different motions that have come forward about lyndale avenue And if the design, if it changes anymore, it's definitely going to be a detriment. I don't know if you guys remember this, but during the time that we had the emergency and annunciation process, My kids attend school right on Lindo Avenue. They go to Stonebridge. So that morning when I was driving my kids to school, we already have a single lane of freaking traffic. And there are ambulances flying trying to get past and there's nowhere for cars or anyone to go because you are in one lane. There's nowhere for you to pull over to get away. You can't jump up on the medium in your car, your SUV, your nothing. There's nowhere for you to go. And I was trying to figure out what happened because as soon as I would move and try to make a quick dip turn off into the next break of a street to get away for the let the emergency vehicles pass, I would travel barely a half a block before here comes some more because there was nowhere for traffic to go, nowhere. They were on both directions of the street trying to hurry up and get there to service our babies who were in danger. Leave these streets alone, my goodness, please. We have done enough to Hennepin. There's enough space for people to ride in between other streets, side streets, something else. But the main veins in these neighborhoods, you got to get emergency vehicles through there. You got to get to people quickly. There's all of these. I get the traffic calming. I respect the traffic calling. I expect the oversaturation of omission to air and all the cumulative air qualities. I'm an environmental justice fellow. I respect all of that. The tree canopies, everything. But man, would you please just leave these streets alone? I just want to go with whatever the plan is that says leave the street alone. My God, I just want to drive down. These people are laughing at me. I just want to drive down a normal street. And I want our emergency responders to be able to get to people effectively. I get the bike lanes. I get all of that stuff. I get the everything. I've been to other cities. They got bike lane, two-lane traffic on one side of the street. One side. So people can move in your bikes, your scooters, your mopeds, whatever it is that you're doing on one side of the street. You got a two lane street. It's real cute. They got the traffic signals and everything up there. It's all cute. And it's like real posh and everything like it's nice. It's really nice. Leave these people in the street alone. If that's the, I don't know. Is that this plan? I don't know. I'm confused. I just want the plan that's no thank you to any more changes to Lindale. Hennepin is already stressful enough. And I just want to leave Lindale. Lindale Northside is jacked up. I just want Lindale to be left alone. Like leave, let Lindale be Lindale. My goodness.

The end. Councilmember Stevenson.

Thank you, Mr. President. It seems like Councilmember Warren and I totally agree that there should be a bus lane the full length of Lindale so that buses and emergency vehicles can pass quickly. Unfortunately, we are not being presented with that plan. We are the city and we're just giving municipal consent. As much as I would have liked to have drawn up the plan deal with it here at this council, that is not how this works. So yeah, this is the plan. This is the plan that the county came up with. They listened for years and years and years to folks coming out and talking about the strengths, weaknesses, and hopes and desires for Lindale. A lot has been said about the business community, and I'd like to say a little something for the residents who live around there in my ward and in Ward 10. People who have been hit by cars and killed on this road, people who have been injured, people who don't cross the road because it is so dangerous, and so they feel hemmed in in one neighborhood as opposed to going to the other. There are so many reasons why this update is happening. I personally don't feel like it goes nearly far enough. There are so many other safety improvements, transit improvements to deal with congestion, to deal with the fact that we're all in here coughing up a lung because there is so much smoke outside because carbon pollution has heated up this earth to the point where our forests can no longer... exist in the way that they do. I mean, this is climate action right here. And we are in a climate emergency. And so I am begging, I am asking for my colleagues to please give municipal consent so that we are not putting the county in the lurch, making them drive up the costs even further. and potentially threatening the federal funds so that we can build this compromise proposal which frankly does not go nearly far enough for me uh... but that's what listening is listening is is hearing from all sides of of the community all sides of the the stakeholders and coming up with something that can work and that's what this this proposal is uh... so i am asking please for the sake of my residents for the sake of the residents in ward ten please approve this so that we can move forward with a safer uh... more legible lindale that gives transit improvements so that emergency vehicles and buses can skirt by when they need to. That gives safety improvements, that expands green space, that expands sidewalk cafes for some of our small businesses. There is so much to like in this proposal and there is so much that it leaves to be desired. But I'm asking for the sake of my residents in Ward 8 and for the sake of residents in Ward 10 that we please approve this so that we can move forward IN THE MOST FINANCIALLY SOUND WAY AND GET THE STREET THAT WE NEED REBUILT AFTER 92 YEARS.

VICE PRESIDENT OSMOND.

JUST THE LAST COMMENT FOR ME HERE. LOOKING OUT FOR THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE THINK ABOUT THEM AT THE SAME TIME ALSO THINK ABOUT YOU KNOW, THE OUTCOME AND JUST IMAGINE LIKE THIS CONSTRUCTION HAPPENING AND WE'RE CELEBRATING, WE HAVE SAFETY, BUS LANE, ALL THOSE GOOD THINGS ON ROAD THAT'S BRAND NEW. I WAS SUGGESTING THAT, YOU KNOW, NOT CLOSE THE WHOLE ROAD BUT I JUST FIND OUT ACTUALLY IT'S A MAJOR PROJECT. THEY HAVE TO RIP THE HOLE. ENTIRE AND IT DOESN'T. IT'S NOT LIKE YOU CAN ALL BE ON ONE SIDE OF THE ROAD. BUT I WOULD ENCOURAGE, I WILL SUPPORT. I THINK IT'S WORTH THE INVESTMENT. I THINK IT'S WORTH THE INVESTMENT. IF YOU LOOK AT IT, BUT LET'S NOT FORGET OUR BUSINESS COMMUNITY. I ENCOURAGE THE COUNTY AND THE CITY TO FIND A WAY TO SUPPORT THE BUSINESSES. AND THE PROJECT, THE COUNTY WHO IS RUNNING THE PROJECT, ACTUALLY GIVE THIS A FACE. DON'T JUST CLOSE THE WHOLE THING ONE TIME. JUST DO IT IN A FACE WAY THAT YOU CAN, YOU KNOW, CONNECT WITH THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY, HAVE A MEETING WITH THE COMMUNITY, HAVE BETTER SIGNAGE OF DIRECTING PEOPLE WHERE TO GO, SUPPORTING THE BUSINESSES THAT WAY AND INSTEAD OF JUST CLOSING, JUST LEAVING THERE WITH YEARS AND YEARS TO COME. I WOULD DEFINITELY ENCOURAGE THE COUNTY AND THE CITY ALSO TO WORK WITH THE COUNTY TO FIND A WAY SO WE HAVE A MINIMIZED EFFECT OF OF BUSINESSES BECAUSE WE WANT THE BUSINESS TO COME BACK, RIGHT? WE'RE BUILDING THE ROAD FOR THAT REASON, TOO, FOR PEOPLE, FOR BUSINESSES, FOR THE COMMUNITY, AND I WOULD LOVE TO SEE BUSINESSES GET AS MUCH SUPPORT AS THEY CAN. SO, YEAH, I APPRECIATE EVERYONE who try to work with this project, finding amendments and amending some of this motion that we see are very important. But overall, it's worth the investment to approve this. Thank you.

Councilmember Travis. Council President Payne, thank you. One last question for staff. Does this design allow for emergency vehicles to go through, along with the resolutions in front of us today?

Council President, Council Member Chavez, Conte Ambrose, Senior Transportation Planner with Public Works. This plan does not change the lane configuration that is out there today. It maintains for a large portion of the roadway a center turn lane which also allows for space for vehicles to move out of the way of emergency vehicles or from emergency vehicles to use that center turn lane. Where there are center medians, we have worked with emergency services and fire to ensure that they can be navigated and driven over so they are mountable both across the intersections where the medians span the intersection and also where it runs along Lindale Avenue.

Yeah, thank you. I just want to make sure that the public wasn't given misquotes about what actually can happen here. Emergency vehicles can still go through. Thank you.

Council Member Whiting.

Thank you, President Payne. Just maybe a quick note for staff here as well. And quickly, just want to note particularly how it kind of goes to the logistics of this plan as stated. I know we kind of have the removal of the design modifications to the proposed medians to ensure driveway access and business operational needs. I think Council Member Stevenson noted that's because Hennepin County is open to changing that design or working through that. Does the design that is in front of us, kind of based on the Lyndale layout, are we giving municipal consent for that specific design? Or is it subject to change WITHOUT, DOES IT HAVE TO COME BACK TO US FOR MUNICIPAL CONSENT IF THEY DO CHANGE THE DESIGN OF THE LAYOUT?

DIRECTOR? COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCIL MEMBER, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR. SO THIS IS ACTUALLY A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT. IT'S A MINOR, SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT FROM MUNICIPAL CONSENT. DOESN'T REALLY MATTER. With the medians, what we've asked the county to look at is to ensure that they can function with, say, large delivery vehicles, and those operational needs are met. I want to be clear, though, that it's not about reducing or eliminating the medians. Those are critical safety features on the project. Removal of a median would constitute, I believe, a substantial change, which would, and substantial changes would come back To the city, but in general, this is a 30% plan more or less. It's saying where the curbs are going to be more or less what features are going to be on the project, say, bike lane. Parking those kinds of things. So, in the median conversation, we would be engaging the county to make sure that vehicles can get in and out as intended. So the curb where exactly it is might move, but it's not saying whether or not there would be a curb.

Okay, wonderful. So it sounds like any minor changes would not need to come back to council. And so anything really over substantial change would?

That is correct. And I will acknowledge, though, that that is a bit of a gray area. But in general, these do not come back to council.

Thank you.

That's all.

Okay, seeing no one else left in queue, I will ask the clerk to call the roll on the resolution as amended.

Councilmember Chavez? Aye. Councilmember Warren?

No.

Councilmember Schaffer?

No.

Councilmember Wamsley?

Aye.

Councilmember Whiting? Aye. Councilmember Chowdhury?

Aye.

Councilmember Stephenson? Aye. Councilmember Rainville? No. Councilmember Vita?

No.

Councilmember Palmisano?

Aye.

Councilmember Vice President Osmond? Aye. President Payne? Aye. There are eight ayes and four nays.

That item carries, and that completes the Climate and Infrastructure Report, and we will return to our agenda next with the report of our Enterprise and Labor Relations Committee, which will be presented by its chair, Councilmember Palmisano.

Thank you, Mr. President. The ELR committee has five items to bring forward today. The first is our appointment of the city assessor. This is the nomination of Rebecca Malmquist to be our city assessor for this next term, ending January of 2030. Item number two is a resolution for the first quarter of quarterly donations. Item number three is a gift acceptance from CoMinnesota for Council Member Stevenson's ATTENDANCE AT A SUMMIT IN DULUTH. ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT FOR OUR FIREFIGHTERS, LOCAL 82. ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS A SETTLEMENT OF A WORKER'S COMP CLAIM FOR GENEVIEVE HANSON, AND I'LL MOVE APPROVAL OF THIS FULL REPORT.

COUNCIL MEMBER PALMASANO HAS MOVED APPROVAL OF THE COMMITTEE'S REPORT. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, I'LL ASK THE CLERK TO CALL THE ROLL.

Council Member Chavez. Aye. Council Member Warren.

Aye.

Council Member Schaffer.

Aye.

Council Member Wansley. Aye. Council Member Whiting. Aye. Council Member Chowdhury.

Aye.

Council Member Stevenson. Aye. Council Member Rainbow. Aye. Council Member Vice President Osman. Aye. President Payne. Aye. There are 12 ayes.

That carries, and that completes the ELR report. Finally, we have the Public Health Safety and Equity Committee, which will be presented by that committee's chair, Councilmember Chavez.

Thank you, Mr. President. The Public Health Safety and Equity Committee is bringing forward three items. Item number one, grants consent to the mayor's nomination of Kayla McConaughey to the appointed position of Civil Rights Commissioner, Director. Item two considers a contract with Skydio Inc. for a drone as first responder pilot program. This item was sent forward without recommendation. Item three accepts a donation with the University of Chicago for police inspector Molly Fisher to attend the Policing Leadership Academy. I'll move approval of item number three and I'll pull out for discussion item one for a motion and two for discussion.

Council member Chavez has moved Item three in the report, and we're gonna take each one of these up separately. So Council Member Chavez, do you wanna make a motion for item number one?

I would like to move approval of item number one, and just wanna thank Director Kayla McConaughey for stepping up for this fresh term as a permanent Civil Rights Department Director. I am very thankful for her work, and just want to send my kudos.

Okay, we have items one and two moved, I'm sorry, one and three moved for approval. Is there any discussion on these items, Councilmember Chaudhry?

Thank you, President Payne. I wish I would have caught the item previous to the appointment of the city assessor. I hope that I could just speak highly of both Director Kayla Maconin-Tierra and Director Rebecca Malmquist. Really excited to be supporting two phenomenal women in leadership whose staff really just love working for the departments that they're in, and I think they're forging ahead on really wonderful work. I want to thank the Director of Civil Rights that we're going to appoint, it seems like today, for taking time with me and sitting down and really talking through all the things that you've worked on and the vision for the future ahead. I think it's an ambitious vision, and I look forward to a future where The Civil Rights Department is a first resort for all Minneapolis residents, especially in seeking justice for the number of things that we aid in. And then as it comes to Rebecca Malmquist, I want to thank her for our meeting. She brought her whole team, and we went through some of the weeds of assessment in the 12th Ward in the city of Minneapolis, and it was really valuable for me and my staff It's a really technical and cumbersome level of information to understand city assessments, but her team did a phenomenal job of explaining what that was, and it was really great to meet the assessors that do the job on the ground each and every day, and I think it's wonderful we're getting to appoint her as she is a leader nationally on assessment work across the country and she also is a professor in this work and so we just we just have some of the brightest women in leadership in our city and I'm proud to support them seeing no one else left in queue I'll ask the clerk to call the roll on items number one and three

Councilmember Chavez. Aye. Councilmember Warren. Aye. Councilmember Schaffer.

Aye.

Councilmember Lonsley. Aye. Councilmember Whiting. Aye. Councilmember Chowdhury. Aye. Councilmember Stephenson. Aye. Councilmember Laneville. Aye. Councilmember Vita.

Aye.

Councilmember Palmesano. Aye. Vice President Osman. Aye. President Payne. Aye. There are 12 ayes.

Those items carry. Next, we will take up item number two, the Skydio contract. Is there any discussion? Councilmember Vita.

Thank you, President Payne. First, I just want to take the time to thank lots of people who have been helping on this pilot project. This has been in the making for two and a half years. And so I want to thank my team. I want to thank DC Campbell, who's got a couple of promotions since we started this work. Sergeant Mua, who's the pilot for drones in the Minneapolis Police Department, Andy Skougman, John Frood in the Mayor's Office, Minneapolis Fire, Regulatory Services, Public Works, 911. There's been a lot of us working on this project for two and a half years. And so thank you all for all the work you've done. And then I want to start my comments out by saying since the day I was elected, I've made a commitment to my constituents to work every day to solve the problems they face. They want neighborhoods that are safe and more livable, faster police response time, cleaner streets, and less violent crime. Year after year, I've had to tell them that we cannot make the progress they deserve because we do not have enough officers on our streets. I'm tired of saying that. I fought for solutions but came up short. I'm tired of explaining that we lost two additional officers to the non-fatal shooting task force after Councilmember Wansley's proposals passed. I'm tired of telling residents we lost an alternative to traditional policing when my colleagues voted to end the contracts with New Salem. I'm tired of explaining that we cannot secure much needed additional crime prevention specialists because I could not get the votes. I'm tired of telling neighbors they must live with the Safety Operations Center in front of their homes because my colleagues eliminated the other option. Most of all, I'm tired of watching my community absorb one loss after another and then facing my constituents knowing their concerns remain unresolved. They deserve better than excuses. They deserve results. If I had the power to make these changes on my own, I would, but I cannot. I am one of 13 members of this council, meetings with residents, every day and that is my responsibility but the responsibility is on all of us to make sure they are safe what i'm proposing is not a permanent solution it's a free 75-day pilot program it's a chance to test the technology evaluate the results and determine whether it works for our city or not I also want to address concerns about privacy and accountability. Skydio will not have access to the data collected through this pilot. The data remains with Minneapolis Police Department, and every deployment is documented through a public dashboard that shows where the drone was used, why it was used, and how it was used. This is a pilot built with transparency and public accountability from the start. I have also heard concerns about Skydio's business relationships with federal agencies. But if our standard is that we cannot work with any company that has contracts with a federal agency who has policies we oppose, we will quickly find that standard impossible to apply consistently. The question before us is, will this pilot help the people of Minneapolis? Will it operate under Minnesota state law and Minneapolis' policies, with Minneapolis retaining control of the data and with full transparency? I believe the answer is yes. When I saw this technology demonstrated, I saw a practical way to make better use of the resources we already have. This is not about replacing human interaction. It's about giving our existing personnel another tool to respond more quickly and more efficiently. Today, the average police response time in the fourth precinct is more than seven minutes. With this pilot, response times for eligible calls could be reduced to under two minutes. So far this year, there have been more than 7,800 calls where this technology could have been deployed, roughly 40 calls every day. Those are thousands of opportunities to get help to residents faster while also allowing officers to focus on the calls that require an in-person response. Take the story of Mr. Bob Stewart, an 82-year-old Marine veteran and Ward 4 resident who went missing for about five and a half hours and was eventually found having fallen into Shingle Creek. After a drone was finally deployed, it found him in just nine minutes. Under this pilot program, a drone could have been in the air in under two minutes once the 911 call came in instead of waiting for deployment. In emergencies, minutes matter. We can never know the outcome of every case, but what we do know is that getting eyes on a missing person sooner can make the difference between life and death. If this program saves one life, it's worth trying. And if it doesn't deliver the results we expect, that's exactly why it's the 75-day pilot program. We evaluate it, and we make a decision based on evidence. St. Paul, Duluth, Rochester, Minnetonka, and Brooklyn Park are already using this technology from the same company. Members of this body often look to these cities for ideas on policies and programs. Members of this body look to Duluth for bathhouses and safe bays. Members of this body look to St. Paul for rent control and non-fading shooting task force. If we are willing to look to them for those initiatives, why wouldn't we also look to them for a tool that they have found success with and has the potential to improve the public safety and city services? At times, it feels like members of this body are searching for reasons to say no instead of looking for reasons to give this pilot a chance. To make the outcome of this decision hinge on whether a country halfway around the world purchases equipment from the same company does not make sense to me. I do not believe that this is a reasonable basis for deciding whether our residents should have access to a tool that can improve public safety. At some point, we have to decide whether our responsibility is to reject every imperfect option or to test promising ideas that could make a meaningful difference for the people we serve. This is all about a pilot. That is all I'm asking for, a pilot. Thank you.

Councilmember Chavez. Thanks, President Payne. I want to thank the public for engaging on this topic. It definitely allowed me to look more deeply into this tool. I have a few questions for the Minneapolis Police Department. First, before this was brought to council, did MPD do any due diligence on Skydio's federal contracts? And do you know if Skydio currently sells drones or related services to ICE or other DHS components? DEPUTY CHIEF.

DEPUTY CHIEF. DEPUTY CHIEF. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAIN. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAIN. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAIN. COUNCIL MEMBER CHAVEZ. COUNCIL MEMBER CHAVEZ. COUNCIL MEMBER CHAVEZ. ROGER MOORE RUNS THE OPERATIONS ROGER MOORE RUNS THE OPERATIONS ROGER MOORE RUNS THE OPERATIONS FOR THE DRONE PROGRAM.

FOR THE DRONE PROGRAM. FOR THE DRONE PROGRAM. GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE. GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE. GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE. I'M THE DRONE COORDINATOR FOR I'M THE DRONE COORDINATOR FOR I'M THE DRONE COORDINATOR FOR THE MINNEAPOLIS POLICE THE MINNEAPOLIS POLICE THE MINNEAPOLIS POLICE DEPARTMENT Just like Councilmember Vita over there stated, if we were to look at every other companies that were also associated with different types of technologies or tools, we wouldn't be able to get anywhere at all. So we did look into them, but more so we focused on some of the good that they were doing, and we focused on the fact that they were already contracted partners with one of our largest evidence management systems, which is Axon.

Thank you. In Chula Vista, California, they spent over $1 million in legal fees fighting to withhold drone footage from the public records request and lost at the California Supreme Court. Has MPD reviewed our public records laws and how it would apply to this footage? And would MPD be withholding any drone footage from the public?

So Council Member Payne and Council Member Chavez, I am familiar with that case. I followed it closely only because of all the privacy concerns. We're a little bit different from Chula Vista, only because we already have safeguards in place. We have safeguards with our state law, we have safeguards with our department policy. What Chula Vista did was they operated their drones under like a blanket. as in they withheld all the data as evidentiary data, and then when the lawsuit came forward, they were basically stuck in a tight place. We're not like Chula Vista, right? We are all about transparency, we're gonna have a public dashboard, and we're gonna abide by state law because state law requires us. to delete all non-evidentiary value within seven days if there's a public data request. Within the Minnesota State statute, all drone video is considered non-public data or private data, however, If there's any video of non-evidentiary data, it's gonna be categorized as so, and within seven days it has to be deleted. But within that seven days, if there are any public data requests, it'll be up to our records unit to determine if they can release those videos. But on the Minneapolis Police side, we're gonna abide by state law as well as the department policy.

Flight records show that these drones were launched at least 31 times to surveil a January 31st ice out protest in Los Angeles, which saw thousands peacefully protest against the Trump administration occupation of Minneapolis. Will MPD follow suit and use these drones to respond to First Amendment protected activity like protests, marches, vigils, demonstrations, regardless of call volume or called safety framing?

Council Member Payne and Council Member Chavez, we will not be following suit. Again, we're gonna be following whatever state law dictates that we can do. We respect people's First Amendment rights. As public servants, that's what we do, right? We are here to help preserve people's civil rights and civil liberties, but if there's an emergency situation that fits state law and our department policy allows us to, we will utilize this technology to help out the community the best that we can.

A Wired article states that a Skydio drone followed two young men in their car, at least one of them whom is described in police records as having been identified as a suspicious person in a vehicle. Then two men emerged onto a basketball court and started playing, and then the drone departed. How does MPD feel about this?

Council Member Payne and Council Member Chavez. For an incident like that, we would not even be utilizing drones for a situation like that. So I don't know what their policies are, but I can only speak to our policies and we will not even be operating drones in that situation.

Given that Minneapolis residents in these same neighborhoods spent recent months documenting and resisting unmarked federal surveillance and ICE activity, what independent verification exists that this technology will never be confused with, mistaken for, or functionally indistinguishable from federal aerial surveillance in the eyes of residents of Minneapolis, besides the police markings that are gonna be really hard to identify up in the air?

RIGHT NOW, WE DON'T HAVE ANY RIGHT NOW, WE DON'T HAVE ANY DETECTION SYSTEMS AT ALL. DETECTION SYSTEMS AT ALL. SO WHETHER OUR DRONE IS IN THE SO WHETHER OUR DRONE IS IN THE SKY, NO ONE IN THE CITY IS SKY, NO ONE IN THE CITY IS GOING TO KNOW WHETHER IT'S A GOING TO KNOW WHETHER IT'S A POLICE DRONE, WHETHER IT'S A POLICE DRONE, WHETHER IT'S A FEDERAL DRONE, OR WHETHER IT'S A FEDERAL DRONE, OR WHETHER IT'S JUST A REGULAR USER. IT'S JUST A REGULAR USER. WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST TO THE WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST TO THE COMMUNITY WHO HAVE CONCERNS IS COMMUNITY WHO HAVE CONCERNS IS IF THEY IDENTIFY A DRONE, IF THEY IDENTIFY A DRONE If they identify a drone in the air and they have concerns about it, to call us, we will go out there and document it. And I am in charge of the drone program, so I will oversee all of those reports. And then I will follow up with them, whether through the marshals or the FAA. And I'll follow up on all of those complaints.

Will drone deployment data be included in the metrics MPD reports to the settlement agreement monitor? So any racially disparate patterns are tracked from day one and not after?

So Council Member Payne and Council Member Chavez, all of the data, all of the metrics that we're gonna be documenting, we're not gonna be documenting race or anything like that. We're gonna be documenting drones based off of behaviors, and that's what state statute dictates us to do.

Okay, the contract that the MPD will be signing with this states that Skydio's collection, use, and sharing of personal information are governed by the company's privacy policy. The company's privacy policy states that the privacy policy does not govern how they collect, use, and disclose personal information for customers who use the type of service that we're talking about here. So if the privacy policy does not govern Skydio's collection, use, and sharing of personal information, and the contract's only mention of privacy rights refers back to the privacy policy, which does not govern here, I know that Skydio has claimed that they will not have any access to data, but my question is, what actually governs Skydio's collection, use, and sharing of personnel information that they may collect in any means? There's only six seconds left.

All right, we'll have to return to that question. Council Member Wansley.

Thank you, President Payne. Also, thank you, Councilmember Chavez, for highlighting and raising some further concerns with Skydio that really show that this is a company that does not align with the city's overall values. And I've been pretty consistent about my skepticism and concerns about MPD's drone use, which is why I brought forward the ordinance that allows for us to have public hearings when MPD is seeking to purchase new drones. uh technology surveillance technology such as the one that we're being proposed to uh consider today um but that said i do think it's also important as we go further into the conversation of this item uh to just level set with the public and make it known that um mpd has the ability to still purchase drones and already have drones um and MPD can and will likely continue to purchase their own drones with their budget for as long as the mayor allows them to and we cannot stop them and I want to make sure I level set that because if you still see drones in the air and think oh council took up this item regardless of the vote outcome I I thought I wouldn't see those they do have these in their possession right now but That said, council does have the opportunity right now to vote this contract down, especially knowing that the vendor does have a documented history of having sold weapons that surveil and kill innocent people. And there is literally no reason for the city of Minneapolis to contract with companies who arm entities such as ICE or Israel, who have shown a disregard for life, especially coming out of a federal occupation that took the lives of two of our residents, also created just lifelong trauma for a North Minneapolis resident who was also shot. And we've seen, even in recent days, several other residents of the general public across the country be killed at the hands of ICE. It makes no sense for why we would be even asked to consider this today. is an unnecessary business relationship that we are seeking out that do not align with the values of our residents in our city. And with that, I want to be clear that I'm also just not in support of drones overall. And one of the main reasons is because I do not trust MPD's ability to practice and enforce good policies around surveillance and data collection, especially when it's already been noted in the most recent Alifa report where we have found, or sorry, where MDHR had found that MPD was not even able to use Facebook in an ethical, constitutional way. So why would we constantly give new tools when it's not very clear? And I don't believe the Alifa report said that we're even in compliance with being able to use Facebook even at this current moment. But that said, earlier this year, too, again, going back to the federal occupation, residents have repeatedly raised concerns around what is the city's responses to surveillance practices. especially in a way in which we're protecting our residents' private data when the federal government is hostile and is using a multitude of, you know, initiatives from extorting information and political retaliation to try to extract information of our residents so they can target them. And because of that, my office actually brought forward a legislative directive asking the administration to share how are they employing data practices that not only protects our residents, but also allows us the ability to hold ICE agents accountable when they're violating the constitutional rights of our residents and is engaging in unlawful behavior. Despite being requested to provide that information about their policies, the Fry administration declined to do so. And again, we are in a current moment where we're having to navigate a hostile federal government. And we have not seen the Fry administration or the Office of Community Safety use these opportunities, such as the legislative directive, to showcase that there are thoughtful and intentional policies set up to center the safety of ordinary residents. And because of that, I don't feel confident in giving them the ability to enter into this contract, which is constantly framed as a no cost. There is no such thing. There is no such thing as a no cost in inspecting after a 75-day trial period that somehow we're going to say, oh, no, we're not going to move forward. That's unrealistic. So with that, I am a no. And I want to say thank you to the hundreds of residents who reached out to Council to share their thoughts, specifically those from North Minneapolis who came to the Public Health and Safety Committee. We had over 40 who testified around their concerns regarding this pilot. And residents overall do deserve quality public safety services. And I do want to highlight too, that there are so many other approaches that we can employ. I think council member Vita mentioned the non-fatal task force. I'm not sure where the information came from around them taking staff or personnel, but from my understanding, that is all based in getting external partners, people with expertise, specifically investigators, to come and help us, many of which right now in a voluntary capacity to help reduce gun violence and do significant work to close cases of unsolved shootings in our communities, which we know are happening all across our city, but disproportionately happen in black and brown communities. And even with less than a $2 million allocation for that non-fatal shooting task force, we've seen case closure rates for non-fatal shootings go up by triple percentages. And that's with less than $2 million. So actually, yes, I'm grateful that we are employing data-backed solutions, one that does not actually hinder or compromises our residents' ability. It actually gives targeted resources to our residents. It actually asks MPD to also use your resources efficiently. in a way that meets the safety needs of our residents. And I don't see how this does that, especially because there has been a change in goalposts around the usage or proposed usage of this. Initially, when we received the presentation in PHS, we were told that this could be used to address illegal dumping. And then I think there was maybe some further conversation with legal experts to show that maybe that didn't fit the guidelines of the state statute and that was removed.

Point of order, Mr. President, could you remind the audience of our reform here?

You have a pattern and practice of interrupting me when I talk. You don't do this to anyone else. Please turn your mic off when I'm speaking, when it has nothing to do with you.

Let me, all right. Council Member Wanzi has not finished her speech. Let's give her a minute back. But just as a general advisory, I'll announce that council rules do not permit comments from the public except during a properly noticed hearing or comment period. The purpose of this meeting is to conduct the business of the city. It is not a forum for public testimony or comments. Under the Minnesota Open Meeting Law, meetings of the city council and its committees are open to the public for the purpose of observation only. Consistent with council rules, individuals who purposely disrupt or OR DISTURB OR DISRUPT THESE PROCEEDINGS AND INTERFERE WITH THE BODY'S ABILITY TO CONDUCT THE BUSINESS OF THE CITY WILL BE ASKED TO LEAVE. THOSE WHO REFUSE TO FOLLOW THOSE INSTRUCTIONS MAY BE REMOVED FROM THE CHAMBER. CLERKS, CAN WE GIVE COUNCILMEMBER WANSLEY ANOTHER MINUTE TO COMPLETE HER SPEECH.

THANK YOU. I SHOULD NOT HAVE TO BE INTERRUPTED BY REPEATLY AGAIN SPECIFICALLY COUNCILMEMBER RAINVILLE WHEN I'M SPEAKING. SO I RESPECT YOU WHEN YOU SPEAK. I EXTEND THAT TO EVERYONE. I ASK FOR THE SAME CONSIDERATION. So that said, I want to be very clear about my concerns around this contract that I've been consistent about and that there's tons of documentation that shows that this is just not appropriate for us to enter into. So again, I want to thank our residents for being bold and persistent in raising these concerns, for holding us accountable. Again, this represents an opportunity for us to not set a new president and entering into what is a non-necessary relationship with a company that does not align with our values, that does not support the well-being of our residents. So thank you all for your leadership, and I look forward to voting no on this contract.

Council Member Palmisano.

I'm not part of PHS committee, but I did watch this long public comment period with interest, and I want to address the suggestions and feedback we've received specifically from the ACLU of Minnesota. As we deploy this new program, we've heard concerns from the community and groups like the ACLU about balancing public safety and protecting people's privacy, and that's a really important balance. Sergeant Moua mentioned some of this earlier, and I see that later we'll get back to Councilmember Chavez's questions, which really reflect some of the things we heard in the public comment period. I think that's important. I want people to understand that this pilot proposal exceeds all thresholds and recommendations from the ACLU. We are already beyond their standards. MPD has offered clarity about their use of drones, and I'll share some of the specific clarifications for the public. Drones will be used to respond to priority zero and one calls, such as a person with a weapon, an accident, an auto theft, or shots fired. And during the pilot, a physical squad will still be sent out. Drones will not be utilized for every 911 call and will only be authorized if there are circumstances that authorize their use under state law. The Federal Aviation Administration, the FAA, and state law do not allow drones to be used for routine patrols or surveillance, to have facial recognition capabilities, or to be equipped with weapons. State statute mandates that footage without evidentiary value be deleted within seven days. And different from our body camera footage, drone footage is considered private, non-public data. The video data collected here will only be used for law enforcement purposes, and just like video evidence, whether that's submitted by neighbors or captured on a security camera, all data will be stored in a way that's only accessible to MPD. What's before us today is a free pilot program. This is an opportunity for Minneapolis to trial this kind of technology, technology that's currently used in St. Paul, Minnetonka, Rochester, Duluth, and Brooklyn Park to determine if it works for us. The goals of this pilot are to reduce our response times, clear low-level 911 calls without officers being dispatched, increase safety, safety of the community, safety of our officers. And we will be tracking and measuring those outcomes specific to our city. Let's see what those outcomes are. We all agree that drones are not a substitute for uniformed personnel, but this pilot provides critical support to a severely understaffed department. And not only that, communities see some really great improvements in response that was previously impossible. I've seen demos with these drones that do things like can bring Narcan directly to someone in need to be used by a community member. This can save lives. I've seen demos where the drones drop a flotation device to someone struggling in the water with amazing speed and accuracy. I want that. Do you know how long it takes a fire rescue boat to get in the water at Lake Harriet or in Lake Nokomis? Agonizingly long. Dangerously long. This is public safety help, broadly defined. It's important to me and I think it's important to every single one of us sitting up here, public safety broadly defined. Our residents deserve police response that is as safe and as efficient as possible. If technology can clear certain calls and provide better information before officers arrive, it frees up officers to respond to other calls and service the community better. AND OUR FIRST RESPONDERS DESERVE TO KNOW IF THEY ARE TRULY NEEDED. DRONES COULD HELP US AVOID SITUATIONS WHERE PERSONNEL ARRIVE AND ULTIMATELY NO ONE IS THERE. WE HEARD YOU DEPUTY CHIEF CAMPBELL IN YOUR PRESENTATION THAT THERE WERE 33 AND A HALF ROUGHLY THOUSAND PRIORITY ZERO AND ONE CALLS IN THE FOURTH PRECINCT ALONE IN 2025. DRONES COULD HAVE RESPONDED TO ALMOST 5,000 OF THEM IN UNDER TWO MINUTES. THAT IS SIGNIFICANT. We know five other cities in this state utilize drones and are using them to make their departments more efficient and their communities safer. We have guardrails around this pilot program and again, meet and exceed the standards set out by the ACLU. I will be voting in support of this pilot, and I am really eager to see how it helps us to reduce response times, protect officers, and improve safety overall. I'm really great for the work that you've done to establish these guardrails and bring this kind of technology to our department. Thank you.

Council Member Chowdhury.

Thank you, President Payne. I just have a couple of questions on on this. The first question that I have is how will the drones itself be controlled? Is it controlled by a human being? And just go through the logistics of that for me. What are you anticipating if this was started?

So Council Member Payne and Council Member Chowdhury, so operationally, the drones are going to be remotely flown from someone from dispatch. So the drones are going to be operated by someone, like an actual officer from dispatch. So what would happen is dispatch would get a call. We'd see it on their screen. And then they would assign it to one of the drones or one of the drone pilots. The drone pilots would respond to that location and then, while en route, again the camera would be set at the horizon at 180 degrees once it gets to the scene it'll pan to the location and then do an assessment of the area that information is then relayed to dispatch as well as officers on the ground and then from there we can tailor a response according to what we've seen got it so it'll be actual officers controlling the drone that is correct

And then you had said previously that these drones would not be identifiable to other drones. Is that correct?

So Council Member Payne and Council Member Chowdhury. So our drones can see other drones that are broadcasting what's called remote ID, which if you think about it, it's like a beacon. So drones have these little beacons and our drones can see them. However, that's not necessarily the case for all of the recreational drones out there. So your question was, can our drones see other drones? That question is yes and no, depending on the types of drones.

That's thank you for that response, let me clarify what my question is will the public be able to discern between what are drones used by MPD compared to other drones by other law enforcement agencies or recreational drones.

So Council Member Payne and Council Member Chowdhury, our drones are gonna be marked with blue and red markings. So that is one identifier. So if community members are looking up at the sky and they see a drone, they will be marked with MPD markings and they're gonna have red and blue lights as well to indicate that they are police drones. A normal recreational drone won't have those capabilities of the red and the blue lights. Normally they're red and green.

Will they be discerned from other law enforcement drones or other drones used by Skydio, such as the ones used by ICE?

So, Council Member Payne, Council Member Chowdhury, a normal person won't be able to differentiate between the two. But again, they also won't be able to differentiate between like what we just had with the Fourth of July. I worked that day, there were maybe saw 15 to 20 drones and were able to identify if they were police drones or if they were recreational users. So for now, there is no standard that holds citizens to that standard of identifying and marking their own drones. So for now, we just have to essentially identify police drones as our markings and red and blue drones, or lights with our drones.

if i may speak to it too i mean just for our um the identification purposes for our drones you know goes back to that public facing dashboard so if somebody does does see a drone flying and they want to they think it's an mpd drone they have the ability to go on that public facing dashboard which will be on the city website and within 24 hours you know they can see if that's an mpd drone and why it was uh where it was flown from and to and for the and what reason

Okay, I feel like there is a lot of issues with being able to discern between other law enforcement drones. And I think it puts a lot of onus on everyday people to do that due diligence. And that's just a quick comment that I'll make. The other thing is since MPD officers will be flying this drone and let's say they go outside of the scope of what's occurring here and do, let's say like one of the worst case scenarios I could see is someone is followed and profiled by a drone. What's the recourse for complaint from citizens and other officers?

So Council Member Payne and Council Member Chaudhry, so we already have policies in place that dictate what happens if we improperly use this technology. So going off of that, we would just follow our own SOPs, our own policies and procedures, as well as state law.

And so it would likely go through either the OPCR or internal investigations if a complaint is filed about misuse of drones by officers, correct?

Correct.

Okay, thank you. Those are all my questions for you. I'll just make a couple of comments with the minute and 40 seconds that I have. BASED OFF OF THAT INFORMATION, I HAVE A LOT OF CONCERNS IN OUR ABILITY TO HAVE ACCOUNTABILITY OVER THESE DRONES, ESPECIALLY SINCE COMPLAINTS WILL BE MADE THROUGH OPCR INTERNAL INVESTIGATIONS AND WE HAVE GOTTEN A REPORT IN OUR COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE FROM THE INDEPENDENT MONITOR THAT The historical backlog for internal affairs still remains like we are just not investigating the complaints at the rate that we need to to satisfy the goals of the settlement agreement. And so I have no reason to believe that we would have a higher level of accountability on this matter or the level of accountability that's necessary. And that is deeply troubling to me because you can say that it's going to follow the scope of what's going on. But if it veers out of it, the recourse is slow, limited, and documented to be right now off track by years. The other thing that I will just share, during the ICE occupation, to my office, we have 40 documented instances of drones flying all throughout the Nokomis East and Standish neighborhood that residents were not able to identify. Even in conversations with the FAA, the MPD, and Hennepin County, no one was able to identify them. are traumatized by drones flying over their households. They do not like them. They feel surveilled. They have been followed by drones. They've had drones show up by their windows as late as 5 a.m. And that's just to speak to the fact that we shouldn't be bringing something in that my constituents say is traumatic for them to experience because they have felt the high pressure of surveillance. And we were still unable to get any responses on who operated the drones.

You're at time. Councilmember Rainville.

Thank you. I'm going to vote yes on this, just like I voted on some other pilot projects we did. We voted to start a pilot project on juvenile crime, to understand how we can get a hand on that. Perfect for our approach to non-armed public safety. And also a pilot project for non-injury traffic accidents. Another move towards the goal of more and more non-armed public safety working for us. And think about the success of the VCR. That started out as a pilot project. To not vote for this today would be a real loss for our community. Not just in North Minneapolis where we could hope to start this, but for the whole city of Minneapolis. And as I contemplated the information we've received after all these weeks, The one thing that's come to my mind time and time again, that if this drone project was in place, when we had the horrible shooting in South Minneapolis where Officer Mitchell was killed, there would have been a drone on site that could have advised him of the danger. The very person that he went to help killed him. A drone would have prevented that. So I hope that my colleagues see that we need to gather this data and that I look forward to making law based on facts, not fear.

Councilmember Schaffer.

Yeah, can you just clarify that the kind of the the rhythm of this drone use I think we're getting two in this pilot and then are they going to be restricted to Ward four or are they going to be piloted in other wards? I know there's a lot of concern about the comas and other areas of the city Can you can you speak and I may have missed that and then just reiterate that for me. I

So Council Member Payne and Council Member Schaffer, so the pilot project will consist of two drones and it would only operate within the geographical locations of the 4th Precinct, which is Ward 4.

GREAT. AND I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT THE WARD FOR COUNCILMEMBER FOR THIS AREA HAS TAKEN THE RESPONSIBILITY AND LEADERSHIP TO STEP UP AND SAY THIS IS SOMETHING MY COMMUNITY WANTS. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I'M FAMILIAR WITH AND COMFORTABLE WITH. I'VE DONE A LOT OF RESEARCH ON IT FOR TWO AND A HALF YEARS. AND I THINK WE SHOULD RESPOND TO AND ACKNOWLEDGE THE THE PRIMACY OF HER LEADERSHIP IN THIS TEST. SHE IS FOR IT, JUST LIKE WE'RE SUPPORTING COUNCILMEMBER WARN AND HERITAGE PARK. I THINK WE OWE IT TO OUR COLLEAGUES FOR HER WORK TO ALLOW THIS TO MOVE FORWARD AND TO SEE HOW DO HER RESIDENTS RESPOND TO THIS AND TO LOOK AT THE DATA THAT COMES BACK. I UNDERSTAND THE FEAR. I UNDERSTAND THE ARGUMENTS, THE MORAL ARGUMENTS THAT PEOPLE ARE MAKING AROUND SURVEILLANCE AND WHERE IT WAS USED IN VARIOUS CONFLICTS AND FEDERAL CONTRACTS. I GET IT. BUT THERE'S A MORAL ARGUMENT ON THE OTHER SIDE JUST AS STRONG OR STRONGER. WE ARE MUNICIPAL LEADERS FOR THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS. AND FOR WE NEED TO DO WHAT'S RIGHT FOR THE CITIZENS OF OUR CITY. RIGHT HERE. And if it's proven that it can save lives in other jurisdictions that we are in friendly with, Duluth, et cetera, then I think we deserve it to Council Member Vita to support her in this trial and get the data. Because I believe the moral argument to save, use drones to help save lost children and adults, Drones that could be used as a force multiplier for MPD when we're short officers, doing more with less. Drones that can be used as first responders in unusual situations that take time, as we mentioned with the water rescues, and takes an element of danger away from those who are first on scene. That's a moral argument I will stand behind for the citizens of Minneapolis. I am the mother of a first responder. I will be supporting this drone pilot.

Vice President Osmond.

Thank you so much. I listened to the meeting a couple weeks ago about this drone pilot program. As you can see, my name is on the co-author. I MADE THE COMMITMENT TO SUPPORT HIM BECAUSE I THOUGHT THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT COULD BE HELPFUL. I DID CHANGE MY MIND, AND I'LL TELL YOU WHY I CHANGED MY MIND. NUMBER ONE, I STRONGLY SUPPORT PUBLIC SAFETY. GIVING OUR FIRST RESPONSERS THE BEST TOOL THEY HAVE TO PROTECT OUR COMMUNITY, RIGHT? This is precisely why I cannot support the Skydio drone pilot, because a true public safety must include trust, ethics, and accountability. Those are my core beliefs. Yes, we are local government people. We also are human beings with ethics. I TALKED TO THE ASSISTANT CHIEF, I TALKED TO OUR POLICE LEADERSHIP, AND I EXPRESSED TO THEM THAT I DO SUPPORT POLICE HAVING A TOOL THAT CAN HELP OUR RESIDENTS WHEN THERE ARE CALLS. THEY ALREADY HAVE BODY CAMERAS. THEY ALREADY HAVE CAMERAS ON THE BUILDINGS. NOW THIS IS JUST ANOTHER CAMERA ON THE SKY. I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT, RIGHT? IF WE HAVE POLICIES AROUND IT AND A STRONG LEADERSHIP, that can protect those concerns and rights. But, and a huge but, Iscario supplies drones to Israeli military who have committed a genocide against Palestinian people and children. That is not my opinion. That is UN Human Rights Office. Look it up. And they also work with ICE, Department of Homeland Security on immigration enforcement surveillance. Nobody knows more than immigrant community, city of Minneapolis, what has taken place in our cities. Bringing offenders that ties to militarized operations into our city underlines the trust we are trying to rebuild with the city, especially in major black neighborhoods, black immigrants, Muslim immigrants. I do not trust Iscario and I would not allow for them to arrive here in our city. I support exploring technology that can help, including drones, in our first response, but only with a vendor that has no contract with militaries that are killing other people. It might be far away, but it is seen on your phones, and we have experienced last winter what ICE did to our community. Those drones were hovering on top of you when you were protesting and exercising your rights. These are the reasons why I'm voting against, and it does not mean, let me just say this, I am voting against public safety because nobody support it. Public safety more than me. Since I came in 2020, Public safety had been in the conversation. I have supported our police officers. I have supported the reform that we expected. CONSENT DEGREE ALL THIS CHANGE WE NEED TO DO SO VOTING THIS DOES NOT MEAN WE'RE AGAINST POLICE DOES NOT MEAN WE'RE AGAINST PUBLIC SAFETY BUT TAKING A STAND ETHICALLY AND MORALLY IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO AND I THINK ESPECIALLY FOCUSING ON CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS WHAT WE HAVE SEEN 99% OF THE PEOPLE THAT CAME HERE, OR CLOSE TO THAT, ARE AGAINST THIS BECAUSE THEY CARE. RIGHT? WE ARE DISCUSSING THEIR TAXES HERE, WE'RE DISCUSSING THEIR CITY HERE, AND WE SHOULD CONSIDER THAT. SO THE REASON I'M VOTING AGAINST THIS IS BECAUSE OF THE ESCARIO BASICALLY WORKING WITH ICE THAT CHEATERIZED MY COMMUNITY AND ALSO working with a genocide military government that continued to kill innocent children. That is not made up. That's just a fact. You can look it up. Thank you, Council President.

I want to note we've been joined by Mayor Frey and I will recognize him.

Council President, members of the City Council, thank you for having me here today. The ethical and moral stance that I am taking in supporting this free pilot is on behalf of our constituents that need response from a police officer or a safety system that allows us to see what is going on in real time. This program, which is modeled after dozens of other programs in major cities throughout the country and in Minnesota, has been shown to save lives and reduce the numbers of calls that our police officers need to go to. That both reduces the number of unnecessary interactions between law enforcement and residents and also improves the response time. And the amount of time that officers need to spend on each individual call. Let me explain what this looks like practically. A call comes in from a constituent saying that there is an individual on the corner with a gun. we can send a drone out to that location, sometimes within 60 seconds. And that drone, through the camera footage, can tell our police officers that it's not a gun at all. In fact, it's a cell phone. That footage can alert the police officer that they're not actually walking into a very dangerous situation where they may need to have their hand on a gun. That footage can let us know ahead of time that in fact that police officer isn't needed at all. And they can instead tend to a far more critical and dangerous situation that is happening perhaps a neighborhood away. This technology is not novel in use by cities. It is presently being used in Duluth, Rochester, Brooklyn Park, Minnetonka, and St. Paul. This technology is being used by New York City, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, Denver, and I could go on. This technology is also in so many respects a part of the future of where law enforcement is going. Because it allows us to get to a location faster, help somebody sooner. And yes, also save lives, which becomes all the more important. when we're down over 200 officers, where we have fewer officers per capita than virtually any city in the whole country, and we need to be using our time and our dollars as efficiently as possible. And so council members on many occasions have righteously asked for greater service, for quicker response, for more attention to victims and their needs. This gives us the ability to do exactly that. Council members, I ask for your support on this because I know that it will help our residents. I ask for your support on this because I know that it will help you provide the constituent service that you demand of our administration. This is not a small item. It is in the sense that it's a free pilot. It's a free pilot. But it's incredibly important in that it gives us the testing ground for free where, yes, we can expand, which, yes, in full transparency, we want to. Virtually every city in the country is going to be ultimately going in this direction, I believe. And I don't think Minneapolis... should have our own residents as collateral damage because of geopolitics. We're not sending... Thank you, Council President. Please don't interrupt. Thank you, Council President. Refusing this pilot, I don't believe sends a message to Israel. IT DOES MAKE IT MORE DIFFICULT FOR US TO PROVIDE THE NECESSARY SAFETY TO OUR RESIDENTS IN THIS CITY AT THIS POINT IN TIME. all of the arguments here, including those that I don't agree with. My ask today, though, is that we find a way to work together to provide the service and the safety that I believe that residents, and by an extension, council members, are deserving of. This pilot, this program, was not entered in a haphazard fashion. As Council Member Vitok can attest, i'm sure she would have liked it to come forward earlier um years ago we did a lot of work on this i'm grateful to our police officers and our office of community safety who have done extensive due diligence to put together both the plan address concerns understand the law I'M IMPRESSED BY THE WORK. I ASK THAT WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS IMPORTANT PILOT AND THE ABILITY TO PROVIDE SAFETY IN THE IMMEDIACY TO RESIDENTS THAT NEED IT. THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBERS. COUNCIL MEMBER CHAVEZ.

THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAIN. I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT CONCERNS WITH ICE ARE NOT Surveilling ICE out protest using these drones is not geopolitics. Surveilling people that are playing basketball is not geopolitics. Having concerns about the use of these drones is not geopolitics. It is just concerns that we have about surveillance in our city. So I just at least want to add that comment. Going back to my question, as I mentioned earlier, the contract states that Skydio's collection, use and sharing of personal information are governed by the company's privacy policy. The company's privacy policy states that the privacy policy does not govern how they collect, use and disclose personal information for customers who use this type of service, which we're talking about here. So if the privacy policy does not govern Skydio's collection, use, and sharing of personal information, and the contracts only mention of privacy rights refers back to the privacy policy, which doesn't govern here based on my reading. I know that Skydio has claimed that they will not have any access to data, but my question is, what actually governs Skydio's collection, use, and sharing of personal information that they may collect?

So Council Member Payne and Council Member Chavez, in regards to their data collection, that was something that we were concerned about as well, as well as our city attorneys. Initially, when we saw the contract, we actually reworded it that way so that they would have no say in how we collect our data. So what we would do is we would set the parameters of how we would document all of these incidences. And then from there, they're just helping us basically set different parameters to help us out.

So it would be set after if this were to get approved?

For all of the data?

Yes.

So we would collect all of the data in-house and then we would present it back to council?

I'm concerned about the guardrails here.

What guardrails? I guess I'm a little confused.

I think I got my answer. I'll move on to the next question because I have limited time. If something goes wrong during the pilot, a crash, an injury, or a data breach, Skydio's own contract seems like it gives the city no meaningful recourse. Under section 3.7, the service level agreement doesn't apply to any of the SAAS services offered on the trial, pilot, or beta basis. Under Section 8, neither the limited warranty nor the DOA warranty applies to any offerings provided under a trial period. And under Section 11.3, Scudio's total liability to the city for any claim is capped at the amount the city has paid Scudio in the preceding 12 months, which in this instance is a free trial, so it's $0.00. I'm concerned that we would be flying these drones, this technology over our resident's head with a vendor that has contracted away our responsibilities for the consequences of violations. I guess, can you explain under Skydio's own terms or whatever contract we are signing, if a drone crashes or causes a data breach during this trial, what is Skydio's actual financial liability to the city and can staff confirm whether that liability is zero?

So Council Member Payne and Council Member Chavez, in regards to data breaches that you're talking about, I know there are concerns. However, there hasn't been any documented cases that I'm aware of, of any data breaches. However, we are working closely with our IT unit, and then we'll deal with it as it comes. But for now, there hasn't been any documented cases. Again, when we're utilizing these drones, we're going through Axon. Right, and we've already been using Axon, their evidence management system. Everything gets uploaded automatically through their servers.

Okay, my time is running out, so I'll just read what I'm concerned about moving forward. Section 12.2 says Skydio will notify the city before complying with a legal demand for confidential information, but only if legally permissible. This contract never actually defines what counts as confidential information. It describes how that information must be handled but not qualifies. Section 6 of the contract prohibits customers from using Skydio drones as weapons or hazardous activity likely to cause death or injury. However, this has one exception for lawful government actions. That phrase is never defined anywhere in this document. It doesn't specify what makes an action lawful for a government to use to cause death or injury or who makes that determination. My interpretation of section 13.13 is that the city standard contract protections don't automatically apply to Skydio unless separately negotiated in writing that includes any specific commitments we might want from Skydio around data sharing guardrails with the federal government when it comes to ICE actions, consistence with our separation ordinance. And Section 3.3 confirms Skydio collects product metadata separate from footage and uses this data to improve Skydio's own current and future product. That contract doesn't specify when or how often this data is generated. And lastly, I am concerned about how we are going to use the flight footage that we have here. I'll be able to know. You're on time. Councilmember Chaudhry.

Thank you, President Payne. I just want to share that I am entering into the public record this document supplied by Skydio called Previous Sales Questions that answers several questions about Skydio's contracting with the IDF. So that's available to the public. I think everyone deserves to know that. I think there are several contradictions within this document. And it also highlights that Skydio is not only a surveillance company, but it is also a contractor of the war industry. And I think that's for us to note. And they do plan on continuing to do so. I also want to highlight right off the top that there was a massive security breach just this last week in San Francisco. And this was under the operation of the San Francisco Police Department. So it could happen here because it just did happen in another major city. And we shouldn't take that lightly. The other thing that I want to highlight is the fact that we still didn't answer this accountability question. There virtually isn't a way to have accountability on breaches of the scope that our own department may have. And there has been a pattern and practice of misuse of technology in the police department. There just has been, and we continue to have that historical backlog. So how would we get recourse? So I want to be very clear, I'm a no. there have been very few times where i have felt absolutely appalled and disgusted by an item that's come before me i just i can't like it is just my honest truth especially as a daughter of survivors of genocide and a granddaughter of a law enforcement officer who had to revolt against a genocidal country. It was Pakistan at the time, backed by US military aid. It does just run super deep. And any participation in surveillance technology that participates in genocide ultimately aids and abets and says that we're signing off on it i did not come to the land of the free my parents didn't come here for me to be an elected official and sit on this body and sanitize any of my feelings surrounding this and my deep history This action is morally bankrupt. It's an abysmal mistake. And nothing is free. This costs the trust of our residents. This costs us valuable, valuable information. This costs us people's sense of freedom. Constituents are crying out all of the time worried about surveillance and the impacts of this ICE occupation only further exacerbating this. This was funded, this organization was funded by the big beautiful bill to the tune of $514,000 in 2025 for immigration customs enforcement. And I understand why some members of this body may not care about the relations to the IDF and Israel related to the genocide in Palestine, but We are talking also about immigration customs enforcement. And we can't just go through an ICE occupation, an historic ICE occupation, say F ICE, and then turn around and build out our surveillance state and say we're going to have a sweetheart deal with the same company that's working with ICE, the same organization that killed our neighbors, brutalized our community, and surveilled each and every one of us. And those are facts. I think there is so much to consider. I keep on hearing that this is going to solve all our public safety issues and problems. There is no silver bullet to the public safety issues and problems. That is very clear. We wouldn't be overspending our budgets. if that wasn't clear. So I want to just dispel that illusion that somehow a free pilot, but again, it's not free, is going to solve our public safety issues. I think that's unfair to the community to set up that premise. So one day of Skydio in our city is one day too much.

Council Member Whiting.

Thank you, President Payne. And I have received a substantial amount of constituent feedback on this issue, both in favor and against this pilot. And I want to thank everyone that has reached out to my office. I want to thank everyone that has come within the community to speak on this issue. I will be supporting this issue today and this pilot today and want to kind of talk through it. And I do want to thank Council Member Vitoff for her leadership on this vote. My colleagues and community members that are not in favor of this pilot have made extremely valid points about the potential negative impacts of a program like this. The civil liberty concerns, the over policing concerns, the concerns about where we are sourcing these drones from, particularly with the issues with the IDF and with DHS and ICE. And the general hesitancy to introduce this kind of technology as it relates to data privacy, data retention, and accountability measures into the business of policing and public safety, I believe are entirely valid. And I take those concerns extremely seriously. And I think that issue alone is why we as a body should work to figure those out. WITH THAT, WITH THIS BODY ABOUT TO COMMIT ITSELF TO A PAID CONTRACT WITH THIS OR ANY OTHER DRONE AS FIRST RESPONDER PROGRAM, I WOULD NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION. BEFORE THE CITY COMMITS ITSELF TO SIGNIFICANT RESOURCES TO A PROGRAM SUCH AS THIS, I THINK Many of my colleagues agree that we need a clearer understanding of the data that supports its effectiveness and whether our current ordinances and oversights are sufficient to appropriately limit their use in the city of Minneapolis. And I think what we have seen, whether it is effective or not effective, would be through a program such as this. And as of right now, I do not believe that those policies are strong enough. Right now, we have data from other Minnesota cities that employ programs such as this, including St. Paul, which seem to support a level of safety and effectiveness. But we have also seen across this country an ability for police departments and jurisdictions to abuse programs and technologies, again, such as this. And so if we are going to commit ourselves to a program like this, I think we would need a full level of information in front of us to make an educated decision. Luckily, we are not committing ourselves to a permanent paid contract today. We are voting to approve a short, time-limited pilot that costs essentially zero dollars. There is no such thing As a free lunch, that's entirely true. I think Skydio probably clearly believes that if this city went forward with a program such as this, that we'd be so impressed by the results that we wouldn't be able to approve a paid contract. It is my understanding that any permanent contract, any paid program would need to come back to this city council for a full vote, full separate vote. This kind of pilot, I believe, can give us hard data about the potential uses of effectiveness of drones or the opposite, or the complete failure of a program like this, a first responders program in Minneapolis, and help us again make a long-term informed decisions on effectiveness. My reasoning for supporting this motion is that I think it has the potential to make our city safer and save lives. A fundamental part of the police reform process, I believe again, is removing officers from situations in which their bias or spontaneous decision making drives their thinking. More or less, I believe you can't train your way out of human fallibility. So while we train officers, we also have to advance alternatives to traditional law enforcement. An officer speeding towards a shots fired call that can be rerouted because a first responder drone reveals that actually no shots were fired and they were just fireworks, I believe lowers the temperature. Drone programs when done with stringent restrictions, privacy protections, I believe can provide on the ground information that reduces the likelihood of an officer's arrival escalating a situation or provide information that an officer response is entirely unnecessary. Our council members on the north side, where this program is going to be deployed, clearly believe that it could save lives. And I think at least some deference should be shown to our fellow council members who represent communities that this will most impact and at least to try. With that, as someone who has seen and grown up in this city, I believe my job, I hear, and it is really, really hard for me, the moral arguments of what is coming up here. And I truly hear it. I believe the obligation that is in front of me as a Minneapolis City Council member is to reduce the harm for my residents. If that is the case, if this saves one life of an unarmed black man in the city of Minneapolis, because instead of an officer going into that call, that is something that we as Minneapolis City Council members need to take serious. As someone who has lived in this city for my entire life, I have had friends, teammates who have been lost to gun violence on the north side, on the south side, every single corner of this city. And if this can save one of their lives, it is worth it. If this, not even just can save their life, if this gives a family the ability to find some level of justice, some level of, hey, this is the person that injured my loved one. That is something that we have to consider. If we approve this pilot program, When it expires in 75 days, I will be looking extremely, extremely close at the results. And at every single regulatory framework that I believe has to be around a program like this, because I think while we have state safeguards and guardrails in place, I don't think they go far enough. And again, I want to thank everyone who has reached out to our office on this program and the people in the conversations in front of us today because I believe that there are valid points across this dais and I am encouraged that this city and that my council colleagues are seeing that and putting weight to those conversations. Thank you.

Council Member Warren.

Thank you, Council President Payne. First of all, I want to say Congratulations to my council colleague Latricia Vita on all of your hard work that you have put in on this research over the last two and a half years or so. And to all the individuals who worked hard with you on this project. It is really interesting. When my council colleague had initially started sharing with me that this was something that she was working on, I was very proud of her because there's a lot of things that I know that we a lot of times don't take, that we kind of take for granted, like the fact that we as average Americans are on camera anywhere from 35 to 45 times a day. You're on camera. Someone's always watching what's going on, walking down the street from the ring cameras here, there, and what have you. No one's asking where that information and data is stored. No one's asking where Alexa and Siri and all of those different people as you're talking to them and asking them for directions about where you're going and who's tracking you and who's finding you, where they're storing the data around where they're tracking you, what you're doing, what's going on. No one's asking about where Apple and who Apple sells their phones to and Android and all of those people. People in all kind of countries all over the world everywhere else got the same stuff you got over here. Levi's jeans and Nike's too. You know what I'm saying? So it's the same stuff. We are no different. And guess what? The people in those other places are not asking about what's happening in North Minneapolis, nor are they asking about what's happening in Minneapolis. They're not standing up for what's happening over here for us when things are happening in our immediate communities. They're not saying, are you selling that? Do you sell that same cup to a girl over in North or South Minneapolis? Because if so, I'm not sure if I want to buy it. Nobody else is saying that but us. And that's just really tacky when we have really, really, really serious things at stake here that we are trying to work on to build embeddement for our community and for ourselves. You know what drones don't do? They don't shoot at people unless they're armed, unless they're armed with, unless they're armed with a weapon. These ones aren't. They're not reading your text messages, but your phone does. They're not listening to your conversations unless they're armed with audio. They're not looking through walls. They're not doing all of these different things. They're going to report an incident. That's it. That's all they're doing. to say if the coast is clear so that emergency medical professionals like the fire department who are actually EMS can actually pull up because they can't even do that until the coast is clear till they know it's an all clear to save somebody's life. That's it. Just asking for life saving opportunities. I don't understand why that is such a challenging thing to think about. And maybe until it's you and you need a life-saving measure, you won't think about what could have been done in that immediate, in that immediate moment in order to save your life, in order to help prevent something from happening, to go one step further. You know, I know it's, you can heckle and jekyll and all of those things and that's fine and cool. But at the end of the day, there are people in my community who are asking for these things. There are people in my community also who are quite opposed to it. There's people who are opposed to a lot of things too. You know? And it's a test. It's a figure out. It's a research. The biggest thing that is interesting to me, and I've read in my research about Skydio, is that their drones are pretty weak. Actually, the drones that you guys have at the Minneapolis Police Department are alleged to be a lot better than Skydio's own. So... We're kind of getting a washed out version right now. I don't know where y'all got the versions that you guys have. Where'd y'all get those ones? Why aren't we using those? Yeah.

Speak to that or turn your mic on?

So Council Member Payne and Council Member Warren, so the reason why we're not going with our current manufacturer drones is because I would say a few years ago, the federal government came up with basically like an act through the NDAA So because of this Authorization Act, it basically questioned our current fleet of drones. Right now, we utilize DJI drones. And the federal government is basically saying they want to put a stoppage on FCC licenses. So for those that are not aware, every drone, whenever they come through customs, gets provided an FCC license. Because the government has questioned that our current fleet of drones, which is DGI, has potential security concerns, they put a stoppage on FCC license for DGI products. So that is the reason why we're opting to go with more NDA compliant drones, which are acknowledged to be more safe by the federal government.

So the drones that you currently are using are far more dangerous than these drones, allegedly?

Allegedly.

Okay. Well, we're getting a knock off. Heck, let's try to knock off for 75 days. I'll take the knock off for 75 days. Thank you.

Council Member Stevenson.

knock off for seventy five days that sounds great uh... i want to talk about the context that we're considering this and and i have a few different things so bear with me but the first is this morning we heard uh... honorary resolution about that two hundred fiftieth anniversary of the declaration of independence uh... and so got me thinking a little bit about our founding documents so i just want to read the fourth amendment The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated and no warrant shall issue but upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized. while the courts may not have found skydio and surveillance drones as explicitly illegal to me it strikes me as un-american this is not within our culture this is not within our tradition to uh to allow this kind of of surveillance um and it it rubs me the wrong way and it rubs a great, great number of my constituents the wrong way. Council Member Warren very clearly laid out the level of surveillance that we are under now and how disturbing it is. It is disturbing that Amazon is constantly listening to you. It is disturbing that I'll have a conversation with my partner about potentially having children and then get baby ads moments later. That's disturbing. It's disturbing that ICE was able to use cameras in our city to follow us during this very recent occupation in order to deport, brutalize, and murder our neighbors. I don't think we should add to that problem. So, keeping with what context are we considering this in, we are considering this in the context of Minneapolis in 2026. In Minneapolis in 2026, the federal government came here and occupied our city. They hijacked many of our public safety systems, though not all. and use that information to steal our neighbors and to murder other neighbors. I believe it's naive to think that ICE won't get access to the data from Skydio. I can't tell you exactly how they would get it, but it just seems very obvious that they would get it, particularly in light of the recent data breach out of San Francisco, I believe. And lastly, again, we are considering this in the context of a place and of a time. And Skydio has helped Israel prosecute a genocide in Gaza. That alone, that alone, we're talking about innocent lives and... I don't think we should be party to an organization, to a company that says that their technology being used to prosecute genocide is fine with them. So each of these levels of context alone, frankly, is enough for me. I've got to be fully honest with my constituents. When this first came up, there was some speculation about whether it would be used to catch uh people doing the the smash and grabs that that we experience in all across the city but at the time it was a lot in south minneapolis and so i was i was actually really considering this i was thinking maybe this would be a good idea but when we listen to the context that we are in the context of an american tradition of freedom from government repression that is so under threat right now The context of a federal occupation and the lack of data security. And the real threat that there will be an additional federal occupation, whether around our elections or another surge to steal more of our neighbors. And the context that the company that we're wanting to do business with participates in genocide. These things. And so I cannot support this, and I won't support it. Thank you.

Council Member Wansley.

Thank you, President Payne. I just wanted to share something. Council Member Warren mentioned that one of the things that we need to consider is when we're citing other countries and other demographics for our reason of not wanting to enter into contracts with questionable governments and entities when they don't show up for us. I just had to share my own testimony that contrasts that. In 2020, when George Floyd was killed and thousands of us were in the streets being tear gassed by the Minneapolis Police Department, I recall Palestinian organizers reaching out and organizing workshops for those of us black folks to learn how we could take care of each other when we were being tear gassed, how to treat munition wounds and all sorts of things because those are the things that they've experienced day after day even more while living under apartheid conditions. And so I don't have that experience. I remember seeing even under those apartheid and segregated conditions, they used the wall that the state of Israel has used as a barrier to confine them to substandard conditions. Even in those moments of us experiencing one of the most gravest tragedies that this city has seen next to the federal occupation and so many others, they painted murals of George Floyd and so many pictures of Minneapolis in solidarity with us. and made the connection of the over-policing, because many of our law enforcement agencies also train alongside the IDF, made the connection to say, we know the injustice, the abuses that we suffer here, and by the hands of a fascist state of Israel, we know you're experiencing that under your racist policing system as well. And for me, that is the reason why I think of those folks when I brought the ceasefire resolution where we explicitly named as part of that resolution that we would not enter into contracts or agreements that help to fund and support the genocide in Gaza. And this is literally one of those moments where we get to act in alignment with that resolution that we passed and overrode when Mayor Fry vetoed it. So I just want to, I cannot resonate with that, that sentiment in my experience. And also I want to name too, again, like this opposition is not just rooted in a vocal minority. We had in our Public Health and Safety Committee over 40 residents, and then following that, received over 300 petition signatures, not by my residents, not in Ward 2, not by Ward 9, all Ward 4 and Ward 5 North Minneapolis residents. These petitions have, and I will forward them to, if they aren't already entering into the record, into our LIMS file so that they can be recorded to show who was speaking out about this pilot loan before we considered it and while we were considering it in committee. But I at least just wanted to name in terms of when I'm thinking about my votes, I can't say other countries, other demographics who's been opposed, who know what it feels like to live under apartheid conditions, how they didn't show up for me. I don't, that has not been my experience. And I also am grateful for those North Minneapolis residents who did come forward and share their opposition when they're being named as rationale for moving this forward. So I just wanted to share that before we move into further discussion and votes. But yeah, that's all.

Thank you, President Payne. So I'm aware that there were some North Minneapolis residents who came here along with certainly people from other parts of the city to speak against this. But I want to be clear here that there are residents, there are business owners, there are visitors of North Minneapolis who certainly are OK with this pilot project. We would not be moving forward had we known that Northside was completely against this. Actually, this has been a long time coming. And this could have been launched in several police precincts. The Northside council member just decided that we would be the ones brave enough to bring this forward because we knew that this is what was going to happen. And so I'm doing this on behalf of my constituents. You know, colleagues, I've listened carefully to your concerns and reasons. Many of you are going to vote no. But I keep coming back to the same question. How am I supposed to explain this decision to the people I represent? How am I supposed to explain to the residents who call my office every day, often multiple times, with concerns that this program could help address that we are choosing not even to give a chance? That my colleagues are focused on events halfway around the world and not on the needs of everyday people here in Minneapolis who elected us? who elected us to serve, I cannot in good conscience give them the answer that we once again said no. Rather, the objection to another country around the world or halfway across the world, neither changes the question before us. The question before us is how Minneapolis will use this technology under Minnesota state law and Minneapolis policies, with Minneapolis retaining the data, public transparency, and council oversight. That is the decision we're making today. I want to be able to tell the grandmother in Limbo Hanna who was carjacked while taking her grandkids to school in the morning that we care about her. I want to tell the father in Weber Camden whose autistic child keeps leaving the house to go to his favorite park in Northeast that my colleagues care about them. I want to tell the people who live in Falwell on Laurie and Logan who hear gunshots almost every day and have bullet holes in their homes and in their cars that my colleagues care about them. I want to tell the blind couple who lives in the McKinley neighborhood who are experiencing a medical emergency that my colleagues care about them. I want to tell the business owners who are spending $5,000 to $25,000 every month to keep removing illegal dumping and garbage from their parking lots while already struggling to keep their doors open that my colleagues care about them. I want to tell the people in Victory who call 911 because they see a suspicious person in the neighborhood, possibly with a weapon, that my colleagues care about them. I want to tell the family in Shingle Creek who are watching their car get stolen while they're sitting at the dinner table that my colleagues care about them. I want to tell the woman who moved to the Cleveland neighborhood from Ecuador in search of a better life who was robbed at gunpoint while waiting at the bus stop on her way to work that my colleagues care about her. What I'm asking you today, colleagues, is simple. Give this a chance. I'm asking you to acknowledge the challenges my community face, to recognize the voices of residents I represent, and to give them the opportunity to see whether this solution can make a difference. At its core, this is simply a request to try, to put our residents first, test whether it's possible And let the results guide us. I am not in no way asking you to make a decision on this, a final decision. I'm asking for a chance to try. I'm asking for you to take all the work that we've done for two and a half years, all the calls that we've gotten that we know could have been answered. All the people who wish someone could have showed up or something could have happened after they were at their worst. I'm asking for a chance. Colleagues, I need your support.

First President Osmond.

I want to thank you guys for being patient and listening to us. You know, I would say, like I said in the beginning, that I do support TECHNOLOGY THAT CAN HELP OUR RESIDENT SAFETY AND ALSO INCLUDING DRONES. I WOULD SAY GO BACK TO YOUR LEADERSHIP AND COME UP WITH A BETTER PLAN OTHER THAN SCARIO. IT'S AS SIMPLE AS THAT. IT'S THAT SIMPLE FOR ME. And people overseas are not the only one that's being affected by whatever's happening. It's affected by my community here, so really want to take the time and say I spoke to the MPD leadership, kind of expressed my stand. I do support public safety. I support council members who really want to do something with their neighborhoods. I just can't do this. We can't just... We just can't do this based on the safety side of it. I think there's so many other ways that we can secure the safety of our residents. And dealing with companies that has a lot of ethical questions is there. And there was an interview, there's a quote. You can do a little research, that's how I study it. There's a quote from the CEO that he just actually said something about the limit of ethics of surveillance. It refused to commit that, basically. That's something similar to that. It refused to commit the limit of ethical surveillance, and companies like that should not be dealing with the city of Minneapolis. So again, please come back. I'm happy to support technologies that can support, but not this way. Thank you again.

Council Member Stevenson.

Thank you, Mr. President. I wanted to clarify that as I'm making my decision, I'm not lost halfway around the world. I'm in the central neighborhood where dads were dragged out of the house and dragged into ICE detention facilities. In that neighborhood where Green Central, a Spanish immersion school is, students were forced to stay home. And they lived under toxic fear for months. In my neighborhood, in the central neighborhood, where Renee Good was murdered by our government. And where my constituent, Alex Preddy, was executed for loving his neighbor. So when I make my decision, I am rooted deeply in my community, in my ward, and with my constituents.

Seeing no one else in queue, I don't believe there's a motion on the table. Is there a motion for this item? The clerk, what are you moving to approve? And it's seconded. The clerk will call the roll.

Council Member Chavez. No. Council Member Warren.

Aye.

Council Member Schaffer.

Aye.

Council Member Wansley.

Nay.

Council Member Whiting. Aye. Council Member Chaudhry.

No.

Council Member Stephenson. No. Council Member Rainville. Aye. Council Member Vita. Aye. Council Member Pomasano. Aye. Vice President Osmond. No. President Payne.

Nay.

There are six ayes and six nays.

That motion fails. Please, we need to continue our business. Mr. Clerk. Go ahead. GUIDANCE. IS IT DONE? WE'RE DONE?

MR. PRESIDENT, IT WOULD BE IN ORDER FOR A MOTION TO DELETE FROM THE AGENDA IF THE COUNCIL WISHES TO REMOVE THIS FROM ITS CONSIDERATION.

SO MOVED, RIGHT? WE WANT TO DELETE IT?

ALL RIGHT. IS IT SECONDED? SECOND. THE CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL.

Council member Chavez. Aye. Council member Warren. No. Council member Schaffer. No. Council member Wamsley. Aye. Council member Whiting.

Just a quick question, clerk. I guess I'm kind of confused by the process here. So is it because it stays because we don't have a dispositive action? Mm-hmm. I see. OK. Nay. I think nay. Council member . Aye.

Council Member Stevenson. Aye. Council Member Rangel. No. Council Member Vita.

No.

Council Member Palmisano.

No.

Vice President Osmond. Aye. President Payne. Aye. There are six ayes and six nays.

That motion fails. I don't think we're gonna impasse here, so. Cue.

Council Member Chavez. Council President Payne, I have a question. So there was a legislative directive or motion that Council Member Walensky brought before where the vote was 6-6 abstain. And that was about asking, it was related to the commission of public safety. uh there was no dispositive motion that item was never brought forward at the following council meeting so my question is what makes that different than this if this already failed and why was that a previous item brought to our agenda as a 6-6 vote so what's the difference here

Mr. President, I'm not sure I understand the context. The contract hasn't been approved, wasn't approved, wasn't deleted from your agenda. The staff could bring a different proposal forward on the same matter of a contract for use of drones. Clearly, they could do that anyways. So deleting it from the agenda, as I've tried to explain before, is simply a matter of us closing out the file in limbs. procedurally taking that off the agenda and removing that. It simply closes the file on the issue. Staff could bring a whole new proposal forward with a different company for the use of drones for the very same purpose.

If there's no action by council today, then it's off the agenda anyways, correct?

This particular item won't come back. The motion to delete from the agenda is simply to close the LIMS file and say with definitive assuredness that that item is done.

Okay, great. So the 6-6 vote already makes it so this item is not before us unless staff resubmits.

The 6-6, the failure to pass this item means that that particular item, as it was brought forward with that particular proposal, is dead.

Okay, thank you. THAT COMPLETES THE REPORTS OF THAT COMPLETES THE REPORTS OF OUR STANDING COMMITTEES. OUR STANDING COMMITTEES. I DID GET A REQUEST FOR A I DID GET A REQUEST FOR A LUNCH.

LET'S GO. LET'S KEEP GOING. LET'S GO. LET'S KEEP GOING. OKAY. OKAY. OKAY.

LET'S BE EFFICIENT. LET'S BE EFFICIENT. LET'S BE EFFICIENT. THE NEXT ORDER OF BUSINESS IS THE NEXT ORDER OF BUSINESS IS THE NEXT ORDER OF BUSINESS IS NOTICE OF ORDINANCE NOTICE OF ORDINANCE NOTICE OF ORDINANCE INTRODUCTIONS. INTRODUCTIONS. INTRODUCTIONS. WE HAVE FOUR NOTICES TODAY. WE HAVE FOUR NOTICES TODAY. WE HAVE FOUR NOTICES TODAY. FIRST, COUNCIL MEMBERS CHAVEZ, FIRST, COUNCIL MEMBERS CHAVEZ, FIRST, COUNCIL MEMBERS CHAVEZ, WANSLEY, WARREN, AND I GIVE WANSLEY, WARREN For the second item, Council Member Chavez gives notice of five ordinance introductions, amending provisions in five separate titles of the code related to noise regulations to remove irrelevant content, organize the structure in a more logical format, clarify language, add a clause regulating the sounding of motion sensor devices on private property, and correcting associated reference numbers. Third, council members Schaefer and Rainville give notice of intent to introduce at the next regular meeting the subject matter of an ordinance amending the license and business regulations code, amending repealing and adding provisions related to rental halls and places of entertainment to create an event center license, allowing for the hosting of both public and private events. Finally, council members Wansley, Chavez, Whiting, and Chowdhury give notice of intent to introduce at the next regular meeting The subject matter of an ordinance amending the animal care and control code, removing conditions and restrictions on pet ownership solely due to prior conviction for certain felonies. These notices are hereby given and no further action is required at this time. Council Member Stevenson.

I just wanted to ask if I could be added as an author on number two, the noise ordinance.

Yes. All right, if the clerks could note that. The next order of business is the introduction and referral calendar. We have one item today. Council members Osmond and Wansley move to introduce the subject matter of an ordinance amending the license and business regulations code for the first reading and referral to the business housing and zoning committee. Adding a new chapter 270 establishing licensing requirements relating to bail fugitive recovery commonly referred to as bounty hunters. May I have a motion to approve this introduction?

SECOND THE CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL I WOULD LIKE TO BE ADDED TO THE QUEUE PLEASE OR NOT THE QUEUE I'M IN THE QUEUE I WOULD LIKE TO BE ADDED AS AN AUTHOR IT'S BEEN A LONG MEETING WE DO NEED LUNCH LOOKS LIKE THE CLERKS HAVE NOTED THAT AND I WILL ASK THE CLERK TO CALL THE ROLL

Councilmember Chavez. Aye. Councilmember Warren. Aye. Councilmember Schaffer. Aye. Councilmember Wansley. Aye. Councilmember Whiting. Aye. Councilmember Chowdhury. Aye. Councilmember Stevenson. Aye. Councilmember Rainville. Aye. Councilmember Vita. It's absent Councilmember Pomisano. Aye. Vice President Osmond. Aye. President Payne. Aye. There are 11 ayes.

That motion carries and the item is referred to the Business Housing and Zoning Committee. The next order of business is resolutions. We have two resolutions on our agenda today, one of which received a presentation at the beginning of our meeting. Do council members have any comments to add? Seeing none, may I have a motion to adopt these resolutions? Second. The clerk will call the roll.

Councilmember Chavez. Aye. Council Member Schaffer? Aye. Council Member Wansley? Aye. Council Member Whiting? Aye. Council Member Chaudhry?

Aye.

Council Member Stevenson? Aye. Council Member Rainville? Aye. Council Member Vita?

Aye.

Council Member Ponsonan?

Aye.

Vice President Osmond? Aye. President Payne? Aye. There are 12 ayes.

That carries and those resolutions are adopted. Our next order of business is unfinished business.

Mr. President, do we want to ask Council Member Rita if she wants to be recorded on the introduction calendar? Yes. AS AN AYE? AYE, PLEASE. THANK YOU.

OUR NEXT ORDER OF BUSINESS IS UNFINISHED BUSINESS. WE HAVE TWO ITEMS TODAY. THE FIRST ITEM IS CONSIDERING APPEAL SUBMITTED BY 1717 DEVELOPERS LOC REGARDING THE DECISION OF THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION DENYING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS APPLICATION TO DEMOLISH THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE TYLER STREET NORTHEAST JOHN COOK HOUSE, AN INDIVIDUAL HISTORIC LANDMARK. This was postponed at our May 21st meeting to allow for a sale of the property. The sale is still going through its final stages, so after conversations with staff and the attorney's office, I will move to postpone this item two more cycles to our August 13th meeting. May I have a second to that motion? Second. The clerk will call the roll.

Council Member Chavez. Aye. Council Member Warren. Aye. Council Member Schaefer. Aye. Council Member Wansley. Aye. Council Member Whiting. Aye. Council Member Chowdhury.

Aye.

Council Member Stevenson. Aye. Council Member Rainville. Aye. Council Member Vita. Aye. Council Member Pomsano. Aye. Vice President Osmond. Aye. President Payne? Aye. There are 12 ayes.

That carries and that is adopted. The next item is the automatic reconsideration of the Mayor's veto of the appointment of Jim Dabney to the Minnesota Ballpark Authority. I'll ask the clerk to explain our next steps.

MR. PRESIDENT, AS YOU NOTED, THE MAYOR DID VETO AND RETURN WITH HIS OBJECTIONS IN WRITING WHAT WAS COUNCIL ACTION NUMBER 2026A-450. THAT WAS THE APPOINTMENT TO THE MINNESOTA BALLPARK AUTHORITY FOUND IN LIMS FILE NUMBER 2026667 AS PROVIDED IN THE CITY CHARTER SECTION 4.4C3 AND UNDER COUNCIL RULES 7.8. An act that is vetoed by the mayor is returned for automatic reconsideration at the council's next meeting. And under that rule, then the reconsidered act is placed before this body in the same form as it was originally passed. The immediate question before the council is as follows. Shall the decision of the city council stand, notwithstanding the veto of the mayor? If at least two thirds of the council votes in the affirmative on that motion, then the mayor's veto is overridden and the original act approved by council is passed. That means that an override requires a minimum of at least nine affirmative votes. Otherwise, the mayor's veto is sustained and the prior action is defeated. To be clear, all council members, a yes vote on reconsideration is a vote to override the veto and approve the original act. A no vote is a vote to sustain the mayor's veto. With that, Mr. President, I'm ready to call the roll on the motion to reconsider.

So to summarize, an aye vote is a vote to override the veto. I will ask the clerk to call the roll.

Council Member Chavez. Aye. Council Member Warren.

No.

Council Member Schaffer. No. Council Member Wansley. Aye. Council Member Whiting. No. Council Member Chowdhury.

Aye.

Council Member Stevenson. Aye. Council Member Rainville. No. Council Member Vita.

No.

Council Member Palmisano.

No.

Vice President Osman. Aye. President Payne. Aye. There are six ayes and six nays.

That motion fails and the mayor's veto is sustained. The appointment of Jim Dabney to the Minnesota ballpark authority appointment is not adopted. Finally, we have the order of announcements. Are there any announcements? Going once. Councilmember Chavez.

Thank you. Just wanted to let the public know, since we have folks from, oh, can you hear me? Yeah, okay. Wanted to let the folks hear from target field workers that the resolution did pass, authored by Council Member Wansley.

Council Member Warren.

I just wanted to say, give a shout out to Council Member Schaffer and her team for organizing the event this morning. It was great and it was an honor to have my daughter a part of that. And so I just wanted to say that. Lots of festivities and fun, cool stuff happening in the neighborhoods. Go outside. Be outside. But take good care of yourself because the air quality is bad. Drink water. Mind your business if you have to. That's always a safe and fun thing to do. And, yeah, just relax. Just eat some ice cream and just relax. And, yeah, stay cool.

Council Member Schaffer.

Yeah, I just wanted to mention to my colleagues, many of you co-authors, that the original idea outlined for data centers regulation and health regulation departments regulations will be coming forward to the Committee of the Whole at the Planning Commission this afternoon.

Councilmember Whiting. Thank you, President Payne. I sent all of you an email. You are all cordially invited to the Southside We Outside second annual cookout. So I expect to see you all there. We have free food, bouncy house, all the fun things. Invite your friends, invite your family, invite your auntie, auntie, neighbor. So thank you. Time and date? Oh, August 8th from noon till four o'clock. Saturday. Where? WASHBURN HIGH SCHOOL.

GREAT. WITH THAT, WE'VE COMPLETED OUR BUSINESS TODAY WITH NOTHING FURTHER TO COME BEFORE THE COUNCIL AND WITHOUT OBJECTION, THIS MEETING IS HEREBY ADJOURNED.