>> GOOD AFTERNOON. WELCOME TO THE REGULAREETING OF THE BUSINESS, HOUSING, AND ZONING COMMITTEE FOR FEBRUARY 4, 2025. I'M JAMAL OSMAN. I'M THE CHAIR OF THIS COMMITTEE. BEFORE W BEGIN THE MEETING, I WANT TO OFFER A FRIENDLY REMINDER THAT ALL MEMBERSES, STAFF, AND THE PUBLIC THESE MEETINGS ARE BROADCASTED LIVE TO ENABLE GREATER PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. THIS BROADCAST INCLUDES REAL TIME CAPTIONING AS A FURTHER METHOD TO INCREASE THE ACCESSIBILITY OF OUR PROCEEDINGS TO THE COMMUNITY. THEREFORE, ALL SPEAKERS NEED TO BE MINDFUL
OF THE RATE OF THEIR SPEECH SO THAT OUR CAPTIONERS CAN FULLY CAPTURE AND TRANSCRIBE ALL COMMENTS FOR THE BROADCAST. WE ASK ALL SPEAKERS TO MODERATE THE SPEED AND CLARITY OF THEIR COMMENTS. WE'LL BE USING SPEAKER MANAGEMENT FOR THIS MEETING. PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU ARE SIGNED IN SO WEAN PARTICIPATE IN DISCUSSION. AT THIS TIME, I'LL ASK THE CLERK TO CALL THE ROLL SO WE CAN VERIFY A QUORUM. >> CLERK: COUNCILMEMBER RAINVILLE. >> PRESENT. >> CASHMAN.
>> PRESENT. >> JENKINS. >> PRESENT. >> CHOWDHURY. >> ELLISON. >> HERE. >> OSMAN. >> PRESENT. >> SIX MEMBERS PRESENT. LET THE RECORD REFLECT WE HAVE A QUORUM. BEFORE WE PROCEED TO THE PUBLIC HEARING, ITEMS ON THE AGENDA, WE'LL FIRST TAKE UP OUR CONSENT AGENDA, WHI IS ITEM 5 THROUGH 12. FIVE IS THREE LIQUOR LICENSE APPROVALS. SIX IS APPROVING THREE LIQUOR LICENSE
RENEWAL. ITEM SEVEN IS APPROVING A RENTAL DWELLING LICENSE REINSTATEMENT FOR THE PROPERTY AT 2008 21st AVENUE NORTH. EIGHT IS GREAT STREETS BUSINESS DISTRICTS GRANT AGREEMENTS. ITEM NINE IS SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR FEBRUARY 18, 2025 TO CONSIDER ADMINISTRATIVE ENFORCEMENT AND PROCEDURE ORDINANCE. 10 IS AUTHORIZING FORGIVENESS OF LOAN
TO MERCADO CENTRAL FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION PROGRAM. 11 IS APPROVING ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR 2025 HOUSING TAX CREDIT FOR HOUSING PROJECT AT 2016 NICOLLET AVENUE. LASTLY, ITEM 12 IS A PASSAGE RESOLUTION APPROVING A GUIDELINE FOR THE HATE CRIME PREVENTION TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ORFURTHE ITEMS? COUNCILMEMBER CHOWDHURY.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I JUST WANTED TO ASK FOR NUMBER 12, HATE CRIMES PREVENTION TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, IF I COULD BE ADDED AS AN AUTHO TO THAT, AS WELL. >> YEP. CLE? PLEASE NOTE THAT. ARE THERE ANY OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS? OUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. I WOULD LIKE TO ALSO BE ADDED AS A COAUTHOR ON THE HATE CRIME PREVENTION TECHNICAL ASSISTAE GUIDELINES. IF THAT'S ALL
RIGHT. I ALSO WANTED TO SPEAK TO NUMBER 8. THE GREAT STREETS 2025 BUSINESS DISTRICT SUPPORT GRANT AGREEMENTS, JUST WANTED TO NOTE HOW EITED I AM TO SEE A COUPLE OF UPTOWN PROJECTS BEING FU FUNDED IN THIS ROUND. INCLUDING THE FARMERS MARKE AND THE UPTOWN RISING TOGETHER MARKETING CAMPAIGN. SO EXCITED TO SEE THESE PROJECTS COME TO LIGHT. COME TO LIFE THIS YEAR. AND I ALSO KNOW, YOU KNOW, UPTOWN IS GOING TO BE CONTINUING TO WORK WITH CPED STAFF ON SOME
ADDITIONAL GRANT PROPOSALS FOR THE YEAR. AND WANT TO THANK STAFF FOR GETTING THIS FUNDING OUT TO COMMUNITY AND COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS WHO REALLY BENEFIT FROM THIS PROGRAM. THANK YOU. >> THANK Y. SEEING NO ONE ELSE, I'LL MOVE APPROVAL FOR THE CONSENAGENDA. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT AND THE MOTION CARRIES. BEFORE WE PROCE TO THE PUBLIC HEARING, I WOULD RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER VETAW HAS JOINED
US IN THE MEETING. FIST, WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION FROM BAR HARMONY. I'LLAVE PHIL FOR THE BRIEF PRESENTATION. WELCOME. >> THANK Y, CHAIR OSMAN AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MY NAME IS PHIL AND I'M THE LEAD INSPECTOR WITH LICENSES SERVICES. PRESENTING APPCATION FROM BAR
HARMONY. 501 FIRST AVENUE NORTHEAST, 0 LOCATED IN WARD 3. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING AN ON-SALE WINE, STRONG BEER LICENSE WITH LIMITED ENTERTAINMENT. THE HOURS OF OPERATION FROM 8:00 A.M.TO 1:00 AMODEILY WITH THE ABILITY TO ADAPT AS BUSINESS NEEDS CHANGE. ON JANUARY 10, 2025, PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES WERE SENT TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 600 FEET OF THE PREMISES. NOTICES WERE SENT TO RESIDENTS
AND PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 600 FEET OF THE PREMISES. RULES WERE SENT TO THE NICOLLET ISLAND EAST BANK NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATION, SAINT ANTHONY WEST NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATION, T MINNEAPOLIS REGIONAL CHAMBER, AND COUNCILMEMBER RAINVILLE. WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANY COMPLAINTS -- I'M SORRY. WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANY COMMENTS FROM THE COMMUNITY. THERE HAVE BEEN NO SIGNIFICANT 311 OR POLICE CALLS THAT CAN BE ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE BUSINESS. THE LICENSES ANDONSUMER
SERVICES DIVISION RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF AN ON SALE WINE, STRONG BEER LICENSE WITH LIMITED ENTERTAINMENT FOR BAR HARMONY. THIS CONCLES MY PRESENTATION. AT THIS TIME, I'LL STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT PRESENTATION. I'M GOI TO PROCEED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND ARE THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? WELCOME. PLEASE STATE
YOUR NAME. >> MY NAME IS ERIC. I'M THE OWNER OF BAR HARMONY. CAFE HARMONY, LLC. WE'RE APPLYING FOR A STRONG BEER AND WINE SERVICE TO EXTENUATE OUR CAFE EFFORTS FROM THE MORNINGS. AND I AM LOOKING FORWARD TO HAVING THAT FOR OUR CUSTOMERS. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. FOR YOUR TESTIMONY. I'LL RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER RAINVILLE TO MAKE A MOTION. >> THANK YOU. AND BEFORE I MAKE THE MOTION, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR COMING DOWN TODAY. IT'S
VERY IMPORTANT THAT I SPEAK WITH YOU. AND SO I LIKE TO MOVE THIS FORWARD WITHOUT RECOMMENDATION TO THE FULL COUNCIL AND USE THAT TIME SO YOU AND I CAN SIT DOWN AND TALK ABOUT CONCERNS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE IS A LOT OF HOUSING VERY CLOSE TO YOUR PLACE. AND I JUST WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT THAT. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> SO BEFORE -- COULD YOU -- WHAT'S YOUR PHONE NUMBER? OR MAYBE YOU DON'T WANT TO -- [ LAUGHTER ] OOPS! SO, YEAH. MAYBE I CAN WORK WITH STAFF HERE AND WE CAN MEET SOON. >> SUR SOUNDS GREAT. THANK
YOU SO MUCH. >> THANK YOU. SO, AGAIN, THE MOTION TO MOVE FORWARDITHOUT RECOMMENDATION. >> ARE THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE. I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER ELLISON. >> THANK YOU, M CHAIR. HAPPY TO SUPPORT COUNCILMEMBER RAINVILLE'S MOTION. BUT, ALSO, TYPICALLY WHEN WE HAVE FOLKS COMING TO DO BUSINESS IN OUR CITY. WE THA THEM FOR THE
BUSINESS THEY'RE DOING. AND I LOOK FORWARD TO THE CONVERSATION YOU'RE ABLE TO HAVE WITH COUNCILMEMBER RAINVILLE. HE'S DOING HIS DUE DILIGENCE ON BEHALF OF HIS CONSTITUENTS. I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR DOING BUSINESS IN THE CITY AND HOPEFULLYHINGS GO WELL AND YOU'RE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD. >> COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN. >> THANKS. I WANTED TO SAY THE COFFEE I EXCELLENT! AND I LOVE THE INTERIOR DESIGN AT HARMONY CAFE. S LOOK FORWARD TO VISITING AGAIN NOW WITH THIS, HOPEFULLY YOU GET THE
NEW LICENSE OPPORTUNITY. >> GREAT. SEEING NO ONE ELSE ON THE MOTION FOR COUNCILMEMBER RAINVILLE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AND THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE I AND THE MOTION CARRIES. NEXT WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR AN APPLICATION FOR THE 1893 HISTORIC GRAIN BELT OFFE FOR RENTAL HALL AND EXTENDED HOURS LICENSE. I WELCOME YOU FOR THE
PRESENTATION. . >> >>: THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS. I'M WH LICENSES AND CONSUMER SERVICES. I'M PRESENTING THE APPLITION FROM ENTOURAGE EVENTS GROUP INCORPORATED DOING BUSINESS AS 1893 AS HISTORIC GRAIN BELT OFFICE LOCATED AT 1215 MARTIAL STREET NORTHEAST IN WARD 3. THE 1893ISTORIC GRAIN BELT OFFICE
WILL HAVE RENTAL SPACE USE FOR SOCIAL, CORPORATE, AND FUNDRAISING EVENTS. CAPACITY WILL BE 823 PATRONS. AND THE HOURS DURING RENTAL CAN BE BETWEEN 7:00 A.M.AND 12:00 MIDNIGHT. ON JANUARY 13, 107 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES WERE SENT TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET. NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE SHERIDAN NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATION, NORTHEAST MINNEAPOLIS CMBER OF BUSINESS
ASSOCIATION, AND THE COUNCILMEMBER RAINVILLE. WE HA RECEIVED ONE COMMENT. WITH THE COMMUNITY SHOWING SUPPORT. AND REVEAL OF COMPLAINTS 311 CALLS, POLICE CALLS, AND OPERATING CONDITIONS SHOW NO SIGNIFICANT ISSUES CONCERNIN THE BUSINESS OR ISSUANCE OF THE LICENSE. THE LICENSE AND CONSUMER SERVICES DIVISION RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE RENTAL LICENSE WITH EXTENDED HOURS. THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. AT THIS TIME, I STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT PRESENTATION. I'M GOING TO PROCEED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. ARE THE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE. I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMR RAINVILLE. >> THANK YOU. I'M GOING IT MOVE APPROVAL OF THIS. AND I DO WANT TO TELL MY FELLOW COLLEAGUES. I HAD SPOKE TO SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS, THEY'RE IN SUPPORT. THERE'S NO HISTORY OF ANY PROBMS AT THIS LOCATION, AS
WELL. >> GREAT. WITH THAT MOTION, ALL THOS IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AND THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT. AND THE MOTION CARRIES. ALL RIGHT. OUR NEXT ITEM IS AN APPEAL QUASI JUDICIAL APPEAL HEARING REGARDING THE DECISION OF THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION WHICH DENIED THE HISTORIC RESOURCE APPLICATION FOR THE PROPERTY AT 3120 WASH BURN AVENUE NORTH. THIS HEARING WAS OPEN AT OUR
LAST MEETING AND REMAINS OPEN. RIGHT NOW I WILL WELCOME ROB FRF CPED TO GIVE THE PRESENTATION. >> THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M A SENIOR CITY PLANNER I THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION SECTION OF THE PLANNING DIVISION. TODAY I'M PRESENTING AN APPEAL OF THE HPC DECEMBER 16, 2 2024 DECISION. FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3120 WASH BURN AVENUE
NORTH. HISTORICALLY KNOWN AS PILGRIM HEIGHTS COMMUNITY CHURCH. THIS WAS CONTINUED FROM THE JANUARY 21st, 2025, BUSINESS, HOUSING, AND ZONING COMMITTEE MEETING TO TODAY'S MEETING. THE SUBJECT PROJECTS INCLUDES A CHURCH BUILT IN THE MODERN STYLE. IT INCLUDES MINIMAL WINDOW BANDS BELOW
THE EVES. THE COMMUNITY AND EDUCATIONAL WINGS ARE TO THE UTH END OF THE BUILDING AND WERE COMPLETED AT THE SAME TIME AS THE CHURCH SECTION TO THE NORTH. PILGRIM CONGRESSIONAL CHURCH WAS ESTABLISHED IN 1873. IN 1974 MERGED TO FORM PILGRIM HEIGHTS COMMUNITY CHUH. LOCATED AT 14th AND LINDAHL AVENUE NORTH. THE SUCCE OF THE MERGER PROMPTED THE
CONGREGATION TO SEEK A MORE CONTEMPORARY BUILDING IN A MORE SUITABLE LOCATION FOR THEIR MEMBERS. PERMANENT RECORDS SUGGEST THAT THE FOUNDATION FOR THE SUPER STRUCTURE BEGAN CONSTRUCTION IN 1952 AND THE NEW BUILDING COMPLETED IN 1953, AS DESIGNED BY ARCHITECTS CRAFT. THE BUILDINGS DESIGN WAS DOCUMENTED IN A FEW EARLY MODERN ERA SOURCES THAT CAPTURED NOTABLE NEW CONSTRUCTION. THE BUILDING WAS FEATURED IN THE NOVEMBER 22nd, 1953 "MINNEAPOLIS SUNDAY TRIBUNE
ARTICLE." IT HIGHLIGHTED SOME OF THE MOST PROMINENT RECENT MODERN CHURCH POINTS AT THAT POINT. AND INCLUSIONS IN THE ARTICLE IS NOTE WORTHY. THE CHURCH WAS RECORDED IN THE 15 BOOK TWIN CITIES ARCHITECTURE, MINNEAPOLIS AND SAINT PAUL FROM 1820 TO 1955 McCLURE. CALLED OUT THE CHURCH FOR THE LIMITED BUDGET DESIGN INCLUDING WORSHIP AND EDUCATION SOURCES FOR THE SUBURBAN CONGREGATION. PILGRIM HEIGHTED MERGED IN 1966 TO
BECOME PARKWAY UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST AT THIS LOCATION. ON OCTOBER 14, 2022, CPED STAFF DETERMINED THE SUBJECT PROPEY APPEARED TO BE A HISTORIC RESOURCE THROUGH A HISTORIC REVIEW LETTER. THAT LETTER CONCLUDED THAT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY APPEALED ELIGIBLE FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION UNDER MINNEALIS DESIGNATION CRITERIA 4 FOR ARCHITECTURE AS A CHARACTERISTIC EXAMPLE OF A MODERN CHURCHING DESIGN IN THE MODERN GOTHIC OR A-FRAME S SUBTYPE THE PROPERTY APPEARED TO BE
ELIGIBILITY UNDER CRITERIA 6. AS WORK OF MASTER ARCHITECTURES. THE MINNESOTA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE DETERMINED THE CHURCH AS ELIGIBLE FOR LISTING IN THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES IN JULY OF 2021. THE APPLICANT IS PREPOSING TO DEMOLISH THE BUILDING ON THE PARCEL. IT REQUIRED A DEMOLITION OF HISTORIC RESOURCE APPLICATION TO BE SUBMITTED AND HERD BY THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION. A APPLICATION WAS
SCHEDULED FOR THE DECEMBER 16, 2024 MEETING. IN EVALUATING IF THE DEMOLITION CAN BE APPROVED, THE ORDINANCE REQUIRES THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS TO BE CONSIDERED: ONE, THAT THE DIRECTION IS NECESSARY TO CORRT AN UNSAFE OR DANGEROUS CONDITION AT THE PROPERTY. OR WITH, TWO, THERE ARE NO ALTERNATIVES TO THE DESTRUCTION. IN DETERMINING WHETHER REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES EXIST, THE COMMISSION SHALL CONSIDER BUT NOT LITED TO THE SIGNIFICANCE OF A PROPERTY. THE
INTEGRITY OF THE PROPERTY. AND THE ECONOMIC VALUE OR USEFULNESS OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE, INCLUDING THE CURRENT USE, COSTS OF RENOVATION AND FEASIBLE ALTERNATIVE USES. CONSIDERING ADDITIONAL RESEARCH AND THE APPLICANT'S SELLERS, STAFF STAFF RECOMMENDED THE COMMISSION APPROVE THE DEMOLITION OF HISTORIC ROURCE APPLICATION. GIVEN THE PROPERTY APPEARED TO LACK SIGNIFICANCE MAKING IT WORTHY OF LANDMARK DESIGNATION. IN CPED REVIEW, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY DOES NOT APPEAR ELIGIBLE FOR LOCAL DESIGNATION.
STAFF NO LONGER CONSIDERED THE PROPERTY ELIGIE UNDER CRITERIA 4 AS A SIGNIFICANT EXAMPLE OF A CHURCH DESIGNED IN THE MODERN OR MODERN GOTHIC STYLE. WHILE THE BUILDING IS ONE OF THE OLDER EXAMPLES OF A MODER GOTHIC OR A-FRAME CHURCH IN THE CITY, THE PROPERTY IS NO THE BEST EXAMPLE OF THE SPECIFIC POPLAR S SUBTYPE. STAFF BELIEVES IT'S NOT ENOUGH TO DISTINCTION TO SUGGEST IT POSSESSES THE REQUIRED SIGNIFICANCE TO BE CONSIDERED FOR LANDMARK STATUS. OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS, STAFF HAD BEEN ABLE TO COMPLETE
ADDITIONAL RESEARCH TO GIVE FULL PICTURE OF THE QUANTITY AND QUALITY OF A-FRAME CHURCHES WITHIN THE CITY. MULTIPLE EXAMPLES OF THE VERY COMMON CHURCH STYLE STILL EXISTS IN MINNEAPOLIS. AND THERE ARE CURRENT I WL NOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST THE PROPERTY IS WORTHY OF THE DISNCTION WHEN COMPARED TO OTHER EXAMPLES THAT EMBODY THE CHARACTERISTICS OF T MODERN GOTHIC OR A-FRAME SUBTYPE. CPED FOUND IT WAS NOT ELIGIBLE. STAFF DOES NOT
BELIEVE THAT UNDER SIX FOR EXEMPLIFYING THE WORK OF MASTER ARCHITECTS.. OF THE REMAINING DESIGNED BUILDINGS IN THE MINNEAPOS, THE MOST NOTABLEAPPE THE BANK BUILDG APPEAR TO BE MORE IN LINE WITH THE RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS THAT THE FIRM IS BEST KNOWN FOR DESIGNING. SO UPON FURTHER RURNLG, THERE'S NOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO SHOW TT THE PILGRIM HEIGHTS COMMUNITY CHURCH
EXEMPLIFIES THE WK. AND THEY FOUND THE PROPERTY TO BE NOT ELIGIBLE UNDER LOCAL CRITERIA SIX. STAFF CONCLUDED THAT THE PROPERTY DOES NOT RETAIN THE SIGNIFICANCE TO BE CONSIDERED R LOCAL LANDMARK DESIGNATION. THEREFORE, CPED FOUND THE PROPERTY NOT ELIGIBLE FOR LOCAL LANDMARK STATUS AND RECOMMENDED TO APPROVE THE DEMOLITION. NOTWITHSTANDING STAFF RECOMMENDATION, THE HPC DENIED THE DEMOLITION AT THE DECEMBER 16th, 2024 MEETING. THE HPC MADE THE FOLLOWING
FINDINGSTHE CHURCH APPEARS TO EMBODY THE CHARACTERISTICS OF AN ARCHITECTURE STYLE. AND RETAIN SUFFICIENT INTEGRITY REQUIRED TO BE CONSIDERED FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION UNDER FOUR. IT MAY HAVE SIGNIFICANCE UNDER SIX AS AN EXEMPLIES THE WORK OF MASTER ARCHITECTS AND AMONG THE BEST OF THE EXAMPLES OF THE FIRM'S RELIGIOUS STRUCTURES IN MINNEAPOLIS. THE HPC AGREED THAT CPED STAFF FINDINGS AGREED
WITH STAFF FINDINGS THAT THE DEM LEGISLATION IS NOT ENOUGH TO CORRECT DANGEROUS CONDITIONS TO THE PROPERTY AND THERE ARE REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE DEMOLITION. THEREFORE THEY DENIED IT. THEY ESTABLISHED INTERIM PROTECTION AND DIRT THE PLANNING DIRECTOR TO PREPARE OR CAUSE TO BE DESIGNATION STUDY. THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED AN APPEAL APPLICATION FOLLOWING THE HPC'S DECISION. THE BUSINESS HEARING FOR THE APPL WAS NOTICED FOR JANUARY 21st,
2025. A IT WAS CONTINUED TO TODAY'S MEETING. STAFF HAVE RECEIVED SOME WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS AND THOSE HAVE BEEN INCLUDED IN THE PUBLIC MEETING RECORD FOR BUSINESS COMMITT'S CONSIDERATION. AT THE JANUARY 21st, 2025, BUSINESS HOUSING AND ZONING COMMITTEE MEETING THERE WERE THREE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO SPOKE IN OPPOSITION TO THE DEMOLITION. THESE COMMUNITY MEMBERS NOTED CONCERNS ABOUT DEMOLISHING A NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE PROPERTY. HOW IT CAN AFFECT SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, THE CONDITIONS OF THE PROPERTY
CURRENTLY, AND THE DETERIORATION AND LACK OF CARE. CONCERNS ABOUT THE PROPOSED NEW CONSTRUCTION DESIGN DISSATISFACTION RESPONSES WITH THE DEVELOPER. AND DESIRE TO KEEP THE PROPERTY A CHURCH AND PART OF THE COMMUNITY. WITH THAT, THE APPELLANT IS HER AND WILL GIVE A STATEMENT. BUT I AM AVAILABLE FOR ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS. ANK YOU. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT. GOING TO PROCEED WITH THE HEARIN AND I'LL GRANT THE APPELLANT 10 MINUTES TO SPEAK AT TH ITEM. AND THEN I'LL HAVE EVERYBODY ELSE SIGN UP TO SPEAK
FOR THREE MINUTES. WELCOME, SIR. >> M I REPRESENT THE DEVELOPER PREMIER DEVELOPMENT. AND I REPRESENT TIR CODEVELOPER OF THE HOUSINGTRUSTF OUR TEAM. CHRISROGAN WHO HAS BEEN THE COMMUNITY OUTREACH FOR US. AMY LUCAS, THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION SPECIALIST THAT WE
RETAINED TO REVIEW THE PROJECT AND THE HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE. WE HAVE THE ARCHITECT HERE, AND WE HAVE OUR CONSULTANT WHO PACKAGED OUR PROPOSAL TOGETHER. SARA LARSON WHO IS HERE WITH US TODAY. JUST VERY BRIEFLY, BECAUS I DON'T -- THEY HAVE MORE IMPORTANT THINGS TO TALK ABOUT. >> REAL QUICK, AND JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW, YOU CAN CALL UP ANY OF THOSE FOL WITHIN YOUR 10 MINUTES, AS WELL. >> OKAY. GREAT. I'LL BE
CALLING THEM ALL. >> BUT I WANTED TO SAY WE THINK THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT PROJECT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S A NEW CONSTRUCTION. AFFORDABLE HOUSG PROJECT. IT'S A TRANSORIENTED DEVELOPMENT. WE FEEL THAT THE PROCT WILL ADD TO THE QUALITY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS PROJECT SINCE BEFORE THE PANDEMIC AND THE QUARANTINE. WE WERE APPROACHED BY THIS -- THE CHURCH REGARDING THE PROJECT AND MAKING SURE THAT WE OFFERED AN ALTERNATIVE.
BECAUSE THEY DID NOT WANT TO REMAIN IN THE CHURCH. AND THEY WANTED TO MOVE ON TO A DIFFERENT LOCATION. SO I'LL BRING CHRIS BROGAN UP, WHO WILL TALK ABOUT THE EFFORTS THAT WE WITH THE CHURCH TO DESIGN THE PROJECT THAT MET THEIR CRITERIA. CHRIS? >> THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, VETAW. I'M THE REAL ESTATE BROKE BROKER WHO GROASHTED
THE SALE OF THIS PROPERTY. I WAS CONTRACTED WITH THE PARKWAY UUC CHURCH IN 2019. TO FIND ABY DECIDED TO MERGE WITH ANOTHER CONGREGATION. AND THEY HAD THIS PROPERTY THEY WANTED TO GET RID OF. THE CHURCH LEADERSHIP DEVELOPED A LIST OFRITERIA THAT WAS CRUCIAL TO THEIR CONSIDERATION IN THE SALE OF THE PROPERTY. THE RESULT BROUGHT
FOUR PROPOSALS FROM WELL-SEASONED AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPERS WHO WERE INTERESTED IN THE SITE FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSE OF CREATING MUCH-NEED HIGH-QUALITY AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN NORTH MINNEAPOLIS. THE LEADERSHIP TEAMEVIEWED THE PROPOSALS, MET WITH EACH OF THE DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS, AND THOROUGHLY DISCUSSED THE PROPOSALS. AND AT A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CONGREGATION, THE PROPOSALS WERE PRESENTED. THE MEMBERS REVIEWED THERITERIA, NOTED THE FINANCIALS OF EACH
OFFER, ASKED IMPORTANTQUESTIONSA DECISION TO SELECT PREMIER DEVELOPMENT PARKWAY HOUSING PARTNERS. THE SALE OF THE PROPERTY INCLUDING ALLOWING THE CONGGATION TO REMOVE SEVERAL ITEMS FROM THE THAT INCLUDED THE KITCHEN EQUIPMENT AND ITEMS FROM THE SANCTUARY, INCLUDING THEORGD GLASS WINDOWS, ANDEWS. ALL OF THIS IN ANTICIPATION THAT THE BUILDING WOULD BE DEMOLISHED.
THE SALE WAS COMPLETED IN MARCH OF 2020. FIRST DRAFT PLA FOR THE PROJECT INCLUDED THE REUSE OF SOME OF THE BUILDING STRUCTURE, BUT UNFORTUNATELY THE BUILDING ITSELF IS NOT APPROPRIATE SPA FOR RENOVATIONS FOR HOUSING. IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE CURRENT STRUCTURE HAD SIGNIFICANT FAULTS AND NEEDED TO BE REMOVED. PARKWAY HOUSING PARTNERS HAS BEEN IN REGULAR CONTACT WITH THE JORDAN AREA COMMUNITY COUNCIL, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS OFFICE, THE MAYOR'S OFFICE, HENNEPIN COUNTY
COMMISSIONER'S OFFICE, AND IN ADDITION, SEVERAL COMMUNITY MEETINGSAVE BEEN HELD TO DISCUSS THE PHYSICAL FEATURES OF A NEW BUILDING. WHICH AREIMPORE RESPONSES AND INSIGHTS FROM THOSE MEETINGS PROVIDED RELEVANT INPUT ON THE DESIGN AND FUNCTION OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING. PARKWAY HOUSING PARTNERs HAS INCORPORATED SEVERAL DESIGN ELEMENTS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED BY THE COMMUNITY IN THE PLANS FOR THE WARREN. IN THE SUMMER OF
2024, PARKWAY HOUSING PARTNERS REACHED OUT TO NEARBY NEIGHBORS REGARDING THEPCOMING HPC MEETING. THAT EFFORT LEAD TO A COMMUNITY MEETING WHERE THE PROJECT WAS DISCUSSED AND COMMENTS TAKEN AND REFERRED TO THE DEVELOP. MANY OF THOSE COMMENTS ARE REFLECTED IN THE DESIGN ELEMENTS IDENTIFIED BY THE MMUNITY MEETINGS IN 2023. THE CHURCH CONGREGATION, THE COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS, ELECTED OFFICIALS,ND THE PUBLIC AGREE THERE IS A VITAL NEED FOR QUALITY, AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN
THE COMMUNITY. IT IS FITTING THAT THIS FORMER CHURCH BUILDING, WHICH HAS BEEN VACANT SINCE 2019, BE DEMOLISHED AND THE SITE REDEVELOPED FOR THAT PURPOSE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NOW WE'LL HEAR FROM SARA LARSON. >> HELLO. THE WARREN, I WANT TO REITERATE, IS FULLY FUNDED. IT'S A $27 .5 MILLION INVESTMENT. IT'S FUNDING FROM THE CITY,TATE, AND COUNTY. IT
HAS $2.2 MILLION COMMITTED IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND FROM THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS. IT ALIGNS WITH THE FUNDER PRIORITY AND DEVELOPER TO DATE HAS INVESTED AND LEVERAGED THEIR OWN FUNDS TO MOVE IT FORWARD. >> NOW WE HAVE OUR ARCHITECT TO TALK ABOUT THE DESIGN OF THE BUILDING. >> A COUPLE OF QUICK POINTS I WANT TO MAKE TO THE GROUP HERE.
WE DID LOOK AT THE CONSTRAINTS OF TRYING TO DESIGN WITHIN EXISTING A-FRAME CHURCH. IT'S REALLY EXTREMELY DIFFILT BECAUSE OF THE UNIQUE NATURE OF THE A-FRAME TO MAKE ANYTHING ELSE KIND OF WORK IN THERE. IT'S NOT A CHURCH. SO WE STUDIED THAT. HOUSING DOESN'T WORK. AT LEAST NOT BE ABLE TO MAKE THE HOUSING AFFORDABLE. A COUPLE OF POINTS ABOUT THE CHCH ITSELF. FROM THE TIME FROM THE CHURCH WAS BUILT ECONOMICALLY. IT DOES NOT POSSESS A LOT OF DETAILS YOU MIGHT FIND OF AN A-FRAME STYLE
CHURCH OF THIS PERIOD. THERE ARE OTHER BETTER EXAMPS OF IT. WHATEVER GOOD STUFF WAS LEFT WAS TAKEN OUT BY THE CONGREGATION. I WOULD NOTE THAT THE BE BUILDINGSN'T HIT BY VANDALS. EVERYTHING IS PRETTY MUCH NAILED DN HAS BEEN STRIPPED OUT OF THE CHURCH. COPPER, ELECTRICAL, MECHANICAL, AND THERE'S A LOT OF MOLD IN THE BUILDING AND PEELING PAINT AND SO FORTH. SO BRINGING THAT BACK TO ANYTHING USAE IS DIFFICULT.
ONE OTHER THING WE WOULD RECOMMEND, I THAT TOWARD THE END OF THE LAST YEAR, BUILDING WAS POSTED BY CONDEMNATION FOR THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS. WE WERE INFORMED THIS WK, CONDEMNATION PROCEEDINGS WILL BEGIN THIS WEEK. ONE THING I WANT TO NOTE FOR PEOPLE WHO HAD SOME, YOU KNOW, COMMENT ON THE PROJECT. I'LL BE GOING THROUGH THE LAND USE APPLICATION PROCESS. SO THERE WILL BE OTHER PUBLIC HEARINGS. OTHER FORMS TO PRESENT ANY CONCERNS THEY MIGHT HAVE ON THE NEW DESIGN OF THE PROJECT. OR HOW THE BUILDING
IS, YOU KNOW, TECHNICALLY HOW IT GETS DEMOLISHED. THEREILL BE PRES PLENTY OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE PUBLIC AND CONCERNED NEIGHBORS TO VOICE THEIR P.R. OPINION AND WE'LL BE ABLE TO WORK WITH THEM ON THE PROJECT. AND I'LL ... >> OUR HISTORIC PRESERVATION CONSULTANT, AMY. >> HI. AMY LUCAS WITH LANDSCAPE RESEARCH. I COMPLETED THE EVALUATION ON THE CHURCH ITSELF. I HAVE FIVE QUICK POINTS. ONE, SIMILAR CHURCH IN SEEMBER OF
2022, THE HPC STAFF RECOMMENDED IN THE PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVE THE DEMOLITION OF AN A-FRAME CHURCH, AN EARLIER CHURCH BY A BETTER MASTER ARCHITECTURE CHURCH. IT WAS 1950. AND THEN THIS CASE, WE'RE HERE BAUSE HPC STAFF DID RECOMMEND OF THE APPROVAL OF THE CHURCH. AND HPC'S COMMISSION DENIED IT. A-FRAME CHURCHES ARE THE MOST COMMON CHURCH TYPE IN THE UNITED STATES. THERE'S ONE
IN EVERY TOWN IN MINNESOTA. THERE'S ONE IN SCHROEDER, MINNESOTA. IT'S LISTED AS THE MOST COMMON MODERNEST CHURCH TYPE. THEY'RE SIMPLE, CHEAP, FAST DESIGNS. MINNEAPOLIS HAS MA OTHER EXAMPLES. LAKE HARRIET METHODIST, SAINT PETERS AME, I CAN GO ON. THREE, A PREVIOUS EVALUATION WAS COMPLETED ON THIS CHURCH AS IT PART OF THE MNDOT PROJECT IN
2012 FOR THE NO TRANSITWAY SURVEY. ROB DID A GREAT JOB TALKING ABOUT THE CHURCH. THE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE, THE CONSULTANT SAID THE CHURCH WAS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR THE REGISTER. THEY CAMEACK. THEY DIDN'T SAY THE BUILDING WAS NATIONAL REGISTER WORTHY. THEY ASKED IT BE CONSIDERED REMAINING ON A POTENTIAL LIST. AND IN THE FUTURE, SOMEONE COMPLETE A MONOGRAPH OF THE ARCHITECTURE FIRM. NUMB FOUR, THE
ARCHITECTURE THEY DID THE DOWNTOWN PUBLIC LIBRARY. THE MINNEAPOLIS TORE DOWN AND BUILD THE NEW LIBRARY. THEY HAVE DONE A NUMBER OF CHU CHURCHES. THEY HAVE DONE A-FRAME CHURCHES. PILGRIM HEIGHTS, CAVALRY, [ SPEAKING WAY TOO FAST ] >>THEY DID INSTITUTION BUILDINGS. IT WOULD BE A LOT TO DO A MOGRAPH OF THEM. WHEN
CONSULTANTS GET THAT KIND OF BUDGET, MNDOT PAYS FOR IT AND USUALLY THEY WRITE A BOOK. IT HASN'T BEEN DONE. AND THE LAST POINT, TWO PREVIOUS EVALUATIONS WERE DONE ON MODERN CHURCHES IN GENERAL. ONE BEING A MODERN CHURCH CONTEXT STUDY THAT SAID -- I'LL GO SUPER FAST. THAT TALKED ABOUT THERE'S ONE CHURCH LEFT. THE FIST, FIRST AND BEST EXAMPLE IS ACTUALLY IN MINNEAPOLIS. IT'S
SIX YEARS EARLIER THAN PILGRIM HEIGHTS. IT'S SAINT FRAIS. MINNESOTA MODERN, LARRY -- >> THANK YOU. >> EVERYONE ACKNOWLEDGES THAT BEING THE BEST CHURCH IN THE CITY SIX YEARS EARLIER THAN THIS ONE. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> YES. THANK YOU. NEX I'LL HAVE ANYONE WHO IS SIGNED UP. DO WE -- ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THE ITEM. YES,
PLEASE COME ON IN AND STATE YOUR NAME. >> MY NAME IS BRIGITTE. YOU MAY REMEMBER ME FROM TWO WEEKS AGO. MY CONCERNS STILL STAND. THE DESIGN OF THE BUILDING IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UMM, I KNOW THAT THEY'VE SAID THERE IS OPPORTUNITY TO WORK ON THAT WITH THEM. WE THOUGHT WE DID THAT THREE MONT AGO. >> MR. CHAIR, I APOLOGIZE FOR INTERRUPTING. BUT I BELIEVE THAT THE SPEAKERS ALREADY SPOKEN
DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING AND IT WOULD BE OUT OF THE ORDINARY TO ALLOW TWO CRACKS -- >> I'M SORRY. YOU WERE HERE A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO. >> YEAH. I WAS. >> OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> ARE THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? SEEING NONE. I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. I RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER ELLISON. OR COUNCILMEMBER VETAW WHO IS FROM THE DISTRICT. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH, CHAIR. OF COURSE, I CAME TO SPEAK TO THIS. THANKS IF ARE T
THANK FOR THE PRESENTATION FROM STAFF. THANK YOU TO THE WARD 4 RESIDENTS WHO HAVE COME TODAY ABOUT THIS MATTER. WE'VE HAD A LOT OF COMMUNICATION ABOUT THIS INHE NEIGHBORHOOD. I KNOW MORE PEOPLE WISH THEY COULD HAVE COME. BUT WEREN'T ABLE TO. SO JUST SO WE'RE CLEAR, I'VE LEARNED ABOUT THIS PROJECT IN 2021, ACTUALLY. AND IN TALKING ABOUT THIS PROJECT, IT WAS EXCITING TO KNOW THAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING WAS GOING TO COME TO THE COMMUNITY. WHAT I TALKED TO THIS GROUP ABOUT, THOUGH, IS HOW
THE CHURCH WOULD BE PRESERVED AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING WOULD BE ADDED TO IT. SO ONE OF THE BIG THINGS COMMUNITY HAS SPOKE U ABOUT WAS THE SAJ WARE. THE SANCTUARY. THE OWNERS OF THEROPERTY TOLD ME AT THE TIME THAT NOT ONLY WAS THAT SANCTUARY GOI TO BE PRESERVED. IT WOULD BE USED FOR COMMUNITY MEETINGS AND THESESORE PROJECT. SO THAT'S CLEARLY CHANGED. AND I DON'T THINK THAT
COMMUNITY IS AGAINST HAVING AFFORDLE HOUSING. I THINK THE OPPOSITE. COMMUNITY WELCOMES AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THIS SPACE. BUT THEY FEEL LIKE THERE'S BEEN A BAIT AND SWITCH HOW WE GET AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT IN THIS SPACE. THE SECOND THING IS, THERE'S BEEN AN OVERWHELMING AMOUNT OF COMPLAINTS ON THE UPKEEP OF THIS PROPERTY AS IS IN THE LAST THREE YEARS. A LOT. ESPECIALLY DURING THE WINTER TIME. THERE'S CURRENTLY A LOT OF COMPLAINTS
ABOUT THE SNOW. THERE'S ANPEN ELECTRICAL BOX. THERE'S -- I KNOW THEY'RE SAYING THAT THE PROPTY HAS BEEN TAKEN OVER BY PEOPLE. I HAVE REACHED OUT TO PEOPLE TO LET THEM KNOW THERE WERE PEOPLE IN THERE. I SAW NO ACTIVITY ON SECURING THE BUILDING NOR GIFTIN GETTING PEOPLE OUT. NOR WORKING TO MAKE SURE PEOPLE DIDN'T GET BACK IN. SO, YOU KNOW, NEIGHBORS ARE UET WITH HOW THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN KEPT. THE EFFECT IT'S HAD ON THE
NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S BEEN LET TWO. THERE'S NO PLOWING. THERE'S NO GRASS REMOVAL. PEOPLE ARE IN AND OUT OF THIS PROPERTY. THIS IS A VERY SMALL AREA WITH A LOT OFAMILIES. THERE'S ACTUALLY A PASTOR THAT LIVES ACROSS THE STREET THAT HAS REACHED OUT ABOUT -- COULD HE RENT THE CHURCH FOR HIS SERVICES. I MEAN, THIS IS A VERY RESIDENTIAL BLOCK. THERE'S BEEN AN OVERWHELMING AMOUNT OF COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE UPKEEP. AND I NT TO END WITH SAYING, YOU KNOW, I SUPPORT THE HERITAGE
PRESERVATION COMMISSION'S REPORT ON STUDYING THIS FOR POTENTIAL HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE. I THINK HAVING THE TIME TO DO THAT MATTERS A L TO THIS COMMUNITY. TO FIGURE OUT IF IT IS ON -- IF IT SHOULD BE PRESERVED AS A HISTORICAL LANDMARK. AND THE PROPERTY AND THE PROJECT HAS BEEN SITTING. I KNOW HOW IMPORTANT AFFORDABLE HOUNG IS TO THIS COMMUNITY. BUT I ALSO KNOW THAT PEOPLE IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD REALLY WANT TO SEE
THIS HISTORICAL PRESERVATION DESIGNATION THROUGH. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER ELLISON. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. IT ALWAYS MAKES ME AT NERVO TO BE AT ODDS WITH MY NORTH SIDE COUNTER PART. I KNOW SHE'S A FICE ADVOCATE FOR HER WARD. I FEEL LIKE THIS -- THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS I WANT TO SPEAK ON TO THIS ITEM. ONE IS THAT IT SOUNDS LIKE, YOU KNOW, WE AS COUNCILMEMBERS WE EXPERIENCE --
WE IN OUR COMMUNITIES EXPERIENCE THESE PROPERTIES. THESE, YOU KNOW, AS HOLISTICALLY. RIGHT. BUT IN A QUASI JUDICIAL MATTER. WE'VE GOT TO SPLIT HAIRS A LITTLE BIT HERE. WE CAN'T SPEAK TO THE EFFICACY OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS ISSUE. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRG, MR. ATTORNEY, BUT IT'S NOT JERMAINE TO THE ISSUE AT HAND. WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUTE HISTORIC SITE. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE N START TO DISCUSS THE
ARCHITECTURE OF OF A FUTURE BUILDING, YOU KNOW, WHEN THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE TO DISCUSS. WE'VE SEEN, ALSO, EVEN WHEN IT COMES TO I'M HEARING WHAT COUNCILMEMBER VETAW IS SAYING ABOUT THE UPKEEP OF THE SITE. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED. AND SO I HOPE THAT REG SERVICES, I HOPE THAT THE COUNCILMEMBER, I HOPE THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTYAN ALL GET TOGETHER TO TALK ABOUT WITH COMMUNITY ABOUT SHOVELING, THE ABOUT PLOWING, ABOUT SECURING
THE SITE TO MAKE SURE PEOPLE AREN'T LIVING IN THERE. THAT'S AN ISSUE WITH, MR. ATTNEY, WE CAN'T COMPEL. THIS ISN'T AN APPROPRIATE AVENUE TO COMPEL THOSE KINDS OF CHANGES ON THE SITE. OR WOULD IT? >> THANK YOU. COMMITTEE MEMBERS, YOU ARE CRECT. THIS IS A NARROW QUASI JUDICIAL MATTER. I CERTAINLY RESPECT AND UNDERSTAND IT'S ONE PART OF A LARGER POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENTND THOSE ARE CRITICALLY IMPORTANT
ISSUES THAT WRAP AT A LOT OF IMPORTANT ISSUES FOR THE CITY. BUT REVIEWING COURTS WILL I ARE STRICT THE CITY'S REVIEW IN IN MATTER TO THE RECORD BEFORE IT. AND NOT TO MY CONTACTS OR MEETINGS THAT MAY HAVE TAKEN PLACE IN PRIOR YEARS. AND NOT WITH REGARDS TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ON THE BACK END. BUT TO THE FINDINGS THAT ARE REQUIRED AND THAT ARE ENUMERATED IN THE STAFF REPORT. IF YOU LOOK AT THE COMPETING FINDINGS, CAUSE WE DO HAVE A SET OF FINDINGS FROM THE STAFF REPORT
THAT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE DEMOLITION AND THEN WE HAVE A SET OF FINDINGS FROM THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION, WHICH RECOMMEND THE DENIAL OF THE APPLICATION FOR DEMOLITION. AND THE ONLY RESPECTS IN WHICH THEY DIFFER ARE WITH REGARD TO CRITERIA FOUR AND SIX IN THE LANDMARK DESIGNATION STUDY. THERE'S BEEN SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT. QUITE A BIT OF DISCUSSION, AS THERE SHOULD BE, WITH REGARD TO THOSE CRY TI CRITERION
AND THOSE FINDINGS THAT NEETO BE MADE AND SOME OF THE ISSUES. WHETHER IT'S THE BEST EXAMPLE OF THIS TYPE OF ARCHITECTURE. OTHER THINGS ALONG THOSE LINES. BUT I WOULD, IN TERMS OF GUIDANCE, THIS COMMITTEE'S DECISION NEEDS TO BE BASED PURELY ON THE REQUIRED FINDINGS THAT ARE ENUMERATED IN THE STAFF REPORT. AND THAT'S T FOR CLOSING ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER. BECAUSE TWO DIFFERENT BODIES CAME TO DIFFERENT CONCLUSIONS WITH REGARD TO THOSE REQUIRED FINDINGS. BUT IT IS THOSE FINDINGS THAT ARE AT ISSUE HERE TODAY. AND NOT ENFORCEMENT
ISSUES ON THE PROPERTY, AND NOT POTENTIAL DESIGN COMPONENTS OF A FUTUREEVELOPMENT, WHICH WILL -- WOULD NEED TO HAVE INTENSIVE LAND USE REVIEW IN THE FUTURE. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. I'M GLAD IT'S COMING UP. IT SOUNDS LIKE SOME CONVERSATIONS NEED TO HAPPEN. BUT I ALSO WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE NARROW SCOPE IN WHICH WE'RE MAKING OUR DECISION. AND THEN ONE THING I WANTED TO ASK STAFF WAS ABOUT THE PROCESS OF
PRESERNG THE PROPERTY. IF WE DENY THE DEMO, THE SITE DOESN'T BECOME, LIKE, A HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT SITE. THERE'S STILL A PROCESS THAT NEEDS TO OCCUR, RIGHT, IN ORDER FOR THAT TO HAPPEN? AND WHAT'S THE TIMELINE ON THAT PROCESS? >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN AND COUNCILMEMBER ELLISON. YOU'RE CORRECT. IF YOU DENY. IF YOU UPHOLD THE HPC'S DENIAL, IT DOES -- THE HPC ALREADY KICKED
OFF WHAT IS CALLED A DIGNATION STUDY. THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY UNDER INTERIM PROTECTION FOR A YEAR. SO WITHIN THAT YEAR'S TIME, IT REALLY FALLS ON STAFF TO COMPILE A STUDY AND PUT TOGETHER EVERYTHING WE CAN FIND OUT ABOUT THE PROPERTY TO SEE IF IT RISES TO THAT LEVEL. SO THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND AT THE END OF THE YEAR, COULD NOT RISE TO THAT LEVEL. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> RIGHT. >> AND SO THANKOU. THAT'S ALL THE QUESTION I HAVE THERE. AND I'M GLAD THAT THIS HOLISTIC VIEW
OF THE PROPERTY IS COMING UP. I HOPE THE OWNS ARE HEARING THAT. I HOPE FOLKS ARE READY TO GET IN CONTACT WITH NEIGHBO AND COUNCILMEMBER VETAW. I HOPE THAT IF THERE WAS A PROMISE OR A SANCTUARY AND COMMUNITY SPACE, I HOPE IT CAN BE MET. BUT REGARDLESS OF THAT, EVEN IF THERE WAS GOING TO BE A SANCTUARY IN A NEW BUILDING. THIS WOULD STILL NEED TO BE DEMOED. AND FOR THAT REASON, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE
TO GRANT THE APPEAL. AND ALLOW FOR THE DEMO TO MOVE FORWARD. AND I HOPE MY COLLEAGUES CAN GET ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THEY HAVE ANSWERED. BUT I DO THINK THAT THE EVIDENCE IS POINTING US IN THAT DIRECTION. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH, COUNCILMEMBER ELLISON. I'LL RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER RAINVILLE. >> THANK YOU. SO TWO WEEKS AGO, SOME RESIDENTS BROUGHT FORTH -- AND I PUT A COPY FOR ALL OF YOU. THERE'S SE SECURITY ISSUES. IS THERE SOMEONE HERE IN CHARGE
OF THAT PROPERTY? COULD SPEAK TO WHY THIS HASN'T BEEN CORRECTED? THIS PICTURE IS FROM YESTERDAY. >> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER. WOULD I HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO VIEW IT CLOSER? >> ABSOLUTELY. CAN ONE OF YOU GUYS RUN THAT DOWN? THANKS. >> KATE HAGER. REPRESENT PREMIER. I'M THE VICE PRESIDENT
OF THE FIRM. SO WE HAVE A SINKING OF CONCRETE. IS THAT WHAT I'M LOOKING AT HERE >> HE UTILITY BOX THAT IS OPEN. >> UTILITY BOX. >> AND PANEL ACCESS BOX. I'M NOT AN ARCHITECT, SO I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT NAME.
>> OKAY. UMM, CANDIDLY, THIS IS JUST COME TO MY ATTENTION JUST NOW. IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT I WAS AWARE OF. THAT I'M NOT AWARE THAT MY FIRM WAS AWARE OF. IF W HAD BEEN, I WOULD HAVE ENGAGED PEOPLE TO WORK THROUGH THAT. THERE ARE NO ACTIVE UTILITY SERVICES TO THE BUILDING. NOR HAVE THERE BEEN IN SEVERAL YEARS. BUT IT IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING WE SHOULD TAKE A LOOK AT AND REMEDY. >> CAN YOU SEE WHE A CHILD OR A PET WOULD FALL IN THERE. THAT IT'S DANGEROUS. >> ABSOLUTELY. ABSOLUTELY. AND BECOMING AWARE OF IT AND HAVING
AT CONVERSATION ALLOWS ME TO SOLVE IT. >> SO NONE OF THE REPRESENTATIVES FROM THIS ORGANIZATION THAT WERE HERE TWO WEEKS AGO INFORMED YOU OF THAT THE REQUEST TO FIX THE DANGEROUS SITUATION. >> NO. >> IS IT POSSIBLE TO SEND AN INSPECTOR OUT THERE AND MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S SOME TYPE OF CORRECTIVE ACTION? OBVIOUSLY THEY SAID THEY WOULD FIX IT. IT WAS TWO WEEKS AGO AND IT DID NOT HAPPEN. CAN THERE SOME
ENFORCEMENT TION WE CAN TAKE. >> MAY I ASK WHO THEY IS. >> WEVER THE REPRESENTATIVES WERE TWO WEEKS AGO FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> THERE WAS NOBODY HERE FROM OUR ORGANIZATION TWO WEEKS AGO. WE ASKED FOR A CONTINUATION. >> I'M NOT SAYING YOUR ORGANIZATION. I'M SAYING SOMEONE FROM THE CHURCH. WHOEVER IS BEHIND THIS PROJECT. >> CORRECT. NONE OF US WERE PRESENT AT LAS MEETING. >> AND I'M AGREEING WITH YOU. I'M SAYING IT'S UNFORTUNATE YOU'RE NOT INFORMED WHEN WE WERE PROMISED YOU WOULD BE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER, THIS MIGHT HAVE TO BE AN OFFLINE. WE DO HAVE TO STAY ON THE TOPIC, I BELIEVE, AT HAND. AND I THINK WE'RE VEERING A LITTLE FAR OFF. AND I AGREE THAT ENFORCEMENT CONVERSATIONS SHOULD BE HAPPENING. I DON'T KNOW THEY CAN HAPPEN ON THIS ITEM ON THE DAIS HERE NOW. >> AND I APPRECIATE THE ADVICE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'M GOING TO VOTE AGAINST THIS. I THINK WE SHOULD TAKE A MUCH MORE LONG-TERM APPROACH TO THE DIRECTIO DESTRUCTION OF
THIS CHURCH. >> > ALL RIGHT. COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN. >> THANK YOU, CHAIRSMAN. WHILE YOU'RE UP HERE. I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR YOU. SOMETHING THAT I'VE STRUGGLED WITH WIT A LOT OF NEW HOUSING DEVELOPMENT. IS JUST THIS IS ALL RENTAL HOUSING, CORRECT? >> CORRECT. >> CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY YOU DIDN'T GO FOR A CONDO ROUTE WHERE THE FOLKS WHO MOVE IN CAN ACTUALLY BUILD WEALTH BASED ON THEIR HOUSING INSTEAD OF JUST A RENTAL MODEL. >> SURE. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY. TO SPEAK TO THE
PROJECT. TO YOUR NOTE, COUNCILMEMBER, WE DID EVALUATE A LOT OF DIFFERE OPTIONS FOR THIS COMMUNITY. I HAVE ONLY BEEN INVOLVED IN THE PROJECT FOR THE LASTWO YEARS. I APOLOGIZE I CANNOT SPEAK TO PRIOR COMMITMENTS MADE. HOWEVER, REUSE OF T SPACE WAS EVALUATED AND FOUND NOT TO BE FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE. ESPECIALLY WITH THE BUILDING HAVING BEEN BROKEN INTO AND AFFECTED BY T CIVIL UNREST. THERE'S NO COVER. THERE'S NO HEATING. THERE'S NO SYSTEMS OF ANY SORT IN THE PLACE. NO COPPER. SO WE HAVE EVALUATED LOTS OF DIFFERENT WAYS
TO FINANCE AND UTILIZE THIS SPACE. MINNEAPOLIS NEEDS AFFORDABLE HOUSING. WE ARE SEEKING TO SUPPORT THOSE AT THE LOWEST INCOME BRACKETS, INCLUDING HIGH-PRIORITY HOMELESS, ANDEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES. SO THAT IS WHY CONDO SERVICE WAS NOT CHOSEN FOR THIS COMMUNITY. WE SPECIFICALLY ARE SEEKING TO PROVIDE HOUSING FOR THOSE IN NEED. >> I WANTED TO REMIND THAT WE WANTED TO REMAIN ON TOPIC. . YEAH. MY BAD. I WANTED TO
TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK ABOUT THAT. I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION TO GRANT THE APPEAL TO ALLOW THIS DEMOLITION TO MOVE FORWARD. I ACTUALLY SPOKE WITH A WARD 7 RESIDENT WHO WAS A PA R PARISHIONER AT THE CHURCH GOING BACK 55 YEARS AGO. HE TOLD ME THE LONG STORY OF HOW THEY, AS THE CHURCH COMMUNITY STARTED TO DWINDLE AND THEY LOST EIR RESOURCES, THEY DECIDED TO CONSOLIDATE AND MOVED INTO ANOTHER CONGREGATION AND LOOKED WHAT DO WE DO WITH THE PROPERTY. THE CHURCH PROPERTY. AND WHO TO SELL IT TO. AND THE
PARISHIONERS, IT WAS A PRIORITY OF THEIRS IT WOULD BECOME AFFORDABLE HOUSING AT THIS LEVEL. AND THIS IS A RESIDENT OFINE WHO IS IN HIS 80s WHO WANTS TO SEE THIS THROUGH. AND I THINK THAT I WE HOLD UP THE DEMOLITION, WE'RE THEN HOLDING UP THE DEVELOPMENT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING. INDEFINITELY. AND I WANT TO SEE THIS HOUSING, THIS AFFORDABLE HOUSING COME TO FRUITION IN THE NEXT CHAPTER. AND I WANT TO SEE THEIR FORMER
CONGREGATION'S WISHES COME TO FRUITION. SO I WILL VOTE TO ON THE MOTION TO GRANT THE APPEAL. THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. I WOULD RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER JENKINS. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSM. MY QUESTION. THERE WAS A MENTION OF CONDEMNATION OF THE BUILDING. AND I'M CURIOUS FROM STAFF, WHAT IS THAT PROCESS? WHAT DOES IT MEAN? >> I'LL RECOGNIZE DIRECTOR. .
>> >>: THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. COUNCILMEMBER JENKINS, I'LL HAVE TO LOOK INTO THAT. I DON'T HAVE THE DETAILS OF THE CONDEMNATION AT THE MOMENT. >> IF IT WERE CONDEMNED, WOULD WE REQUIRE THE OWNER TO DELL DEMOLISH THE BUILDING? >> CHAIR OSMAN, COUNCILMEMBER JENKINS. IT DEPENDS ON WHAT'S
THE NATURE OF THE CONDEMNATION. IF IT'S DUE TO BOARDS ON THE WINDOWS. WE WOULD REQUIRE THAT THE BOARDS ARE REMOVED. IF THERE ARE OTHER LIFE SAFETY OR OTHER SAFETY ELEMENTS THAT ARE EGREGIOUS, WE WOULD REQUIRE THAT THE BUILDING BE BROUGHT UP TO THE CURRENT CODE. BUT THERE'S NOTHING THAT I CAN THINK OF, AT PRESENT, THAT WOULD REQUIRE T BUILDING TO BE DEMOLISHED. UNLESS IT WAS IN SUCH DISREPAIRE
ITSELF WAS UNSTABLE AND POSED AN IMMINENT SAFETY RISK. >> THANK YOU. >> COUNCILMEMBER CHOWDHURY. >> THANK YOU. I WAS JUST LOOKING AT THE STAFF REPORT AND THEN THE AHPC. AND TS IS PROBABLY A QUESTION FOR THE STAFF. YEAH. DON'T WANT TO MAKE YOU STAND THERE FOREVER.
THERE SEEMS TO BE A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWE THE HPC AND STAFF FINDINGS ON CRITERIA NUMBER SIX. EXEMPLIFYING THE WORK OF MASTER ARCHITECT WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT, IT DISCUSSES THAT THIS WAS DESIGNED BY ANRCHITECT GROUP THAT IS CONSIDERED A MASTER ARCHITECT. IT DOES NOT EXEMPLIFY THEIR WORK. AND I'M WONDERING IF YOU CAN KIND OFETAIL HOW STAFF GOT
TO THAT CONCLUSION. AND THEN HOW DID HPC GET T A DIFFERENT CONCLUSION. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. COUNCILMEMBER CHOWDHURY, THAT IS SOMETHING THATTAFF DID DISCUSS INTERNALLY. AT LENGTH. TO TALK ABOUT IF THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, THE BEST EXAMPLE OF THISFT EVALUATION AND THROUGH THE RESEARCH WE DID, DID DETERMINE THAT CHURCHE THEMSELVES AREN'T
TO THE LEVEL THAT WOULD EXEMPLIFY THE FIRM'S WORK. THE BUILDINGS THAT WE NOTED, THE PILLSBURY CLUB, THE FARMERS AND MECHANICS BANK. IT'S CURRENTLY KNOWN AS THE WESTIN HOTEL DOWNTOWN. THAT'S ONE THAT IS NATIONAL REGISTER LISTED BUT NOT LOCALLY DESIGNATED AS A LANDMARK. THERE ARE DIFFERENT EXAMPLES WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE BODY OF THE FIRM'S WORK, THAT WE SEE OTHER AREAS WHERE THESE BUILDIN WOULD BE WORTHY
OF DESIGNATIONS. AND IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY FALL ON THE CHURCH BUILNGS THAT THEY DESIGNED. AND I BELIEVE THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION DISAGREED WITH THAT. AND MAYBE THOUGHT DIFFERTLY. SO THERE'S AN ELEMENT OF DISAGREEMENT THERE. >> GOT IT. AND GOING BACK TO SOMETHING THAT YOU MENTIONED BEFORE. THERE WOULD BE A YEAR-LONG STAY SHOULD ANYTHING -- SHOULD A DEMOLITION PERMIT BE GRANTED. CORRECT?
BEFORE DETERMINE IN ADDITION CONTINS. BECAUSE HPC IS DOING A STUDY. CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT AGAIN.>> SURE. YES. SO THE STY ACTUALLY GOES AWAY, IF THE DEMOLITION HAS GRANTED APPROVAL. IF THE DENIAL OF DEMOLITION IS UPHELD AND GOES FORWARD, AT THEIR MEETING ON DECEMBER 16th, THE HER HERITAGE PRESERVATION MMISSION. IF THEY'RE GOING TO
DENY A BUILDING, PLACE IT UNDER INTERIM PROTECTION AND CALL FORF THE DEMOLITION IS -- THE DENIAL IS UPHELD. THAT STUDY DOES HAVE TO CONTINUE. IF THE HPC'S DENIAL IS OVERTURNED AND THE DEMOLITION IS APPROVED, THEN THAT STUDY WOULD NOT HAPPEN ANYMORE. SO THEROPERTY COULD RECEIVE A WRECKING PERMIT APPROVAL FROM THAT POINT FORWARD. >> THAT MAKES SENSE. SHOULD THE
STUDY PROCEED? THERE ARE TWO OUTCOMES. IT'S EITHER DESIGNED AS HISTORICAL OR NOT. AND IF IT'S DESIGNATED AS HISTORICAL, THENHERE'S A LEVEL OF PRESERVATION THAT NEEDS TO OCCUR. IF IT'S NOT, THE PROPERTY OWNER COULD MOVE FORWAR ON WHATEVER THEY WOULD LIKE TO DO AND NOT HAVE TO STICK WITHIN THE CONSTRAINTS OF HISTORICAL PRESERVATIONS, IS THAT RIGHT? >> THAT'S CORRECT. ES. ONE THING TO NOTE, AS WELL, WHILE THE PROPERTY IS UNDER INTERIM
PROTECTION, IT IS SUBJECT TO ALL PRESERVATION REVIEWS THROUGH THE CITY. 23 THAT'S SOMETHING THE TEAM WOULD REQUIRE APPLICATN REVIEW FOR. IT'S THE SAME PROCESS. THAT'S CORRECT THAT YOU MENTIONED. IF IT EVENTUALLY WOULD GO FORWARD AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S STUDIED AND THROUGTHE STUDY, IT'S DETERMINED BY COUNCIL IT ACTUALLY IS NOT WORTHY OF LANDMARK STATUS, YOU KNOW, A YEAR LATER, ANDHAT DOES NATION
IS DENIED. THEN THE PROPERTY OWNER, AT THAT POINT, COULD DEMOLISH THE BUILDING. OTHERWISE THE OPPOSITE. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. AND I ALSO WILL NOTE, I SEE -- I THINK STAFF MAKES A PRETTY GOOD CASE ON CRITERIA NUMBER FOUR THAT THE
PROPERTY EMBODIES DISTINCTIVE CHARACTERISTICS OF AN ARCHITECTURE OR ENGINEERING TYPE OR METHOD OF CONSTRUCTION. STAFF IS SAYING IT DOES NOT. AND IT'S WORTH LOOKING AT WHAT THEY'VE LAID OUT IN THE NUMBER OF CHURCHES THAT DO HAVE THAT TYPE OF DESIGNATION. I DO SEE THAT THERE'S A CLEAR SEPARATION. RIGHT NOW I AM INCLINEDO SUPPORT THE PERMIT. I KNOW
WE'VE HAD DIFFERENT DISCUSSIONS UP HERE. I WOULD BE REM REMISS TO SAYT'S DEEPLY REGRETTABLE THAT MAINTENANCE OF THE PROPERTY HASN'T CONTINUED WHILE UNDER OWNERSHIP. WE, AS A CITY, ACROSS THE BOARD, EXPECT EVERYONE TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS TO ONE ANOTHER. AND I REALLY DO APPRECIATE AND UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS THAT COMMUNITY MEMBERS HAVE BROUGHT UP.
>> THANK YOU. I WANT TO REMIND THE MEMBERS THAT WE HE A LENGTHY AGENDA TODAY. AND WE HAVE TO BE OUT OF HERE BY 4:15. I WOULD RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER JENKIN. . OH. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. TT'S ALL.
I WILL HAVE THE CITY CLERK CALL THE ROLL. FOR COUNCILMEMBER ELLISON'S MOTION. >> ON THE MOTION OF ELLISON'S MOVE TO GRANT THE APPEAL. COUNCILMEMBER RAINVILLE. >> NO. >> CASHMAN. >> AYE. >> JENKINS. [ AWAY FROM MIC ] >> CHOWDHURY. >> AYE. >> VICE CHAIR ELLISON. >> AYE. >> CHAIR OSMAN. >> AYE. >> THERE ARE FOUR AYES AND TWO
NAYS. >> ALLIGHT. THAT MOTION PASSES. NOWE HAVE A ANOTH QUASI JUDICIAL. CERTIFICATE OFG REGARDING THE DECISION OF HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION. I'LL ASK -- TO SPEAK ON THE ITEM. WELCOME.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. SIOR CITY PLANNER IN THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ECONOMICE TODAY TO PRESENT AN APPEAL OF A CONDITION OF THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION OR HPC'S APPROVAL OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS APPLICATION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 204 FIFTAVENUE SOUTHEAST IN THE SAINT ANTHONY FALLS HISTORIC DISTRICT. I'LL BRILY INTRODUCE THE PROJECT, SUMMARIZE THE DECISION, AND SUMMARIZE THE APPEAL. HERE IS AN AERIAL VIEW
OF THE PPERTY'S LOCATION. THE HOUSE WAS BUILT CIRCA 1902 AND CONSIDERED A CONTRIBUTING RESOURCE TO THE SAINT ANTHONY FALLS HISTORIC DISTRICT. THE APICANT IS PROPOSING TO MAKE SEVERAL EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS TO THE PROPERTY, INCLUDING WINDOW AND DOOR REPLACEMENT, REPLACEMENT OF A SIDE STAIRCASE WITH A BALCONY, AND FRONT STOOP AND REAR DECK. NEXTWO SIDES, SHOW THE FOUR SIDES OF THE HOUSE. WHAT IS PLANNED TO BE REMOVED IN RED. AND WHAT IS PROPOSED IS ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF
EACH SLIDE. ON JANUARY 7, 2025, THIS APPLICATION WAS HEARD BY THE HPC. STAFF RECOMMENDED APPROVAL WITH FIVE CONDITIONS. HPC ADOPTED STAFF FINDINGS AND MODIFIED THE WORDING OF TWO CONDITIONS. PPROVED THE APPLICATION WITH FIVE CONDITIONS, ULTIMATE. THE APICANA APPLICANT AGREES. ANDT RELATES TO WHETHER OR NOT HISTORIC WINDOWS SHOULD BE REPAIRED OR REPLACED AT THE PROPERTY. HERE ARE
REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOS OF HISTORIC WINDOWS FOUND AT THE PROPERTY. IN THE HPC'S DISCUSSION OF THE ITEM, THEY AGREED WITH STAFF'S ANALYSIS AND FELT THAT THERE WAS NOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE PROVIDED TO SHOW THAT THE WINDOWS ARE DETERIORATED BEYOND REPAIR. IN ORDERED TO JUSTIFY REPLACEMENT. THE APPLICATION INDICATED THAT THE WINDOWS LEAK AND ARE DRAFTY. HPC'S OPINION, THE PHOTOGRAPHS PROVIDED SUGGESTED THAT THE WINDOWS COULD BE REPAIRED INSTEAD OF REPLACED. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF THE HPC'S DECISION BASED ON THE DESIGN
GUIDELINES AND THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS. WHICH INDICATE THAT REPAIR IS GENERALLY PREFERRED BEFORE REPLACEMENT ESPECIALLY WITH HISTORIC MATERIALS. THE APPELLANT IS THE PROPERTY OWNER. AND THEY ARE ASKING THAT YOU STRIKE CONDITION NUMBER THREE AS FOLLOWS: HISTORIC DOUBLE HUNG PICTURE-LEADED ENCASEMENT WINDOWS SHALL BE REPAIRED AND NOT REPLACED. IN PARTICULAR THE LEADED WINDOWS SHALL BE RETAINED. IN THEIR APPEAL, THEY PRIDED MORE SPECIFIC DETAILS ABOUT THE CONDITION OF THE
WINDOWS THAN INCLUDED IN THEIR APPLICION. THEY DESCRIBE EXTENSIVE WATER DAMAGE TO THE PROPERTY, WHICH HAS IMPACTED THE CONDITION OF THE WALLS AND WINDOWS. THEY NOTE CONCERNS ABOUT ROTTEN WOOD, BROKEN PARTS, AND MOLD. THEY ASSERT THAT MORE THAN HALF OF THE WINDOWS HAVE MISSING OR NONFUNCTIONING PARTS. THEY HAVE EXPRESSED CONCERN THAT SOME WINDOWS MAY NOT BE UP TO CODE AND THE CURRENT ARRAY OF WINDOWS ARE A MISMATCH OF VARIOUS TYPES. STAFF RECOGNIZE THAT SOME OF THE ISSUES MAY BE DIFFICULT TO SEE IN STATIC PHOTOGRAPHS. IT'S HELPFUL TO HAVE ADDITIONAL CONTEXT BEFORE
YOU. IF YOU CHOOSE TO GRANT THE APPEAL AND STRIKE CONDITION NUMBER THREE, IT WOULD NOT BE NECESSARY TO MAKE NEW FINDINGS. STAFF HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS EITHER FOR THE HPC MEETING ON JANUARY 7, OR FOR TODAY'S HEARING. THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. I'M HAPPY TO STAND FOR QUESTIONS. THE APPELLANT, CRAIG HARRIS, IS HERE AND WOU LIKE TO GIVE A PRESENTATION. >> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. ALL RIGHT. FIRST, I'LL HAVE THE APPELLANT TO COME
SPEAK. AND THEN ANYBODY ELSE SIGNED UP CAN SPEAK. WELCOME. >> HELLO. THANKS. I'M CRAIG HARRIS. CHAIR OSMAN AND COUNCILMEMBERS, THANK YOU FOR THE CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF OUR REQUEST THAT IS BEFORE YOU. AND FOR PROVIDING ME WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK FOR A FEW MINUTES ABOUT THIS HOUSE. WE SUBMITTED A DETAILED APPEAL. I KNOW YOUR TIME IS LIMITED. I'M GOING TO BE BRIEF AND HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.
MY WIFE CANDY AND I MOVED INTO AN EARLY 20th CENTURY HOME IN IN 1994. AND WE HAVE BEEN COMMITTED AND ACTIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR THREE DECADES. WE TOOK OWNERSHIP A SECOND HOME. THIS ONE NEAR SAINT ANTHONY THAT WAS IN SERIOUS DISREPAIR WHEN WE ACQUIRED IT. WE OBTAINED HALF A MILLION DOLLAR LOAN TO REMODEL THE HOME AND ITS ADJACENT CARRIAGE HOUSE. THE CARRIAGE HOUSE IS NOW COMPLETED. AND IT LOOKS IMPECCABLE! IF YOU
GO DOWN SECOND STREET SOUEAST, THE CARRIAGE HOUSE IS THE MOST PROMINENT FEATURE THAT YOU'LL SEE ON THE PROPERTY. IT HAS BRAND NEW WINDOWS, AND ARE ALIGN WITH THE HISTORIC NATURE OF THE OPERTY. AND THIS WAS APPROVED BY HPC IN 2017. OUR INTEN IS TO BRING THE MAIN HOUSE TO THE SAME HIGH LEVEL OF FINISHES AS THE CARRIAGE HOUSE BRINGING IT UP TO A LEVEL OF EFFICIENCY THAT IS APPROPRIATE TO PRESERVIN THE HOME AND ENSURING THAT IT'LL BE STANDING FOR YEARS TO COME. WE APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT HPC
DOES AND WE'RE GRATEFUL THEY APPROV OUR RENOVATION PLANS. AS YOU KNOW, TWER APPEALING THIS NDITION ABOUT REPAIRING EXISTING WINDOWS. AND WE'VE GONE THROUGH THISROCESS WITH HPC TO REPAIR THE HOME'S EXTERIOR. THIS WAS IN DESPERATE NEED OF REPLACEMENT IN MANY AREAS. AND THE PROCESS HAS BEEN LENGTHY. AND OUR VIEW IS WE'RE DISAPPOINTED WE DIDN'T GET THE OPPORTUNITY TO REPLACE THESE WINDOWS WITH NEWER, UPGRADED WINDOWS. AND FORCED TO KEEP THE
WINDOWS, WHICH ARE OLD AND IN DISREPAIR, AND WILL NOT STAND THE TEST OF TIME. AS YOU CAN SEE, FROM OUR CONTRACTORS' TESTIMONIAL, FINDING SOMEONE TO REPAIR THE WD WINDOWS THAT HPC WANTS US TO KEEP WOULD BE NEAR IMPOSSIBLE. VY DIFFICULT. EVEN IF WE COULD FIND SOMEBODY TO DO THE WORK. IT WOULD BE EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE AND TIME CONSUMING. AND IT WOULD LIKELY ADD MANY THOUSANDS OF ADDITIONAL DOLLARS AND TAKE SEVERAL MORE MONTHS TO FINISH T PROJECT.
NOW CURRTLY THE 1970 STORM WINDOWS ARE IN FRONT OF MOST OF THE OLD WINDOWS. SO YOU CAN'T EVEN VISUALLY SEE THE ORIGINALS. BECAUSE THE OLD WINDOWS ARE SINGLE PANE WINDOWS, IT WOULD HAVE TO PUT NEW STORM WINDOWS TO PROTECT THE HOUSE ANYWAY FROM THE MINNESOTA WINTERS. SO THE HISTORIC WINDOWS, EVEN IF REPAIRED, WOULDN'T BEEEN VERY WELL. NOW WE UNDERSTAND THE VALUE OF HISTORIC WINDOWS. WE'D
LOVE TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT. BUT IT'S JUST NOT PRACTICAL IN THIS CASE. AND WE THINK IT'S NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE HOUSE. AND IT'S UNFAIR. FIRST, BECAUSE THEY APPROVED THE WINDOW AND DOOR REPLACEMENTS ON THE CARRIAGE HOUSE ON THE SAME PROPER ALREADY. WITH NO ISSUE. AND SECOND, THEY APPROVED THE SAME REQUEST FOR FULL WINDOW AND DOOR REPLACEMENTS FOR THE NEIGHBORS DIRECTLY TO THE NORTH. PASSERS
BY WILL NOT SEE THE HOM AS AN EXAMPLE OF PRESERVED ARCHITECTURE. BUT MORE AS A MISMATCH OF RENOVATION THAT STICKS OUT. LIKE A SORE THUMB. WE'RE ASKING FOR THE SAME CONSIDERATION THAT WAS ALLOWED FOR THE CARRIAGE HOUSE AND FOR THE NEIGHBORS HOUSE SO WE'RE ABLE TO CREATE A BEAUTIFULLY RENOVATED HISTORICAL HOUSE THAT ISCONOMICALLY AND ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE. AND ESTHETICALLY CONSISTENT WITH THE LOOK OF THE CARRIAGE HOUSE AND THE NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE. WE BELIEVE THIS IS THE BEST AROACH TO PRESERVING THE ICONIC HOME.
THANKS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. WE'LL CONTINUE TO RECEIVE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THE ITEM? SEEING NONE. I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER RAINVILLE. >> THANK YOU. I'MOING TO MOVE TO UPHOLD THIS APPEAL. I SAY THAT BECAUSE OF THE WILLINGNESS OF THE APPLICANT TO SPEND A HALF A MILLION DOLLARS ON THE DETERIORATED HOUSE. YOUR WILLINGNESS TO APPROVE IT IS WELL TAKEN. AND YOU SHOULD BE
TREATED THE SAME AS THE CHARGER CARRIAGE HOUSE TREATED AND THE NEIGHBOR WAS TREATED. IT'S A QUESTION OF FAIRNESS AND EQUITY. >> THANK YOU. >> COUNCILMEMBER ELLISON. >> DIDN'T MOVE FAST ENOUGH TO REMOVE MYSELF FROM QUEUE. I AGREE WITH COUNCILMEMBER RAINVILLE. AND, YOU KNOW, FOR ALL THE REASONS HE STATED. >> SURE. COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR. ONE QUESTION FOR STAFF. WHEN DOING
E ASSESSMENT. I APOLOGIZE IT'S IN THE PACKET. DO YOU LOOK INTO THE FEASIBILI AS IF THERE IS A CONTRACTOR WHO CAN DO THIS. AS THE APPELLANT RAISED THERE'S AN ISSUE THAT THERE'S NOT A CONTRACTOR TO DO THE WORK. >> THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. ASSESSING THE FEASIBILITY OF THE WORK IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE SPECIFICALLY EXPLORE. HOWEVER, IN OUR EXPERTISE WORKING WITH PAST PROJECTS, WE ARE FAMILIAR
WITH VARIOUS CONTRACTORS WHO DO HISTORIC WINDOW REPAIR PROJECTS. AND ONE OF THE DISCUSSIONS OF THE HPC MEMBERS, INCLUDING SEVERAL ARCHITECTS, WAS T ABILITY TO POTENTIALLY REPAIR WINDOWS. THAT BEING SAID, I THINK WITH THE INFORMATION PRESENTED IN THE APPEAL, THERE MAY HE BEEN GREATER CONCERNS WITH THE CURRENT WINDOWS THAN WERE FULLY ELABORATED WHEN THE HPC HEARD THE ITEM. >> OKAY. SO DOES THE HPC GIVE RECOMMENDATIONS ON THESE CONTRACTORS THEN TO THE PROPERTY
OWNERS THEY'RE WORKING WITH? >> AT THIS PARTICULAR HEARING, THEY DID NOT MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT TYPICALLY HAPPENS. BUT WE OFTEN DIRECT OUR APPLICANTS TO PRESERVATN SPECIALIST DIRECTORY THROUGH THE MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY, IF THEY'RE LOOKING FOR POTENTIAL CONTRACTORS. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. SEEING NONE, -- ALL THOSE -- COUNCILMEMBER RAINVILLE'S MOTION
TO GRANT APPEAL, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AND THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY. THE AYESAVE IT. AND THE MOTION CARRIES. ALL RIGHT. WE ARE ON DISCUSSION ITEM 13. A DISCUSSION EYE TEMPT RELATED TO THE PUBLIC HEARING WE HAD TWO MEETINGS AGO. CONSIDERING THE LOWRY HANDY STOP APPLICATION FOR EXTENDED HOURS OF OPERATION LICENSES. I'LL ASK MANAGER AMY TO PROVIDE US WITH
UPTE. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR OSMAN. COMMITTEE MEMBERS. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS AMY. THE MANAGER FOR LICENSES AND CONSUMER SERVICES. THIS IS THE CONTINUED APPLICATION FOR THE LOWRY HANDY STOP EXTENDED HOURS APPLICATION FOR THE GAS STATION. THE REQUEST FOR 24 HOURS A DAY FOR THE PUMPS AND SERVICE WINDOW FROM 12:00 A.M.TO 5:00 A.M. THIS BUSINESS HAS BEEN IN OPERATION SINCE 2007, AND IT IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE CORRECTION TO BE ABLE TO GET THEIR LICENSE T
BE RIGHT SIZED. THIS IS HOW THEY'VE BEEN OPERATING SINCE 2007. WE'VE HAD MEETINGS WITH THE COMMUNITY, AS CONCERNS CAME THE DAY BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND WE HAD MEETINGS WITH THE COMMUNITY. I HAD MEETINGS WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, AND THE OWNER. AND WE HAVE COME UP WITH A PLAN TO HELP ADDRESS THE CONCERNS FROM THE COMMITTEE. OR FROM THE NEIGHBORSHERE WE'RE GOING TO WORK ON SOME SIGNAGE AND TO DEAL WITH SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT HAPPEN OVERNIGHT. AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND I ARE
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR THIS LICENSE AT THIS TIME. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. ARE THERE ANY DISCUSSIONS WITH MEMBERS? I SEE COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN.>> THM GOING TO -- THERE'S A MOTION IN FRONT OF YOU. T'S PRINTED ALL FOR COMMUNITY MEMBERS. I'M GOING TO MOVE TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION. BUT UPON A NEW CONDITION BEING ADDED REQUIRING THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE LICENSE SECURITY TO BE PRESENT BETWEEN
12:00 A.AND 5:00 A.M. WHEN OPENED AND OPERATING. WE HEARD FROM A LOT OF COMMUNITY MEMBERS ABOUT SAFETY CONCERNS HERE. THEREAS A VERY HIGH NUMBER OF 9-1-1 CALLS RELATED TO THIS GAS STATION. AND I TNK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THE NEIGHBORS' SAFETY CONCERNS BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY. THAT WE BALANCE THEIR CONCERNS WITH, YOU KNOW, THE FINANCIAL VIABILITY OF THIS BUSESS. BUT BOTH SIDES NEED TO BE ABLE TO COMPROMISE. AND I THINK REQUING SOME SECURITY TO BE PROVIDED BETWEEN
12:00 A.M.AND 5:00 A.M.IS A REASONABLE REQUEST IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN THEIR 24/HOUR EXTENDED HOUR LICEN. >> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN, I PUT MYSELF IN QUEUE. I HAVE A QUESTION. THIS MOTION CAME NOT THAT LONG AGO. I THINK IT WAS THIS MORNING. I SAW IT. AND THANK YOU, FIRST, BEFORE THE STAFF AND FORHE OWNER AND, ALSO, THE RESIDENT TO MEET AND
COME TOGETHER AND COME UP WITH SOME KIND OF PLAN. BUT REQUIRING A SECURITY, I CAN IMAGINE THEOST OF THE OWNER. AND ARE THERE -- CAN YOU TALK ABOUT THE DATA, YOU KNOW, AROUND THAT TIME. WHAT IS THE 9-1-1 CALLS? WHAT IS THE -- WHAT ARE YOU HEARING FROM THE POLICE OFFICERS? ORHE INSPECTOR IN THAT AREA? >> CHAIR OSMAN, THANK YOUOR YOUR QUESTION. IN SPEAKING WITH INSPECTOR, THE INSPECTOR FOR THE
SECOND POLICE PRECINCT, HE REVIEWED, AGAIN, AFTER H HAD SIGNED THE SECURITY PLAN FOR THIS BUSINESS FOR THIS OPERATION IN NOVEMBER. UPON RECEIVING THE COMPLAINTS, HE DID REVIEW PERSONALLY THE CALLS. WE HAVE VERY, VERY LITTLE 311 CALLS. ALL THE CALLS FROM 9-1-1 . IT'S HIS UNDERSTANDING OF THE CALLS THAT MOST ARE GENERATED NEAR AND NOT NECESSARILY ABOUT THE LOCATION. SAID HE'S GOT MANY CALLS THAT ARE WHERE PEOPLE HAVE COME TO THE GAS STATI TO MAKE
THE CALL. OR THEY HAVE COME TO THE GAS STATION TO MEET THE OFFICERS. OR IT IS THE, YOU KNOW, MOST OBVIOUS LOCATION. SO HE IS NOT SEEING THAT THE BUSINESS IS THE NEXUS. T'S THEY'RE THERE. SO WE ARE NOT SEEING OF. AS FAR AS NUMBERS GO, I'LL HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU. >> NO. THAT'S GOOD INFORMATION TO HAVE. WHERE THE CALLS ARE COMING FROM. IT'S NOT JUST THE SINESS THAT IS CREATING THE ISSUE. OR THE CALLS ARE COMING FROM AROUNTHE AREA. I CAN
IMAGINE PEOPLE GOING THERE TO FEEL SAFE TO CALL THE COPS. I CAN IMAGINE THAT. ALSO, I WOULD LIKE TO MENTIONHAT WE HAVE BEEN JOINED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT YNE, WHO REPRESENTS THAT DISTRICT. I'LL RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER ELLISON. >> CAN IAVE COUNCIL PRESIDENT, WOULD YOU LIKE TO TAKE A MOMENT? >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. AND THANK YOU COMMITTEE MEMBERS. THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
CASHMAN, FOR CARRYING THIS AMENDMENT. I'VE HAD A NBER OF ESTABLISHMENTS IN MY WARD. IN FACT, LAST YEAR I HAD ANOTHER GAS STATION UNDER THE EXACT SAME CIRCUMSTANCES. THEY'VE BEEN OPERATING 24/7 FOR MANY, MANY YEARS. IT TURNED OUT THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE APPROPRIATE LICENSE TO HAVE THOSE OPERATING HOS. WE WERE ABLE TO RESOLVE THAT, ESPECIALLY AFTER A HUGE AMOUNT OF ENGAGEMENT FROM T
COM COMMUNITY, AS A RESULT OF A HOMICIDE THAT HAD TAKEN PLACE AT THE GAS STATION. THERE WAS A LOT OF COMMUNITY CONCERN WHAT WAS HAPPENING IN THE OVERNIGHT HOURS AT THE GAS STATION. THE RESOLUTION WAS GETTING THE OWNER'S AGREEING TO SECURITY GUARDS IN THE OVERNIGHT HOURS. WE HAD A SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCE WITH SOME OF YOU MAY REMEMBERED MRS. DESSERT DURING RAMADAN LAST YEAR. THERE WAS A SHOOTING NEAR THAT ESTABLISHMENT. , YOU KNO WHEN
I SPOKE TO THAT BUSINESS OWNER, IT HAPPENED DOWN THE STREET FROM HIS ESTABLISHMENT. AND HE COULDN'T SPEAK TO WHETHER OR NOT THEY WERE HIS PATRONS. BUT HE ALSO AEED TO DO SECURITY FOR PART OF HIS EXTENDED HOURS APPLICATION. AND I THINK THAT WAS A GOOD COMPRISE. I'M LOOKING TO TREAT THIS SIMILARLY. I'VE HAD A LOT OF COMPLAINTS FROM COMMUNITY. THEY DON'T WANT THIS TO BE 24 HOURS PERIOD. BUT
I WANT TO TRY TO BALANCE THE COMMUNITY CONCERNS WITH THE NEED OF THE BUSINESS TO STAY OPEN. I THINK THAT HAVING SECURITY IS A REASONABLE COMPRISE. AND I KNOW THAT STAFF HAD RECOMMENDED THAT WE REASSESS THIS IN THREE MONTHS. I THINK WE SHOULD REASSAYS THIS IN THREE MTHS AND SEE HOW THE OVERNIGHT IS GOING WITH THAT SECURITY. AND SEE ABOUT MAYBE BEING MORE LENIENT. BUT AT THIS TIME, I THINK IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE AND JUST CONSISTENT WITH OTHER ESTABLISHMENTS IN THE WARD TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THIS TYPE OF CONDITION ON THE LICENSE. SO I
APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION. >> COUNCILMEMBER ELLISON. >> THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND COUNCILMEMBER OSMAN, YOU MAY HAVE GONE OVER THIS ALREADY. BUT I KNOW THERE ARE CONDITIONS SO FAR PLACED ON THE BUSINESS. AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THIS ONE WAS NOT ABLE TO BE SEEN BY THE BUSINESS. HAVE THEY AGREED TO THIS? HAVE WE SHOWN THEM THIS? I'M SEEING A NO FROM STAFF.
>> CHAIR OSMAN, COUNCILMEMBER ELLISON. THE BUSINESS HAD MADE AWARE OF THIS CONDITION PROPOSAL THIS MORNING WHEN I WAS MADE AWARE OF IT. SO HE HAS NOT YET AGREED TO IT. WE HE HAD CONVERSATIONS IN THE PAST ABOUT THE CONCEPT OF LICENSE SECURITY. HE HAS DONE A COST STUDY ON HOW MUCH IT WOULD BE. HE'S PREPAREDDPREPARED TO DO IT IN THE SPRING AND SUMMER. AT THIS TIME, IT'S COSTPROHIBITO
THE POINT, HE WOULD NEED TO CONSIDER OPENING THE ENTIRE STORE INSTEAD OF THE SERVICE WINDOW IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD IT. WE'RE NOT SEEING EVIDENCE IT'S REQUIRED FOR THE COLD MONTHS. WE WOULD READDRESS THE CONVERSATION WARM MONTHS. HE WAS NOT AWARE OF THE CONDITION. >> SO A BUSINESS THAT HAS A SERVICE WINDOW AT THE HOURS WOULD HAVE TO OPEN UP ENTIRELY. I FEEL LIKE WOULD DEFEAT THE PURPOSE OF WHAT THE INTENT OF THE NEIGHBORS, WHICH TO SEE THE FOOTPRINT AT LEAST SHRINKED, IF NOT ALL THE WAY CLOSED DURING
THE HOURS. I, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK I CAN SUPPORT THIS CONDITION TODAY. I FEEL LIKE TODAY IS MY DAY WHERE I'M PISSING OFF MY COLLEAGUES WHO AREN'T ON THE COMMITTEE. I DON'T THINK I CAN SUPPORT THISTE BUSINESS OWNER TO BE MORE INVOLVED. I WOULD WANT TO SEE, YOU KNOW, -- YEAH. I'D WANT THERE TO BE -- WHENEVER YOU HAVE A BUSINESS THAT IS OUT OF
COMPLIANCE. AND, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. IT'S N ALWAYS THAT FOLKS ARE TRYING TO PULL A FAST ONE. IT'S SOMETIMES THAT WE AND EVERYBODY JUST SORT ASSUMES THEY'RE IN COMPLIANCE. AND WE FIND OUT THEY'RE NOT. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S THE CASE HERE. BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THAT COULD BE THE CASE HERE. WE'VE GOT THE BUSINESS COMING BEFORE US TRYING TO GET IN COMPLIANCE. AND I'M ALL FOR IMPOSING MORE CONDITIONS WHEN IT IS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY. I D GET A LITTLE BIT NERVOUS WHEN WE'RE SORTF FORCING
PRIVATE SECURITY ON EVERY SINGLE BUSINESS AND EVERY SINGLE APARTMENT BUILDING. WE'VE SEEN PRIVATE SECURITY BALLOON COSTS AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO THE POINT WHERE IT'S BECOMING A BIT OF A CRISIS FOR OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROVIDERS. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE HAVEN'T HAD TO CONTD WITH UP HERE. BUT IF A LOT OF PEOPLE HIT THE STREETS AND IF WE CAN'T HAVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE CITY BECAUSE THIS COST HAS BEEN INCURRED, AND IT IT'S HASN'T BEEN APPROPRIATELY PLANNED FOR AND PEOPLE CAN'T AFFORD IT. BUT WE'RE DEMANDING
IT AND THE COMMUNITY IS DEMANDING IT. I DON'T KNOW WHO IS HELPED BY THAT. I DON'T KNOW WHO IS ULTIMATELY KEPT SAFER BY THAT. AND SO IF, YOU KNOW, IF AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE IMPOSE THIS AND NOW THE BUSINESS HAS TO SHUT DOWN. OR HAS TO OPEN UP MORE OF ITS OPERATION, AND IT OPENS UP MORE OF ITS OPERATION AND BRINGS MORE FOOT TRAFFIC OR IT SHOUTS DOWN ENTIRELY AND NOW A VACANT, YOU KNOW, PROPERTY. I DON'T KNOW WHO IT HELPS. EITHER ONE OF THOSE SCENARIOS.
IT SOUNDS LIKE WE HAVE A BUSINESS WILLING TO REVISIT THIS IN THREE MONTHS. SOUNDS LIKE WE HAVE A STRONGER CASE TO REVISIT THIS AND COMPEL IT IN THREE MONTHS. AND SEE IF IT'S REQUIRED. I THINK WE SHOULD TAKE THE TIME AND WE SHOULD REVISIT IT THEN. I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD TAKE THIS ACTION TODAY. ESPECIALLY WHEN WE'VE GOT A BUSINESS OWNER WHO IS FINDING OUT ABOUT THE POTENTIAL, YOU KNOW, CONDITION JUST THIS MORNING. AND IT'S NOT A COSTLESS CONDITION. SO THAT'S
MY VIEW. I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THE AMENDMENT. BUT I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE UNDERLYING ITEM. >> YEAH. ALL RIGHT. COUNCILMEMBER RAINVILLE. >> THANK YOU. SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING THISMENDMENT. I BELIEVE IN LISTENING TO MY COLLEAGUE, PRESIDE PAYNE, AND I BELIEVE IN LISTENING TO THE NEIGHBORS. BECAUSE THAT IS WHO WILL BE HELPED. IT WILL BE SAFER FOR THE NEIGHBORS. ONE OF THE REASONS, PERHAPS, WHY THERS NOT AS MANY 9-1-1 CALLS,
IS BECAUSE THE POLICE PARK THEIR CARS IN THERE ON A REGULAR BASIS DUE TO THE VIOLENCE AND GUNS THAT COME THROUGH THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. SO AT THENED OF THE DAY, WE HAVE TO TELL THE TRUTH. UNFORTUNATELY GAS STATIONS, ICE CREAM SHOPS, BUSES, TRAINS HAVE BECOME PLACES OF VIOLENCE. AND WE CANNOT ACCEPT THAT VIOLENCE. AGAIN, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION TODAY. >> COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN. >> > THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. DEFINITELY HAVE SEEN GAS
STATIONS BE A PLACE THAT DOES ATTRACT SOME CRIME THROUGHOUT THE CITY. NOT SURE ABOUT ICE CREAM SHOPS. [ LAUGER ] I'LL SAY OPERATING A GAS STATION ALL NIGHT IS IS A PRIVILEGE. IT'S NOT A RIGHT. LIKE. YOU OW, YOU DON'T JUST GET PERMISSION TO OPERATE ANDELL GAS 24 HOURS A DAY. THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE GRANT ALL THE TIME. I THINK WE'RE FULLY WITHIN OUR RIGHTS AS A COUNCIL TO PUT THE CONDITION UPON THE
LICENSE. JUST ADD THAT. >> THANK YOU. AND CLERK, WE ARE TAKING THE VOTE FOR THE MOTION FIRST. CORRECT? FOR THE AMENDMENT. >> ON THE MOTION OF CASHMAN'S -- OH, I'M SORRY. ON CASHMAN'S MOTION. COUNCILMEMBER RAINVILLE. >> AYE. >> CASHMAN >> AYE. >> JENKINS. >> NAY. >> CHOWDHURY.
>> AYE. >> VICE CHAIR ELLISON. >> NO. >> CHAIR OSMAN. >> NO. >> THERE ARE THREE AYES AND THREE NAYS. >> THAT MOTN FAILS. NOW WE ARE GOING TO TAKE THE UNDERLYING MOTION FOR THE ITEM. CAN YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> COUNCILMEMBER RAINVILLE. >> COULD YOU PLEASE READ WHAT
WE'RE VOTING ON THE UNDERLYING MOTION. >> IT IS -- >> I'M READING IT NOW. NO. >> CASHMAN. >> NO. >> JENKINS. >> NAY. >> CHOWDHURY. >> NAY. >> VICE CHAIR ELLISON. >> AYE. >> CHAIR OSMAN. >> AYE. >> THERE ARE TWO AYES AND FOUR NAYS.
>> MR. CHAIR, UMM, THIS IS A BIT OF A PREDICAMENT. THAT MOTION WOULD HAVE BEEN TO GRANT THE LICENSE. SO I DON'T KNOW THE EXTENDED HOURS LICENSE. SO, UMM, IT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE TO MOVE THE MATTER FORWARD T THE FULL COUNCIL WITHOUT RECOMMENDATION. >> RIGHT. >> YEAH. >> I'LL MOVE THE ITEM WITHOUT RECOMMENDATION. >> PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> RAINVILLE. >> SO I HAD -- I WANTED TO SPEAK TO THE MOTION, PLEASE. >> OH. SORRY. COUNCILMEMBER RAINVILLE. >> THANK YOU. I AGREE WITH TS TO DELAY IT AND GIVE THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIME TO SPEAK WITH THE BUSINESS OWNER. AND I'LL BE VOTINGES. >> ARE THERE ANYONE ELSE? ANY MEMBERS? SEEING NONE. CLERK, WILL YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL TO
MO THE ITEM WITHOUT RECOMMENDATION. >> COUNCILMEMBER RAINVILLE. >> AYE. >> CASHMAN. >> AYE. >> JENKINS. >> AYE. >> CHOWDHURY. >> AYE >> VICE CHAIR ELLISON. >> AYE. >> CHAIR OSMAN. >> AYE. >> THERE ARE SIX AYE >> THAT MOTION CARRIES. NEX ITEM WE HAVE IS DISCUSSION ITEM AN UPDATE FOR INCLUSIONARY ZONING REQUIREMENTS IN THE UT FIVE HOUSING POLICY FROM
EVALUATION CONDUCTED BYHE STREET LEVEL ADVISORS. I WILL FIRST WELCOME HALEY TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM. >> ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR OSMA AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MY NAME IS HALEY. I'M A SENIOR PROJECT COORDINATOR ON CPED'S RESIDENTIAL FINANCE TEAM. OUR CONSULTANT FROM STREET LEVEL ADVISORS IS ALSO HERE.
AND WE WILL BE PRESENTING OUR PROPOSED UPDATES TO THE INCLUSIONARY ZONING POLICY. RICK WILL INTRODUCE HIMSELF DURING HIS PART OF THE PRESENTATION. SO BEFORE WE DIVE INTO THE PROPOSED POLICY UPDATES, I'LL GIVE AN OVERVIEW OF THE CURRENT POLICY. AND TALK ABOUT WHATUR POLICY REVIEW PROCESS LOOKS LIKE. AND THEN I'LL HAND THE MIC OVER TO RK. HE'LL DIVE DEEPER INTO THE ANALYSIS AND UPDATES. SO
INCLUSIONARY ZONING OR IZ FOR SHORT. AN ORDINANCE WITHIN THE ZONING CODE THAT HAS AN ASSOCIATED POLICY IN THE UNIFIED HOUSING POLICY. THE PERMANENT ORDINANCE AND POLICY WAS ADOPTED IN 2019, AND WENT INTO EFFECT IN 2020 TO ALIGN WITH THE ADOPTION OF THE CITY'S 2040 PLAN. THE POLICY WAS CREATED IN PANERSHIP WITH CITY STAFF, CONSULTANTS AT GROUNDED SOLUTIONS NETRK, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, AND DEVELOPERS. IT REQUIRES THAT NEW MARKET-CE PROJECTS PROVIDE SOME LEVEL OF
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON SITE OR PROVIDE ANOTHER PUBLIC BENEFIT SUCH AS PAYING A FEE THAT GOES INTO THE CITY'S AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND PROGRAM, OR THE MINNEAPOLIS HOMES PROGRAM. THE LZ POLICY WAS ADOPTED TO HELP CREATE MIXED INCOME COMMUNITIES, AND DIVERSIFY HOUSING OPTIONS THROUGHOUT THE CITY. AS WELL AS TO INCREASE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING SUPPLY, ALL OF WHICH ARE GOALS OF THE 2040 PLAN. MOST DEVELOPMENT OF NEW HOUSING IN MINNEAPOLIS OCCURS IN AMENITY-RICH AREAS
WITH ACCESS TO A VARIETY OF TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS, JOBS, GOODS, SERVICES, AND RECREATION. AT THE TIME OF POLICY ADOPTION WITHIN THERE WAS AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT THE MARKET ALONE WOULD NOT DELIVER NEW AFFORDABLE HOUSI UNITS TO THE EXISTING RESIDENTS, AND THAT CITY INTERVENTION MAY BE NEEDED TO SUPPORT MIXED INCOME HOUSING. INCLUSIONARY HOUSING IS INTENDED TO PROMOTE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND FULFILL THE GOALS OF THE CITY'S HOUSING PICIES BY ENSURING THAT MODERATELY
OF-PRICED HOUSINGS PROVIDED IN MIXED INCOME DEVELOPMENTS. SHORTLY BEFORE THE ADOPTION OF IZ, A STUDY WAS PUBLISHED BY PBE, THAT EXAMINED THE EFFECTS. USING METRO DATA. THE STUDY FOUND THE DEVELOPMENT OF MARKET RATE HOUSING CREATED A NEEDOR ADDITIONAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING ABOVE AND BEYOND THE EXISTING GAP IN THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING SUPPLY. THIS STUDY CONCLUDED IT WAS APPROPRIATE TO IMPLEMENT INCLUSIONARY ZONING POLICIES AND
REQUIRE MARKET RATE DEVELOPERS TO HELP FILL THAT NEED FOR ADDITIONAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING. A SUMMARY OF THIS STUDY IS ATTACHED TO THE RCA TO BE FILED AND RATIFIED SINCE THE STUDY WAS PUBLISHED, OTHER CITIES IN THE METRO HAVE SUCCESSFULLY ADOPTED IZ POLICIES. INCLUDING BLOOMINGTON, AND MIN MINNETONKA. I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT IZ ISNE TOOL THAT THE CITY USES TO CREATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. OTHER PROGRAMS LIK THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND ARE BETTER POSITIONED TO
ADDRESS THE NEED FOR DEEPLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND HOUSING FOR THOSE EXITING HOMELESSNESS SINCE PUBLISUBSIDY IS INVOLVED IN THOSE PROGRAMS. SO IZ APPLIES TO NEW RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS WITH 20 OR MORE UNITS, THAT SUBMIT A COMPLETED LAND USE APPLICATION. THIS INCLUDES BOTH RENTAL AND OWNERSHIP PROJECTS. THAT SAID, CURRENTLY OWNERSHIP PROJECTS AND RENTAL PROJECTS 20E CONVERSION PROJECTS, SINCE LAST
FALL, ARE EXEMPT FROM IZ. WHEN THE POLICY WAS ADOPTED, TEMPORARY EXEMPTIONS WERE PUT IN PLACE FOR OWNERSHIP PROJECTS AND SMALLER RENTAL PROJECTS, BECAUSE WE KNEW THAT THESE TYPES OF PROJECTS WOULD BE MORE FINANCIALLY IMPACTED BY INCLIONARY ZONING. AND, THEREFORE, MIGHT NEED MORE TIME TO ADAPT TO THE POLY. TO DATE, THERE ARE NO OWNERSHIP PROJECTS THAT ARE SUBJECT TO INCLUSIONARY ZONING. SO THE REMAINDER OF THE PRESENTATION AND OUR ANALYSIS WILL FOCUS PRIMARILY ON THE RENTAL MARKET AND REQUIREMENTS FOR RENTAL
PROJECTS. THE RENTAL IZ REQUIREMENTS INCDE BOTH ON-SITE COMPLIANCE OPTIONS AND ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS. THIS M MENU OF OPTIONS OFFERS FLEXIBLE TO DEVELERS TO CHOOSE WHAT WORKS BEST FOR THEIR OPTIONS. ON SITE INCLUDING 8% OF UNITS AFFORDABLE AT OR BELOW0% AMI FOR 20 YEARS. OR 4% OF UNITS AT OR BELOW 30% AMI FOR 20 YEARS. OR 20% OF UNITS AFFORDABLE AT
% AMI FOR 30 YEARS. WITH REVENUE LOSS OFFSET FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE, WHICH IS TIFF. ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS INCLUDE PAYING A CASH FEE OR PRODUCING REQUIRED USES OFF SITE. OR DONATING LAND T THE CITY. THE IZ POLICY WAS DESIGNED TO HAVE MINIMAL IMPACT ON THE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY OF MARKET-RATE PROJECTS. RICK WILL GO FURTHER INTO DETAIL ON HIS SLIDES. I'DA
GREAT RESOURCE FOR INCLUSIONARY ZONING, AND THAT IS OUR ONLINE DASH BOARD THAT STAFF MAINTAINS TO SHARE CUMULATIVE IZ DATA. THIS DASH BOARD IS FEATURED ON THE CITY'S DATA SOURCE WEB PAGE AND SERVES AS A RESOURCE TO STAFF, THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY, ENTHE MUST BE LICK ABOUT THE WORK. AS SHOWN IN THE SCREEN SHOT PROVIDED ON THE SLIDE, TO DAT WE HAVE PERMITTED 25 LARGE A-SCALE RENTAL PROJECTS. THESE PROJECTEDS HAVE
COLLECTIVELY PRODUCED 248 AFFORDABLE ON SITE UNITS AND 278 AFFORDABLE STUDENT BEDROOMS. MORE DETAILS ON THE AFFORD BILITYD LEVELS AND UNIT SIZES IN THESE PROJECTS CAN BE FND ON THE DASH BOARD. THE DASH BOARD ALSO SUMMARIZES PROJECTS THAT HAVE CHOSEN ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE OPTIONS LIKE PAYING A CASH FEE, ANDS A SNAPSHOT OF PROJECTS EXEMPT FROM INCLUSIONARY ZONING. THIS SLIDE IS ANOTHER SCREEN SHOT FROM THE OUR DASH BOARD THAT SHOWS THE GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION OF PROJECTS THAT HAVE COMPLIED WITH IZ, AND
THE COMPLIANCE OPTIONS THEY HAVE CHOAS CHOSEN. YOU CAN FURTHER EXPLOR THE LOCATION OF IZ PROJECTS BY WARD AND NEIGHBORHOOD WHEN YOU TOGGLE TO THE GEOGRAPHI SUMMARY VIEW OF THE IZ DASH BOARD. SO NOW WE'LL GET INTO THE POLICY REVIEW. FOR THE PAST YEAR, CPED HOUSING STAFF ALONG WITH PLANNING, DEVELOPMENTINANCE, AND THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH CONSULTANTS AT STREET LEVEL ADVISS TO CONDUCT A COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF INCLUSIONARY ZONING, WHICH IS
REQUIRED BY THE UNIFIED HOUSING POLICY EVERY THREE TO FIVE YEARS. THIS REVIEWNCLUDED A FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS TO ASSESS THE FINANCIAL IMPACT OF INCLUSIONARY ZONING ON RENTAL PROJECTS. AS WELL AS DEVELOPER INTERVIEWS, PEER CITY RESEARCH, AND IN EVALUATION OF HOW THE PROGRAM IS ADMINISTERED. I WILL NOW TURN THE PRESENTATION OVER TO RICK WHO WILL INTRODUCE HIMSELF AND TALK ABOUT OUR ANALYSIS EV AND PROPOSED UPDATES. . >> >>: THANK YOU. THANK YOU
FOR HAVING ME. I'M GLAD TO BE BACK HERE TALKING ABOUT THIS. I'M RICK. MY FIRM IS CALLED STREET LEVEL ADVISORS. WE WORK WITH CITIES AROUND THE COUNTRY ON HOUSING AFFORDABLE HOUSING POLICIES. ONE OF MY AREAS OF EXPERTISE IS INCLUSIONARY ZONING PROGRAMS LIKE THE ONE YOU HAVE HERE IN MINNEAPOLIS. I WROTE A BOOK ON THIS TOPIC. I WORK A LOT OF CITIES THAT IMPLEMENT THESEOLICIES, AND I HAVE A HIGH LEVEL OVERVIEW OF WHAT IS WORKING, WHAT IS THE CHALLENGES
ARE I DIFFERENT GEOGRAPHIES. AND I WAS ALSO PART OF THE TM THAT WORKED WITH GROUNDED SOLUTIONS NETWORK BACK IN 2018 TO 2019 WH MINNEAPOLIS WAS SETTING UP ITS POLICY INITIALLY. WHAT I WANT TO DO TODAY IS GIVE U A LITTLE BIT OF THE BACKGROUND AND THE MARKET CONTEXT FROM THE RESEARC WE'VE JUST COMPLETED. AND SHARE WITH YOU THE FINDINGS FROM OUR FEASIBILITY STUDY, AND THEN THE REPRESE RECOMMENDATIONS WE CAME TO. I WANT TO SAY TO UNDERSTAND THE MARKET, RELIED ON
INTEIEWS WITH LOCAL STAKEHOLDERS, REAL ESTATE DEVELOPERS, AND INVESRS ACTIVE IN MINNEAPOLIS. MANY OF WHOM WOULD PREFER THAT YOU DIDN'T HAVE THISOLICY, BUT NONETHELESS, LEANED IN AND GAVE US THEIR TIME AND THEIR DATA GENEROUSLY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN UNDERSTAND THE POLICIES SO YOU COULD UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT OF THE POLICY. SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE THANK THEM FOR THAT COOPERATION. WE HAVE -- I WANT TO TAKE YOU BACK A LITTLE
BIT TO 2018. WHEN WE STUDIED YOUR MARKET BEFORE. WHEN W HELPED YOU DEVELOP THE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING POLICY YOU HAVE IN PLACE NOW. AT THAT TI, WE DEVELOPED A SET OF PROPERTY TYPES, LIKE THE ONES I'M GOING TO SHOW YOU IN A FEW MINUTES WITH OF DIFFERENT RENTAL PROJECTS IN MINNEAPOLIS AND APARTMENT BUILDINGS AND WHAT THE MARKET RENTS WOULD BE AND HOW AFFORDABLE THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE. AND AT COUNCIL'S DIRECTION, WE SET AN AFFORDABLE TARGET FOR MOST O THE PROJECTS AT 88% OF THE UNITS AFFORDABLE AT 60% OF
AMI. AND WE SEE ON THE CHART IS THE 60% OF AMI RENTS WERE WELL BELOW THE MARKET RATE RENTS. THIS IS THE GOAL OF ALL THE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING POLICIES. RIGHT. TO CREATE TO SORT OF INDUCE DEVELOPERS TO CREATE UNITS THAT RENT AT A BELOW MARKET PRICE. THAT'S ENOUGH BELOW MARKET THAT WE'RE SERVING PEOPLE THAT WOULDN'T OTHERWISE BE SERVED IN NEW HOUSI IN THE CITY. BUT TO DO THAT IN SUCH A WAY THAT THE NET IMPACT ON FEASIBILITY IS SMALL ENOUGH THAT THE REQUIREMENTS DON'T BECOME A
REASON THAT WE DON'T GET THE HOUSING BUILT IN THE FIRST PLACE. AND THAT BALANCING ACT IS REALLY DIFFICULT. AND THE COUNCIL SPEND SPENT A LOT OF TIME. SO WE WOULD GET A MEANING AMOUNT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING. WHAT HAPPENED, IN THE MEANTIME, IS TT THE CITY AND THE BROADER REGION HAVE PERMITTED AND BUILT A LOT OF MULTIFAMILY HOUSING. AND THING IS LARGELY BEEN THE RESULTF
THE SORT OF COMPREHENSIVE SET OF STEPS THAT MINNEAPOLIS TOOK TO MAKE IT POSSIBLE FOR DEVELOPERS TO BUILD AND BUILD IN MORE PLACES, MORE TYPES OF HOUSING, AND THE RESULT HAS BEEN A DRAMATIC CHANGE IN THE AMOUNT OF HOUSING THAT HAS BEEN BUILT YEAR AFTER YEAR OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS. ONE OF THE INTENDED, I THINK, SCONCE CO CONSEQUENCES, RENTS HAVE REMAINEDELATIVELY FLAT SINCE WE ADOPTED THE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING POLICY. YOU SEE THE GREEN LINE IN THE CRT IS RENTS
GOING BACK TO 2015 ARE NOT SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHERHAN THEY HAVE BEEN. THAN THEY WERE. OVER THE PERIOD OF TIME, INCOMES HAVE CONTINUED TO RISE. A SO THIS IS THE REVERSE OF WHAT WE SEE IF YOU LOOK BACK OVER THE PRIOR 30 YEARS, RENTS WERE RISING FASTER THAN INCOMES. IN PART, BECAUSE MINNEAPOLIS HAS DONE SUCH A GOOD JOB AND ITS NEIGHBORS, HAVE DONE A SUCH GOOD JOB OF PERMITTING HOUSING. WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO SLOW THE GROWTH OF MARKETENTS IN THE CITY AND THE CITY HAS BECOME A MORE AFFORDABLE PLACE. IT ESN'T MEAN, HOWEVER, WE'VE
SOLVED THE AF AFFORDABLE USING NEED. IT MEANS WE HAVE SLOWED THE DEGREE TO WHICH THINGS ARE GETTING WORSE. BUT WHEN WE LOOK TODAY AT THE MARKET, WHAT WE SEE IS THAT BRAND NEW BUILDINGS COMING ONLINE ARE RENTING AT RENTS AT, IN MANY CASES, ARE AT OR JUST ABOVE THE 60% AMI AFFORDABLE LEVEL. IF YOU SEE ON THE CHART, THE LIGHT BLUE LINES ARE THE MARKET RENTS WE FOUND FOR BUILDINGS TODAY. AND THE DARK BLUE LINES ARE THE
AFFORDABLE RENTS. AND FOR THE STUDIOS, THE AFFORDABLE RENT IS HIGHER THAN THE TYPICAL MARKET RENT. FOR TWO AND ONE BEDROOMS. IT'S BELOW. BUT IT'S NOT BELOW BY AS MUCH AS WE ORIGINALLY HAD ANTICIPATED WHEN THE POLICY WAS ADOPTED. AND THIS IS GOOD NEWS. IN BROAD STROKES. IN TERM WAS AFFORDABILITY IN THE CITY. IT MEANS WE HAVE TO THINK A LITTLEE INCLUSIONARY POLICY WORKS. AND WE NEED TOAKE CHANGES. SO THE, AT THE SAME TIME, THE
MARKET CONDITIONS FOR BUILDING NEW HOUSING HAVE WORSENED SIGNIFICANTLY. IT'S GOTTEN MORE EXPENSIVE TO BUILD. AND INTEREST RATES HAVE SPIKED REALLY DRAMATICALLY. T HEY HAVE COME DOWN QUITE A BIT. THE RESULT OF THAT HAS BEEN RECENTLY BUILT BUILDINGS HAVE BEE SELLING FOR LESS THAN THEY COST TO BUILD THEM. DEVELOPERS ARE LOSING MONEY IN MULTIFAMILY HOUSING IN MINNEAPOLIS LATELY. WE ALSO HEARD FROM THE
INTERVIEWS THAT WE DID CONCERNS ON THE PART OF INVESTORS ABOUT THE POTENTIAL FOR RENT CONTROL IN MINNEAPOLIS. OR CONCERNS ABOUT CRIME AND POLICING ISSUES IN MINNEAPOLIS. AND I WANT TO SAY, WE DIDN'T INDEPENDENTLY VERIFY THAT'S A REAL INVESTOR CONCERN. BUT WE HEARD IT ENOUGH THAT I THOUGHT IT WAS WORTH MENTIONING TO YOU. THERE'S A TALKING, YOUNOW, OF CONCERN ABOUT THE CONDITIONS FOR INVESTMENT IN MINNEAPOLIS. AND CERTAINLY IT'S CLEAR THERE'S LESS INVESTMENT HAPPENING IN NEW
MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT IN MINNEAPOLIS. A GIVEN EXAMPLE, THIS IS A PROJECT THAT WAS COMPLETED IN 2014. THE BUILDING COST $86.3 MILLION. IT SOLD IN 2023 FOR $74 MILLION. WHAT YOU CAN SEE IN THE SMALL PRINT THERE, THE RENTS IN THAT BRAND NEW BUILDING, RELATIVELY BRAND NEW BUILDING ARE, ATTART, AT THE LEVELS THAT THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE INCLUSIONARY POLI ARE TARGETING. AT 60% OF AMI. THANK YOU. DIFFERENT
NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE CITY HAVE DIFFERENT RENT LEVELS. DIFFERENT BUILDINGS ARE ALL DIFFERENT. THERE'S NOT ONE TYPE THAT STANDS FOR EVERYTHING. BUT I THINK YOU CAN SEE DIFFERENT THE GENERAL TREND HAS BEEN TOWARD MORE AFFORDABILITY IN MANY PARTS OF THE CITY, THE AVERAGE RENT IS BELOW THE AFFORDABLE LEVEL WE SET OUT. IN TERMS OF OUR FEASIBILITY STUDY, I WANT TO SAY WHAT WE DID IS WE CONSTRUCTED A SET OF PROPERTY TYPES TH ARE NOT NECESSARILY THE REPRESENTATIVE EVERY POSSIBLE PROJECT. BUT TRYING TO GET AT THE TYPICAL PROJECT.
WHAT MIGHT A TYPICAL PROJECT LOOK LIKE. WE LOOKED AT FIVE DIFFERENT RENTAL PJECTS. THREE-STORY, A SIX-STORY, EIGHT-STORY, AND 12-STORY BRAND NEW CONSTRUCTION APARTMENT BUILDING AND OFFICE CONVERSION. WE LOOKED AT THREE DIFFERENT FOR-SALE PROPERTY TYPES. TOWNHOUSES, STACKED CONDOMINIUMS, AND CONDOMINIUM WER. WE COMPARED THEM BOTH ON THE PROFITABILITY METRICS. LIKE, THEY USE SLIGHTLY
DIFFERENT METRICS FOR RENTAL AND OWNERSHIP. BASED ON THEINTERVIW MUCH -- HOW PROFITABLE DOES A PROJECT HAVE TO BIN ORDER TO GET INVESTMENT AND MOVE FORWARD. WHAT WE FOUND IS THAT FOR ALL OF THE RENTAL HOUSING PROTOTYPES, THE PJECTS FELL SHORT THAT WE CONSTRUCTED. FELL SHORT OF THE PROFIT LEVELS WE THOUGHT WOULD BE NECESSARY FOR A PROJECT TO GET FINANCING AND MOVE FORWARD TODAY. THEY WERE NOT FEASIBLE. AND WHAT YOU SEE IN THE BLUE BARS, IS HOW FEASIBLE THE PROJECTS WOULD BE.
WHAT RETURNS WE WOULD EXPECT. IF THERE WEREO INCLUSIONARY HOUSING POLICY. AND IN THE ORORANGE BARS, YOU SEE WHAT THE RETURNS WOULD BE IF WE APPLIED 8% OF 60% AMI ON SITE. AND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THOSE IS THE IMPACT OF THE INCLUSIONARY ZONIN POLICY. AND I WANT TO SAY WHEN WE ADOPTED THE -- WHEN YOU ADOPTED THE POLICY BACK IN 2019, THE MODELING WE DID SHOWED MUCH LARGER DIFFERENCES. RIGHT. BECAUSE THE RENTS WERE LOWER RELATIVE TO MARKET. THE
DIFFERENTIALIAL OF PROFITABILITY THAT THE PROGRAM HAD ON PROJECTS WAGREATER. SO WE HAVE A SMALL DIFFERENCE RIGHT NOW. WE FOU THE SAME THING FOR OWNERSHIP PROJECTS. MOST OF THE PROJECTS WE LOOKED AT, WERE NOT ONLY PROFITABLE ENOUGH, THEY WER WEREN'T PROFITABLE AT ALL. THEY WERE LOSING MONEY. WE COMPARED THE COST OF COMPLIANCEN A PER-UNIT BASIS, AS WELL. AND WHAT THIS CHART IS SHOWING IS HOW VALUABLE THE BUILDING IS PER UNIT. YOU TAKE THE BUILDINGS'
TOTAL MARKET VALUE AND DIVIDE IT BY THE NUMBER OF UNITS WITH DIFFERENT REQUIREMENTS. SO THE FIRST BAR IS, IF IT WAS ONLY A MARKET RATE BUILDING AND NO AFFORDABLE UNITS. THE SECOND, IF WE COMPLY WITH THE ONSIT REQUIREMENT. 8% OF 60. AND THIRD, PAID IN-LIEU FEE. FOR THE SIX-STORY PROTOTYPE, THE DIFFERENCE COMES OUT TO A CHANGE IN THE VALUE OF THE BUILDING OF $2,600 PER UNIT. THAT'S ABOUT
1% OF THE VALUE OF THE BUILDING. SO INCLUSIONARY POLICY REDUCES THE VALUE OF THIS TYPICAL BUILDING BY 1%. THE IN-LIEU FEE REDUCES IT BY ABOUT 4.5%. WE ALSO LOOKED AT COST OF COMPLIANCE ON PER-SQUARE FOOT BASIS. AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE IN-LIEU FEW IS SIGNIFICANTLY MORE EXPENSIVE. IT WAS CALIBRATED ON THE ON-SITE REQUIREMENT. AND THE INTENTION HAVE IT BE AN OPTION BUT NOT A
LOWER-COST OPTION. NOW IT'S SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER COST. BECAUSE THE RENTS HAVE COME DOWN. SO LASTLY, I WANT T JUST SAY A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT DO WE DO WITH THE INFORMATION? IF NOTHINGS FEASIBLE. IT'S DIFFICULT TO THINK ABOUT HOW WHAT IT MEANS IF ARE THE POLICY. IF WE WERE DOING THIS KIND OF ANALYSIS WHEN THE MARKET WAS BOOMING AND EVERYONE BUILDING AND WERE CRANES IN THE S SKY. WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT OUR PROJECTS TYPICALLY PROPERTIABILITY ENOUGH TO AFFORD THE INCLUSIONARY REQUIREMENTS.
COULD THEY GO HIGHER. SLIGHTLY LOWER? CAN WE BE ABLE TO USE THE TOOL TO TEST DIFFERENT OPTIONS? BUT BECAUSE EVERYTHING IS INFEASIBLE THE AND INFEASIBLE, EVEN IF WE HAD NO INCLUSIONARY REQUIREMENT, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO DO THAT TYPE OF THING. IT'S NATURAL FOR A CITY TO LOOK AT THIS DATA AND SAY, "WELL, MAYBE WHAT WE NEED TO DOS LOWER THE INCLUSIONARY REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE THE MARKET IS DOWN." AND I WANT TOP SAY THAT WE'VE SEEN CITIES TRY TO EXPERIMENT WITH THAT. IT'S ACTUALLY FAIRLY COMMON FOR
CITIES TO TRY TO RESPOND TO THE DOWNTURN IN THE MARKET BY CHANGING THEIR POLICY. WHA WE HAVEN'T SEEN IS AN EFFECTIVE APPROACH. WE HAVEN'T SEEN ANY CITY COME UP WITH AAY TO DO IT THAT HAS WORKED. TO GET DONE WHAT THE CITY WANTS TO DO. AND I WANT TO POINT AT THREE DIFFERENT REASONS. ONE, MINNEAPOLIS PROVIDES INCENTIVES THAT OFFSET, AND IN SOME CASES, MORE THAN OFFSET THE COST OF COMPLIANCE. AND SO AS A DEVELOPER, YOU CAN CHANGE THE
PLANNING RULES. YOU CAN HAVE DIFFERENT STEPBACKS OR HEIGHT LIMITS. YOU CAN GET WAIVERS OF PERMITTING COSTS. A MOST IMPORTANTLY, YOU CAN GET -- YOU CAN ACCESS THE 4D TAX PROPERTY TAX ASSESSMENT SAVINGS. IF YOU INCLUDE AFFORDABLE UNITS UNDER THE INCLUSIONARY POLICY. AND THOSE INCENTIVES, FOR MOST PROJECTS, COVER MUCH OF THE COST. MUCH COMPLIANCE AND PARTICULARLY THE 4D COSTS CAN PAY MORE. >> NOT TO RUSH YOU, WHAVE TO GO A LITTLE FASTER. >> THE LAST THING I WANT TO
MENTION, IS WHERE CITIES HAVE TRIED TO ADJUST THEIR REQUIREMENTS, THEY MESSED UP THE TIMING. IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO TIME THE MARKET PROPERLY. SO TYPICALLY WHAT WE SEE IS A CITY TRIES TO LOWER THEIR REQUIREMENTS. GOING INTO DOWNTURN BUT BY THE TIME THE REQUIREMENTS ARE ADOPTED, THE MARKET IS STARTING TO RECOVER. AND THEN THE BUILDING HAPPENS WHEN THE REQUIREMENTS ARE LOW. AND THEN WHEN THE MARKET COMES BACK UP, SOMEONE WANTS TO LOWER IT. SO LET ME QUICKLY MENTION
THE RECOMMENDATIONS. YOU HEARD THEM BEFORE. BUT THE FIRST IS WE'RE SUGGESTING THAT YOU ADD A NEW OPTION TO ALLOW DEVELOPERS TO SERVE 50% OF MEDIAN INCOME INSTEAD OF 60. AND DO SLIGHTLY FEWER UNITS WHEN THEY D THAT. IT'S AN INCENTIVE TO MAKE IT FINANCIALLY EASIER FOR DEVELOPERS TO MEET THE MARKET WHERE THE MARKET IS. THE NEXT TO ALLOW THE OPTIONS FOR STUDENT HOUSING. THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL LIMITED THEM TO ONE OPTION. WE DON'T SEE A REASON FOR THAT.
WE'RE SUGGESTING YOU EXTEND THE PHASE IN FOR THE SMALLER PROJECTS AND FOR OWNERSHIP THAT YOU CONTINUE TO ALLOW THOSE PROJECTS TO BE BUILT WITHOUT THE INCLUSIONARY REQUIREMENTS FOR NOW BUT RECONSIDER IT WHEN THE MARKET HAS RECOVERED. THIS SUMMARIES THE CHANGES. AND THIS VERY MUCH STAYS IS THE COURSE. IT'S NOT DRAMATIC CHANGES. THEY'RE SIMPLE FINE TUNING BASED ON THE CHANGES IN THE MARKET CONDITIONS. WHEN THE MARKET RECOVERS, WHAT WLL HOPE YOU SEE IS THAT THESE REQUIREMENTS ARE MODEST. THEY'RE NOT
DRAMATIC IMPACT ON THE FEASIBILITY OF DEVELOPMENT. AND THEY PRODUCE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. I'LL STOP HERE AND TAKE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT WONDERFUL PRESENTATION. JUST REMINDER, WE HAVE THREE ITEMS THAT ARE AT LENGTH TO GO. AND WE HAVE ABOUT AN HOUR LEFT. SO I RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN. >> THANK YOU. THIS IS A REALLY IMPORTANT TOPIC. I'M GOING TO ASK STAFF IF THERE IS A
REASON WHY WE NEED TO RUSH THIS. OR IF IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR ME TO MOVE TO CONNUE THIS A CYCLE SO WE CAN HAVE A ROBUST CONVERSATION. >> I THINK THE USHER ARE IS RUSH IS OURS BECAUSE OF
COMMITTEE TIMING. >> I REMEMBERHEN WE HAD THE 4D CHANGES. IT WAS TIME SENSITIVE FOR YOU TO MAKE THE CHANGES. I THERE A REASON FOR YOUR DEPARTMENT WE WANT TO MAKE THE CHANGES WITHIN THE NEXT CYCLE? CXSGCAPTIONPERIOD >> THROUGH THE CHAIR, COUNCILMEMBE CASHMAN, THE ONLY CHALLENGE IS THE CONSULTANT IS FROM OUT OF STATE. IF WE WERE TOO DELAY A CYCLE, WE HAVE TO BRING HIM BACK. >> I WOULD MOVE TO POSTPONE THIS A CYCLE SO WE CAN HAVE MORE
CONVERSATIONS AND I'M NOT, YOU KNOW, I FEEL LIKE WE CANO SOME OF THE CONVERSATIONAL WORK VIRTUALLY, AS WELL. THAT WE WOULDN'T NEED TOFUL TO FLY HIM BACK IN TWO WEEKS TIME TO CONTINUE THECS COUNCILMEMBERS WITH OUR CONSTITUENTS AND WITHUR STAKEHOLDERS COULD CONTINUE THE ENGAGEMENT. >> SECOND. >> YEAH. OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER RAINVILLE. >> THANK YOU. I AGREE. I VOTE
TO MOVE IT TO THE NEXT CYCLE. AND IN THE MEANTIME, I WOULD ASK OUR CONSULTANT, OUR EXPERT, HOW UR RECOMMENDATIONS FIT INTO THIS MARKET WHERE HOUSING STARTS ARE JUST FLAT. HAVE PROJECTS THAT ARE STALLED OF HIGH INTEREST RATES AND RELUCTANCE OF INVESTORS TO INVEST IN
MINNEAPOLIS. >> WHAT WE FOUND, THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE FINANCIAL CHALLENGE IS OUTSIDE OF THE CITY'S CONTROL. AND IT IS TEMPTING TO ADDRESS THIS ONE THING. BECAUSE THE CITY CAN DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. EVEN IF YOU ELIMINATE, THE INCLUSIONARY HOUSG REQUIREMENTS, NONE OF THE PROTOTYPES WOULD BE CLOSE TO FEASIBLE. WE FOUND THAT ONLY 4% OF THE DIFFERENCE FROM THE CURRENT RETURNS AND FEASIBLE RETURNS IS RESULT OF INCLUSIONARY POLICY. SO, YEAH. EVERY LITTLE THING COUNTS. BUT WHAT YOU'RE WAITING FOR, IS FOR
THE BROADER MARKET CONDITIONS TO CHANGE. WHEN THEY DO, YOU HAVE A MODEST REQUIREMENT. AND SO WHAT WE'RE TESTING FOR IS IS IT STILL A MODEST REQUIREMENT? THE RENTS HAVE COME DOWN TO THE POIN WHERE THE COST OF COMPLYING IS QUITE LOW. AS RENTS GO UP, IT'LL GO BACK UP. BUT I DON'T THINK YOU CAN TODAY REALLY PREDICT PERFECTLY WHAT KINDS OF CHANGES WOULD BE IN THE FUTURE ENOUGH TO KNOW EXACTLY
WHAT THE RIGHT LEVEL WOULD BE IN THE FUTURE. OUR ADVICE IS TO KEEP A CLEAR AND CONSISTENT BUT MODEST POLICY. AND NOT TO INFLICT ON THE MARKET THE UNCERTAINTY OF A LOT OF CHANGES. BECAUSE THAT COSTS MONEY, ALSO. AND THE IMAGE I WANT TO CON OWA PIECE OF PROPERTY, A LITTLE BIT ATTACHED TO YESTERDAY'S MARKET VALUES, HAVING TROUBLE AGREEING TOELL AT A LOWER PRICE TODAY WHEN THE MARKET IS DOWN. WHO HEARS THAT THE COUNCIL IS
NSIDERING REDUCING THIS REQUIREMENT MIGHT FEEL LIKE THEY CAN GET MORE FOR THEIR LAND. MIGHT LD OUT. WHAT WE WANT IS FOR THE LAND MARKETS TO ABSORB THE COST OF THIS INCLUSIONARY REQUIREMENT. IN ORDER TO DO THAT, WE NEED TO KEEP THE QUIREMENTS STEADY OVER TIME AND PREDICTABLE. >> HOW DOES YOUR RECOMMENDATION FIT INTO THE FACT THAT NOTHING IS GETTING BUILT FOR A MARKET RATE HOUSING. WHICH WOULD INCLUDE INCLUSIONARY ZONING. >> IT FITS IN IN THE SENSE WE ARE ALL STUCK IN A MARKET THAT IS BOOM AND BUST. WHENEVER THE
MARKET IS BUST, WE DON'T SEE DEVELOPMENT. WHETHER OR NOT WE HAVE INCLUSIONARY. SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO ADD. YOUR RIGHT. THAT'S THE SITUATION WE'RE IN. >> COUNCILMEMBER ELLISON. >> THANK YOU. MOSTLY I WANTED TO JUMP INTO MAYBE ADD ON A LITTLE BIT TO THE DESIRE TO EXTEND -- TO CONTINUE THE ITEM. BUT I WANT TO SAY TO THE CONSULTANT. THANK YOU FOR COMING TO PRESENT TO US. AND GIVE US THIS INFORMATION. I THINK IT'S VALUABLE. AND WHAT
I'M HEARING, I MEAN, KIND OF MAYBE IT'S LAY TERMS. WHAT I'M HEARING IS, Y KNOW, IF WE WERE TO REPEAL INCLUSIONARY ZONING, OR PAUSE IT OR TR FREEZE IT OR WHATEVER. WE WOULDN'T SEE ANY CHANGES ON THE GROUND. RIGHT. BUILDINGS WOULDN'T SUDDENLY START SPROUTING OUT OF THE GROUND. WHEN WE'RE OVER THE HUMP, WHAT WE WOULD EXPERIENCE IS LESS AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AND SO I KNOW THE'S THE URGE. YOU'RE HEARING FROM FOLKS WHO BUILD AND THEY DON'T WANT ANY
REGULATION. SO IT IS THE NATURE OF THINGS. AND SO YOU'RE MAYBE, YOU KNOW, I KNOW WE'RE HEARING FROM FOLKS WHO WOULD RATHER HAVE NO REGULATION. THEY'LL TAKE A WIN WHERE THEY CAN GET IT. BUT, YEAH. YOU'LL BE -- WE WOULD BE DOOMING THEUTURE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING WHEN WE'RE IN AN UPCYE, IF WE WERE TO REPEAL IT OR PAUSE IT OR FREEZE IT. I WANT TO THANK THE CONSULTANT FOR YOUR TIME HERE. I THINK YOU KNOW, I'M OPEN TO SOME DISCUSSION HERE. IF STAFF IS CONCERNED ABOUT HAVING TO BRING
THE COULTANT BACK, MAYBE I COULD OFFER MY COLLEAGUES. COULD WE DO MAYBE ONE ORWO, LIKE, INFO SESSIONS BETWEEN NOW AND NEXT MEETING SO WE'RE NOT LEARNING EVERYTHIN UP HERE ON THE DAIS. BUT WE CAN MAYBE COME THROUGH WITH A LITTLEIT MORES ONMOREBSERVATION. AS OPPOSED TO CALLING YOU BACK ON THE BROADCAST WHEN WE HAVE LIMITED TIME. WOULD THAT BE ACCEPTABLE TO MY COLLEAGUES? WOULD FOLKS BE INTERESTED IN DOIN A STUDY SESSION IN BETWEEN? I'LL HAVE MY STAFF NOTE THAT. I'LL HAVE
COUNCILMEMBER OSMAN'S STAFF NOTE THAT. WE'LL WORK TO PULL THAT TOGETHER. OTHERWISE I WOULD SUPPT CONTINUING THIS ITEM.. >> I SEE COUNCILMEMBER RAINVILLE. >> YEAH. I WANT TOP ASK ONE TO ASK ONE MORE QUESTION BEFORE YOU GET OUT OF HERE. THE LAST TIME WE HAD THE TREMENDOUS STOPPAGE OF MARKET RATE HOUSING. EVENTUALLY BECOMES OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. IT TAKES 10 YEARS OR SO. WAS IN '08, '09, '150'10. MANY OF THE
PROBLEMS WE'RE FACING TODAY WERE -- BY THE STOPPAGE IN '08, 2009, AND 2010. DO YOU SEE DIRECT COMPARISONS? HOW IS IT LIKE THOSE CONDITIONS? >> I THINK THE SPECIFIC FACTORS THAT ARE DRIVING THIS SLOWDOWN ARE TOTLY DIFFERENT. INTEREST RATES PLAYING A LARGER ROLE THIS TIME THAN IT WAS THEN. INTEREST RATES WERE VERY LOW THEN, RELATIVELY SPEAKING. BUT THE
RESULT IS THE SAME. THE MARKET FREEZES UP BECAUSE IT TAKES AWHILE FOR EVERYONE T ADJUST THEIR EXPECTATIONS. RENTS, YOUS COME BACK IN LINE. AND PROJECTT SAME PATTERN IN EVERY CITY. WE SEE IT GOING BACK, YOU KNOW, FOR DECADES. THERE'S JUST A TENDENCY TO HAVE A BM AND A BUST CYCLE. DEVELOPMENT GETS ENTHUSIASTIC. YOU SEE A LOT OF BUILDING. AND THE BUILDINGS COMPETE WITH EACH OTHER ON REPRESENT. AN -- RENTS.
AND THE RENTS DON'T TURN OUT TO GROW AS FT AS HOPES OF DREAMS. YOU END UP WITH A FEW PROJECTS FALLING SHORT . IT DRIVES A DOWN CYCLE. WHEN COSTS RISE, WHEN INTEREST RATES RISE. THOSE THINGS PILE UP. YOU END UP WITH A TEMPORARY SHUT DOWN OF THE MARKET. WE DIDN'T FIND ANYTHING IN OUR RESEARCH THAT SUGGESTED YOU AER PERMANENE DESIRABILITY OF A MARKET.
MINNEAPOLIS PEOPLE WANT TO LIVE HERE. YOU'VE DONE A LOT OF THINGS RIGHT. THE MARKET SMS LIKELY TO REBOUND IN THE RELATIVELY SHORT TERM. NO ONE CAN PREDICT WHEN OR HO IT'LL HAPPEN. >> THANK YOU. >> COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I WANTED TO NOTE THAT, YOU KNOW, CONDOS HAVE BEEN EXEMPTED FROM THIS POLICY. AND WITHOUT AN INCLUSIONARY ZONING POLICY, IT DOESN'T MEAN WE'VE SEEN A HUGE DEVELOPMENT OF CONDOS IN THE CITY. LIKE, THERE ARE A LOT OF OTHER RESTRICTIONS. AND FOR M
IT'S IMPORTANT THAT OUR MULTIFAMILY BUILDINGS ALLOW THE OPPORTUNITY FOR HOME OWNERSHIP AND WEALTH BUILDING. AND SO I SEE THAT YOU INCLUDED LPM HERE. WELL, THAT'S 350 UNITS OF HOUSING. IN MY WARD. AND RESIDENTS THAT ARE PAYING $1,000 OR $2,000 OF T THEIR SALARIES EVERY SINGLE MON. SEEING IN THE PACKET THAT IT WAS NSTRUCTION FOR $80 MILLION AND SOLD FOR SOMETHING 70 MILLION. IT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE $5 MILLION OF REN THEY DO GET
FROM THOSE RESIDENTS EVERY SINGLE YEAR. TO PAY FOR SOME OF THOSE COSTS, AS WELL. SO I JUST WOULD LIKE TO SEE US, AND I NO KNOW IT'S UNRELATED TO THE TOPIC, BUT LEAN INTO PURCHASING OPTIONS FOR RENTERS SO THEY CAN PUT THAT MONEY THEY'RE PAYING FOR RENT INTO THEIR OWN POCKETS. KIND OF A COMMENT HERE. BUT DO YOU AGREE THAT THE CONDO OWNERSHIP THAT THIS HASN'T BEEN
THAT BARRIER TO BUILDING CONDO OWNERSHIP OR CONDO OPPORTUTIES IN MINNEAPOLIS. >> YEAH. LET ME SAY CONTRARY TO MY ANSWER TO THE LAST QUESTION. WE DID FIND THAT THE CONDITIONS ARE, IN SOME SENSE, PERM PERMANENTLY STACKED AGAINST CONDO DEVELOPMENT. MAYBE NOT PERMANENTLY BUT IN A MORE LASTING WAY. AND THE PRIMARY CONCERN THAT WE HEARD OVER AND OVER AGAIN IS ABOUT DEFECT COSTS THAT CONDO OWNERS,
THE DEVELOPERS OF CONDO BUILDINGS FACE A LEGAL CHALLENGE THAT REQUIRES PROBABLY STATE LAW CHANGES BEFORE YOU'RE GOINGT SEE A LARGE UPSWING IN THE CONDO MARKET. CONDOS WORK AT THE HIGH END. THEY CAN COVER A LOT OF COSTS. MIDDLE-INCOME CONDOS DON'T SEEM TO BE WORKING IN MINNEAPOLIS AT THE MOMENT. AND THAT WAS TRUE, ALSO, WHEWE DID THE STUDY IN 2018. AND THERE'S NO SENSE IN WHICH INCLUSIONARY POLICY IS AFFECTING THAT. BECAUSE THE POLICY IS NOT BEING APPLIED. AND WHAT YOU ADOPTED,
ORIGINALLY, WAS NOT TO APPLY THE POLICY UNTIL AFTER THE CONDO MARKET RECOVERED. IT HASN'T RECOVERED AND YOU HAVEN'T APPLIED THE POLITICIAN. CLUSIONARY IS NO WAY POSSIBLE FOR THE CHALLENGES THAT THE CONDO MARKET FACES. IT'S T MARKET RATE CONDO PROJECT THAT DOESN'T WORK NOW. >> THANK YOU FOR SHANG THAT. AND I LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING THE CONVERSATION. I BELIEVE WE DID POSTPONE THIS ITEM? WE CONTINUE TO HAVE A DISCUSSION. SO WE'RE RUNNING OUT TIME. COUNCILMEMBER
JENKINS. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. I'M CURIOUS. THERE'S A CASH OPTION. ARE WE SEEING DEVELOPERS CH OUT. >> YEAH, CHAIR OSMAN. COUNCILMEMBER JENKINS. SO I HAD SHOWN PREVIOUSLY ON THE DASH BOARD WE HAD PERMANENT 25 LARGE-SCALE RENTAL PROJECTS SUBJECT TO IZ. AND FOUR OF
THOSE CHOSE THE IN-LIEU FEW OPTION. >> THANK YOU. AND THAT MONEY GOES TO THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. >> TRUST FUND PROGRAM. THAT'S CORRECT. YEAH. >> THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. WITH THE MOTION TO POSTPONE, THOSE IN FAVOR S AYE. AND THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT AND THE MOTIONARRIES. NEXT ITEM IS PRESENTATION ABOUT THE USE OF ALGORITHMS IN RENTAL RATES. I WELCOME SARAH. THANK
YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE. WELCOME. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M AN ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL WITH THE MINNESOTA ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE. AND I AM ONE OF THE
ATTORNEYS THAT HAS BROUGHT A CASE UNDER ATTORNEY GENERAL KEITH ELLISON AGAINST REAL PAGE OF THE ALLEGED COCONSPIRATORS. AND I'M HAPPY T VEHI SPEAK TO THE COUNSEL ABOUT T CASE TODAY. I'M COGNIZANT OF TIME. I CAN GIVE A SHORT BACKGROUND ON THE CASE AND ON THE ALLEGATIONS. I WILL NOTE, AS WE MEET THE COUNSEL WHERE THE GIVEN PENDING LITIGATION. WE ARE SOMEWHAT LIMITED IN WHAT WEF
2024, MINNESOTA ALONG WITH SEVEN OTHER STATES, AND THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, SUED REAL PAGE ALLEGING VIOLATIONS OF SECTION 1 AND 2 OF THE SHERMAN ACT IN THE DDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA. THE ALLEGED AGREEMENTS RELATED TO INFORMATION SHARING AND RELATED TO THE DECISION TO ALI PRICING. AND ATTEMPTS TO MONOPOLIZE FOR THE REVENUE MANAGEMENT SERVICES MARKET. REAL PAGE MOVED TO TRANSFER.
AND TO DISMISS THEIR MOTIONO TRANSFER WAS DENIED. AND THEIR MOTION TO DISMISS WAS MOOTED WHEN PLAINTIFFS FILED AN AMENDED COMPLAINT. IN JANUARY, THIS PAST JANUARY, PLAINTIFFS AMENDED THEIR COMPLAINT TO ALLOW TWO OTHER STATES TO JOIN. AND, ALSO NAMED SIX OF REAL PAGE'S ALLEGEDLY COCONSPIRATORS IN THE TEAM. THEY ARE CAMDEN PROPERTY TRUST, COURTLAND MANAGEMENT, PINNLE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT.
GREY STAR RATTLEARTNERS, LIVE CORPS. LLC, AND WILLOW BRANCH PRERTY MANAGEMENT. FORMERLY KNOWN AS LINCOLN. ALL BUT CAMDEN OPERATE IN MINNESOTA. AND TOGETHER THE PROPERTIES MANAGED BY THESE ENTITIES CONSTITUTE A SUBSTANTIAL PORTION OF THE DOWNTOWN RENTALS IN MINNEAPOLIS. AND THERE ARE OTHERENTAL PROPERTIES THROUGHOUT MINNESOTA OPERATED BY THESE ENTITIES. SO THAT'S JUST A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ON
WHERE WE ARE IN THE LITIGATION AT THE MOMENT. AND I'M HAPPY TO SPEAK TO SOME OF THE ALLEGATIONS OF WHAT IS SPECIFICALLY ALLEGEDD THE C CSPIRATORS ARE DONE. REAL PAGE, ACCORDINGED TO THE AMENDED COMPLAINT, IS ALLED TO EXET COMPETITIVELY SENSITIVE DATA. SUCH, YOU KNOW, COMPETITIVELY SENSITIVE DATA, SUCH AS RENTAL APPLICATIONS, EXECUTED LEASES, RENEWAL OFFERS,
AND ACCEPTANCES, FORWARD-LOOKING OCCUPANCY INFORMATION, AND TO USE ALL OF THIS INFORMATION IN ITS A ALGORITHMIC SOFTWARE TO GENERATE SPECIFIC PRICING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COMPETING LANDLORDS. IT DOES THIS WITH TWO PRODUCTS PRIMARILY. WITH THE YIELD STAR PROCT AND THE AARM SOFTWARE, BOTH OF WHICH ARE DIFFERENT TYPES OF REVENUE
MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE. IT OFFERS A THIRD PRODUCT, BUT OUR CASE FOCUSES PRIMARILY ON THESE TWO SOFTWARE REVENUE MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE PROGRAMS. REAL PAGE IS EXPLICIT ABOUT USING THI DATA IN THE PRICING RECOMMENDATIONS. SO LANDLORDS ARE FULLY AWARE THAT THEIR COMPETITIVELY NSITIVE DATA WE ALLEGE THAT THESE LANDLORDS AREULLY AWARE THEIR COMPETITIVELY SENSITIVE DATA WILL BE USED IN THE SOFTWARE TO GENERATE PRICING
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THEIR APPRALS. -- RIVALS. REAL PAGE AMASSES THE NONPUBLIC COMPETITIVELY SENSITIVE DATA FROM COMPETING LANDLORDS USING A VARIETY OF MECHANISMS. ONE KEY ONE IS THA EACH YIELD STAR AND AARM CUSMER/CLIENT SHARES LEASE LEVEL INFORMATION NIGHTLY ON EACH UNIT'S EFFECTIVE RENT, RENT DISCOUNTS, RENT TERM, LEASE S STATUS, ET. CETERA.
THEY'RE GATHERING IS NONBLIC, COMPETITIVELY SENSITIVE INFORMATION FROM THE USERS OF THE SOFTWARE ON A NIGHT BASIS THAT IS THEN BEING USED TO TRAIN THE ALGORITHM AND RECOMMEND PRICES TO ENTITIES AND THEIR COMPETITORS, ACCORDING TO THE ALLEGATIONS IN THE AMENDED COMPLAINT. THEY ALSO GHER INFORMATION COMPETITIVELY SENSITIVE INFORMATION THROUGH A VARIETY OF OTHER PROGRAMS.
INCLUDING BENCHMARKING, BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE. THESE ARE A VARIETY OF PROJECTS THAT REAL PAGE OFFERS. BASICALLY WE ALLEGE THEY SELL DIFFERENT TYPES OF PRODUCTS AND GATHER COMPETITIVELY SENSITIVE INFORMATION FROM MANY OF THE ENTITIES TO WHOM THEY ARE SELLING THESE PROJECTS. AND THEN USE THAT AS THEY TRAIN THEIR PRICING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE PEOPLE THAT BUY THAT SERVICE. WHICH IS THE AARM AND YIELD STAR SOFTWARE. THAT IS REALLY THE FOCUS OF THE COMPLAINT. THEY ALSO DO MARKET SURVEYS. THEY JUST CALL PEOPLE
UP AND ASK ABOUT THEIR PRICING. GENERALLY THERE'S A LOT OF INFORMATION SHARED THROUGH THAT CONDUIT, AS WELL. WE ALLEGE. SO THE RESULTF OUR ALLEGATIONS HERE IS THAT WE, IN OUR VIEW, AL PAGE'S DATA IS DIFFERENT THAN PUBLICLY AVAILABLE DATA. IN SEVERAL DIFFERENT WAYS. THEY HAVE INFORMATION ON ACTUAL TRANSACTIONS AND FLOOR PLANS LISTED RENT, AND FINAL TRANSACTED PRICES IN A WAY THAT IS SIMPLY NOT AVAILABLE IN
PUBLIC DATA. THEY HE INFORMATION THE QUALITY OF INFORMATION THEY HAVE ON THATS SIMPLY NOT AVAILABLE. THE PUBLIC DATA. THEY HAVE INFORMATION ON RENEWALS, WHICH IS TYPICALLY NOT LISTED PRIVATELY. BOTH OFFERED PRICES AND ACCEPTING PRICES. THEY HAVE INFORMATION ON TIME STAMP. THEY HAVE INFORMATION THAT GOES BACK YEARS. THEY HAVE INFORMATION ABOUT FUTURE DAND. SO INQUIRIES AND ALICATIONS THAT WOULD TYPICALLY NOT BE AVAILABLE
PUBLICLY. AND THEY HAVE MUCHMOR COVERAGE IS MASSIVE. SO AARM AND YIELD STAR REAL PAGE'S TWO PRODUCTS THAT ARE THE FOCUS OF THE COMPLAINT USE THIS NONPUBLIC SENSITIVE DATA TO GENERATE PRING RECOMMENDATIONS, AS WE'VE DISCUSSED IN THE ALLEGATIONS. AND THEY DO THAT IN A FEW DIFFERENT WAYS. AARM USES NONPUBLIC DATA TO TRAIN ITS
ALGORITHMS TO SET PRICING RECOMMENDATIONS. AND TO PRICE PARTICULAR UNITS. YIELD STAR USES IT TO SET FLOOR PRICE RECOMMENDATIONS AND TO SET UNIT LEVEL PRICES. SO SPECIFICALLY WITH AARM. AND AARM IS THE PRODUCT THAT REAL PAGE HAS INDICATED IT PLANSO USE GOING FORWARD. YIELD STAR IS BEING SUNSET. SO I'LL FOCUS FOR THE SAKE OF TIME ON AARM HERE. WE ALGE THAT REAL PAGE USES ITS
NONPUBLIC DATA TO GENERATE IMPROVE, LEARN PARAMETER LIKE THE COEFFICIENT OF A REGRESSION MODEL. TAKES THE DATA AND IMPROVES THE LEARN PARAMETERS GENERATED FROM NONPUBLIC DATA THAT ARE THE APPLIED TO RECOMMENDATIONS MADE FOR A LANDLORD-SPECIFIC PROPERTY. SO THAT IS J, YOU KNOW, USING THISONPUBLIC DATA TO TRAIN THE MODEL AND MAKE A PRICING RECOMMENDATIONS THAT'S ONE OF THE ALLATIONS ABOUT AARM. SPECIFICALLY WE
ALLEGE WITH RESPECT TO FLOOR PRICE RELATIONS THAT REAL PAGES US PEER DATA IN NEARLY EVERY PHASE. SO IDENTIFYING PEERS, FORECASTING OCCUPANCY AND LEASING, CHANGING THE RENT, SO IT USES THE NONPUBLIC DATA IN A VARIETY OF SENSESES WHEN IT'S GENERATING FLOOR PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS. AND ALSO TO DETERMINE UNIT LEVEL PRICES. AND I'M REALIZING WHEN YOU'RE
NOT EAKING TO THIS LANGUAGE, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEENLOOR PRICES AND UNIT PRICES. UNIT PRICE IS SHOWN IN A PRICE MATRIX WITH THE PRICE BEI SET FOR COMBINATIONS START DATE AND LEASE TERMS. ONCE THE FLOOR PRICE PLAN HAS BEEN SET AND ACCEPTED BY THE PROPERTIES' PRICING MANAGERS. SO SETTING PRICES BASED ON TERM LIKE THAT HELPS WITHXPIRATION MANAGEMENT. SO WE ALLEGE THAT REAL PAGE ALSO USES
COMPETITIVELY SENSITIVE NONPUBLIC DATA IN HELPING GENERATE RECOMMENDATIONS BOTH FOR THE GENERAL FLOOR LEVEL FLOOR PRICE RECOMMENDATION AN SPECIFIC UNIT LEVEL PRICES. MEANING INCLUDING THE TERM. REAL PAGE WE ALLEGE USE A VARIETY OF MECHANISMSES TO INCREASE COMPLIANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS. AMONG THEM THEY QUITE LITERALLY MAKET EASIER TO ACCEPT RATHER THAN REJECT PRICING RECOMMENDATIONS
BY MAKING BULK ALLOWANCE OF RECOMMENDATIONS ALLOWED. BUT BULK REJECTIONS WITHIN THEIRSOF AUTOACCEPTANCE IS STRONGLY ENCOURAGED FOR, WE ALLEGE THAT AUTO ACCEPTANCE IS STRONGLY ENCOULD REMEMBERED AND DEFAULT ENABLED WHEN THE ENTITIES, THE ALLEGED COCONSPIRATORS ARE STARTING TO USE THE SOFTWARE. THEY HAVE A SERVICE CALLED REAL PAGE PRICING ADVISORS, I CAN SPEAK MORE TO, IN INTEREST TO
THE COUNCIL. THE QUESTION IS, WHAT ARE THE ACCEPTANCE RATES? HOW MUCH IS THE USE OF THIS NONPUBLIC DATA IMPACTING LEASES? WE ALLEGE THAT BETWEEN 201 AND 2023, WITHIN A 1% RANGE OF TH RECOMMENDATION. THERE WERE 40 TO 50% ACCEPTANCE RANGES. WITHIN 2.5% OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS. SO UP OR DOWN. PRETTY CLOSE TO THERE. 60%. AND THEN WITHIN 5% OF THE
RECOMMENDATION THERE WERE 80% ACCEPTANCE RATES. SO THOSE ARE THE KEY ALLEGATIONS IN O COMPLAINT. AND, AGAIN, WE'RE ALLEGING TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF CLAIMS ONE IS FOR SECTION ONE AGREEMENTS AND RESTRAINT OF TRADE. AND THE OTHER IS ATTEMPTED MONOPOLYZATION OF THE ATTEMPTED MARKET. WITH THAT, THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME. AND
I'M VERY HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE PRESENTATION. I WANT TO RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER WONSLEY HAS JOINE US IN THE COMMITTEE. AISLE A I'LL HAVE COUNCILMEMBER WONSLEY JUMP IN. BEFORE THAT, I HAVE A QUESTION. HOW LONG HAS THIS BEEN GOING ON? THIS SYSTEM? >> REAL PAGE HAS OPERATED FOR QUITE SOME TIME. I DON'T KNOW THEIR EXACT INCORPORATION DATE. BUT I MEAN, THEY'VE BN
OPERATING FOR, YOU KNOW, MANY YEARS. THIS IS NOT A NEW -- THEY'RE GENERALLY NOT A RELATIVELY NEW COMPANY. I MEAN, AT LEAST 2017 IS WHEN WE HAD GOOD DATA ABOUT THE IMPACT OF THEIR PRICING RECOMMENDATION. T LITIGATION, WE ALLEGE SPECIFIC -- THERE ARE SPECIFIC SPECIFIC -- MARKETS ALLEGED. AND THE ABILITY TO
BRINGNTITRUST CLAIMS RELATES TO PENETRATION. SO PART OF THE NATURE OF THE CONCERN IS THE EVALENCE OF ADOPTION OF THIS SOFTWARE. AND THE ABILITY WE BELIEVE WE CAN SHOW THE IMPACT ON THE MARKETS ALLEGED. >> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER WONSLEY. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. FIRST, THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. AFTER LEARNING ABOUT THE DEPARTMENT OFUSTICE
AND THE CASE LAST YEAR. I IMMEDIATELY REACHED OUT TO SEVERAL COLLEAGUES. ONE OF WHICH, OR SEVERAL OF WHICH ARE W MY COAUTHORS ON AN ORDINANCE WE'RE BRINGING FORWARD THAT INCLUDING -- WELL, VICE CHAIR ELLISON AND COUNCILMEMBER CHAVE TO BASICALLY INTRODUCE THE ORDINANCE THAT WOULD BAN THE USE OF RENTAL ALGORITHMS ON UNITS IN MINNPOLIS. AND KNOWING THAT
SOME OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS, THE MANAGEMENT COMPANIES YOU LISTED IN THE CASE ARE NOT ONLY LOCATED IN MINNEAPOLIS, BUT SEVERAL ARE LOCATED IN MY OWN WARD. SPECIFICALLY GRAY SR. I'VE REFERENCED THIS. IT'S ONE OF THE LARGEST, I BELIEVE, PROPERTY OWNERS OR MANEMENT COMPANIES IN THE U.S. AND I'VE HEARD STORIES FROM STUDENTS ABOUT THEIR EXPERIENCES. I BELIEVE COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN HAS ALSO SHARED ABOUT STORIES YOU'VE HEARD FROM YOUR OWN CONSTITUENTS
AND THEIR EXPERIENCE WITH THAT COMPANY, AS WELL. AND KNOWING THE ORDINANCE, INDEPENDENT OF THE LAWSUITS, GIVES THE CITY AN OPPORTUNITY TO ENSURE THAT THIS HARMFUL TECHNOLOGY IS ESSENTIAL I WILL NOT BARRIER TO OUR CITY'S GOAL OF MAKING SURE THAT OUR HOUSING MARKET IS BOTH EQUITABLE AND AFFORDABLE TO EVERY SINE RESIDENT. BECAUSE EVERY SINGLE RESIDENT SIMPLY DESERVES
HOUSING. I'M GRATEFUL THAT THE AG'S OFFICE IS PART OF THA COALITION TAKING ACTION TO ENSURE OUR HOUSING MARKET IS MOVING IN THAT DIRECTION. AND HOLDING EXPLOITIVE AND BAD-FAITH ACTORS ACCOUNTABLE. I'M EXCITED TO CONTINUE USING THE TLS WE HAVE AVAILABLE AT THE LOCAL ACTION TO COMPLEMENT THE ACTIONS YOU ARE TAKING. AND WE'RE LOOKING AT WHATEVERE CAN DO
GOING FURTHER TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ADDRESSING ANY EXTRACTIVE AND EXPLOITIVE PRACTICES THAT CORPORATE LANDLORDS AND DEVELOPERS ARE LEVERAGING THAT ARE HURTING RENTERS AND TENANTS HERE IN MINNEAPOLIS. WHICH I THINK IS VERY TIMELY IN LIGHT OF THE CONVERSION YOU ALL HAD REGARDING INCLUSIONARY ZONING IN THE FUTURE OF OUR HOUSING MARKET, AGAIN, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE PRESENTATION. I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THE WORK THAT WE DO ON THIS ORDINANCE. AND
EXCITED GET IT PASSED IN THE COMING WEEKS. SO WITH THAT, I KNOW M FELLOW COAUTHOR WANTED TO SHARE SOME WORDS, AS WELL. >> COUNCILMEMBER EISON. >> YES. THANK YOU. AND I KNOW COUNCILMEMR OSMAN ASKED, YOU KNOW, HOW LONG IT'S BEEN GOING ON. HOW LONG DO YOU THINK THIS FIGHT IS GOING TO, YOU KNOW, -- I KNOW IT'S I'M ASKING YOU TO BUSTUT THE CRYSTAL BALL A LITTLE BIT HERE. AS WE THINK ABOUT THE WAYSES IN WHICH ANTITRUST UNDERMINES CONSUMER PROTECTIONS AND FOLKS ARE SORT
OF, WHETHER THEY KNOW IT ACUTELY OR NOT, THEY'RE DEALING WITH THE CONSEQUENCES OF THESE KINDS OF WHAT I WOULD CAL VIOLATIONS. YEAH. WHAT DO WE THINK WE'RE IN FOR IN TERMS OF LENGTH OF FIGHT AND ALL OF THAT. >> YEAH. SO I WILL SAY, CERTAINLY YOU KNOW, OUR MISSION OF MY THE OFFICE THAT I WORK FOR IS TO HELP PEOPLE AFFD THEIR LIVES. THAT MOTIVATED BRINGING THIS PARTICULAR COMPLAINT. CIVIL LITIGATION, WHICH IS WHAT I DO, PARTICULARLY ANTITRUST
LITIGATION, IS BY NATURE QUITE SLOW. YOU KNOW, WE'RE IN THE -- WE'RE VENUED IN NORTH CAROLINA. SO THE JUDGE IS THERE. WE'LL MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT TIMING. BUT TYPICALLY, YOU KNOW, IT'S ANTITST CASES, IN PARTICULAR, ARE VERY DOCUMENT HEAVY. THEY REQUIRE EXERT S S. THAT REQUIRE MONTHS TO YEARS OF RELATIVELY DETAILED WORK.
ALONG WITH OUR PARTICULARLY GIVEN THE NUMBER OF PLAINTIFFS AND THE NUMBER OF DEFENDANTSN THIS CASE. I WOULD EXPECT THIS, YOU KNOW, WITHOUT HAVING A CRYSTAL BA AND, OF COURSE, CASES MOVE AT DIFFERENT PACES, THIS CASE WILL TAKE SOME TIME. >> THANK YOU. UNFORTUNATE I HAD, YOU CAUGHT US ON A DAY WHERE THE COMMITTEE AGENDA IS PACKED. >> FULLY AWARE. >> I WOULD LOVE TO AG EDUCATE MY COLLEAGUES ON ANTITRUST. I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THIS WORK AND, ALSO, THE AG'S OFFICE HAS DONE A LOT IN THE LAST COUPLE OF
YEARS AROUND SEEING TENANT ISSUES REALLY AS CONSUMER PROTECTION ISSUE I THINK HISTORICALLY WHAT TENANTS ARE DEALING WITH IS KIND OF BEEN CONSIDERED ITS OWN RELATIONSHIP AND IN ANOTHER REALM. AND WE'VE SEEN OUR ABILITY TO PROTECT FOLKS AND KEEP THEM HOUSED, BE ABLE TO AFFORD THEIR LIVES YOU KNOW, WE TALK A LOT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, AS A COUNCIL, AS A BODY, HOW DO W MAKE SURE WE'RE GETTING MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING BUILT? AND I THINK A LOT LESS EFFORT GOES INTO A LOT OF DISCUSSION BUT A LOT LESS POLICY
GOES INTO MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE ATTACKING AFFORD AFFORDABILITY FROM EVERY ANGLE. THIS IS ONE. THANK YOU FOR THE WORK AND EXTENDED WORK ON TENANT PROTECTIONS THAT THE STATE HAS ENGAGED IN. >> CERTAINLY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. YES. COUNCILMEMBER RAINVILLE. >> BEFORE YOU LEAVE, BEFORE YOU GO, TYPICALLY INASES LIKE THIS, ARE THERE DAMAGES PAID? IF FOUND GUILTY. >> THERE CAN BE. IT DEPENDS ON THE NATURE OF THE PARTICULAR
CLAIMS. SO WE'RE, YOU KNOW, CURRENTLY CERTAIN STATES ARE SEEKING DAMAGES. AND CTAIN STATES ARE SEEKING INJUNKTIVE RELIEF. >> THANK YOU. I'LL ASK THE CLERK TO RECEIVE AND FE THIS ITEM. EYE TESTIMON 16 IS FOOD VITAMIN DOOROCATION AND
OPERATIONS. I'LL WELCOME THE HETH DEPARTMENT. ^ THANK YOU FOR BEING PATIENT. WELCOME. >> THANK YOU.
>> WE'RE SORTING OUT TIMING HERE. WE'VE GOT AN ITEM WE WANT TO GIVE DUE RESPECT TO. WE'VE GOT LIMITED TIME. WE'RE DISCUSSING OUR OPTIONS HERE.
OKAY WELL THANK YOU FOR BEING PATIENT. WHAT I WOULD DO IS, WE TOOK SO MUCH TIME TODAY. WE'LL POSTPONE ITEM 16 FOR NEXT CYCLE.
AND TAKE ITEM 17 NOW. AND BECAUSE WE HAVE PEOPLE THAT HAVE TRAVELED HERE THAT ARE HERE. SO WE'LL TAKE ITEM 17, WHICH IS FOOD VENDOR PRESENTATION. I WELCOME MINNESOTA IMMIGRANT MOVEMENT FROM THAT PRESENTATION. >> COUNCILMEMBERS -- COUNCILMEMBER? >> YES. >> THERE HAS TO BE A VOTE.
>> OH, YOU'RE RIGHT. I'M SORRY. ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT POSTPONE ITEM 16 FOR NEXTYCLE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT AND THE MOTION CARRIES. ALL RIGHT. NEXT WLL HAVE ITEM 17. FOOD VENDOR PRESENTATION.
WELCOME. THE CLERK CAN HELP, IF YOU NEED IT. >> MAYBE.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. I'M A COMMUNITY
ORGANIZER WITH THE MINNESOTAIMMD AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. I'M THE FOUNDER OF ... >> AND TODAY WE ARE HER TO SHARE ABOUT MINNEAPOLIS AND SO THE PURPOSE OF THIS PRESENTATION IS TO SHARE THE INFORMATION THAT THE MINNESOTA IMMIGRANT MOVEMENT HAS GATHERED OVER THE SEVEN MONTHS WHILE WORKING IN AND FOR
OUR COMMUNITY OF FOOD VENDORS IDTIFYING CHALLENGES TO SETTING GOALS. WE AIM TO FOSTER UNDERSTANDING AND COLLABORATION WITH HOPE FOR POSITIVE OUTCOMES MOVING FORWARD. SO ABOUT US, THE MINNESOTA IMMIGRANT MOVEMENT WAS STARTED IN 2008. IT'S A STATE-WIDE GRASSROOTS NONPROFIT COMMITTEE COMMITTED TO EMPOWERING UNITED LATINO COMMUNITY ACROSS MINNESOTA. WE PROVIDE A SAFE SPACE FOR LATINOS TO COME TOGETHER, R RAISE
THEIR VOICE, AND ADDRESSOCIAL CHALLENGES AFFECTING OUR COMMUNITY. THROUGH ADVOCACY, SOLIDARITY, AND COLCTIVE A WE WORKED TOWARD A FUTURE WHERE ALL MINNESOTANS HAVE EQUAL OPPOUNITIES AND RIGHTS. OVER THE YEARS, WE HAVE BROKEN DOWN BAIERS AND CHAMPIONED JUSTICE BY EMPOWERING COMEURCHTIES AND AMPLIFYING IMMIGRANT VOICES. OUR EFFORTS HAVE CONTINUED TO DEMOCRACY AND IMPROVE THE LIVES OF OUR COMMUNITIES ACROSS MINNESOTA.
>> YEAH. I THINK I GOT IT. THANK YOU. SO THE FOOD VENDORS THROUGH OUR MEETINGS. WE FIND OUT MANY FOOD VENDO IDENTIFY AS PARENTS, INCLUDING SINGLE MOTHERS, FAMILIES - LET ME SEE. AND, ALSO, NAVIGATING
DIFFERENCES ACROSS THE SYSTEM. WE FIND OUT GENDER BREAKDOWN 25 VENDORS ARE WOMEN. 8 VENDORS ARE MEN. WE WE ALSO THE NUMBER OF CITATIONS ISSUED. SEVEN VENDORS HAVE RECEIVED CITATIONS WITH FINES RANGING FROM $200 TO $3,000. AND, ALSO, WE FIND OUT AND LEARN A LOT PPLE LIVING IN
MINNEAPOLIS FOR VARYING LENGTHS OF TIME BETWEEN 10 MONTHS AND FIVE YEARS. WE ALSO LEARN A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THEIR INCOMES AND FOOD VENDORS WORK ON AVERAGE 11 DAYS A MONTH. THE AVERAGE INCOME FOR FOOD VENDORS IS LESS THAN $60 PER DAY. TOTALING APPROXIMATELY $600 MONTHLY. WE LEARN ABOUT THE LANGUAGE BARRIERS THAT OUR THEY SPEAK A
DIFFERENT LANGUAGE THAN ENGLISH. WE ALSO -- I'M GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ALSO LEARN ABOUT THE CHALLENGES WE'RE FACING. LIMID ACCESS OF EMPLOYMENT. MANY VENDORS RELY WAS ONE OF THE ISSUES NOT HAVING A JOB. IMAGINEOT HAVING EMPLOYMENT. THAT HOUSING INSECURITY COMES
WITHOUT A STABLE HOME. SECURE HOUSING BECOMES IMPOSSIBLE. AN HOW TO OBTAIN A DRIVER'S LICENSE OR NAVIGATE THE CITY. ALOCATIOT THE ACCESS OF SCHOOL OR RESOURCES FOR THEIR CHILDREN. WE FIND OUT MENTAL HEALTH. WITH THE TRAUMA AND LIMITED ACCESS TO MENT HEALTH SERVICES, LEAVING
THEM VULNERABLE TO ONGOING EMOTIONALLY AND PSYCHOLPSYCHOLOGICAL CHALLENGES. WE LEARN ABOUT CHALLENGES OF BASIC NEEDS WHICH ARE FOOD, CLOTHING, IMPACTING DAILY WELL BEING. THROUGH THIS, WE FIND OUT THE WAY THAT IS INTERACTING OUTSIDE SELLING
FOOD. THE LACK OF SENSITIVITY TO CULTURAL DIFFERENCES. WE FIND OUT A LOS ANG LANGUAGE BARRIERS. CITATIONS AND APPLICATIONS ARE OFTEN PROVIDED ONLY IN ENGLISH. LIMITED ACCESS FOR KNOWN ENGLISH SPEAKERS. WE ARE ALSO LEARNING ABOUT FEELINGS OF INTIMIDATION
FROM THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS AND VENDORS EXPRESSING THEIR EATMENT THROUGH THE OPERATIONS OF THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS. SOCIAL AND CULTURAL DIFFERENTS. MANY VENDORS ARE ACCUSTOMED TO SELLING FOOD OUT OF THEIR HOME COUNTRIES. THEY FACE THE SHOCK THAT STRT VENDING IS SEEN AS ABNORMAL IN THE U. AND, ALSO, WE LEARN CONFLICTING POLICIES AND GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS,
IMMIGRANTS STRUGGLE TO NAVIGATE A NEW GOVERNMENT SYSTEM WITH UNFAMILIAR POLICIES. >> AND SO THESE FINDINGS, OF COURSE, WERE FOUND THROUGH THE TIME THAT WE WORK WITH THE FOOD VENDORS. O IN MAY, WE STARTED TO GET TO KNOW THE FOOD VENDORS. THIS PROCESS WAS SLOW. AND IT REQUIRED PHONE CALLS, CALLS,
MEETINGS, FOLLOWUPS, AND CONSISTENCY. AND SO THROUGH THE INTERACTIONS, WE GAIN DEEPER UNDERSTANDING OF THEIR IDENTIFIES, THE CHALLENGES THEY FACE, AND THE TRAUMAS. AND SO BEING TRANSPARENT, WE DIDN'T SUCCEED IN BUILDING RELATIONSHIP THE BEGINNING AT THE FOOD VENDORS DID NOT HAVE TRUST AND WERE SCARED TO INTERACT. AND SO IN AUGUST OR SEPTEMBER, WE CONTUED THAT RELATIONSHIP BUILDING WITH THE FOOD VENDORS.
SO IN THE URGE IS, WE LEARNED THAT THE CITY -- WE LEARNED FROM THE CITY INITIATIVES, WHICH WERE INSPECTORS, WHO WERE WORKING CLOSELY WITH THE FOOD VENDORS. SO WE INVITED INSPECTORS TO THE COMMUNITY OUTREACH AT COMMUNITY CENTERS AND FOR THEM TO PROVIDE TRAININGS. AND AT THE END, WE LEARNED THAT CHALLENGES CAME UP. AND SO THERE WERE 10 PARTICIPANTS BUT OUT OF THOSE 10 PARTICIPANTS, ONLY TWO FOOD VENDORS. THERE WAS LITERACY
CHALLENGES AS MENTIONED. MANY OF THE FOOD VENDORS DO SPEAK DIFFERENT LANGUAGE THAT IS NOT ENGLISH. AND THE LENGTH OF THE CLASSES LEAD TO LOW ATTENDANCE. AND SO IN OCTOBER, A COMMUNITY MEMBER WITNESSED A FOOD VENDOR BEING CITED. SO THIS LEAD AN EMERGENCY MEETING, WHICH WE GATHERED WITH THE AFFECTED FAMILY MEMBERS, OTHER FOOD VENDORS, WARDS 9 AND 12. AND SO
WE GATHERED TO IDENTIFY WHAT -- IDENTIFY WHAT VENDORS WERE EXPERIENCING. AND IF IT WAS THE SAME. ANDO IN THIS MEETING, THERE WAS ALSO OTHER FOO VENDORS HAVE SHARED FEELINGS OF INTIMIDATION AT THE CITY. AND SO THIS RESULTED INTO THIS FOOD COALITION. AND SO IT WAS ESTABLISHED TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE. AND IN NOVEMBER, WE COLLECTIVELY SENT A LETTER TO
THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS TO ENGAGE DIRECTLY WITH THE COMMUNITY AND TO HEAR THEIR STORIES. AND ON NOVEMBER 17, A PRODUCTIVE AND IMPACTFUL MEETING WAS HELD BETWEEN FOOD VENDORS, MINNESOTA IMMIGRANT MOVEMENT, AND CITY OFFICIALS. THIS TONE IN MIND, THAT BRINGS US HER JANUARY. SO WE WANT TO CONTINUE WORKING ON BRIDGING THAT RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CITY. AND FOOD VENDORS. AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, FOCING ON EQUITY. AND CREATING A GROUP WITH HEALTHY AND INTENTIONAL CONVERSATIONS FOR BOTH VENDORS AND THE CITY SHARE VALUES AND
GOALS THAT ARE REFLECTED. WE WANT TO WORK ON AN ORDINANCE AND PROGRAM ALLOWING FOOD VENDORS TO SUCCESSFULLY AND SAFELY WORK IN OUR CITY. >> AND THAT BASICALLY THOSE MEETS AND THE WAY WE'VE BEEN WORKING IS THROUGH THE RELATIONSHIP IS WE ARE BUILDING BETWEEN THE VENDORS AND THE COMMUNITY AND THE CITY WORKING WITH ADMINISTRATION,
COUNCILMEMBERS, HEALTH DEPARTMENT, PARKS, AND ALL. WE AIM TO ENSURE THAT THE VOICES OF FOOD VENDORS ARE HEARD AND ACKNOWLEDGED. WE SEEK THE IMPLEMENTATION OF FOOD VENRS PROGRAM THAT MEETS NEEDS OF OUR COMMUNITY WHILE PROVIDING PATHWAY FOR OUR COMMUNITIES. AND THIS IS INCLUDING ASSESSABLE PERMITS, ORDINANCE SUPPORT, TRAINING, AND RESOURCES. WE
NEED TO ADDRESS CULTURALLY COMPETENCY, EDUCATION, AND FINANCIAL BARRIERS. THIS PROCESS HASN'T BEEN EASY BUT WE LEARN FROM OUR CHALLENGES. AND RESPOND PRO ACTIVELY TO CREATE MEANINGFUL CHANGE. WITH THIS, I'LL SAY THANK YOU FOR HEARING
THE STORY OF THE VENDORS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE PRESENTATION. WE HAVE BEEN RECOIZED BY COUNCILMEMBER CHAVEZ. I WANT TO REMIND THE MENS THAT WE DID POSTPE ITEM THAT WILL GIVE US MORE DETAILS OF WHERE THE CITY STANDS AND CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS FOOD VENDORS AND RELATIONS AND SO ON. ANY QUESTIONS THAT COME UP WITH, WE CAN HAVE THOSEUESTIONS ANSWER BY NEXT CYCLE. I HAVE ONE
QUESTION AND I'LL PASS IT TO THE MEMBERS. WHAT IMPROVEMENT OR THE CHANGE ISN THE -- FOR FOOD VENDORS, WHEN WHEN IT C -- WHAT ARE THE SPECIFIC PROCESS PEOPLE ARE SELLING LOOKING FOR THE CITY TO DO? >> WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR IS I THINK THE CONCLION THEY WANT
A PERMIT TO HAVE ACCESS TO SELLING THE FOOD OR FRUIT THEY'RE SELLING OUTSIDE. WITH THE REQUEMENTS THAT THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT PROVIDES. >> SURE. OKAY. I'LL RECOGNIZE KO COUNCILMEMBER CHOWDHURY. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH, MR. CHAIRMAN. I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR TAKING THE TIME. NOT ONLY TO JUST ORGANIZE THIS PRESENTATION, AND COME BEFORE
THIS COMMITTEE TO SHARE THE EXPERIENCE OF FOOD VENDORS, BUT, ALSO, JUST TO THE MEMBERS HER ON THE BODY. AS COUNCILMEMBER CHAVEZ AND I ARE WORKINGN THE ORDINANCE AROUND FOOD VENDOR LICENSES. SPECIFICALLY LOOKING AT A LOT OF IMMIGRANT COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND NEW ENTREPRENEURS IN THE CITY. THIS IS ONE ISSUE THAT IN ORDER FOR US TO COGOOD POLICY MAKING WORK, WE NEED TO RELY ON THE EXPERIENCES OF THE FOOD VENDORS. RIGHT. AND
MINNESOTA IMMIGRANT MOVEMENT HAS BEEN HUGELY HELPF IN BEING A BRIDGE BETWEEN FOOD VENDORS, THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS, AND COUNCILMEMBERS. IN ORDER FOR US TO BEST COMMUNICATE AND TALK THROUGH WHAT POLICY CHANGES WE NEED TO MAKE. BECAUSE AT FACE VALUE, IT MIGHT SEEM SIMPLISTIC. IT'S LIKE CREATE A SPECIFIC CENSE OR CHANGE DIFFERENT CONDITIONS. BUT AS A PRESENTATION REALLY SHOWED, THERE'S A HIGH NEED FOR CULTURAL
COMPETENCY THROUGH THE WORK THAT WE DOING. COMMUNICATION AROUND TRAINING FOR FOOD VENDORS, WHERE PEOPLE ARE AT, THERE NEEDS TO BE A LEVEL OF TRUST THAT OCCURS BETWEEN THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS, US AS POLICY MAKERS, AND THE FOOD VENDORS THEMSELVES. SO WE REALLY WANT TO ENCOURAGE THIS PRESENTATION SO WE'RE ACTUALLY CENTERING THE VOICES OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE MOST IMPACTED AND THAT YOU HAD THE FULLONTEXT WITH US AS WE MOVE THROUGH THE LEGISLATIVE
PROCESS. AND THAT'S JUST WHERE I'LL CONCLUDE. I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THE DISCUSSION THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE AS COLLEAGUES TOGETHER IN THE COMING MONTHS. AND, ALSO, JUST APPRECIATE OUR CITY STAFF FOR WALKING THROUGH THIS LEGISLATIVE AND COMMUNITY JOURNEY WITH US. WE HAVE HAD SEVERAL, SEVERAL MEETINGS FROM THE TIME THATE NOTICED THIS UP UNTIL THIS PRESENTATION. AND THERE WILL BE
MANY FOLLOWING THAT. SO THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER CHAVEZ. >> THANK YOU. [ SPEAKING IN LANGUAGE OTHER THAN ENGLISH ]
CHAIR OSMAN, I WANT TO MAKE SURE I SPOKE IN SPANISH. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO RECOGZE THERE'S LANGUAGE BARRIERS, AS WELL. CHAIR OSMAN, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR AOWING OUR COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO BE ABLE TO PRESENT THIS PRESENTATION TOD. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE HUMAN ELEMENT OF BEING OF DOING THIS WORK. AND I THINK HEARING THE PERSPECTIVE FROM OUR FOOD VENDORS BEING ABLE
TO PRESENT TODAY IS REALLY CRITICAL. AS WE ADVANCE THIS ORDINANCE MOVING FORWARD. I THINK ONE THING IS CLEAR, IS THAT WE'VE HAD PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS WITH OUR CITY STAFF. VERY PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS WITH COMMUNITY. I THINK THERE'S A OPPORTUNITY HERE. AND LOOKING FORWARD TO THE PRESENTATION NEXT CYCLE FROM STAFF ON THE WAYS WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE WORKING TOGHER TO ADVANCE AN ORDINANCE THAT IS ULTIMATELY GOING TO GET PEOPLE INTO COMPLIANCE ABIDE BY THE SAFETY REGULATIONS AND EXPAND ACCESS TO THE PERMITS TO MAKE
SURE THAT OUR RESIDENTS ARE ABLE TO GET THE PERMITS. BEING ABLE TO DO THIS JOB. BEING ABLE TO DO THE WORK THEY WANT TO DO. I'M EXCITED. VERY HAPPY TO SEE THIS PRESENTATION. THAT IS FROM OUR COMMUNITY. IN A VERY IMPORTANT TIME IN OUR COUNTRY. HONESTLY. AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I THANK THE FOLKS FOR COMING DOWN TO THE CITY HALL. IT'S NOT EASY GETTING DOWN HERE. HANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. I'M SEEING NO ONE ELSE. OH. I SEE COUNCMEMBER ELLISON. I'M SORRY. >> YOU'RE ALL GOOD. YEAH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR GIVING THE PRESENTATION. AND I THINK SO MUCH OF WHAT WE TALK ABOUT HERE IS SO TECHNICAL. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT COMPLIANCE. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THESE THINGS. BUT FOR YOU ALL TO BE HERE AND BRING FOLKS OM THE COMMUNITY HERE. I THINK IT LETS US KNOW, YOU KNOW, WHO ARE THE FACES BEHIND THE ISSUE. ND I THINK THE SAME GOES FOR COMPLIANCE. RIGHT. IT CAN BE THE CITY ANDT CAN BE,
YOU KNOW, CAPITAL C CITY CAN BE SCARY. TO SEE THE FOLKS DO THE REGULATING OUT IN COMMUNITY. AND I THINK BUILDING THAT BRIDGE AND BUILDING THAT CONNECTION, I THINK, IS IMPORTANT. YOU KNOW, I WANT TO ASK, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO HAVE THE FINAL WORD HERE. BUT I WANT TO ASK YOU GUYS, YOU KNOW, WHAT CAN --I THINK, HOW CAN COUNCILMEMBERS LIKE US, NOT JUST, YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT IT TO BE ALL ON COUNCILMEMBER CHAVEZ AND OTHER THANS, BUT HOWAN THE COUNCIL
AS A WHOLE. BECAUSE WE KNOW WE HAVE IMMIGRANTS IN EVERY SINGLE WARD IN OUR CITY. WE KNOW THAT FOLKS ARE TRYING TO DO BUSINESS IN EVERY SINGLE WARD ACROSS THE CITY. H CAN BE BETTER INVOLVED AND MORE PROACTIVELY INVOLVED IN MAKING SURE WE HAVE THE DISCUSSION ABOUT COMPLIANCE THAT WE'RE ENGAGED IN PROVIDING DIGNITY, SAFETY, AND SORT OF BRIDGING SOME OF THOSE CULTURAL AND LANGUAGE TWIEDZ DIVIDES THAT MIGHT EXIST BETWEEN STAFF AND THE COMMUNE I. CMUNITY.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. IT'S SUPER IMPORTANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT THER IS A LOT OF LEADERS AROUND -- THAT IT'S A GRASSROOTS IN ORGANIZATIONING THEIR OWN COMMUNITY. THEIR OWN WARDS. THAT WE NEED TO GO ON THOSE MEETINGS AND EVENTS WHERE YOU CAN ENGAGE THE DFERENCES. THE DIFFERENCES OF COMMUNITY THAT WE LIVE IN MINNEAPOLIS. BECAUSE THIS IS A VERY DIVERSE COMMUNITY. IT'S SO BEAUTIFULTH,
THE LATINO CMUNITY, THE NATIVE COMMUNITY. THE ASIAN MMUNITIES AND MORE COMMUNITIES WE HAVE AROUND MINNEAPOLIS THAT WE NEED TO ENGAGE THEM. WE NEED TO HAVE A SPACE FOR THEM. AND BE WITH THEM. AND LEARN WHAT THEIR CHALLENGES ARE AND HOW TO BUILD THAT RELATIONSHIP AND BUILD WHATEVER NECESSITY THEY'RE FACING. COLLARATING EACH OTHER. IT'S A WAY TO COME IN AND BRING THEM TO THE CITY AND
LEARN MORE ABOUT HOW THE SYSTEM WORKS. BECAUSE I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO EACH ONE OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS GOING TO THE COMMUNITY. WE RESPECT ERYBODY. THEY HAVE CREDIBILITY AND WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THERE'S A LOT OF GRASSROOTS LEADERSES THAT REALLY DO THE WK. THANK YOU. >> YEAH. WELL, --
>> ANOTHERHING. IF YOU HAVE CAPACITY. ARRANGING THE SCHEDULE, I KNOW FORANY VENN DOORS, SCHEDULES VARY FROM A 9:00 TO 5:00. FOR MANY FOOD VENDORS, THAT'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT SCHEDULE. IF Y'ALL HAVE CAPACITY, LIKE MTINGS, LIKE ON SUNDAYS. SATURDAYS. I KNOW THAT'S A LOT. BUT I KNOW THAT IF WE'RE GOING TO GET INTO THE CULTUR CULTURAL COMPETENCY. FOR FOO VENDORS
AND OTHER FOLKS, THAT SCHEDULE. SO JUST KEEPING THAT IN MIND. SO, YEAH. HANK YOU. >> WELL ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU FOR YOURED A HAVE SKATE SIGNED YOUR ADVOCACY AND BRINGING THIS ISSUE IN A REAL WAY. AND I OK FORWARD TO ENGAGING. BEING MORE HANDS ON IN THIS CONVERSATION WITH MY COLLEAGUES. I WANT TO APPRECIATE THEM. AND, YOU KNOW, COMPLIANCE AND FOOD SAFETY AND ALL THOSE TECHNICAL THINGS ARE IMPORTANT. BUT, ALSO, LIKE YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE CONDUITS OF CULTURE. WE HAVE A DIVERSE, AS YOU SD, A
DIVERSE CITY. RICH WITH CULTURE. FOODS IS A BIG CONDUIT OF CULTURE AND HOW WE KNOW EACH OTHER AND BUILD WITH ONE ANOTHER. SO JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR ADVOCACY. I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU. >> TNK YOU. AND SOMEONE WHO IS AN IMMIGRANT MYSELF. I APPRECIATE YOU STANDING UP FOR THOSE FOLKS THAT HAVE A LOT OF BARRIERS. COMING TO A NEW COUNTRY IS A CHALLENGE. AND I LOOK FORWARD WORKING WITH YOU. FEEL FREE TO LET US KNOW. A OUR STAFF, ALSO, IS WONDERFUL.
AND THEY ARE WILLING TO SIT DOWN AND WORK AND, YOU KNOW, TALK ABOUT THE COMPLIANCE STUFF. TO MAKE SURE THAT THE RESIDENTS THAT LIVE IN MINNEAPOLIS ARE SERVED THE BEST WAY WE CAN. THANK YOU SO MUCH. ALL RIGHT. SEEING NO FURTHER ACTION, I'LL ASK THE CLERK TO RECEIVE AND FILE FOR THAT ITEM. ALL RIGHT. THANKS EVERYONE FOR BEING PATIENT. SEEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS BEFORE US, WITH NO OBJECTION, I'LL DECLARE THE
MEETING ADJOURNED.