City Council - Regular Meeting

Call the meeting of the St Paul City Council to order. Roll call please.

Coleman. Here. Kim. Here. Yang. Here. Bui. Here. Jost. Here. Johnson, Council President Nacre. Here. Six present, one absent that being Council Member Johnson and she is expected shortly.

Great. Welcome everyone to our City Council meeting. Thank you for joining us today. We invite everyone to join us in standing for the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States Of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Consent agenda items two through 29 are before you for your consideration.

I know I was hoping to pull number 13 for separate consideration. Is there anything else to come off of consent? Seeing none, I'll take a motion from Vice President Yang for the balance of the consent agenda. All in favor say aye. Aye.

All opposed? Six in favor, none opposed. The consent agenda is adopted as amended. Item number 13 is Resolution 26 dash 534 initiating business sign zoning code study.

And this is an item that is in direct follow-up to our policy committee meeting just last week where we talked about the need to take a fresh look at our sign ordinance both for downtown St. Paul but also for citywide to try to make it easier for our businesses to hang out a shingle, let people know that they're there, and just make it easier to do business in general in St. Paul. So this is a zoning code study that we're initiating today that we hope will come back to us yet this year with some recommendations for how to do that. So just wanted to take a minute to pull it off of consent. Thanks, staff, for the hard work to get this going and the hard work ahead in advance. Any discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed?

Six in favor, none opposed. The resolution is adopted.

I'll take a motion from Councilmember Kim for to suspend the rules in order to consider resolution 26 dash six seventeen. All in favor of suspending the rules, please say aye. Aye. All opposed.

Six nineteen. Six seventeen. Six in favor, none opposed. The rules are suspended. Resolution 26Dash617, honoring the legacy of Dolores Huerta and recognizing 04/10/2026 as Dolores Huerta Day in Saint Paul.

Council member Kim. Awesome. Thank you. I am just going to say some brief remarks, but then I'd like to welcome two guest speakers to speak to share a few words as well. But I'm proud to bring this resolution forward just to, I think, speak very bluntly.

It was awkward to bring on April 1 which was Cesar Chavez's day and then we didn't his birthday and then we didn't have counsel that aligned. And so this is a resolution is honoring the legacy of Dolores Huerta for her birthday which was April 10. Her birthday is recognized as a holiday in states like California and Washington. And of course her impact to the labor movement has extended far beyond her home state. So I would now like to welcome Norma Garces and Katie Avinia from the Academia Cesar Chavez to come up and join us.

Please join us at the dais to share a few words So as to provide a little more context as they come up. Yep, right in the middle. Thank you so much. Some of you may know but Dolores came out and identified herself as a victim of sexual assault and had two children that she had to bear and she is a labor movement. So, is much more than the pain that was caused to her. But looking across the table at all my female colleagues, we have an opportunity to sort of write history. And so, I'm gonna just yield to my speakers here and then I'll share a few words and I'll read brief excerpts from the resolution. So, the floor is yours. Thank you so much for joining us today.

Good afternoon. There we go. Good afternoon. Thank you council members for inviting both Ms. Norma Garces and me, Katie Avenia here. Both of us are executive directors and co directors at Academias La Paz. We're both here in strong support of recognizing 04/10/2026 as Dolores Huerta Day here in Saint Paul. Dolores Huerta's legacy is rooted in the fight for human dignity. She stood up at a time when people were treated as invisible, as treated as invisible and as disposable and less than human, and she refused to accept that. She demanded that farm workers, families, and entire communities be treated with respect, with fairness, with with humanity.

But it's not just about history. Right now, people are still fighting to be seen, still fighting to be treated with dignity, still fighting to be treated for their humanity. And that's why Dolores Huerta matters in this moment. Her life reminds us that dignity is not guaranteed. It is something that we have to protect in how we treat one another and in the systems we uphold and in the values we've chosen to live by. In Saint Paul, recognizing Dolores Huerta Day is not just symbolic. It is a declaration of who we are today and it says that we believe every person deserves to be seen, to be respected and to be treated as fully human. We urge you to pass this resolution. Thank you.

Thank Thank you so much. Thank you.

So, for sixty years Dolores carried a secret that was not her shame to bear. She carried it because she believed that so many women have been conditioned to believe that the cause was larger than her own wound. That is what the patriarchal violence demands, that women of color absorb harm quietly so that powerful men can keep their pedestals. When Dolores finally spoke her truth, she did not do it to tear anything down, but she did it because she has always known that the movements built on silence and suppression are not liberation movements, but rather more of the same. At 95, with the same conviction she brought to the picket line and the bargaining table, she chose accountability over comfort.

That is not a footnote to her legacy, it is the fullest expression of it. We know what it means to fight for workers who are told their labor has no value. We know what it means to show up for communities who are told their humanity is conditional. Dolores Huerta spent her life making sure those workers, those communities understood that si se puede was not a slogan, it was a promise. We owe her not just our admiration, but our own commitment to build, to building movements worthy of our example.

Honest, accountable, unafraid to name who causes harm no matter how beloved their name, and a singular vision towards our shared liberation. I just want to give an extra shout out to my legislative aide out to Hamid who wrote those comments. I'm just going to read two excerpts from here. Great job. I always say they have to be Thai spicy, and that was definitely a Thai spicy.

Beginning in 1955, Dolores Huerta co founded the Stockton chapter of the Community Service Organization leading voter registration drives and civic engagement efforts for the Latina community at a time when those communities were systemically shut out of political power. In 1962, Dolores Huerta co founded the National Farm Workers Association, which later became the United Farmers Farm Workers of America, one of the most consequential labor organizations in American history dedicated to securing fair wages, safe conditions, and basic dignity for the workers whose labor feeds this nation. Dolores Huerta's years of boycot organizing including national boycotts helped produce the California Agriculture Labor Relations Act of 1975, the first state law in the nation to recognize farm workers' rights to collective bargaining, a landmark achievement of the labor movement achieved through community power, not charity. The last one, Dolores Huerta gave the labor movement one of its most enduring rally cries, a declaration of collective power widely credited to her that is echoed from the fields of California to the streets of Saint Paul, fueling generations of workers, organizers and community leaders who fight for the dignity of working people. I just really appreciate the opportunity to bring this under suspension.

Feeling very emotional about it. Great job, Abdi Hamid. And I yield to my colleagues for statements, but I move approval.

Thanks so much, Ms. Kim. There's a motion for approval. Is there a discussion of the motion?

Ms. Bowie. Just brief remarks. I just want to say thank you so much for the representatives that were here to receive this honor. Thank you so much, Council member Kim for just bringing this history to surface and also just eloquently like telling the story and truth and transparency.

I I recall this year was the first time, unfortunately I should say that I heard about Dolores history and her legacy. So, I do appreciate you ingraining this into St. Paul City Council's expression of women, you know, as a woman of color who represents this body, it's really important that the truth is told and also the efforts of so many women who was the backbone of our movements and this labor movement is also recognized. And April 10 is a really special day, not only for me, but my best friend who's Ecuadorian, her birthday is April 10. And when I think about the legacy of her family having to migrate to Minnesota and they share the same type of history of being labor workers, right, and farmers and skills built in like agriculture and ensuring that in St.

Paul that they can be protected and they also have a voice and that they're also part of that movement. So, thank you so much for recognizing this. Thanks, Ms.

Bui. Any other discussion of

the motion? Ms. Yang. Thank you, Council President. I want to say thank you to you, Council Member Kim and also to our speakers, Abdi Hamid as well for your work in bringing forward the resolution here. It is very meaningful. I'm very grateful and honored to support it And just wanted to name that for me personally. I still remember when I first saw that post that Dolores Huerta shared on Facebook about breaking the silence and just sharing about the very traumatic experience that she went through. And to me, was shocking. It was heartbreaking.

And I can only imagine what somebody has gone through just decades of that pain and living in silence, but also the deep courage that she exemplified to all of us and wanted to just name like it's never too late to speak your truth, to speak our truth. And so it's really powerful. This is definitely a really powerful resolution. And I'm just like really living into just how grounding like storytelling is and how powerful truth telling is that we have to continue doing it. We need leaders to continue doing it so that we can give others permission to keep sharing their stories too. And so I want to say thank you for bringing forward the resolution here.

Thanks Vice President. Any other comments on the motion? Otherwise, I just want to echo my colleagues thanks to you, Ms. Kim, for your leadership and your courage in bringing this forward. I want to thank our speakers as well. It's a really important time to be making sure that this story is told and I'm hopeful that in the months and years ahead we will be telling Ms. Huerta's story and many others at the same time. Thank you. With that we have a motion on the floor for approval. All in favor say aye.

Aye. All opposed.

Six in favor, none opposed. The resolution is adopted. Item number 30 is final adoption of ordinance 20 six-seventeen, administrative ordinance establishing the minimum qualifications for the vacancy for the position of fire chief pursuant to the provisions of section 12.12.1 of the city charter.

So this brings us to

the ordinance section of our agenda. For those of you who don't join us every single week or tune in with our millions of you online, we always have three readings at least of all of our ordinances. Our first reading is a staff report giving us basic context for what we're doing, what the ordinance is proposing. The second reading is a public hearing when we hear public comments on what's being proposed. And the third reading final adoption, so the final vote on that ordinance. Sometimes we take more time. Sometimes we need additional weeks to consider additional amendments or to have more discussion, but at a minimum three weeks. So anything you see before us for final adoption that is an ordinance has already had at least two previous readings before it's being adopted today. So this item 30 is before us for final adoption. I will look to Ms. Coleman who is our lead author.

No additional amendments, no changes. I would move approval.

Motion on the table for approval. Any discussion of the motion? Ms. Bui.

Yeah, I just wanted to say I want to support and just like congratulate all the robust conversations that went into it. Having a chance to hear from like Local twenty one representatives also the fire fires united which African American based group. In our fires department where they're really excited for the to continue the legacy you know Chief Inks, former Chief Inks had left some really big shoes to fill. So, thank you so much council member Coleman particularly around making those amendments to the qualifications. Think it's really important that we have these robust conversations just because these are really important leadership positions.

And I do have a question, but just a follow-up. I know this is just established the minimum qualifications, but I just want to make sure on record it's clear that this position is appointed by the mayor only, right? There isn't or is this a community based interview process in the same way that we also appoint our chief?

Yeah, thanks Ms. Bui. That's actually a great thing to daylight. So this position, like only the police chief and the director of human rights and equal economic opportunity, have a more robust community process and our council has more of a role. So besides establishing the minimum qualifications, this council will also be establishing the membership of a selection committee made up of folks from the community. And then after that, that committee will make a recommendation to the mayor. The mayor will make an appointment and this body will approve it. So there is another step along the way and Vice President Yang has graciously agreed to lead the work to establish that selection committee.

Okay. Thank you.

Thanks. No, thanks for raising it. Any other discussion of the motion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. Aye.

All opposed. Seven in favor, none opposed. The ordinance is adopted. Item number 31 is ordinance 20 six-nineteen adding chapter 40 four-eight, the administrative code to institute training, reporting and programming related to the city's relationship with civil immigration laws and enforcement practices under Administrative Code Chapter 44.

So as I was saying on the previous item, an introduction to this section, we sometimes take just three weeks to approve an ordinance. Sometimes we need more time than that. And often that's when we have additional information that comes forward that needs additional public comment. For this item we have received a memo from the city attorney's office which was also recommended by the city attorney's office to have the chance for public review and public comment on it. So I for those of you who are here today for final adoption of this item unfortunately we are not going to be able to take a final vote on this today.

We will be holding the public hearing on this reopening the public hearing And then we will continue that public hearing until next week because we always have to give folks a week notice when we have a public hearing. And our hope is to take a final vote on this item next week. I know we're all very eager to do that, but we have to make sure that we give plenty of time transparency and input when there's new information forthcoming. So that memo from the city attorney's office is attached to the record now for anyone who wants to review it. I'll take a motion from Ms. Coleman to reopen the public hearing at this time. And we will hold it. And we will hold that public hearing. And then again, we will lay this over and continue the public hearing till next week so that people who aren't here right now know about it and can have time to weigh in. So this is a public hearing. If you first, we are going

You have to vote.

To reopen. First, we're going to vote to reopen the public hearing. So motion from Ms. Coleman to do that. All in favor say aye. Aye.

All opposed. Seven in favor, none opposed. The public hearing is reopened.

So this is a public hearing. If you are here to speak on this issue or if you would like to speak on this issue because you didn't know there was going to be a public hearing but you're here now, you are welcome up. Please come on up. All right. Seeing none, the public hearing take a motion from Ms. Coleman to continue the public hearing. Oh, you would like Okay. Come on up. I know this is sort of a last minute, so welcome. And for those who are here to testify on any item for our public hearings, I'll just take a minute to give the intro to that. For public hearings, we ask that you come up as is being demonstrated beautifully. Stand in between the two microphones. You don't need to adjust them. They'll pick you up just fine. You have two minutes to testify, and we ask that you start with your name and where you're coming from.

And when you're done testifying, please sign in on one of the two sign in sheets. Welcome up.

Thank you. President Aker and other council members. I'm Jean Comstock. I live on the East Side Of St. Paul. Hi. And I was not prepared to speak today. We thought this was just going to move on through, but I did want to just run up here and say we I believe I speak for people at UNIDOS in saying that we are fully in support of this resolution and believe it really needs to be passed. So I would just encourage you to do so, ask a quick question. Does that mean people will be able to testify next week? Perfect. Thank you so much.

Thank you so much. Make sure to sign in. Anyone else here to testify or want to testify on this item? And as Ms. Komslak just asked, the reason for having to wait a week is exactly so that people can be noticed of the public hearing, either sent emails or come and testify next week, and then we will hope to take a final vote next week. And again, apologies that this was a last minute delay. All right, seeing that no one else is here to testify, I'll take a motion from Ms. Coleman to continue the public hearing and lay the matter over until April 22. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed.

Seven in favor, none opposed. The public hearing is continued to April 22. Item number 32 is ordinance 26 dash 20, leading chapter 54 of the legislative code pertaining to rental application fees.

This ordinance is also before us for final adoption. I'll look to author Ms. Johnson for a motion.

Thank you. I appreciate just being able to make this update. It's genuinely more of a change that needs to happen in order to be able to prepare for our tenant protections orders that goes into effect on May 14. So with that, I move approval.

Great. Motion for approval. Any discussion of the motion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed?

Seven in favor, none opposed, the ordinance is adopted. Item number 33 is final adoption of ordinance 20 six-twenty one updating chapter 13 of the administrative code pertaining to the Department of Safety and Inspections.

This is also before us for final adoption. I'll look to Ms. Johnson for a motion.

Insert all of my comments previously. No, I'm kidding. But in actuality, again, just wanting to make sure that anything that was not currently covered in in the gender protections ordinance, but that is covered in Chapter 54, is now also being able to update Chapter 13. So with that, I move approval.

Great. Motion for approval. Any discussion of the motion?

Ms. Kipp. I just want to extend my gratitude to who I'm, I think, affectionately calling Chair Square Johnson, our HRA chair and budget chair. Just for your persistence and diligence and ensuring that tenant protections is fully implemented, you are our housing champion. I remember sitting in this chambers watching my chong get sworn in and I remember asking like, hey, what committee would you want to be on?

And we talked about HRA. And so, it's just to say I'm just really proud of the work that you're doing and I substantively did nothing. I added my name to it but just to show you how much I'm supportive of it. So deeply grateful for all the work that you're doing to ensure that some of our strongest tenant protections in the city that you championed is being implemented. And I know the implementation side isn't like the one that everyone talks about, so just lifting it up and just so grateful for your leadership.

Thank you. Thanks, Ms. Kim. Any other discussion of the motion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed?

Seven in favor, none opposed, the ordinance is adopted. Item number 33 is Resolution Public Hearing twenty six-seventy five authorizing the police department to accept four donations from the St. Paul Police Foundation holding $109,332.41 and amending the 2026 grant budget and adding activity budget.

This is a public hearing. Is there anyone here to speak on this item, item thirty four? Thirty Seeing none, I'll take a motion from Ms. Bui to close the public hearing and approve. All in favor say

aye. Aye. All opposed. Seven in favor, none opposed. The resolution is adopted. Item number 35 is Resolution Public Hearing 20 six-seventy six authorizing the acceptance of the Department of Emergency Management of $1,505,142.29 in total granting total grant funding from the Federal Emergency Management Agency to build and sustain the capabilities of the urban area to pretend prevent, protect against, mitigate, respond to, and recover from acts of terrorism and other hazards authorizing the execution of a grant agreement and amending the 2026 grant budget.

It's good to know that FEMA owns a thesaurus. This is a public hearing. Is there anyone here to speak to this item? Seeing none, I'll take a motion from Ms. Dose to close the public hearing and approve. All in favor say aye.

Aye. All opposed? Seven in favor, none opposed. The resolution is adopted. Item number 36 is resolution public hearing 20 six-eighty four, proving the application of Breakaway Festivals LLC for sound level variance in order to present amplified sound for the Breakaway Minnesota twenty twenty six event on Friday, June 26 and Saturday, 06/27/2026 at 400 Snelling Avenue North outside Allianz Field Grounds.

This is a public hearing. Is there anyone here to speak to this item? Welcome up.

Welcome back. It's great to be back.

Hello, everyone. My name is Jared Fucci. I serve as the president of Breakaway Music Festival. It's great to see some of you again, some familiar faces. I just wanna take a second to highlight a few items for this year's festival. We're excited to return to the great city of Saint Paul for our third annual Breakaway Music Festival. Thanks in large part to our partnership last year, we saw a tremendously successful event, and it mitigated many of the concerns that stemmed from our first year. Last year, we welcomed over 25,000 people to the festival incident free. This year, the festival is anticipated to return in just what feels like tomorrow, about eight weeks. We have 13 stops on our festival tour this year that we are incredibly excited about.

We just completed our first one in Dallas, Texas last week. Our team is currently setting up in Tampa, Florida this week. We're in Arizona next week, and we are awfully busy. Ticket sales are off to a strong start featuring global icon DJ Zedd. Many of you may have heard of him before. Our goal and primary and principal goal here is to stay in the city of St. Paul long term. This year we are again returning to our plan is to return to Allianz Field and we are exploring alternative locations as Allianz and the area continues to develop for 2027 and beyond. Last year, in large part, we saw a great decline in the number of, for lack of better words, complaints or pieces of feedback. In 2024, there was over 600 calls into municipal services.

Last year, to DSI's knowledge and ours, there were zero. We received about 50 pieces of feedback into the community notice form that we established alongside St. Paul PD, as well as DSI, ranging from, we love this event, there's a lot of foot traffic, please turn down the music, all over the place. We deployed a mailer that went homeowners out and residences around the community. We are partnering with DSI this year to expand that program and continue to try and receive even more feedback, and especially the piece around parking in neighborhoods. We had a great meeting with the Union Park District to continue this effort. So I know I'm out of time. I appreciate it and we look forward to hopefully returning.

Thank you very much. Make sure to sign in. Anyone else here to testify on this item? Seeing none, I'll take a motion from Ms. Bui to close the public hearing. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed?

Seven in favor, none opposed. The public hearing is closed.

Ms. Bui?

Thank you, Council President. I'm open to adopt the resolution for the variance. I just wanted to share. I had a chance to talk with DSI staff. It's been really amazing.

Thank you so much for coming and testifying. I know you've been doing a lot of travels. We've been hearing from the Breakaway Festival for their team. Been really proactive with partnership and actually expanding not only the geographic area, but expanding their plan in terms of parking and traffic mediation. I also was able to observe that they're going to be repositioning and putting some sound blockers, installing some sound blockers to ensure that the sounds not gonna be amplified from the freeway like we all have experienced in 2024 that was just really unsettling for many of us.

I did receive some concerns from some of my constituents. I have shared with them that they also not only can submit their complaints and live feedback through the QR code that's presented or provided from the event organizers, but they also can utilize our new poly system. And that's a way for the city to be able to capture those complaints. As heard from the event organizer, there was about zero complaints that came in from last year, but there I do want to make clear that there were complaints that did not go through the proper channels, but you can always contact your council members on it. But we did see a huge dramatic decline of complaints.

I wanna support you know events and festivals. I want St. Paul to be a place where people can have their concerts, but we wanna make sure that especially in the residential areas that there's strong partnership and that's something that at least I was able to see and just for our million of viewers out there, know, can always contact me if there's any concerns. This event is about eight weeks out. So if there's some some accommodations that needs to be made ahead of time please do not hesitate to reach out to

me. Great. Thank you Ms. Bui. And that's a motion for approval of the Sound Lone Bowl? Yes. Great. Thank you. Any discussion of the motion? Seeing none, I just want to say I support the motion and Ms. Bouie, I appreciate your leadership and your diligence to your constituents concerns about this. I also echo your thanks to the organizer for continuing to come in person. I think it's easier maybe to come in person after a year of very few complaints and definitely harder to come last year when we had some complaints. And appreciate that you are personally taking accountability and seeing positive change as a result of the efforts you're making. So thank you for that. All right, seeing no more discussion, there's motion for approval. All in favor say aye.

Aye. All opposed. Seven in favor, none opposed. The resolution is adopted. Item number 37 is resolution public hearing 20 six-eighty five, proving the application of Anderson Race Management for a sound level variance in order to present amplified sound for the ALS Superhero Dash event on Saturday, 05/16/2026 at 200 Doctor Justice O'Hage Boulevard, Clarence W. Wiggington Pavilion, Harriet Island Regional Park Riverside.

This is a public hearing. Is there anyone here to speak to this item? Seeing none, I'll take a motion from Ms. Johnson to close the public hearing and approve. All in favor say aye.

Aye. All opposed. Seven in favor, none opposed. The resolution is adopted. Item number 38 is Resolution Public Hearing 20 six-eighty seven authorizing the police department to accept the Community Crime Intervention and Prevention 2026 grant from the State of Minnesota Department of Public Safety Office of Justice Programs authorizing the execution of a grant agreement and amending the 2026 grant budget and adding activity budget.

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

Aye. All opposed? Seven in favor, none opposed. The resolution is adopted. Item number 39 is resolution public hearing 20 six-eighty eight, accepting grant funds authorizing execution of a grant agreement and amending the operating budget with respect to the Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund for a local housing incentives account grant program for 680 To 694 Minuteehaha Avenue East.

This is a public hearing. Is there anyone here to speak to this item? Seeing none, I'll take a motion from Ms. Johnson to close the public hearing and approve. All in favor say aye.

Aye. All opposed. Seven in favor, none opposed. The resolution is adopted. Item number 40 is resolution public hearing 20 six-eighty nine, accepting grant funds authorizing execution of a grant agreement and amending the operating budget with respect to the Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund, a local housing incentives account grant program for the common bond communities at 58 East Wood Street.

This is a public hearing. Is there anyone here to speak to this item? Seeing none, I'll take a motion from Ms. Kim to close the public hearing and approve. All in favor say aye.

Aye. All opposed? Seven in favor, none opposed. The resolution is Item number 41 is resolution public hearing 20 six-ninety one providing the issuance of and accepting a proposal on the sale of a general obligation judgment bond series twenty twenty six A and levying a tax for the payment of the series twenty twenty six A bond.

This is a public hearing. Is there anyone here to speak to this item? Seeing none, I'll take a motion from Ms. Jost to close the public hearing and approve. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed.

Seven in favor, none opposed. The resolution is adopted. Legislative hearing consent agenda items 42 through 114 are before you for your consideration.

Welcome, Ms. Mormon.

Thank you, council president. There are two items to be pulled for consideration today. The first is number sixty five, six sixty five

Item number 65 is RLHTA26Dash44, ratifying the appealed special tax assessment for property at 665 Frye Street. Miss Marvin.

Council president, this is a an assessment for boarding and securing a property. In this particular case, I believe we're looking at an emergency call out one with one board being secured. The police called the boarding company to come in. It appears that there was a SWAT raid at the property before them. Testimony in the legislative hearing indicated that the owner thought that the person the police were seeking, the tenant in this case, should be responsible for paying for the boarding and securing of the structure or the city who actually did the damage to it.

A claim form was provided to determine for the city separately to determine any responsibility that would exist there. As you know, the city would seek recompense from the property owner, the property taxpayer, rather than seeking out separately from the tenant that they have no obligation for property taxes.

Thank you, miss Mormon. Are there questions for miss Mormon before we open up the public hearing? Doesn't look like it. Alright. This is a public hearing. If you're here to speak to this item, come on up.

Yes. Hello, counsel. James Murnicki. I'm the property owner. So this boarding took place without my knowledge or consent. I had no knowledge of it until after the fact. If I was given the option, I would have and could have done it myself or hired my own contractors. In this property, I've not had any other instances such as this during my ownership of police forced entry. I brought to low income residents, and I have for a long time. Like I said, I've not had other instances like this.

And, really, I think the assessment in whole is unjust, but I think any reasonable person would conclude that just the amount of the assessment is unjust. To put a $25 piece of plywood over a door, I think just under $500 is very excessive. And I don't see the reason for this this great of an amount in the situation.

Just to be clear, are your what is your ask to us?

I would ask the entire assessment be struck because I had no knowledge of this occurring and I did not give any consent for this to be done to the property.

Great. Thank you very much. Make sure to sign in. Is there anyone else here to speak to this item? Seeing none, I'll take a motion from Ms. Coleman to close the public hearing. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed?

Seven in favor, non opposed. The public hearing is closed. Ms. Coleman.

Thank you, Consent President. I just do have a couple of follow-up questions for miss Mormand, and I think specifically it'd be helpful to just hear a little bit, about how we do emergency boarding and kind of when that decision is made.

Council president, council member Coleman, emergency boardings are called in by the fire department following fires by the police department when a property needs to be opened or is found open already, or typically inspections, mostly vacant buildings, would be calling in. In the case of an emergency situation, the biggest portion of the assessment is the emergency call out. It's not unlike calling out a plumber on an emergency basis. That's $250 just to get the person on-site. The actual securing was $60 so it's getting somebody to drive out there.

Particular boarding occurred at and I do have the police report on this seventeen forty four, so a quarter to six in the evening. When it's an emergency, the police in this kind of a situation where there's a raid, the police need to secure the site as quickly as possible in order that they can move on to their next call. So, it's considered an emergency. You don't want to leave a site where there was a raid or other kind of criminal activity open to entry. And there is, in many cases, no effort to reach out to the property owner because of the exigent circumstances. So that's what we're looking at here.

Thank you. And just to be clear, there's no you said in many circumstances there that outreach doesn't take place. There's no requirement that the city take any specific steps to notify a property owner before they respond in an emergency like this?

No, there is not.

Thank you.

Thanks, Ms. Coleman. I have a follow-up question, actually. Ms. Mormont, I seem to remember that there are some times when we do first contact the owner, and then only if we don't get a response, we call for the boarding. Can you clarify the distinction?

Yes. That would be more in a situation where we have, for example, a fire and someone can be identified. You have city staff on scene for a longer period of time. There's property damage and there's a lot going on. In terms of a raid, in terms of gunfire, in terms of other kinds of things that are moving like that, it's extremely common to see, you know, a boarding right then and there if there were squatters inside of a vacant structure and they were roasted out as it were.

There would also be a securing right away, especially if there was any sort of a fire to keep warm or other kind of thing going on like that. So it's it is determined in the field. Yeah.

And then with your permission, Ms. Coleman, another so in terms of the responsibility when the damage to the property has been done by the city in pursuit of its official duties like a SWAT raid, for example. Where does the responsibility lie? Is that that is determined to be with the property owner or that is something the property owner can submit a claim to the city for and that's processed separately? I know you mentioned a claim was submitted, so I'm just trying to follow the thread a little bit.

A claim form was provided as the owner indicated he thought the city or the tenant should be responsible. If it is the tenant he believes is responsible, then that would be a private claim against the tenant handled in court. For if the city is responsible, that would be filing a claim form, having it reviewed by the city attorney's office and arguing that out.

So it's possible that we would approve this assessment today because the boarding work was done, the cost was incurred. That does not mean that the property owner can't still claim that to be reimbursed by the city or separately privately as a civil matter, the tenant.

Indeed, that can be handled through a claim, separately, the record of this assessment is can go forward to district court, should an appeal be filed. So that would there's written guidelines on how that can happen, when it needs to be filed, and so on.

And I think my last question, with my colleague's permission, sorry for the barrage. We heard the testimony about not receiving notice until after the boarding had happened. What is the timeline after which? How much time do we allow to pass before notification? I assume we notify the property owner that it has occurred within some timeframe afterwards. What is that?

The next business day or following business day is when the letter is sent out indicating a board you know, the building was boarded or otherwise secured. So, they send it out right away and they say there is a charge that's going to be associated with this coming forward with an assessment down the line.

Okay. Thank you. Ms. Butey.

I have a question out of curiosity since we're, you know, learning more about this situation here. And I also just want to say that we support the council members' amendment or adoption. So I just I'm curious because I know there's like the DSI, there's this assessment charge, but I'm just curious around because what was said in the testimony was there was damages from the raid. So, there like is there a certain channel you go through if you're looking to get support around like what are those damages that are separate from just the boarding rate? I imagine I don't I'm not able to see the pictures to see what level of damage was done, but I'm just curious to know when a raid is conducted and they'll say doors need to be broken into or whatever.

What is the follow-up? And is that just only solely through like SPPD? Is there any financial or coordination in the aftermath? I can imagine with your property being damaged and now you're being fit with a bill that has a different department. I'm just curious to know what SPD's response after a raid has been conducted.

I have not heard of although there could be cases where the city has paid out for property damage. I don't know. Typically, in this kind of situation, if the city would not cover, I have not heard of the city covering. It doesn't mean it didn't happen, but that's not in my experience. I would say this is kind of a claim you could bring to your insurance company perhaps, but it is not considered the responsibility of the general taxpayer to cover the cost for a raid and invest, you know, in a in a property. So that's the reason it's called out separately as a nuisance emergency boarding.

Any other questions from Ms. Mormon? I would look to Ms. Coleman to see if there's a motion.

Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Mormon. And thank you, Mr. Murderkeefe for being here to testify today. I would move adoption of the recommendation of the legislative hearing officer. I think that there are a whole variety of questions in a situation like this, many of which were raised at this table. I do you know, when we sit in this role on a matter like this in our quasi judicial role, I'm looking for either is there some misunderstanding of the facts, do we have the facts wrong, or has the law been misapplied to those facts? I think in this case, seems like there's factual agreement and a clear understanding that the law as it exists was applied to those facts. I think the outstanding questions of does the city bear liability here are good and correct ones.

But this is in the forum to litigate those. And just to the question of sort of the amount, I do just really want to emphasize that when we are loving these assessments, aren't punitive assessments. They aren't we're not multiplying them by 10. It's just for the cost of the work, as Ms. Blomond was describing. Given that, I think it is appropriate this case for the city to recoup their costs. I will move approval.

Okay. So the motion is for approval. Is there any discussion of that motion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed?

Seven in favor, none opposed. The resolution is adopted. Ms. Mormont.

Council President, the second case, is item number 85.

Item number 85 is RLH twenty six dash forty ratifying the appealed special tax assessment at six two two prior avenue north.

Ms. Marmot. Council president, this is very much second verse the same as the first. We have an emergency boarding following a raid. In this case, I don't have a police report that indicates it's a SWAT raid.

What I have is a police report that refers to a previous case number, and it indicates also that the disposition was advised at SIST. The previous case number is under investigation, and so we do not have access to that file at all. We can't see that. What I can tell you is this was a raid that happened at the property, and following the raid, there was also the need for the property to be secured. In this particular case, the securement happened with sorry.

The opening was secured with metal fasteners, two doors. That was, again, two doors at $60.120 dollars and the emergency call out fee is $250 This occurred according to the report at about 06:30 in the morning.

All right. Any questions before we hold the public hearing? Doesn't look like it. Don't go far. This is a public hearing. If you're here to testify on this item, please come on up. Welcome.

Hello. I'm Nathan Arbold. I'm the property owner at 622 Prior Avenue. On October 7, there was a swap grid. They were looking for not a tenant of mine, but someone in association with that tenant.

From listening to the last person up here, I guess, I would have liked to have been notified. I am now understanding that that's not something that the city does. I think it should be something that the city tries to I mean, would have given them the keys. They could have walked straight in the door and done whatever they would have liked. The second thing so my phone number is right next to the door. Somebody could have called. We could have been there within minutes to secure the building as needed. My one of my biggest problems was that the building was not adequately secured. So they did take a couple metal brackets and screw them into the door frame and into the door with number two Phillips screws. That somebody something that anybody walking down the street with a screwdriver could just open up.

So we're talking about a building with thousands and thousands of dollars of construction equipment in it, something that is a highly stolen item. And when the SWAT team came in, they drove over two sets of fences, one to gain entry into front part of our lot and then over a basically six foot fence with barbed wire, drove the SWAT truck straight through it. Those areas were not secured at all, leaving a ton of vehicles and construction equipment just there. We were never notified. I know I just heard that the city sent something out within one day.

We never saw that letter. I was actually notified a week later by my tenant that something had happened, at which time we came in and found gates drove over the building poorly secured. And now we have an assessment for upwards of $500. And all they did was put about $10 worth of steel brackets on two different doors that didn't adequately secure the building. We're just sort of an innocent victim here trying to pick up the pieces from this.

I think that either the Saint Paul SWAT, Saint Paul Police, whoever came through, should be responsible for their damages. They came in way too hot and basically broke down doors after they had the suspect in custody. So that's why I'm here today to just ask you to please don't assess me with this.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Make sure to sign in. Is there anyone else here to speak on this item? Seeing none, I'll take a motion from Ms. Coleman to close the public hearing. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed?

Seven in favor, none opposed. The public hearing is closed.

And after you're done testifying, by the way, you're welcome to stay there. You can also take a seat again. We'll call you back if we need you. It's up to you. Ms. Coleman.

I have no additional questions. Happy to defer if others have questions.

Okay. Questions or comments for Ms. Mormont? Does not look like it. Okay. We look to Ms. Coleman for a motion.

In that case, I would also move approval. I think my previous comments apply in the situation. I will say having heard this now from two different test ifiers today, I think that it is it would be well worth our time to look into when the city makes that emergency determination versus when a property owner is given notice. And I think hearing that there are some situations where city staff is on scene long enough in the instance of perhaps a fire to give people a little advanced notice and sort of have a better communication plan that I'd be very curious if there are ways that we can sort of better operationalize that. Know, I understand that there are likely trade offs, but I think it would be worth looking into and making sure that we have that balance right. That said, given kind of where we are with the current policy and current practices, I would move approval here. Okay.

Thank you, Ms. Coleman. And I support that and I know to both of our testifiers, I really appreciate you coming out and I'm sorry that this happened to you on your properties. And I think Ms. Coleman expressed it really well that we're in this situation acting almost acting like a court, quasi judicial when we're considering cases related to someone's property and we have to take the law as it is and apply it fairly.

But that doesn't mean that we're not also hearing some of the concerns that you're raising about how the law is. And when we take off our court hats and put back on our legal hats which we can do at a future meeting after consideration, this is often the kind of thing that does lead to policy changes. So I think Ms. Coleman your questions about both notice and then also I heard Ms. Mormon say and I think it's important to note that claims can be filed against the city for damages to the property.

And so I certainly hope that those who testified today can be assisted with that process, have been made aware of how to do that, because I think that those concerns that I heard today are also very valid. So, with that, there's a motion on the table. Is there further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed? Seven in favor, none opposed. The resolution is adopted.

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

Not to my knowledge.

All right. We will hold a hearing on the balance of the legislative hearing agenda. If you are here for any of the other legislative hearing items from some number 42 to 114. This is your public hearing. So if you're here for any of those items please come on up. Seeing none, take a motion from Vice President Yang to close the public hearing and approve the items with the recommendation of the legislative hearing officer and any amendments thereof. All in favor say aye. Aye.

All opposed? Seven in favor, none opposed. The resolution is or the legislative hearing consent agenda is adopted as amended.

That brings us to the end of our meeting. And I would look to my colleagues to see if there's any news from the wards. Vice President Yang.

Thank you. I have a couple

of events to share. In the East Side, there's a neighborhood cleanup happening on Sunday, April 26 from 9AM to 12PM at the Hazel Park Rec Center. There will be gloves and bags provided. It's a great chance to meet your neighbors and help keep the neighborhood clean. And the second one is that there's a personal safety virtual workshop being hosted by the St. Paul Police Department. It's on Thursday, April 23 from 6PM to 7PM and it is virtual. So you can go on to their website for more information. Thanks, Vice President. Ms. Coleman.

Thank you. I am super excited to share the news that just came out yesterday about the Hamlin Midway Library. So while we don't yet have a finalized opening date, we were looking at the end of the year and director Hartman announced yesterday that it will actually be by the end of the summer that our library is back open. So stay tuned for more. Stay tuned for some exciting opening day events. But someday I'm gonna say summer is before Labor Day. So sometime before Labor Day, we will have a library again

in Midway. Great. Thanks so much, Ms. Coleman. That is truly exciting news. More exciting than some of the other neighborhood news that you have shared at this table in some previous weeks. Ms. Johnson.

I just wanted to be able to say this weekend on Saturday, there's a black authors expo that's taking place at George Central Library. I'll be stopping by there as well. There's 20 plus authors that'll be there, panel discussions. Just a really great way to support especially local but Minnesota black authors. Great. It's from eleven to four on Saturday.

Thanks, Ms. Johnson. Other good news, Ms. Bowie.

And also on Saturday, before you go to the Minnesota Black Authors Expo, you can join us on University Avenue. We're having a community trash pickup starting at ten a. M. There's going to be free beverages at Flava Cafe, also at Life Juices, all are along University Avenue. There is about four pickup locations where you can get a bag and join some friends and help clean up University Avenue between Lexington And Rice Street. It's going to be between ten to two p. M.

Great. A lot going on. Any other news? I'll just mention two super quickly. One is that today is the deadline to sign up if you want to be part of the Cinco de Mayo parade, which is coming up the first Saturday in May. It's always a wonderful event. I just found out that the deadline is today. I wanted to make sure I shared that with the world. And then also on Monday, April 20 at I have it on 08:30AM, but maybe it's not starting at 08:30AM. The state of the city address, I think it's later than that, maybe others know, will be held.

The mayor will be giving her state of the city address at the International Institute sixteen ninety four Como Avenue. I'm sure online they have the actual time. That might be the arrival time for us. Any other news from the wards? Otherwise, thanks so much for a great meeting. We are adjourned.

No, I think