prevents here. Johnson here, toast here, Kim, here, council PRESIDENT Maker here, 7 PRESIDENT. No one Welcome everyone to our city council meeting. Thanks so much for joining us today. Before we start, I just want acknowledge that we are. Down a city clerk and down executive assistant normally really assist with the way these meetings are run. So our Intrepid Council director Jay Williams is taking their spot. If there are any technical or human difficulties that happened as a result of that switch today. Please bear with us, but I'm sure will be great. We welcome everyone now to join us and stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. The all. Consent agenda items. 5, 3,
30 year before you for your consideration. And I understand that we are taking item 16 for separate consideration. Is there anything else to be withdrawn from consent? Seeing none. I'll take a motion from his belief for the balance of the consent agenda. Any discussion of that motion? All in favor say Aye. Aye, all opposed. 7 in favor. None opposed. The consent agenda is adopted as amended. Item. 16 is resolution. 25 Dash 6.78 authorizing the Department of Public Works to accept the gift of travel expenses, unrelated conference cost of $1600 from Wts stash and then for city staff to attend the 2025. Wts International annual Conference end the budget to accommodate the gift of $1600. And I would like to move the version 2 of this item,
which jst increases the total maximum amount of the gift to $2000 to allow a little extra wiggle room in case they received more of a gift. Like to move urgent to for adoption. Any discussion that motion. Seeing none all in favor say Aye. All opposed. 7 in favor. None oppose. The amendment is approved. And we a. I would move approval the item as well. All in favor say all opposed. 7 in favor. None opposed. The resolution is adopted as amended. Item. 31 is resolution 25 dash 7.20, recognizing Fair Housing Month in Saint Paul. It's going. thank you. Council PRESIDENT Lacks briefly just recognize that APRIL is Fair Housing Month in Saint Pa and it was really fitting for us to have it on this council meeting as we are going to
vote on to protections and also vote on the Red Sea Lies Ation ordinance. Also the past couple weeks we didn't have a council meeting on our 5h Wednesday. So I want just recognize the hard work of now only our staff here and see Saint Paul 50's you know was real support of of tis for housing has a fair housing court support of this recognition, but also how the city of Saint Paul has established a fair housing framework that includes increasing hsing acess, decreasing housing displacement and the firm solely furthering our fair housing initiative. So I would like to and by page from the Saint Paul area Associations of Realtors to speak briefly
on the importance of this resolution and the organizations that help writing this work forward. They welcome a page and you'll be since your first public use this opportunity to let everyone know that when you come to speak, you can just stand in between the 2 makes you don't need to touch them at all. The picking up just fine. And after you're done testifying has just signed in on either the right or left the port. Welcome. Okay. We'll Thank you. Good afternoon, everyone. My name is page Kale and I'm here is a member of the Saint Paul Area Association of Realtors also a Saint Paul resident and a co-lead of twin cities Enb yes, in my backyard. As a member of spar, I would like to thank you all for your continued support of fair housing with this resolution during Fair Housing month. The purpose of the fair of the
1968 Fair Housing Act is to prevent discrimination in housing and to reverse neighborhood segregation. Although the law lay the groundwork for advocating discrimination in housing. 60 years later, we still have a long way to go for it to fully be realized in 2023, there were more than 34,000 complaints filed for housing discrimination which continues an upward trend over the past few years. According to findings in the 2020 for Fair Housing Trends report, there was a noticeably steep increase in the number of harassment complaints, particularly harassment based on color and race, which skyrocketed by 470% and 115% respectively. A 2021 study done at the University of California Berkeley shows that
racial residential segregation is both more widespread than is generally understood and more harmful. They found that more than 80% of major metropolitan areas in the United States were more segregated in 2019 than they were in 1990. A 2021 Minnesota housing report shows Minnesota is not immune to these nationwide trends. Well, Minnesota has the 3rd highest homeownership rate in the country. It also has the 4th largest disparity between white households and black indigenous and households of color. When it comes to home ownership. These data show that we have yet to achieve. The goals outlined by the Fair Housing Act, which is why bringing attention to it is so crucial. We are facing extremely difficult times and housing here in Saint Paul throughout the state and nationwide. I think it's fair to call it a housing crisis.
And that started decades ago, housing is getting more expensive in part because we face a steep housing shortage in Minnesota alone. It is estimated that we are over 1100 1000 units short of what would be considered a healthy housing market. More and more. I see that affordable homes are not actually affordable. The bottom end of the homeownership market is in the $300,000 plus range. And even those often needs significant work done. This reality means that so many people, especially younger generations and people of color just don't have the access to this foundational wealth building opportunity.
In order to solve these problems. We must build more housing of all types, continue to highlight the importance of in strength and fair housing policies and worked desperately to reduce these homeownership gaps that are unacceptable. With that as a resident of Saint Paul as a spar member and as a realtor, I am committed to upholding these ideals and goals set forth in the Housing Act. And I am very glad to see that's a policy committed to them as well. Thank you for your time and attention. Thank you so much for your comments and thank you to spire for your advocacy. As did, you have any other comments before we take a vote. Know my only comment. I just appreciate this actually
was inspired by and event that took place in Iran, though, where we talked about. The red lighting racial discrimination at has took place in is still taking place, particularly. In our city that we're trying to rectify and know through our policies and through our advocacy, make sure that we have fair housing as as the main, you know, lot of the land. So thank you again for coming in in advocating. That's all that we have today. Great. I'll take that as a motion from his family. Any discussion of the Seeing none all in favor say Aye. I all posts. 7 in favor. None opposed. The resolution is adopted. Item. 32 is final adoption of ordinance. 25 Dash 26 amending chapter. 43.0 3 of the legislative code pertain to vacant buildings as it relates
to the vacant building registration fee. And this is before us for final adoption. We've had a public hearing. We've had a frustrating a staff report. I do want to know we got some very helpful public comments. And even though this particular ordinance is not about the larger systemic changes to our bacon building ordinance that I know we all want to make and that we're working on the comment that we received, I think will be really helpful in informing some of those changes. So want to thank those who rode in and informed them that this is this is simply a feat change. So I would move approval. Any discussion. All in favor say Aye. All opposed. 7 in favor. None oppose. The resolution is adopted item. 33 its first reading
reading of ordinance. 25 dash 32 considering the application Matt Canavan to rezone the item for rezone property at 9.59. Payne Avenue from be to community business to t to traditional neighborhood. In amending chapter 60 of the legislative Code pertaining to the zoning map. And is this is a frustrating and believe we have a staff reports. Council PRESIDENT Council members, thank you, money and stuff and a curse. And a city planner it. And I. Presenting the case for the rezoning from to t 2 for 99. Avenue. 9.59 in Avenue is located in the pain fail and neighborhood. On the Southwest corner of the pain having case have intersection. It is. Primarily surrounded by the 2 zoning on the pain corridor with office used to the North Bar restaurant and retail uses to
the East. Retail and office to the south. And that is a vacant residential lot zone. H 2 to the West. The property at 9.59 pain. Ave has been used The general retail you specializing shoe sale since 1948. And has been zoned b 2 since 1975. The property was sold to the applicant in SEPTEMBER of 2024. And the applicant has requested a rezoning as the property owner from the 2 community business to key to traditional neighborhood. To establish a small cannabis product manufacturing facility. 4 findings that must be met for rezoning and Planning Commission found that these findings were met. He too, is a good fit for this property given that the uses allowed into 2 are. Complimentary to the mix of uses in the 2 zoned areas
along Penn Ave additionally, there's existing transit service along paying Ave. The uses, allowed into to help facilitate a vibrant business district along pay There's a question from Ms Perfect timing. One does Can Just kind of went back to how the rest of Payne Avenue this is zoned. You sure as the only 2 to this be the only 2 teams on property and that block radius. Council pesident Ken Senator Johnson Not be the only where is nearest. Went back to the slide, but you have dozens about where's the nearest? Yeah, it's about 2 blocks south. I don't. Have it up on the map here. This is just that intersection 2 blocks south. There is too. On the intersection of pain and wells. That is key to zone a. But additionally, I would say that the eu says into 2. Complimentary to the uses in
the 2. That's how we're evaluating Okay to as a follow could use a little bit more about like how how they're complementary I know it's not on the screen I don't think it's relatively close to where the next 2 to zone area just share a little bit more like when you are viewing this application and this request, what kind of what do you mean by complimentary and what exactly so when I see like, you know, just some of the things that kind zone for the bar restaurants, let tell you says office and retail and then I hear cannabis. Some just second of growing pressing fight. Could you just clarify again and like complimentary? How? Council PRESIDENT Council member Uses allowed it to include many of the commercial uses
allowed in the 2 as well. Us. Small. Low-density housing. Some low density mixed use. Residential and commercial that. With the commercial corridor such as payment Thanks, MISTER Anderson, thanks Johnson. And course, that advantage to having the staff report. A frustrating is that it gives us time to follow and get additional information we need to so appreciate the presentation. Any other questions for MR. Anderson. It looked like it. Okay. Thanks so much. The item is laid over to MAY 14 for second meeting public hearing. Okay. So this brings us to the public hearing section of our agenda just as a reminder to those who are testifying again, really, really glad to see the chamber so packed. We joke about are millions of viewers at home that looks
like millions viewers and listeners here today. So that's even better. I do want to let some of te millions on that side know that there are seats on that side as well. And you can hear just as well. So just wanted to encourage people. If you're feeling crowded, there's a lot of other seats over here. We're actually going to do a little bit of reconfiguring of the agenda just because we we have a couple of individuals who are here for individual items and to be respectful of their time. We're going to be moving them up. So we are going to Mormon to come up. Tell us which items those are and then we'll move on to the rest replicates. Item number 50 arrow hta. 25 dash one. 59 ratifying it killed Special Tax Assessment for property at 6.71. Cook
Avenue East. Good afternoon. Council members. Property 6.71. Cook Avenue East received an order to clean up the property. And DECEMBER 23rd of 24. It was to be done by DECEMBER 30th and it was rechecked on DECEMBER 31st. The work was not completed and the crew was dispatched to hit the cleanup. JANUARY 3rd. So about 10 days later. This is the original order going out to the owner. You can see the photograph with that. The snow-covered pick up the mattress there and follow-up. This is what the crew found when that's what the recheck was. And here's what the crew found. So throughout we're seeing the mattress, the pickup truck went away.
But the Mattress Firm Inc. The owner did indicate that he never received notice. Of this violation and therefore, he didn't correct it. Notice was sent to the owner's address of record and there was no returned mail. On So I don't know what to say on that. I can say that the he's the city has had a history of successfully providing notice to this honor 3 different occasions and this last year there were cleanups performed by the city in another 3 occasions that were cleanups performed by the owner before the city crew had to be there. So. There's been a correspondence of the past and MR. When indicates this is perfect today. thank you so much. That are unhappy, MR. When before you go away, any questions for it?
Not seeing any. All right. Welcome You'll have and everyone will have 2 minutes to testify with one exception, which I'll tell you later. So 2 minutes they go by fast. My job is to make sure everyone keeps to 2 minutes. So I will let you know when you're at time. There's also clock right in front of you. Again, just between the 2 microphones, you don't need to touch them. Start by telling us your name and where you're coming from. And afterwards. Just sign. And I'm one of the to sign in sheets and and present camp just a penny for education because you In fact, he does And it's only for contaminants. Okay. Thank you so much. Go ahead. Yeah. Good afternoon to and good afternoon, everyone. To win the to address 6, 7, 1, could have a new is subpar. I the mta land several
months ago. And the like to see the U.S. Several land as made to the yard. The someone and then doubling the gas and with it that the press. But I didn't see a that is. And the cdc me 3 citations. I ordered the time to pay 2 of them. And 3rd one 20 so about that I paid 2 of the more and I'm here. To appeal and the requests, you can, way 3rd. Assessment. Hey, man, part-time recently and they have a Toledo gets so. This amount a big for me please help me. Thank you. Thank you so much for your testimony make sure to sign and anyone else here to speak on this item. Seeing none. I'll take a motion from missing to close the public hearing all in favor say Aye. All posts. 7 in favor opposed the
public hearings close. Emaar when you can take a seat and we're going to talk about your your case so you can sit down. Thank you. Yes, thanks. This Thanks. Comes the PRESIDENT. Well, first, want to say Happy Thank you so much for joining us in the council chambers hearing testifying. have questions for you, Marsh. I'm wondering what's that? I mean, the property owner mentioned that they paid some these amount are ready. It could you repeat that question? What's the remaining balance that needs to be paid? Without looking at the old assessments, just looking at the one in front of the council today, the amount just check it out That's what we have today. Thank you. That's really helpful to know. I do want to say thank to the property Thank you for taking it. Now taking the issue into your own hands for
the past at the months that have been ordered. It sounds like you have taken action before in the past and I'm sorry that you didn't receive the the notices for this item here. What is really difficult situations like this is that when it is the city, that's that some sense workers out to do the cleanup, there has to be. But there is assessment for it. And if it isn't paid for by the property owner, then the fees just shift it over to other residents across the city. So it is a really tough decision to make what I would be willing to do is to spread out that the balance that needs to be paid over 5 years, though, because it does sound like what you with what you mentioned. It's a large amount you having to pay in one lump sum. So I hope that that's an accommodation that would be helpful to And I And light that motion. Thanks, And so the motion is 2. The recommendation, legislative hearing officer but allowed
the payments to be made over 5 years. Any discussion of that motion? Seeing none all in favor say Aye. Aye. All posts. 7 in favor. None opposed. The resolution is adopted as amended. This moment is there another case in front of us? Yes. Item number 60. Item, number 16, ratify legislative hearing iem 25 dash one. 71 ratifying the Field. Special Tax Assessment for 2, 0, 5, 4 Laurel Avenue. Council PRESIDENT, this is another summary of it in order the record on it as we speak. So this is a photograph of the red coaching question. It said. Please remove him properly. Dispose of the red couch
pallets from the rear of the property. Thank you. And so that is where we begin the. Staff was out there to do a recheck and the red coat he's gone. But these pallets to remain. Finally excuse about that. A contractor showed up at the property and did find that those pallets remained and remove. There's the after photo. Charged the suspect. $440 total. And the challenge is indicating that he disputes how the pilots were handled and whether or not they continue to be a violation of like to speak to that. Any questions from his moment? Looked like it. All right. This is a public hearing. Well, come The 2 minutes. Just a reminder to start tell us your name and where you're coming from. Thank you so much. But it was Thomas Fisher. I'm owner and resident of 2054 Laurel
Avenue for especially asked the council Labor Shepherd just part of for a dollar assessment because one, the contractor move property that was never cited and what's and the neighboring parcel and to the city acted long after it complied with the written order and without giving fresh snow is required by law. The item was not cited and was on the run parcel she didn't mention it and the photos on the front pulls back up. Are able to do that. There was a great couch and those photos that was on the neighboring lawn, the neighboring parcel that was taken away by this contractor was not even included in the original assessment. That was a red couch completely different. And but Ad also the gave me 5 days to move the couch and read pallets. I met that
deadline for the couch and had a range removal for the pallets within 5 days. Basically we had those all removed from our property. There was there were 2 stacks of pallets. That's what I wanted. So as you can see up there on the screen out us have in front of you. But there's that great couch in the background. There. Not the right coach. And in the next photo, you can see that they have taken away the gray couch that was here. That's on our neighbor, that this garages are neighbors and not our property. And then these blue pallets here in the middle. We're part of much larger stack of pallets that were used for a event we had in our backyard. And those that big stack of pallets was taken away. We had scheduled to be taken away and the smaller stack was remain in our yard
and used for our parking pass for cars to back up the original. And after we had taken all the spots way, w have never received any notice from the city that those pallets in the rear of our parking pat, we're a new sensory needed to be removed. We are moved a much larger stack of pallets that. You are at times to manage your app up. Okay. Removed. I'll just skip to my clothes in them. I support the city's cleanup program here. However, the record show acted quickly. State of communication. Was billed for removing an item that was never cited and wasn't even on my lawn. Equity in the code. Both require that the assessment struck or at least paired down to minimal cost of the last stack, which in normal power, Louisville is about $40 versus the front of 40.
Thank you. Appreciate it. Anyone else here to testify on this item, don't forget to sign in. It doesn't look like it take a motion from MR. Provides key to close the public hearing all in favor say Aye. I also host. 7 in favor. None opposed. The public hearing is closed. And you can take a seat, MR. Pratt's, Kenya, Pfizer's, thank you. Present a curfew in mind that latest overs have a chance to chat with legislative hearing. Officer Marshall motion is for a one-week layover of the item. Any discussion of the motion seeing none all in favor say Aye. Aye. All opposed. 7 in favor. None oppose. The resolution is laid over to MAY 14th 2025. As far are there any other items legislative hearing agenda here to speak, not that I'm aware but I will be here and he's somebody shows up Quick. Thank you so much. Okay. We are going back to our
regularly scheduled program kind of we're going to do. 34 35 36 in a slightly different order. We're first going item 36 35 34 just to make sure people are paying attention so well. Item, 36. Item 36 is a pc. 25 dash 4 considering the appeal of Brian peers to decision and the planning commission improving every establishment of nonconforming use for a belt plea. A go or goce at 2.37. Richmond Street and I believe we have a staff report. Welcome back. Striker said. It's a PRESIDENT Can members. Hello again. We step on my presentation. Technical difficulties now. Thanks for
your patience. So this case is to 37 Richmond Street. It's appeal of the planning commission approval of a nonconforming use permit for a service business with workshop. 2.37 Richmond Street is located in the West 7th neighborhood on that. Northwest corner of Saint Clair, Ave and Richmond Street intersection. The surrounding zoning is. Primarily residential to the North South and west with its 2 zoning residential to the East. T one zoning. There's also an auto service station to the southeast, area zoned b, 3. Extensive history at this site. So I just want to go into a bit of background the previous use was a longtime auto repair business that became a legal nonconforming use due to a citywide rezoning
in 1975. So it was. Allowed prior to 1975 and that zoning It was. Re zones. And the previous it's not allow Under that rezoning that sense. It was. Established prior to the rezoning. It was. Some might say grandfathered really using that term now. But and the person was rezoned to its current t one zoning in 2011 as part of the District, 9 residential zoning study. Auto repair license associated with the property expired in 2023. The expiration of the license led to the loss of the legal nonconforming use status at the property. The current owner. Purchased the property in 2023 and initially operated without proper city permission. This is their operations after a complaint was forwarded to Department of Safety inspections. And apply to become a legal
nonconforming use with the Re establishment. Nonconforming use permits. In our zoning code. A reestablishment of a nonconforming use permit is. Allowed if applied for once the nonconforming use has been vacant for more than a year. Planning commission ultimately approved. With conditions on APRIL 4th. There were additional conditions. Addicts quick summary, but happy to take any questions. There MAY be questions on this right? Thanks so much. Any questions. Doesn't look like it. All right. We might need backstroke effect. All right. This is a public hearing and this is the situation I mentioned earlier where we actually do have more time given for certain parties. So will first have the appellants those individual who submitted the appeal coming up and you'll have 5 minutes. Then the the applicants, the owner of the
space in this case would have 5 minutes and then we'll open it up for general public testimony where everyone will be limited to 2 minutes. So we'll start with 5 minutes for the appellants and remember to start with your name where you're coming from. And - welcome up. Good afternoon Council. Thank you, members for taking our field and taking the time out today to try and assess the situation and help us. Back a look at 4.47. Saint Clair been there since 1984. We have extensive remodel are also got a brand-new basement underneath w put two-story addition on remodeled from top to bottom. My wife and I some family members have done invested heavily in our hall. Had the one we moved into. The also was a residential home on the 2.37. Richmond lot. Firms
turned into a parking lot. The parking lot was was some resistance to that. And we were polling condemning a ball the meantime, a lot to what was posted on the lot was never follow through with the city Planning Commission to make sure that what was to plant what was given to us was there. So although the parking boxers, things are missing the parking lot today that were never bust ever put there. Anyway. This not good for this one. When construction company moved in all they've been making we tried to see we can live with it. That's why call right away. But these raw materials are on loading and unloading trailers the planning Commission is trying to compare that 2 of starting up a car and driving into a garage. It's calling it an equal. It's not they're loading unloading. And their documents are letting them use
the parking lot for storage and loading and unloading. And that was not a lot United Healthcare shop. They got one mechanic that was there. The person on the house was working in the garage. You know, we've got 10 people come and gone. Impact is far greater than what it is. The hours are proposing the use of 77 7 days a week. They already were coming around holidays and everything else. I don't have a home. Taken away my my home. If you allow this to go work we are home, we can't we can't enjoy what you invested It's not the proper use for this. And they made a mistake on classifying it as a similar used to an auto shop. It's a construction company, which is clearly not a lot of He won. It's not a lot also storage. I think they didn't put enough weight on the fact that what it actually is that tried to massage it.
And if you listen to the planning cmmission, they were talking about why are we trying to do this should be where we're trying to. 57, where we putting lipstick on this. So they clearly struggling and Energy Department to what's the right to do. It's not the appropriate thing for the neighborhood. I's not a good use is not a good match and it's really got harm It's going to damage to us for their property value and our quality of life. I'm not saying it can't develop into something but a construction company is not it. Member, you try to put something on the voice activated projector. Over we try project something. We just need the projector. On. Thank you. You can put it back where you were putting it come up in the state up a thing. Was just trying to show their the nature of their business is a great They flip
homes so they bring back debris. We're talking about bad. You're talking about coaches. You talk about furniture. Appliances, that's kind of stuff to bring back. So bags garbage left around the property. We can't control whether linebackers Festus whether bring back lead, whether bugs and rodents, we can't control. And that was what the way they use the property. There's no there's no way to safeguard that were not exposed to that. That's really the problem. And they're bringing stuff is not just car concrete on the site. Relies are trying to say if we do these things a little bit to get it, it's not going to work. It started at 5 o'clock 05:30am, in the morning. I tried to second year to talk to anyone right back to in 2024. Start in the morning early again. There's one guy trying to be quiet, but you can't be quite at that time of the morning of the neighbors.
Quiet. You can actually have your windows open. Enjoyed in the city quiet. So in a certain was tougher on It's disturbing. So it's just not a good He says in letter he wants to be a good neighbor. His grass is about a foot tall right now. Is it my responsibility to call the city and turn them any question about why she years since he's been there. They also they'll take care of the show this null. They don't maintain the property in a good manner. He says he wants to be a good neighborhood is not doing anything to show that. So I have no faith that he's going to act and follow through these conditions. We're just going to prolong this problem. Make it worse. Already got about $10,000 up internet speeds in legal fees to try and stop this. I'm going want to attorney to make the city aware of that. They were used in the property and property. And I just want to turn to ask that they would follow the rules and applying correctly when the city attorney to approach my
attorney should what do you want out of this? I said I want them to follow the rules and follow this through. So that's when they dismissed the case. They said they would do that. And that's not where we're at. They're trying to get it to fit in it's not appropriate. I need help from the call. So get allow this, I'm moving on making product more appropriate use for that need your help. I don't know what else to say I think. Thank you very much for testimony. All right. Thank you very much. Make sure to sign in and then we will hear from me. The property owner next and absent because you're using an interpreter, we will make sure that you have equal time will stop the clock during the interpretation. Coming up, welcome. Instead between the 2 microphones and just tell us your name and where you're coming from to start 2 cases
the start of listening Good afternoon. My name use of vehicle. Both of And that's just We're not going to for them to their And I appreciate dissipation of the support that we're going to have or we can have from when I bought the property a pretty much I bought it Newton and for my construction mission. But I do know that the rule, which you know, should be allowed. Be honest. I didn't know the rules kick out. Initial. And the whole. My son kind of like got to there. Went in the water. But I'm just going to she full, which we charge of continuing with a federal covid actually on whole movie ostds. Yes misses. But unfortunately my son passed away in months ago. He you'll know put him on man and which are in. But out of I was unable to move us
just trying to. But we're going show people Libya and that meant that alisal medical bull, But I didn't have clue that I couldn't material or move anything in those days when fortunes appropriate to a where people could go in the If month that he had and I got to that. And that's the motive that I've had so much to those in my yard. She she fed them is the son Libya's building will cause to get your lovely us again. But you just need to tell me what tools that they need I will make sure that I will follow them. No, nothing going pull him But on show that so this amendment, the money that I don't have any programs, I'm from the same community. Monica Castillo k I do I'd love supplement. Only thing
that I ask is if you could help me, please to solve this problem. We got it in the hole or is Bush and what I'm able see that going be a good friend of the neighborhood for sure. Should a nothing will done yourself into it than if it was unable you know, get the needle that is type of business over 20 years. And I've never any issues until today. So which you if just give ghoshal even when se I don't anything else to say. I just want to say that I'm a good citizen. Show. She put the You got to your right. And if if got to make one but I really want to start communication within and oh, no, we open that none other than what they do this and I got shoot them. If they could just be I'm not going put any materials in my there. We have
to know when I will find but know we have been can the MAY have a couple trucks trailers. But I was not have anything that interferes creates any the store events with the community going think gonna think with request on front because picking I don't big want folks 11 the last just before. But I it's only the trial is that I'm using 4 might work. If you're one of them, wish they left the the city commission to be sure put us into the lush if anybody in the community needs my services, I will help them. If don't get to see on the on the things that I want to say, look U.S. So, it. Sorry about what happened in the past because they ddn't know the
rules. But I know now. Think that if she does to let you should thank thank you very much for tells Okay. Now we'll move on to the regular rest of our public hearing and again, for all future testimony, there will be a limit of 2 minutes per person that does go by really quickly. And I will be can you at the 2 minutes, which is the least favorite part of my job. So come on up. Would be great if folks do my lining up. If you're planning to speak on this issue just so we can get a sense of how many folks were expecting. And our first speaker can come on up. Definitely council members. Thank you for taking the time to address this issue of my name is make a door. 2.23 Colborne. So I am an immediate neighbor to the site in question. They also serve as the board PRESIDENT Of the West 7th Florida Federation want to start off by saying that we support small
independent businesses and we empathize with the situation, but it is not the community or the city or the City council's responsibility to do the necessary due diligence for property owners in determining if 3rd, if their planned uses permitted at the site. So I just want to make sure clear on that. The nuisance issues have been discussed Maybe they'll be fixed. Maybe not. But sure. The federation, our big concern is actually with the zoning and the film process between the planning Commission and planning staff This is a neighborhood noted it's one block from the Saint Clair, West 7th neighborhood node which is supposed to be supporting pedestrian friendly transit oriented development that provides community
amenities. The previous use was a small car repair shop that did provide some neighborhood services. Locals get their cars fixed. This is purely a construction workshop that has no public facing amenities whatsoever. So there's a number of other in consistencies with the comprehensive plan. But one thing that we're concerned about is the zoning committee initially determined to 5 to 0 to reject this. Extension, the not just use permit, the planning staff actually came back against those recommendations and proposed the staff report recommending approval and ultimately it was passed with very little discussion about the community concerns alliance with the comprehensive plan. We also
have questions about whether city ordinance 62.1, 0, 9, applies, which is additional condition that requires a notarized addition of 100 residents within 100 feet of the property in support never happened there. It wasn't mentioned it wasn't discussed. Thank you so much. Appreciate your testimony. Don't forget to sign and come on up. My name is by the vet for 6.60, Clair Avenue. And I'm just here in support of the neighborhood. Been there for the past 15 years in the neighborhood. I frequently went to the automotive mechanic who was about half a block away I I would rather see something there for the neighborhood for for people. Interact with their. I mean, my my plan when I saw first set was opening like this kind of industrial themed coffee shop and there, but that never
panned out I I just want to say that the property is surrounded by houses. Think it's it's in the neighborhood surrounded by houses. So it's I think, unfortunately, the owner chose the wrong location for his type of business and really shouldn't be there. I'm in support of denying the renewal of the permit. Thank you very Forget to sign and welcome up. Good afternoon. Members of the council. Well, tere are many other issues, many of my name is Anna Swanberg. I live at 2.17 Richmond Street, 2 houses down from the property we're discussing today. Tere are many other issues that have been mentioned previously that I would like to address. But I'm gonna keep my comments the
city ordinance. 62.1, 0, 9, e which discusses the requirements for the reestablishment of nonconforming use permit of the 5 conditions. None are being met. The requirement that number one is the structures, structures and land combination cannot reasonably or economically be used for a conforming purpose. I believe that with a little creativity, the garage and lot could be repurposed into something appropriate for the neighborhoods such as a coffee shop or artist's studio. Requirement to the proposed use is equally appropriate or more appropriate to the district than the previous legal nonconforming Ryan talked extensively about this. So I don't feel like I need to elaborate on that any further. Requirement. Number 3, the proposed use will not be
detrimental to the existing character of the development in the immediate neighborhood or endanger the public health safety or general welfare trucks consistently park across the sidewalk posing a safety risk to pedestrians, particularly the many children that live in the immediate vicinity. I lived 2 houses down and have 3 elementary age children. And there are many others that live on the same block. So with the increased traffic, there is a risk to pedestrians in the neighborhood requirement for the proposed use is consistent with the comprehensive plan. This point I think is largely covered by what other people have said that there could be more appropriate uses semi industrial use of the contractors. Lot is not appropriate for the comprehensive plan. And
finally, the requirement 5 with a notarized petition of at least 2 thirds of the owners describe at of the parcel Lake in favor of the establishment of the permit that make mentioned has not been anywhere in the discussion you need to stop thank you very much. Thank him to get to sign in. Just a reminder to everyone that since 2 minutes does go by so quickly, any e-mails or other correspondence that we received on these items is in our record and is in front of us for review. So don't feel like if you are unable to say everything in 2 minutes. That's the only way to communicate your views to the council will come out. Daryn told I live 2, 1, 2 Colborne Street, which on the block that that is in question here. It's a really weird block. Don't know if it knew
seam that it's like there's no So I were all within 100 feet. One lives on that block. So I did send an email. I have sent correspondent. i'm just here saying a look at my e-mail. But up, I just want to stick the higher level view of of what the zoning, you know, just like asking you to like live with the plans that we've made like as a community. I was on the district also in 2011 and yes, I was a user Magic's autos. Well, it was really nice to be able to push my part to the auto repair shop, but that's not what this type of the new type would be. Obvious. Not going to neighborhood serving business. If you look down and that like I you know, my my original comments. Where how the staff laughable the staff report was and how this would the standards and it doesn't. We, you know, like this is going to be within the commercial know of of Saint
Clair and West 7th, which is going to be a transit stop. It's going to be a different kind of transit stop than people thought. But it's going to be a transit stop. It's going to be a stationary design. There's been a lot of talk about, you know, what's going to happen within the station area. So saying that this is commercial area, it's not commercial. I also the calling it a service The gas station's convenience store. Others do auto service there. So you know, this is a very this is, you know, restaurants, grocery stores, all these things. I mean, this this block could use, you know, more density could use that coffee shop that that you want or I mean, there's you know, so many great opportunities. I want to point
out that staff did at one point say, well, it's a hard we use for property and it can't be something like a coffee shop or restaurant said, well, I want to be bad weather and have that conversation. I mean, we can do good, creative reuse and we should. And you deserve Please be either. Parks, thank you very much. To forget to sign unwelcome up. Hi, name is Rebecca Company. Essalak that they you love it. For 6.60, Claire. With Jermaine who testified earlier. I was also our cars went to Magic's before. I'm primarily here to support my neighbor who is in huge amount of distress only recently learned about it, how much it's disrupting their quality of life. But I want to say, you know, first and foremost,
I am, you know, a supporter immigrant and small business owners. And after hearing the testimony of senior Yale, I my heart goes out to him and sorry for the loss his son and understand where the circumstances of that brought us to where we are today. I want to give instead some context around commercial businesses and our neighborhood. So my husband and I had a small community art gallery, something that would be appropriate for mixed studio. You know, commercial space like this one. And we had a space on Smith Avenue close that down during the pandemic. So I've been calling around many places in West 7th neighborhood and surrounding neighborhoods looking for something similar. And there's a systemic issue places not being shared with the
community and appropriate timeline so that community, local community members can make a decision about how to activate those spaces. And then most of the time rent the families. Don't even call me back. So they would rather that those commercial spaces go empty without anybody activating those spaces. And so my my larger concern is about the way in which this place was purchase without us, even knowing about it. Meanwhile, we have all these other empty places that are more industrial. Just one block away. Thank you very Thank forget to sign in will come up. I Lo Council, my name is Fernando vague. I also live in the neighborhood. So first of all, it's not a workshop were not working in there. We bring our trailers. We're not working there all day. Like we grab
early in the morning. Had to get our job done. And yes, with the debris that does come from. The job that we had did. They closed the places where we can go down like 05:00pm. So there's nowhere else we can go down. So we have to dump that tomorrow and more like that. So I that all the trash and debris stuff came to be because we have to sometimes we get out of work later. Flight. But yeah, we're not working in there. The trucks being in the ways because it's also the sidewalk is on the driveway as well. So kind of makes that, you know, lke the truck has to go to sidewalk over the sidewalk because it. But yeah, that's that's really all I have to say too late thank you for your time. Yeah. Thanks so much for testimony get to sign in.
Well, come up. And I just encourage at this point anyone else wants to testify item. 36, please stand up to get line. This is a final thought. And repairs of 65. Okay. Let Brian's I used to live at 4, 4, 7, Clair going up. Before it was an auto shop. For me. It was it was busy. Traffic caused a lot of accidents on o the corner grew up there Lot of accidents on the corner. I can't imagine that back in trailersyou know, over the sidewalk the extra traffic. There's gonna help anything else far as that I had a few things going sticking out. I'm not my thing to speak publicly. So all you I know it will. So he would follow a rules that were given to I know what a closing table when
you buy a property. explained what the uses of the company and what previous you slice. And I know is one of the neighbors. He said that, you know, he was running an automotive shop out of there. So I think you have a little bit better idea of rules that were at and that he MAY be breaking some. Also know during a season this is for operating business there. He continued to operate through that. So I don't think, you know, that giving him a new set of rules is you know, rectify the situation. Also last seen on the the nonconforming use a 84 hours a you can imagine that construction 84 hours a week. It's, you know, most of the waking hours a day for some of
the 7 days a week, 12 hours a That's a lot to ask out of a neighborhood in residential neighborhood. My 2 to day care my mom through down when construction, the breeze coming Don't know what it is. It's coming out. All the houses that saw 50's houses in Highland Park. Well, there's a lot of his best. This is a lot pain. Most tells us. And you are times I do need to have your the field with. Thank Thank you very much. Don't forget to sign in. All With that looks like public hearing on that item. I to close the public hearing all in favor say Aye. Opposed. 7 in favor. None opposed. The public hearing is closed. I want to thank everyone so much for coming out to testify today and also for all of your engagement over the course of this process over the last few months MR. Vargas, I want to
say I'm very sorry for your loss and I'm really grateful to you your openness about that. And for doing business in the city. Yes, the cuncil in these situations is very narrow. Its to see if there are any errors in the findings of the previous body to to send a recommendation to us. In this case, it was the planning commission. That sentence recommendation for approval. And so our job is to see if we can if we think they were in error in any way. So if our discussion seems very narrow and very legal and very court like that's because it has to really acting as a court and the situation. So I the council members where this is and I watched the planning Commission meeting in the entire discussion dedicated to this item and listen to the entire zoning committee discussion this item and I've read the record in the
testimony in front of us. And I believe that the planning Commission erred in findings 1, 2, 4, And I'll explain to my colleagues Righ. Finding one is that the structure structure inland combination cannot reasonably are economically be used for conforming purpose. This was mentioned during the testimony today, but in the staff report and in the zoning committee discussion and in the Planning Committee discussion, the staff report only listed daycare our residents as possible uses, but they ignored at least 3 other uses that are allowed by right into one districts, including a trade school general officer studio and service business, which includes some of the retail that was just
mentioned. Those specific alternate uses were never discussed at the planning commission and the entire question of whether other uses for reasonable was barely discussed except for a point that was made that would require that remediation would be needed if it were converted to a residence. But that's not the only permitted use. Findings to and fighting for are also not met. Finding to reads the proposed use is equally appropriate a more appropriate to the district. Then the previous legal nonconforming use and finding for is about compatibility with the Conference of Plan staff's findings, which then oriented all the conversation of Planning Commission focus only on one part of this, which is whether or not the
use is more or less intense. We heard some comments about this just now. I think reasonable people can differ as to whether or not concrete truck storage and warehouse is more or less intensive than an auto repair shop. The trucks are heavier and there's different kind of contents. But, you know, there might be more cars and the amount of daily traffic might be smaller but the discussion completely overlooked the question of appropriateness to the district from a different angle, not intensity, but whether or not the business is oriented toward the needs of the neighborhood. And as we heard here tonight, this business is in a neighborhood note and the Conference of plan repeatedly over and over again and all of its policies about neighborhood nodes emphasizes that the kind of
businesses that are appropriate for those nodes are those that somehow, sir, the immediate neighborhood, it's not that we're trying to encourage all businesses are all economic development is specifically businesses that. Quote, develop the micro economies of neighborhood notes or invest in neighborhood notes to, quote, achieve development that enables people to meet their daily needs within walking distance. Or promote, quote, neighborhood serving commercial businesses. So it's clear over and over in the comp plan that the neighborhood know it has. Supposed to be for a specific kind of business. The planning Commission barely discussed this question. The only time the question of whether or not this business was neighborhood oriented came up was 1, one commissioner mentioned that the business was neighborhood oriented because he could walk
in and ask about getting concrete work done at his home. By that reasoning, any use would be neighborhood serving as long as there was a person behind the counter. And you can walk in and ask them for services, right? A scrap metal yard would be neighborhood serving if you can walk in and ask someone behind the counter to help you with your scrap metal. But that doesn't make any sense. And even if it dd, tere isn't going to be anybody behind the counter to talk to at this business because there isn't a counter. The applicant has very clearly stated in application. We do not anticipate any customer visits to the shop. The property will strictly for storage purposes. Only it could not be more clear that this is not a neighborhood serving business. The applicant is clear as such. And so it is not consistent with the neighborhood know door with
the Conference of plan. Rather than focusing on all of these. Relevancy is and the appropriateness of the use, the discussion of the planning commission only revolved around whether the conditions could be imposed to make the use more acceptable to the neighborhood conditions like planting trees are repairing the fence are not blocking neighbors, driveways, which is already legal. But all of those conditions which took up again almost all the time at Zoning Committee and Planning Commission. Those are completely beside the point. Those conditions are about how to make the use less of a nuisance to the neighborhood rather than whether or not the use is appropriate in the first place. And that to me is the most glaring error in the discussion and the planning Commission. So for those
reasons, I believe the planning commission, Aaron, this decision and I would move to grant the appeal. Open it up to my colleagues for additional comments and thoughts. Doesn't look like there are any okay. We will take roll call. So the motion again is to. Approve the appeal, which would deny that reception of the nonconforming. It spread. Prevatt ski note. Yang. I. Johnson no. Toast. Kim. Yes. Council PRESIDENT Maker, I. They're being 5 in favor to oppose those being opposed prevents can Johnson the motion of intent to grant the appeal? The motion of intent is to grant the appeal. 35 his final
adoption ordinance. 25 Dash 31 creating chapter one 93 of the lab city code pertaining to tenant protections. The public hearing was continued from APRIL 9th. All right. And this before us for continuation of a public hearing. We held on APRIL 9th and there are no amendments bing proposed. So the ordinance remains in the same form and what you saw it on APRIL 9th. So we do welcome your testimony, but especially would welcome testimony. That is new. We're not repetitive or redundant from testimony that maybe was given on APRIL 9th. And again, the ordinance has not changed in its form since then. Again, you'll 2 minutes. Start with your name where you're coming from get to sign in. And if you're here to testify, intended protections. And Scott has grave that was here the last time. But I different points to make.
According hospital couple blocks from the Capitol. And I never thought I'd see things like this happening in the city of always lived in the money side. Now and manage a little 5 plex the stripping those boundaries that protects the safety of the tenants. What the worst part of this ordinance does. Safety boundaries. Those are those are good, healthy relationship, boundaries that we all have. We discern what we want relationships with and then also affecting how we can sever those rlationships on equal manner. He's just cause vision to put conditions on of this. Just isn't working out about. Give notice and it it's just a simple as that. Call it tenant protections. But you're not protecting the tenants. The only ones you're serving Fallon's. Imagine if you're prison for a felony. And somebody is threatening cause
that happens all the time. There and your wife or girlfriend in your children renting. Are forced to live next t more Fallon. This because of an ordinance like this, those people there that are that are threatening. You can also put their other people next door to your family to abuse an end. You know, covertly or overtly. And then you have the management can't even hardly get him out of there. That's that's the effect of what's going on here. You're putting the most predatory felons. Housing, whether you, you know. Our on our own rent, all it effects, you it not without empathy for people that have committed crimes. There is healing, but our city, our state doesn't
help with that at all. But there is always in America the opportunity to diligently save up only 20% of the capital required to buy your own. And ever, even most egregious felons can do that and shouldn't everybody should do that? We all have a duty in America on our piece of the pie and keep it from these corporations. What your other ordinance is discriminate. Favoring over. We the people. Thank you. Thank you so much. Wake up to 2 minutes. I was very impressed. Don't forget to sign it. Anyone else here to testify on will come Good afternoon. My name is Tony. Can I reside in Cottage Grove. I own several rental properties in Saint Paul. I've been a real estate broker since 2012 and I've been a landlord since about 2015. 504, b of state statute covers most of what tenant
protections is trying to do. A perfect world. We wouldn't need a tenant protections ordinance because landlords would already be complying with 504, But we do know that that's not. The reality I have also been a city COUNCILMAN The sailors and and I when I took my oath. It was on to promote the health and welfare. My community through enacting local ordinance. And I believe that's what you guys are trying to do here. You're trying to promote the public, the public safety, health and welfare of your mmunity. I support. Tenant protections what its goal is. Sometimes is the law of unintended consequences. And as councilmember, I sometimes had to make decisions that were unpopular. But were the right choice to progress. The the
best outcome from a city tenant protections. Sounds good on paper. It should do more than it does. You know, Final 4 0.1, 8, 1, says that landlords are supposed to inform their tenants that the landlord tenant handbook exists. I bet if you survey to 100 landlords 70 of them wouldn't even know what that. Okay. It's so I think. Informing tenants is a huge tenant to making tenant protections it more effective rate. People need to know what their rights are. Thank you for your time. Thank you very much. Thank you for your service and the city council as well. Yeah, afternoon city council members a Testify. But there are things that I defend. I notice. And man meant I came in late. So excuse me, I just
want to point out. One of the things you page 2. It says exemption to the limitation on rent increases shall not apply to a project until I am so sorry, but that is actually the other ordinance for considering rent stabilization. And right now we're on tenant welcome you back as sorry. I got a have a change. Wouldn't even know about thank Just make a comment. Well, we'll you back on that item because we have to stick to this one for. Okay. We'll bring you Okay. Thank you. Coming up. Hi, Tom Baggaley. I love it to 7 to Woodlawn Avenue throughout my whole life. Ramsey County lived in Saint Paul. My whole life only just recently left for college. I had actually structured my speech to include the 2 sons of the first time for me, just kind of figure and help how things are done. Just say I
have always. Been interested in real estate. Got my first job out of college department broker. I know the implication of that in reference to what what's being discussed. Haven't made a dime a real estate. You don't make a dime continue so deal. So it's not really implicated as a bias here. I just feel like this would not go over well with a lot of owners that I talked to. As my job. It's literally my job to talk to owners stuff that affects them stuff that could lead to affecting them. I call probably 100 donors every day. And every owner that I talked to that I talked to about this and talk to how they're dealing with. Rising inflation and construction costs and insurance and building expenses building that was built in 1920, not 2004. It's all somewhat manageable. But it's manageable. What's not manageable is when you talk to
every owner, they all literally every single one of them. Sometimes countless down the line, even if it's a duplex or if it's units they all have stories and those stories. Stories vary with. Difficulty complexity. I talked to older yesterday that on the building Grand Avenue, just a small 5 plex caught up. She had in 1994. She had members living in the House can get him out for 6 months. Happy. They're so sorry. Thank you your testimony. Well, coming up. If folks, John Slade and that on the and I am a small onboard, I heartily in favor of all of these tenant protections. I want to thank I Councilmember Johnson for pushing him. And doing which
they've got. These are reasonable protections and they're reasonable protections for an industry that has a history of abuses, redlining, restrictive covenants. I mean, if you look at the history of what has happened real estate racism up and down. I want very much everybody the work on the Fair Housing Month. He's and I also wanted to say that as the organizer, the same poll, Micah Chapter one tenant protection that we have been pushing. We don't see yet is fair housing testing. And so I am using this opportunity to say, hey, let's get for housing testing where we get people to different races. But the same financial background to go out into the industry and see what departments to get shown to see what housing
they get, houses they get shown. And if there are differences, it's a violation of fair housing lw and it gets prosecuted by the city. Thank you very Thanks so much. Comfort to sign a. All right. Last call for any testimony on tenant protections number. 35. Not seeing any. So I'm take a motion from Johnson All right. If anyone else is here to testify for 10 protections, please line up now at. Otherwise. This is at welcome, Sir. All right. Thank you for the opportunity. I also want to thank my my single parent mother who raised my brother and mostly Frankel. Situations here in Philadelphia. Moving here, we actually found ourselves homeless at one
point. Want to urge City Council to continue to not continue monetize. Listen to what voters have across Saint Paul advocated for. And that's stronger. Renters Looking back 20 years. I'm so sorry, but I think you also might be testifying on rent stabilization, not tenant protections. Is that right? This is a blanket. Looking back 20 7, we have the housing crash. And here we're looking at the same some of the same But with look, we're struggling. First blue sky at this point for wall simply scare. As renters individuals and families to call this community home. Let's stand together and strengthen strength, lies in unity, advocating for our
needs and well-being. Not prioritizing private interest over lives and hopes. Which meant to say your name and where you're coming from today. Yanni from district to work 6. Thank you so much. Don't forget to sign an alright. And take a motion from his Johnson to close the public hearing all in favor say Aye. a host. 7 in favor. None opposed. The public hearing is closed Johnson. Thank you so much. Council PRESIDENT And thank you to all of the community members who took the time write an e-mail. Our office 10, one of our many community discussions with council members at the table. I for the past year and a half. I've had the honor of being able t be lead counsel member onto protections that says. Officially, you know, the first time our office is bringing forth a my little ordinance that I think is
really important. And honestly, truly stems back beyond my tenure and is pretty much bringing back an old promise and revitalizing that reclaiming that and ensuring that committee members understood that we didn't forget about it when it was voted to re send prior to my time. I want to just share share with you all that. I am thankful to the council and to the administration, the city and our city attorney's office and Sparta and you can have their city attorney Lindsay Olson as well for working with U.S. Spending many hours. I'm sure they're probably like, yeah, hours nights, weekends, but I just want to share with you all that like it took a
lot of work to bring this forward. And I wuld also remiss if I didn't discuss and just highlight former Councilmember Jalali and doing half who also participated along with commit councilmember Pratt as well. And some of the initial temperatures conversations. But I think the main things, you know, for my comments, i'll be brief and just one of the things I think that is important about this ordinance. That's that is reasonable. It's something that has passed the most accounts before. And in many cases there work to be done on an ordinance just like with any other place. It's important that we don't make promises, years prior and then re re send on them in the never bring them back to community. And I know that
I've heard and had intentional conversations with housing advocates, which with developers landlords property managers with renters with homeowners and folks citywide because this is a citywide conversation. You know, I probably represent the east side Saint Paul and I'm in. We're at 7. We have one of the highest eviction rates. We have the highest disconnection rates. We literally pies of code 5, 5, 1, 0, 6, on the top of the list on all of those inequities. And when you think about evictions, it's not just a simple as saying yes, in our state, you're supposed to get 14 day notice where what this is doing is allowing us to catch up with many other municipalities and provide a 30 day written notice to give individuals and knowledge and
notice that, hey, if you're not able to pay your rent me to explore other have been using it to its more rental assistance. You need to basically blow the horn now because you're getting that 30 day notice. It's not preventing. You know, what it is not doing is basically preventing that ability for any other reason besides that. And I think we're clarifying that as well. Tere are several different screen protections that are in fact that are in place here that I think are really important. But honestly, I think the the the notice it's a policy that is brought forward took into account a lot of the community feedback. A lot of the back prior years as well to really make it something that could be enforceable, but also something that could stay challenge. In addition to that, I would say the security deposits piece that's embedded in policies that we see here. It's really important opinion whether or not you're going
rent an apartment building. Our town home you know, home You do see security deposit minds climb in many ways. We've heard stories, especially on the east side of had to pay to 3 times the rent at times, just a sick just to move into and get the keys to their place. I am proud that hopefully after this and to all my colleagues who have all committed co-sponsored it, I just want thank you for being able to do that. Thank you for reviewing the work. Thank you for spending the time with me and asking your questions. We read every single public comment that was given read the full record. Whether you're in my ward or not, because a citywide conversation, we've continued to try to be transparent with our leadership and have those conversations. But I'm really excited today in part from being able to bring this back because it's multi year conversation with multiple different folks at at the food
at front line of everything at meeting spaces but I know that it takes a lot of work to get to this point. And so I know that it's just one item on the many things that we have to do today. But I'm extremely excited to support this ordinance. I was happy to be able stand in solidarity my sister last year outside of my outside of awards, 7 property talking to individuals and renters about why they're protections needed to be protected. And I just want to share with my words have because issuance it said constituents is a promise that I shared with you when you vote when you voted me in and it's a promise I intend to keep today with my boat support and I to approve. Thanks so Martin. Other comments. It's just. Thank you. Council PRESIDENT Of
thank you, counselor Johnson. You know, Saint Paul really needs tenant protections in there very long overdue. The last time that this was discussed in our city 5 years ago when I was sitting on a district council in McAllister Groveland. truly believe that tenant protections are the right policy tool for the job that we're trying to sell. Tenant are a majority of the residents in te city. And I think it's uncontroversial to say that they deserve a similar kind of stability as those who own their homes. I'm really proud of the work that Councilmember Johnson has done on this. I'm grateful for it. And also for formal council, PRESIDENT Meter Jalali and all of their aides and all of their staff and to the city attorney's trying get anyone
here. But thank you so much for their work on this and all my colleagues and I'm extremely proud to be supporting this today. All right. Thanks. I'm sorry. I'm moved. I didn't even think to say the next like thanks so much. Just just not Other comments missing. Thanks. Council also want to chime in and say thank you. Covered Johnson for. You're working leading our tenant Draft ordinance here. I'm very supportive of it. And I just wanted to say overall that mean, I was a supporter from the get-go. It was one of the biggest book site to coming into office here. And I believe that what we're passing here, it's it's deeply aligned with our mission and values around. Restorative justice is giving folks a second chance so that they do
have a home, which to me a home is that the 16 and human right? What setting limits on security deposits and giving folks really a fair chance to be able to team housing without having to having to pay so much up front. And to me, that's really important because as a council member where my in my ward, the average median income of households is only a lit a little over $50,000. It is. This is going to make a huge difference in te lives of people who aren't even counted out from the beginning. So it is very important balance that we are creating here in the council to the good people in our communities who are hurting most, especially economically, a fair chance to be able to get the housing
that they deserve. And my hope is that that our council here in future councils will only continue to get input from community members about how we can strengthen this ordinance here. And what I'm really proud about is that me, I'm thinking back to the committee event that we had few weeks back. Your office and my office and also the council, vice presidents I mentioned that what is here in the ordinance is chilly. Crafted by community members because these are their concerns that we've been haring that we have worked together to to find a result more and so really proud of how cnter this is in community, especially again, voices of folks who've so deeply
marginalized in in our city here. Thanks so much Thank you. I'm gonna just log so just time and time again, our constituents have shared their strong desire for more protections for renters and him. Very happy that we're building on the work that was done at the state legislature that we're making it easier for renters live here in Saint Paul. I wish I had actually bright flowers. Know that and think but you deserve all the flowers. When you first proposed this and you have language, there is very little that I will say I had concerns with a much more impressed about how robust and inclusive and how directly how it directly. Address the issues that constituents have for the tiny slice of the east side that I have in the north end.
I also it's important to give flowers to Melanie Johnson, the only in the words of an office. Thank you so much for the work. I was witness to a very brief moment of you to work any other pulling this and together you're quite the formidable team. So congratulations to the both of you. And lastly, of course, are from a council PRESIDENT, but it is very uniquely a poetic to be at the table here with Councilmember Progress. Key who some of the best years in city Hall. You never around fighting all the fights together. But don't quote me on this. But I think my last and city hall where we need to project can day was that we had to reveal the first iteration of tenant protections so the fields sort of like a poetic justice, but
also very happy to have you here, Matt, and be able to take this vote with you and I'm planning on voting in the affirmative. Thanks. MISS Kim. MR. Prescott. Thank you. Council PRESIDENT Maker, there's so many folks in the current departments who help make this happen. Councilmember Johnson, you carry it over the finish All take my token responsibility and named the city staff who did so much to bring this forward the first time around, which we near Carter Ramos. Kirsten Birch killed Church Kate Rodriguez were lead staff internally put so much blood, sweat and tears and the shaping ordinance. So so so many folks in the community who spent years fighting for this before that folks like here in Penske, Trump a market cap and folks
at home lne many, many, many others that are in this room that I'm forgetting are not able to directly who have spent years fighting for the hundreds of thousands of renters across Tampa, home. Obviously to my former boss, Aoun who love the second the first time around to Hernandez who ensured that this lived on to come back to us at the table to Jenny Nelson and Christian Coto, who have, you know, are my very short stint version of the word for office now and are so fantastic in helping these these projects going forward as Councilmember Joe spoke to and so many folks have said all renters, community deserve safe and stable housing. This ordinance means is close to that real reality. And it really is that simple, very proud to vote. Yes event. Thanks so much.
This belief. Thank you, council PRESIDENT, also thank you, Councilmember Johnson for be unlikely on this. I really appreciate voting speaking to ordinances that we have unanimous sponsorship in support of. I also want to just the appreciation for all of the staff, all the leaders, all the advocates that went into creating an idea into now, Lauren in Santa legal statute, particularly and I and our city charter. So. Also want lift the work from many of the advocates within my defraud Town Neighborhood Association, our district councils that have fought for housing, justice and over have always been on the front lines, ensuring that
the voices of renters are heard. My heart is 100% committed to ensure that this work is done. However, I would say my analytical mind reads caution around the continuous work that's going to take place. That is ahead, particularly around the enforcement. And always have said that and made that pretty clear around making sure every keeping our promises. And doing that through a really strong, adding citations, really strong enforcement. Also really strong staff capacity to actually implement this quake. And in the ordinance itself, it does says it's fun take a year for this to go into effect. I do think I'm voting for primarily because it doesn't hurt. It
doesn't hurt the housing advocacy doesn't hurt the housing availability. And autumn Ali, we we need landlord licensing program. We need clear enforcement mechanisms. We need more staffing importantly, we need a strong tech. Tech space to build the government programs actually to protect tenants. So we are not in the same position where with the passing of the rent, stabilization. But without, you know, the supports to enforce it. And lastly, I want to speak to this because I heard it come up and some of the testimonies. I want to also highlight, there's really been some bold moves has been happening on the state level and also I our neighboring city city of Minneapolis to
ban the box issuing a ban, the box campaign to where we will eliminate housing discrimination against people who have criminal backgrounds. And I've had heard, you know, do some of the testimonies. Some really. Discouraging comments, particularly around how we see in view people who are financially challenging, who have had criminal backgrounds, you know, having access housing as someone who has championed restore the boat at the state level and also someone who has been a voice for making sure our communities are inclusive of people who have served their time and have paid their dues of their past mistakes. It will be counter intuitive for me to not acknowledge that there are still barriers as
existing with our policies. And I'm voting today in favor of this because I believe interest that we still I committed to that and advocating now state level. But hunt him to continue to make sure that we are free barriers to housing and also just believe I don't believe perfection, be the enemy of the good. So this step forward is a good direction. I also want to gift flowers against a council member Johnson to leading this conversation as we are taking really big changes when it comes to our housing development here in Saint Paul. Thanks to all my colleagues. There's literally nothing to except to say another huge. Thank you to you. Chair Johnson fear. Consistent and visionary leadership to get this done and I can say is someone who
was here when we had to withdraw the 10 protections. Art. It's the first time there are very few things as painful as having to withdraw an ordinance that so many people worked so And I'm really glad that we mention former council PRESIDENT Michel ally in the space because of her leadership that got us here in the first place having to withdraw. That is is so hard and was so confusing to our residents and I'm so glad to be able to tell them. Finally, tenant protections are back and you're covered so with that. We take a vote. The motion is for approval. All in favor say Aye. I'll post. 7 in favor. None opposed the ordinance. Is it? The ordinance is adopted. 34 is final adoption of ordinance. 25 dash 29 amending chapter one. 93 8.0 8 of the Legislative Co commit pertaining to rent
stabilization. The public hearing was continued from APRIL 9. So the way we're going do this one is there are 2 amendments that are going to be offered for consideration prior to the public hearing. I'm gonna call on the 2 main sponsors of those amendments to just preview what those amendments will be. So that if you're testifying, you know what could be what will be put in front of us for consideration after the public hearing. So you can make your comments on the ordinance as it is the ordinance with the amendments. However, you'd like. And then we will vote on the amendments. And then we after the public hearing and then we will vote on the ordinance as a whole. If the amendments are adopted, this ordinance will need to be laid over for another week before a final vote can be taken. So it's possible a vote tonight.
It's possible. Well, the next week. So with this is a public hearing on item 34 rent stabilization. Coming up. It's just oh, I'm so sorry for you that literally just what they do that this yet. Thank you. In. We're getting comments basically right? Oes are introducing amendment is what you're a cane me. All right. Well, I want to open up my statements here first thing that I am so grateful to a voters here in our city and so many nonprofit unions, just community groups and committee members who have been who are still involved time when. The Rent Stabilization ballot initiative was happening back in 2021. I was very supportive of this initiative and that i bring this up because I believe if it weren't for that ballot initiative in our city right now, we probably wouldn't have rent
stabilization. Not because it isn't something that That there is there isn't support for. But really, you know, during my work on the council here it's always been pretty split in terms of where the stances that been from council members also out in the community as And it I believe that folks recognize that. That's why they realized this was something that needed to be brought to the voters. And so I'm very grateful that in our democracy even have a ballot initiative option for folks who really so that the will of the people is put on the ballot and you can make decisions on what they would like to see happen in their city, whether it's a policy or anything just related to work here that is happening in our
city. I have always been really supportive rent stabilization. And I do want to first say if it were up to me, my preference would be we wouldn't make any amendments right now to our current ordinance for several years. Now, I've been hearing not from council members here. I have also been raising this myself. I've been hearing it from committee members about the need to have data on how our how effective ordinance has been and what are the impacts of it? There's always there's been this rhetoric around the rent. Stabilization has been delaying construction here in our city. My question has always been what is the justification? Where's the justification for that? And to this day, I have not seen the data get delivered here in
front of the council at to make to justify any of rhetoric been hearing that time. Seeing that rent stabilization isn't working for city. And to be perfectly honest, it when that there were conversations around amending I rent stabilization ordinance. And also with this proposal around a permanent exemption for new construction built after 24 was and she was I was very opposed to it. And Durham, I want share roughly what the amendment here is that I'm bringing forward. Because while I under while my stance is wouldn't I would I prefer that we not make any amendments to ordinance. I understand that there is an
interest from some council members to move forward in in amending our current ordinance. And I think that it's really important for us to really go back to the things that are important to the council hear things that we've been bringing up at the table. Things that are our values and what I believe should be really centered conversations like this and even in amendments because one of the things that I see is really problematic about the proposed amendment here. The original proposal meant being proffered by customer tells us that most importantly, this truly does reflect work that has been informed by community members or pretty much an extensive community process. And so what I'm bringing forward here, some of you I are probably really familiar
with that because I'm not bringing forward anything that is new at all. I'm bringing forward something that hs been discussed has been considered and has the evening been supported by elected officials. Some elected officials here in the city, especially those who have pretty much been pretty resistant to te idea of rent stabilization and the the amendment here with on and under the language for. Exceptions to residential rental property that is newly constructed or had a change in occupancy classification. The changes that the limitation rent increases shall not apply to newly constructed residential rental properties that were issued their first building. So back, you can see less than 30 years from the date of notice of a rent
increase. So we are changing that 20 the current 20 year exemption for those properties to 30 years. Also the limitation on rent increases shall not apply to formerly non-residential properties or portions of non-residential properties that were issued a new or renewed building certificate of occupancy because of a change in occupancy classification. 2 residential rental properties, such properties are portions of properties that have change occupancy classification from non-residential to residential rental property are exempted from the limitation on rent increases for 30 years. From the date of the first building, certificate of occupancy issued after the change. So to just reiterate that the with the striking out the 20 year exemption in or
ordinance to 30 years. I put a lot of thought into, you know, why I would even be putting this forward. And to me what? I really decision based on the conversations that were had in the rent, stabilization stakeholders group that was convened by the mayor's office few years ago. And I want to say thank you to so many people who dedicated their time energy to serving on this. So that was a really long and extensive committee process that occurred and I really value your time. I think it's really important that but we put forward in terms of changes to policy is actually discussed who went in community. And I've said that, I said that earlier. I also want to reference a few things that were even written in the
report. There was a report basically that think summed up meetings that happened during the state quarter, and to also shared proposals that were considered by Pew poll. Results as well and rent stabilization programs, rent stabilization programs, provide exemptions for new construction and one of 2 ways the first is to exempt all housing constructed at or after a specific date. That date is usually set at or near the initiate initiation of the rent stabilization program. And this type of exemption. But I just read from the report here is what is is what is current original purpose of amendment being forward by customer toast and it even less to that. A concern with exemptions of this type is that the result in an ever shrinking stock of
rent-regulated units both relative and absolute terms as new units are constructed that are exempt in order. Units are demolish or other rights removed. How I understand that is no to meet. My biggest concern is with a permanent exemption in place and basically what I what we are going to be seeing more of its working class folks, frontline workers living in buildings that are old about new shiny construction buildings are Patrick, gentrification in our communities and having friends that are extremely unaffordable. Also, it's going to create a 2 tiered system amongst property owners landlords to like to me, it is extremely and equitable that are small. Landlords going to have to be complying with the I rule and arrest of a station that is extreme. That is where than newer construct newly
constructed units which are pretty much built by corporation corporations. And it got big developers. And so there's a huge equity issue here which has already been named by many people who have been sent have been sunny and testimonies to us. Another type of exemption. But I want to read here because it says there's 2 the second of coaches take new construction in a bowling fashion where the exemption last for a period of years and the units are brought into the regulated stock. The terms of building exemptions vary greatly from 5 years at the short end to 30 years at the longest. And in a point that happened within the state quarter scoop members favored of only exemption a fix. The exemption by a 70 to
30% margin, meaning that there were more people who actually favored that only basis exemption, not a fix. One. And this is group that is that was convened and it was a really diverse group of people, individuals who sat it. There were 10 and advocates that were developers, property owners landlords representatives. And it you know, to really when we talk about wanting a lot of folks, you know, a diverse set of folks at the table. That's what it would look like. Know, and to me, it's really it's really problematic that we have a proposed amendment for rent stabilization, where question who was at the table for that, which council members we're at the table fighting for what council
priorities when it comes to renters the housing priorities that we as a council have. Who are the committee members there? Well, Mike, my concern is that it was investors know folks who aren't even committees that were making negotiations with city folks. And that's not the type of politics nor business that i want us to be operating in the inner city here, especially now when we talk about one a half to the operating in politics that is centered around our community members. I you know, one thing I want to name when you are getting paid presentation about the proposed amendment. It was said that about 5% of properties under city would be permanently exempt from rent stabilization. And as I was
thinking about that, my question is, genuinely I wonder, is that a statistic that we should be proud of like 5% fire units sever since 2004 have been newly constructed. And where where does that put us comparison to other cities are even are in city as a whole to me, if it is something that we should be really proud of. I will be proud of it. But if not, it also indicates to me that when was principal is a shun is not the reason why we have delayed construction ad that there are so many factors seriously since 2004 and maybe even Pete 18th at about why when why construction has been delayed in the first place. And so while there while they're
talking points fom folks about why the permanent exemption, the proposed amendment original one right now is is good for our city. I really question that. And this just really goes back to the concern that I have around data that comes numbers have not been getting. And these are really important questions for us to consider. One thing I want to another thing I want to say, too, is that. I am seriously concerned aout the direction that we are that we would be going if we approving a permanent exemption here in our city. Again, a question like why is that the staff? You know folks are folks at the table here are supporting if it is something that you are supporting, if it is what
you if you're undecided, I would really caution has think about how we can make sure that we are taking baby steps that are needed for us to make informed decisions because if we do not get the results that we want after a permanent exemption, I tell you what is next is going to be a big, push for, yu know, from folks who have already really a post to write, stabbed to just completely repeal the ordinance. But if we were to support that 30 year exemption today, but there's still an option for us, too. More options down the road, including a permit exemption. If that was where the political will of the council here was that. So to me, I mean, there's so many different versions of rent stabilization that are implemented right now all
across the country. And it there's not a single that is the same. So to me, indicates that this is all really all about political. This is the political will of the people who are sitting in these seats making decisions. And my question to folks here is what is your will to continue advocating for the people who have 5.41, it's like this to make sure that we as policymakers are not doing that policy making by making decisions that are very rash that are that really. Catering to investors. Keating, to folks who don't panda and also just really making sure that the direction that we go as a city is going to be getting us to bigger goals, which is the house and just the schools that we won having a roof over
folks over everybody's head. There's you know, there's a lot that I still I would want to say, but I. What I would do is captains, their hand. Just want to see overall that I hope that my colleagues at the table will consider the things that I've said you know, continuous entering the voice of people who've been involved in this process from the start. If you MISS Yang. Appreciate your comments. And and just to clarify for the public hearing that the amendment you're offering would be a 30 construction exception, rather than 20 year, which is currently the ordinance and rather than everything since 2004. As PRESIDENT. I mean, it's the comments for later. I'm just going to introduce my amendment for the sake justice, I guess having
it on the record for public hearing. There is a legal memo that attach the public record as is language we had copies printed in 100% are with us, ended up landing. There are 15, no less than 15 copies wandering aound. I to amendment is adding a prevailing wage amendment and this proposed language to be eligible for either new construction exemption or change in occupancy classification exemption. Landlords will have to verify that all construction workers on the project have been page the applicable prevailing wage rate as defined by section 82.0 7 of the same pod Ministry of Code. It also requires advance notice to developers a prevailing wage. Pete prerequisite ensure in shoes payment up revealing ways to contractual
requirements requires anti retaliation and notice of rights posting requirements on development projects and provides due process procedures for workers who need to file complaints of prevailing wage volations through this city. Saint Paul, which ordinance that is before you today and looking for a hearing, this testimony and and looking forward to coming to both my colleagues today and great thanks scam. So those are the 2 amendments that will be considering after the public hearing, as I said earlier and then totally forgot the second after a Senate. We will now hold a public hearing. So thanks to you we are standing for patients and welcome folks up. Remember 2 minutes, start with your name and where coming from. Great. Thank you so much.
Good afternoon. My name is Lucas Franco. I'm from Minneapolis, but I'm Minnesota, North Dakota. We represent approximately 600 construction workers. Other public sector workers here in Saint Paul. I'm here to urge a vote. Yes, to vote. Yes. On the prevailing wage standard for exempted projects to amendment. This is the best tool we have to prevent wage theft on projects here in Saint Paul wage theft is a crime, plain and simple. Research is showing that nearly a quarter of Minnesota construction workers or victims, it hurts working families and it hurts contractors who play by the rules. Many over 830 plus signatory contractors are consistently losing out on work. T those that have built business models of cheating. We made pogress tackling wage
theft by expanding prevailing wage protections on publicly subsidized projects, raising penalties and increasing investigative capacity and appreciate much of the work that has been done here in Saint Paul. But the truth is, we're nowhere near stopping the problem. Prevention measures have been applied to publicly financed projects. But this is just a drop in the bucket of construction. I've reviewed years of permitting data here in Saint Paul and many large projects are not are not and have not been covered by prevailing wage and were built by general contractors that consisting we use problem. Contractors. The hard truth is this. We will continue to see wage theft. Must we create standards that apply to all construction. We cannot enforce our way out of this. More investigators and higher fines. Only chase the crime after the fact. And that
is not enough prevailing wage is the single most effective tool we have to prevent wage theft. Not only does it create a fair wage floor, but it requires certified payroll. That is essential transparency mechanism for prevention. You have the opportunity to implement the strongest wage theft prevention policy available little to no impact on construction. The market data on this is clear. Also, the research is very clear about cost. The standard would strengthen the industry by protecting hire a local contractors and ensuring workers can afford to live in the homes they build. Please thank you so much Thank you so much. To forget to sign unwelcome up. As you just implied this rent control is affected people's wages. Landlords don't actually get
wages. I work my place all the time. Get paid. Unless we can make a little profit. And we're not that greedy like it's it's always attacked by Marxist and what it could Mark says to the attack. Property and contract Now that we just got this new law. Privacy law prevents me from telling my beloved neighbors that I just had to read to a murder aganst. There's an arsonist upstairs and a burglar next door to you. But thanks a lot. You got another one through. We'll see if a judge calls it unconstitutional. Next time. But your rent control the red control thing that the people voted for has failed. So now you want to give a discriminated of exemption.
Anything new we're than 20 or 30 years that discriminates against anybody that has an older, smaller property. Other than that takes power from we the people and gives it to corporations. What is that exemplary Fascism, corporate it government cronyism and big developers and corporations they donate to nonprofits that support. Candidates. What what else is it failed on. You lost revenue in the city bureaucracy. Sorry. You're not getting the density you wanted. So you want to feed these big corporations. By taking. You know, the right exemption discriminates against us. It's it's ridiculous. It's like laws designed to push in targeted people out of a region or a city like Jim Crow laws or laws in Georgia during the first Democrat PRESIDENT Stonewall Jackson's administration targeted
Cherokee who had could constitutionally and legally owned their land and their cities and now targeting what capital is the small guys, the free market capitalist, not the corporatist discrimination. It's ridiculous. I'm so sick of this marks a stuff that's going on and it's also good in empathy. No, it explains empathy destroyed the things that give freedom opportunity I swear if you get if rent control is allowed to fail a lower my rent because I would have to defend against the future and resist property that very much storing in and come on up. Welcome. my turn. The main to around Ward 2 and I'm speaking against this
amendment aended I'm very sympathetic with both presenters of the amendments to the amendment. But I'm going to address the fact that this amendment does not move Saint Paul closer to fair housing goals that we so eloquently presented at the start of this meeting. That goal to increase the supply of badly needed housing that is affordable to all that in particular, especially to low-income residents, those at 10, 20 or 30% am I? Quite the opposite. This amendment. If past moves in the opposite direction at a time when more and more fixed income elders like myself, retired many of them are financially unprepared. Their surprise to found themselves homeless at a time when they need affordable
housing. This amendment allows landlords of new housing to raise rents by any amount dollars every year for ever. And I oppose tat. It is totally inconsistent with fair housing goals. And I urge you to take more tme to consider and discuss the data that is out there to take into acount fair wages to take into account what is actually at the impact upon the supply o low affordable housing. Thank you. Thank you very much. Make sure to sign an unwelcome up. Hi there. My name is course Ilyas. I am a renter in Saint Paul. I am also a union member Pei, you local 12 and I'm a proud member of the Twin Cities, Democratic Socialists of America. I moved here 3
years years ago for union job. And one of the reasons why I moved to the Twin Cities was its affordability. And one of the reasons being that it had rent stabilization. I want to be very clear that I support the Amendment. 4, the prevailing wage as a union member and a union organizer. I am against any efforts to weaken rent stabilization. I am confused by some of the comments that have been made by some of y'all saying care about. Renter protections you care about banning the box, but you want to make changes to rent stabilization. Do we not care about working class people and people in poverty? Do we not care about black brown and indigenous people of
color? Who need affordable housing? I am also a community organizer and I drive between the 2 cities and I se many homeless indigenous people. If we cannot and sure. But people who middle class income can't afford to live in the city's. How are we going to make sure? That our friends? And our neighbors who don't have a wage homeless will have a living. And a safe place to live. I want to be clear that the Democratic Socialist America who are in the same poll branch. Are against Mayor Carter's proposed amendment to exempt all rentals bill after. 2004. 94 per 0. One percent of us suppose it start Nice and I worked. Thank you very much
for your testimony statement by saying, please do the right thing and ask people first. Come on up. Welcome. 2 minutes short. I hate keeping it to it. But it's out of respect for everyone is here to testify. My name is Karen TransCanada, renter and work for testified on this. But I wanted express strong support for both Councilmember Yang and councilmember Kim's amendments. I also just wanted to remind the council of how overwhelmingly the city supported rent stabilization. And so 60% of Ward, one voters voted yes. 55 1% of war to voters voted yes. 46 1% of Ward 3 voters. 57% of ward for voters. 54% of Ward 5 voters. 51% of Ward 6 voters and 53% of Ward 7 voters said in no uncertain terms that they want more financial stability
around rents for renters. And over the past several years, there have been multiple acquiescence to the landlord and developer lobbies. Ad I would just say that if today, once again, the developers landlords when I would really appeal to all of you who seem to be really in support of tenant protections to ask. What's next? What are we going to do next? 2 actually dal with the problem of increasing rents. And I would point out by reducing the number of people who have rental protections were actually reducing the number of people who have the tenant protection of just cause as well. So kind of going in both directions today. So I just want to thank you to a
councilmember's Yang and Kim and I would urge the other council members to support those amendments. Thank you very much. Welcome up. In 20 combat, I reside in Cottage Grove. I just wanted to comment that that election where we the stabilization ordinance, was an off year election. And I think the little over 30,000 people voted in that election. In favor or against rent control. So I think that's hardly a full representation of the city's will for or against it. I'm in favor of either of the 2 amendments. But I think neither of them go far enough. Prior to rent control. I raise my runs by an average of about 1.1 5% a year prior to rent control as a whole in the Twin Cities rents raised by less than 2% on average. That's not to say
that there weren't individual cases where something MAY have gone awry. But historically it was less than 2% after rent control. Now it's 3%, every year because the see the floor becomes this year. The ceiling becomes the floor. And numerous studies have been done on rent control. Most notably a Stanford University study which cited that that would happen. My units outside of Saint Paul. I I raise rents when the tenants leave. They might not get a increasing for 5 years but because of rent control. I have to maintain that or lose it or face challenges with that. In rent control While the meeting has adverse effects on affordable housing. Having permit applications are down 80% from where they were prior to this stabilization ordinance. That's for number of reasons. But not. I was standing the
fact that this. Deters development in Saint Paul. So I'm asking you to b objective. Look at the empirical data and follow your mission increasing affordable housing. This hurts affordable housing. So please try it's stable ecosystem for tenants. Landlords and yes, I to very much appreciate it. Don't forget to send We are excited you. Well, coming up. Thank you. My name is Jim Halley. I represent party for socialism and liberation here in the Twin Cities. The proposed amendment to chapter 1993 a extending rent control exemptions from 20 to 30 years. And Mayor Carter's proposal, which hopefully you are not considering. Is cleared betrayal of
public trust. The city's 2022 rent stabilization Stakeholder Group report that COUNCILWOMAN Mentioned. Recommended to you a 15 year Brent Extension, which is still giving a much more consideration to the landlords in the city. Residents who are experiencing a combination of economic crises, environmental crises. And housing prices that they have no control over until the state gives them more and more rght rights and protections what's to stop exemption. That has been proposing the amendment from 20 years to 30 years to 40 until again, we have this conversation 15 year from now and it's completely
eliminated. For all the new construction that's being built to help citizens have housing that under threat of homelessness in the next week or 2 and they get hit by a massive health care bill. Every one of us, every working class prson is a bill away from being homeless and to prevent them from having rent control on new buildings, which majority of buildings and Saint Paul are becoming bill after 2004. They will lose that ability to have control over their their home and tey could easily become homeless. And for the people saying landlords don't make money, they don't even work. They own these properties and let us the working class pay their wages. So to complain about working class people who could be homeless. Well, you have control over their homes
is a disgrace and to give them capitulation. Xover the working class also disgrace. We need invest into our housing for communities. Thank and sure to sign in. Well, come up. Like to ask all those of us in the audience to please remain quiet. And if you want to have a conversation, you can take it out. Thank you. Kevin Prana summer resident of work for also a member of Lana. I didn't intend to testify but read the city attorney's letter in this matter and just wanted to respond to some misunderstandings in that letter, the letter makes to legal objections. First second prevailing wage requirements can only be applied to publicly funded projects. And second says the state does not publish rates that cover residential project to 12 or more units and then makes a remarkable claim that this cannot be remedied without changes to satute. I'm happy
to report that none of things are true. There's basic factual errors are based on misunderstanding of the state prevailing wage laws which are happy to clarify and cn easily be verified by talking to the Department of Labor industry. In fact, I talked to the commissioner just now to verify one of these points in Minnesota. Prevailing wage records can be and currently are applied to projects that are financed with public funds, mix public and private funds and purely private funds. Examples of purely private funds include all energy projects, funded through the rule development account, which are not public dollars and every energy project permitted by the State Public Utility Commission Transmission or generation, all of which are privately funded and finance and covered by state prevailing wage requirements that the legislature passed a couple of years ago. The simple fact is
that state grilling wages are used to set floors also for projects that are not covered by state prevailing wage requirements, including municipal and school construction. And in fact, the city of Saint Paul covers uses state requires state wage rates to cover projects that are not covered by state prevailing wage law. So that's entirely incorrect. The other question that the state does not publish rate specific projects or 12 more units is also an accurate all moldy family projects of this size specified by the proposed amendment are considered commercial construction for purposes of assigning appropriate rates and there should be no confusion over race since the number 12 is large number to all of those rates would be commercial construction. Happens at least send the links for Ramsey
County for all of those rates. So of those is accurate. Now, obviously problems of legislation can almost always be remedied. And I think the decision to not run media is because people don't want Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Make sure to sign unwelcome up. Good afternoon. Council PRESIDENT And members of the council. My name is Cara Peterson. I'm PRESIDENT Of the regional Labor Federation. I'm here today to encourage the council to support a prevailing wage amendment to the city of Saint Paul's rent, Stabilization ordinance, the Saint Paul Regional Labor Federation unanimously adopted a resolution in support of a prevailing wage amendment. This was communicated to previous council under council PRESIDENT Brenda Bowen. Some of you will remember that. When construction workers are paid the prevailing wage,
they're better able to afford rent payments. Payment of prevailing wages also been shown to increase wage rates of workers outside of the construction industry. Saint Paul's families continue to struggle to afford the cost of rent and amending the city's rent. Stabilization ordinance will benefit construction workers in the city who work on multifamily projects, which that has been documented in the multifamily construction industry I the Twin Cities, according to the testimony of workers and advocates. And it is a significant and growing problem in Minnesota's construction industry. Researchers at the Midwest Pot Economic Policy Institute estimates that approximately 26% Minnesota's construction workers have been victims of wage theft. Prevention of wage theft on multifamily family.
Construction projects is in the city of Saint Paul's interest and its residents interest as well because it protects workers from unlawful treatment, local businesses from unfair competition and taxpayers from subsidizing the underpayment of workers through higher taxes. We're urging the city to create a prevailing wage prerequisite as a condition of any exemption of multi-family residential rental properties containing 12 or more units that are newly constructed or had a change in occupancy classification after the DECEMBER 31st. 2004 payment, a prevailing wage to construction workers promotes the quality of construction and the durability of residential buildings. And thereby increase is the available stock of rental housing. Encourage you vote. Yes. Thank you. Thank you so much. Make sure to sign in will come up. Good evening. I think it's
about that time now. Council PRESIDENT Members of the city council. Thank you very much for this opportunity to address you today. On a matter. That is not only significant but so deeply personal to many of us in the community. Appreciate your willingness to engage in this complex and offering often controversial it topic recognizing the emphasis on a multitude of perspectives and concerns. As we gather here to central to acknowledge the pressing need for our community. Saint Paul is at a crossroads and the decisions that you make today will shape the future for our city for generations to come. We are facing challenges that are not just numbers on a page. They are the realities of our neighbors, our friends and our
families, the lack of housing is not merely an inconvenience. It's a crisis that is driving up costs and limiting options for residents. Families are struggling to find homes they can afford. Young professionals are being forced to look elsewhere for opportunities. This is not a future that we envision for Saint Paul. We must take action and reverse the trend. I stand before you today. Not only advocate for the end of rent stabilization, but also urge you to consider prevailing wage. This is not just about economics. It's about dignity, respect and a promise for a better life for hardworking women and men of our city prevailing wage has a long and proud history in Saint Paul. And they have always the cornerstone of our commitment to creating
opportunities for workforce by using prevailing wage. We can ensure that our workers are compensated fairly for their labor, which in turn stimulates the local economy. When people earn a living wage, they can invest and their families, their homes and their community. This is how we build a thriving stuff. Saint Paul by creating better quality well paying careers that provide real pathways for our residents. Let us not forget our community. I had done. Thank you very much good Thank you. That afternoon or evening council, PRESIDENT Maker members of the council. I'm Erin Rosenthal research director with Northstar Policy Action in Saint Paul think tank advancing evidence-based solutions for working Minnesotans and also a lifelong Saint. Paul White born and raised in Summit University, a proud symbol,
Central graduate and Hamlin midway resident. I'm here today to urge you to vote yes on the prevailing wage amendment to prevent what MAY be the most prevalent form of theft in our city wage theft. One in 4 Minnesota construction workers or wage that victim statewide 316,000 workers experience wage theft each year losing 6.2 billion dollars in compensation to put that in perspective. Wage theft affects 30 times more people than auto theft in Minnesota and the total amount stolen from workers is 160 times greater and the value of all cars stolen. Same poll rightly responded to rising auto theft with urgency and innovation becoming a national model. I'm asking you to do the same to wage theft wage theft is also a taxpayer issue. Up to 1.3 billion
dollars in Minnesota tax revenue is lost every year for programs like unemployment insurance, leaving Saint Paul taxpayers to pick up the bill. Final victim of wage theft are honest. Employers must choose between being under bid by those committing wage theft or exploiting their own workers. Only government intervention can stop this race to the bottom. Fortunately, there's a solution as you consider exempting new housing for rent Control. You're offering a substantial financial benefit. That benefit should come with the same condition. That same poll already places on publicly financed projects require a prevailing wage and ensures the fair pay and transparent payrolls able to prevent wage theft from happening in the first place.
The city is rightly pairing, rent control exemptions with tenant protections for renters aren't the only ones who need safeguarding. So the same poll workers he should be able to afford to live in the homes they build again. I urge you to vote yes on the prevailing wage amendment. Thank you. Thank you very much. Good evening. Council. PRESIDENT Maker. Members of the council, my name is Joe Follower the business Andrew of Labor's local, 5, 6, 3, We represent more than 10,000 members across Minnesota and North Dakota. Person began my career more than 26 years ago. And the labors union probably about 20 of which were in some form of management Weatherby field management during te un Office for the last 12 years. I believe. And I've also had
the honor of serving on a couple of the council said the governor's appointment to the governor's economic expansion council a few years ago. And currently, I fill a seat on the Minsi for Minnesota, Climate, Innovation Finance Authority as the organized labor sheet there as well. And I'm here to speak positively and support of Le of Councilmember amendment in regards to prevailing wage. Couple things including prevailing wage, many reckon troll exempted project regardless of how long that rent control exemption is would do, as for should ensures that our construction workers building Saint Paul's affordable housing, multifamily housing can actually afford to live there themselves in the places that they build. And when workers are when workers earn a living wage, they tend to spend it
locally, which is an economic force multiplier by it's increasing the tax base Saint Paul as well as the development that happens in Saint Paul. Second, it levels the playing field for our good contractors that do work here both union and non-union already. Perry pay a fair wage and follow the rules. It prevents exploitation of those workers who are predominantly immigrant, both documented and undocumented construction workers that end up taking the brunt of that wage theft. And it does so by creating a higher quality housing that last longer and has less repairs and it should not be controversial to attach prevailing wage to reckon troll exempted project. We have major developers and contractors like Ryan companies, whether it's friend, whether it's watching for is Bird, whether trap name staple Port Authority, all of
which pay the prevailing wage on all their projects, all of which can compete with a field. Thank you very much. Don't forget to sign in. Hello. My name is Carl I am a resident of Ward tree in Saint Paul and of coming registered the u of m. I want to say I indoors both of the amendments, especially the amendment COUNCILMAN Ken. But I also wanted to highlight as Councilmember Yang pointed the potential negative effects of continued exemptions. I was in the rent stabilization system. I specifically want to highlight a study done air published in the Journal of Housing Economics, which was a meta analysis looking at over 100 published studies on the effects of rent Control globally. And one of the most common, the potential side effects of a tiered system of
rent-controlled in cities is that you have one section of the housing market which is impacted by. Less mobility for essentially like people because the rent is so low. They do not want to leave even if like the utility of the location is. Less than what they want And then the flip side of that is the newer developments. As a result, I have generally speaking had higher rates of rent increase as a result. So essentially you will have one side of the market which has lower mobility. People not leaving everything. It shrinks over time as people try to lay special like landlords are like exit or like convert it their properties and to White House is or what not. And then you have the other side, which is your they are not exempt whatsoever. Are they sure they
are exempt from the stabilization policy. And a result, they generally are more likely to that increase their rent. Generally speaking is not necessarily a good thing. So. Thank Thank you very much. Don't forget to sign a well come And just sort of a semi last call, if you're here to testify on item 30. Please line up that. Good evening. My name is Ken Nelson Minnesota, deputy political director for North Central States, Regional Council of Carpenters. Also known as the carpenters union were located at 700 Island Street here in Saint Paul. Council members, residents of Saint Paul, thank you. On behalf of our 27,000
construction workers, we represent many of our skilled trades people live in Saint Paul and thousands more have been trained through our Carpenter's training institute care. Our members have been part of living in and building this great city for over 100 years. W appreciate the city Council working to address a few major unintended consequences that have occurred from passage of rent stabilization. We also appreciate the city council's intention to want to do right by the residents of Saint Paul. And we're gonna fort for double housing issues that can often be nuanced. And multi player. However, rent stabilization has led to some very real consequences for our members, their families and businesses for most. It has discouraged housing supply as we have seen a drastic
decrease in financing and building a new construction yet we know increasing housing supply is a key factor to keeping rents low and housing affordable. Many developers have halted construction and Morehead projects planned but decreased the size of those projects. As was stated earlier in 20 in 2024, seen Paulson immediate 80% decrease in multi-family unit permits after the passage of rent stabilization. And as recently as this past month. But construction permits have have seen 38 1% increase in the 13 county metro area. But Saint Paul Lakes. All of this directly affects the livelihoods of our members who want to live and work in Saint Paul. And we have seen more layoffs than any other year. We think the city council and city staff for your work and
leadership to address this issue. And we respectfully ask that you support the version. One change in Chapter 1, 9, 3, 8, 0, 0, 8, Thank you very much. Make sure to sign welcome up. Good Evening. Council Council chair and Council committee. Colleague Rogers, director catalysts for systems change formerly homeless youth graduate of Saint Paul, cut the colleges and High School I'm here in support of the proposed amendment about records show, but aso how we can rewrite a new narrative for. The city of Saint Paul. We have opportunity to lead a cross-sector, Nana, generational approach, bringing together youth elders, developers, policy leaders and community members such an this room today co create a cost effective and innovative solution to our
city's affordable housing and homelessness crisis. This this moment requires us to shift from well intended and short-sighted solutions to long-term strategies to deliver sustainable impact. Amending the record troll is one important step, but it must be part of a broader vision that protects renters will also encouraging responsible development and investment in our communities. It's not either or it's both Saint. Paul can lead the way I'm bracing collaboration, equity, long-term thinking. Ultimately let's try to build the city. Were solutions reflect the complexities of the problem and the dignity of
the people most Thank you very much. Thanks site and will come up. Afternoon almost evening, members of City Council and ladies and gentlemen, my name is Joe Nathan of lived in Saint Paul for 50 years. Our children of attendance, a public schools. My wife and I both in public school teachers. We have deep respect for unions and we have interest in and it worked for decades to try to increase the supply of affordable housing. On the question was asked about half an hour ago. What's the research? And I want to cite 2 quick pieces or search one done by usc professors that was published 2022. 1 published by lecturer at the University of Minnesota published earlier this year.
This information, by the way we shared with you and I apologize if it was not shared in a way that was clear. First in the 222 sudy, the usc researchers point out that the dramatic dramatic results us there were dramatic results, rent control, which question was well intended. They said there was 1.6 million dollar drop and property values here in Saint Paul. They also said, quote, the realized impact of the law was the opposite. Was the oposite of its intention. Second research or this person, a lecture at the University of Minnesota said that rent control Saint Paul. It's led to an alarming drop off and housing production, which means a well intended policy has backfired and is worsening the housing crunch. Renters clique. Rogers and I have proposed met with a number of you will be meeting
with others to talk about ways that the school district charter schools, the city and the county can work together to increase the supply of affordable housing. That's what's really needed. We urge you to support the recommendations of the council chair and the mayor. Thank Thank you very much, Simon, welcome up. And this will be our final cll. 4 like an airline pilot for the public hearing tonight. If you're here to testify on 34 rent stabilization, please line up now. Welcome. Yes, and Jeanne, given 9 from Saint Paul Ward for and former landlord, the bottom line is that we need to prioritize people over profits. Im amember of my Co Saint Paul and a member of Saint Matthew Lutheran and Saint Paul. We value
immigrants, the lgbtq+ community and all of our neighbors. Housing is more than a business. It is a basic human right. As an adoptive parents of children, early childhood was marked by homelessness. I know the profound lifelong impact. Housing insecurity has. The need for housing is best fulfilled when we realize that people are more important than profits. My faith, my basic human values coming to make this testimony today. Thank you. Thank you very much. Sign in will come up. One person, one vote. Council member at a 20% vote in favor stabilization and more one. that's because there was a
15% Ryan construction. Now they've got one vote and 4 billion and billions o dollars. But part of the 4 million dollar campaign against rent stabilization and many of you ran against. Opponents that were finance b that sme group of multifamily developers and you made it through. Very happy for that. This is once again, you know, I was part of the hands camp and when we when we got this past and they're always saying you got to get, you've got win twice. You gotta win at the ballot bx. And then you gotta win to implement. As a coalition. We haven't been winning implementing. That's why I support the percent or the 30 year exemption because it's better then forever exemption. I totally support the prevailing wage proposal,
even though it's Benefiting some unions that haven't been supporting the rent stabilization but because it's right for workers and its rate renters. If we have. A cap on the industry. I mean, as I said before, my last testimony, it is the tenant protections are reasonable. Regulation of an industry that has human value that at its core, the had the value of housing of providing housing. So is rent stabilization. There have been plenty of cities that have had it for a long time where the economies have not collapsed. But right here right now, Ryan companies, Cecil Smith's billionaire. You remember the
last time we testified he talked about I was not fancy Chicago place. The merits billions of dollars looking to invest. Those are same people that took our mortgage industry and made it the financial and dumped U.S.. And That's I you got people versus profits. Thank you. Thank you so much. Pressure to sign in and looks like our last test coming right up. My name is Nick. Know what our ski I we the multi-family development business at Weidner apartment homes. My company is the developer of the multi-family portion of Highway Bridge. Which will create over 1000 new homes and your community and will be prevailing wage and also leed certified projects.
We're a national apartment owner builder. We own over 31 properties in the state of Minnesota over 7,000 units. We are and sent in a sense local and that way. We are very invested in this community over the last 5 years, we've doubled our unit, count our home count in the state. You know, our goal is a company is provide high-quality housing. We are a long-term owner builder. We try to do everything as best we can. We really focus. I'm building something communities can be proud of. And that is going to stand test time. You know, we have and you see the vision for having bridge. It's going to be beautiful. We are so closely worked countless hours to move it forward. After rent controls put in place. We want to pass. I think. You know, it's it's
it's fundamental. On tis project to say. 30 year exemption is not enough. 30 year exemption. We are not moving forward. We want to be there and want to do it. Effects our ability to get debt and equity financing. We will not move forward if there's a 30 year exception. Needs to be a static date. Like I said, we see the vision for the community. We want to be here. We love Saint Paul, Minnesota. Can see the vision. We want to move it forward. But this is this is where at least my company U.S.. Thanks. Don't forget to sign in. Is there one more person testify? last test I want to safely stop Rasheena little. And then you need small local.
Landlords. What would you say? Your name and where you're coming from? Saint Paul? And your camera. Candy, thank you so much. Thanks for the silent. All right. With that, I'm gonna take a motion from. MR. Progress Ski to close the public hearing all in favor say Aye. 7 in favor. None opposed. The pblic hearing is closed. Want to thank everybody for coming out testify tonight and it was lengthy. And out, take a moment to consider the testimony that we heard and to actually discuss the amendments that were mentioned earlier to vote on them. And then depend what happens with the amendment potentially to vote on me. Full proposal. So I would look to either missing or Vice PRESIDENT Kim to formally make your motion. Things Council PRESIDENT. I move approval my amendment which would be to strike out the 20 years.
In the exceptions for. Residential property that is newly constructed or had a change in occupancy classification and changing it to 30 years. Great. So that is one Legistar. Thanks. MISS Is there discussion on the motion? Is just in the South. Thank you so much, council PRESIDENT. Thank you. Councilmember For for your time on And thank you to everyone that came here today to testify. I want to talk about the amendment that's being brought forth for the 30 year exemption and just little bit of background. You know, is my understanding is the lead author of this primary primary rent stabilization. That meant the 20 year new construction exemption, which is from 2022. Was intended to address the city's development concerns at that time with original rent stabilization ordinance. However, I believe that that exemption failed to meet the
needs of builders and a much stronger development market. And unfortunately, our situation has become worse and it has not gotten better. The 3rd year exemption, in my opinion, is an outdated requests that no longer meets the moment. The people are building our housing are asking for something more now. 3 years later, it's our understanding that private capital. Is not investing in rent stabilized by. So whether it's a 20 year, we're 30 year that just doesn't provide the reassurance of the market. So regardless. The timing, the financing they need to build understand, you know, the payoff of that financing when it's being sold and any subsequent sale after that, if their own think on property. And so we heard from folks like I mentioned in the public I guess, month ago, folks that own property that rent
stabilization had decreased the value of that property. And if there's an end point to that exemption, that would impact how investors and lenders look at building and investing in property in the city of Saint Paul. So I believe that a clear point in time exemption would provide the predictability and the assurance to developers improper property owners that are weighing Saint Paul against other regional markets now will not be supporting the 30 Year Amendment today. Thanks, Justin Johnson. Thank you. I appreciate what I just want to say. Thank you to everyone who took the time to come out to give. Public comment either. Last through many different iterations of testimony. What came from that testimony and something that I'm actually here glad that we're having
this discussion. From the first time I sat in the budget address AUGUST of last year and heard about the permanent new construction exemption that received a call a week prior. That was the first time I ever heard. About the new construction is a fun being considered at all. At the time for the previous year, basically had spent most times talking individuals about a 30 year. New construction exception there were questions about it. We actually had a chance to, you know, 10 check where folks for ad and what people were doing. Some of the same organizations who are actually supportive of the new concessions action. Now we're on record supporting of the 30 year exemption. We're pushing for candidates at the time to support a 30 year exemption. So I just, you know, be
supporting this amendment today because I don't necessarily think that it's fair to say some things outdated when you never really points. The question are never - really gave the opportunity even to entertain a 30 You can check an exemption. We never brought it up last year. We never brought it up to the Council for discussion or even to remotely entertain it. We just jumped straight to a construction exemption. Conversation. And I don't think counselors even had a chance to pause and really even react to the 30 year new construction exemption request. And so I'll just share from my vantage point. And even from what I'm hearing the community and community partners in committee organizations, there are many Isaiah testimony testimonies last time that also share the 30 year exemption. I know I've had tough conversations with
housing advocates. We're never centered in the media's conversations surrounding permanent construction exemptions about how they felt about. And I remember having hard conversations with them even to get them to the place of being able to be willing to accept 30 year new construction exemption and so I, you know, will be supporting that. And I also will be supporting prevailing wage and we haven't gotten there yet. But one thing I will share with us that this. Conversation on this new construction is action has not felt like a negotiation. I think for months I've been wanting to see our really actually dive into all of the options that we could have explored. And I don't we did that. And so my support today for both the prevailing wage amendments and for 30 year new construction exemption amendment really stems from that place when we make policy
decisions and especially when we make community process to constituents and we have important ballot initiatives that come through. Folks expect us to act on. If we don't go back to the public with the same type of remedies that we are trying to put forth, we lose a large body of people out of curiosity in this room right now. Who are the renters? Is there anyone who's currently a renter? Thank you. In the back. Thank you. But you had your hand up. The point is there's about 5 of you and I could count on one hand about how many renters are in the room right now. I could do that last week. I couldn't do before. I could do that. Every community event that Ihave. And I represent a war that's half renters. Have homers. And in a space where
we did have a election, we did have individuals who did a poll on nobody asked if I was prepared to really make the jump from a 30 year to you from a construction exemption before it was made public in AUGUST. I think one of the biggest things now is that we've had months to have this conversation, but we never fully gave amendments fully backed up the press that they needed. We nver really entertain alternatives. We never really explored with 2 printers and committee members about, Let's get you up to speed. I were making a 30 year job. 20 years to permanent. And for me, that is the problem that therein lies the problem with everybody's testimonies. Regardless of our partners in our spaces. And I really appreciate it. But what? In lies the problem with this as that we went from 20
years, the permanent with no discussion about anything in between and that's been what's been very disappointing to me. And I just in you and me really want to plant that seed especially for future conversations and how we do policy. I'm open for adjusting to the times being reflective of the development understanding that are downtown and our Highland Bridge site so many other places are experiencing difficulties that maybe they didn't experience and 2023 2024. But I also know that. I watched. Mailer's gets into my house actively opposing be being a council member because there was a candidate who actively support of 30 year exemption at the time. And I was not prepared at that time to support that. I recognize how despite that lieu of that,
my community stood by me and put me in the city. And so as I you know, think about the votes today. I will be using that my deciding factor for it. And it's not because I at all haven't had many conversations but only people in this room. I consider my union supporters and my Union Partners and Contracting Partners Development Partners, property Manager Partners to people important in this matter. And in this equation. But at the end of the day, I represent for some people in a war that truly doesn't benefit from this discussion. And so I will be supporting 30 exemption because I do think that there's there's going to have to be pathways in the future, especially surrounding this ordinance. I don't think people are prepared to just let it rest. I hope that for all of my colleagues that are voting today on the permanent
new construction exemption, that we are in a position as a council to send a strong message that we are no longer going to continue this conversation next year and use the same arguments about why we need We need to fully repeal. I will be actively opposed to it And so I look forward to being able to continued conversations with people about the real problem over control that people are sharing because I don't think this even scratches the surface to really talking about costs and for a lot of people about is can I pay my But to my aunt for others, it's if I can't afford to build here, maybe I won't be able to invest in Saint Paul I just don't know what the permit and construct an exemption really fixes that. So I will be supporting the 30 exemption. And I just think
prevailing wage separately is just kind of situation. When we look at what we want to support and how we want to pay our workers. I'm going to always side in the sense that I feel like we should be paying them equitably unfairly. I sat in meetings earlier this week talking to private investors who had private funding and private financing just about why they needed to potentially even part of what you Contractors and getting your projects on on that when it's an option, it's not a requirement. But when it's an option, people MAY choose to privately finance the projects. Just not take the public sector funding not to the city funding if they can. And Peter workers with their spots too. That's why I was consistent on supporting wage theft. That's why I'm someone who advocate for the protections. That's why I was a supporter of administrative citations. I have a history of continuing
to support workers and their fair wages. So like for me, these are really genuinely the problem in lies with that approach and our process. And just the mere fact that we didn't even know for once consider openly and alternative to what we given. So appreciate council vice PRESIDENT Kim for bringing for them preventing which amendment and council readings for your 30 your amendment. Thank you. Thanks Johnson. present You know, very I plan on supporting on council beings I the question that we had earlier stage areas. I begs the question 30, 40 25 15 like. I guess prove it. I really haven't seen anything that shows. That it's a requirement for financing like and it and never ending exemption, you're financing will expire and we'll still have a different housing market. We will still have different financing
options to still have a very different. Te landscape will constantly change. And so we have to make decisions now based on what the information that we have I still I have yet to see any proof that shows, I guess the the burden of the truth that demonstrates that developers are unable to to make the plan work based on like an unlimited except exception to all of this. So I I'm skeptical of and I will just also add initially because nobody approached me about this. And then I said no, because this is honestly. Completely like so far off the conversation that I want us to be having, which is. Saint Paul voters passed one of the strongest rent stabilization ordinance is in the country to
protect renters track. Working class families to crack black and brown and immigrant folks here in our city and even adjusting it, I think was just a slight in the face that we cannot trust voters that vote us and to make decisions about their livelihood and their ability to house their families. Given more thought being a single know for everything is not. It was the most useful and what I'm offering, I'm supporting the amendment because it. Well, I I have sort of similar criticisms, as I know Councilmember does as well. Offering a harm reduction opportunity for us to revisit it and unlimited approach is gives no cap it all for us to revisit. And so Its to name that this is not even the conversation, but I want to be have having around the value that we place on our on our renters are majority city of renters. We heard that time and time again. I will be supporting the amendment I still remain citical of the
data that we have yet to see. And in addition, the last thing is we had a really great presentation from the alliance and there's nothing that correlates rent stabilization, like whilst development cities that don't have rent stabilization. A very similar development trends as we do. And actually we're doing better than and we have rent stabilization. But the data that I actually really want to see is how is rent stabilization, actually working for for renters. How are they feeling when they're able to afford? Food a little bit easier. That month. That year when they find a good land there that's willing to to adjust to their needs. So I want to see that data. And also the really interested and seeing the data of how many times we actually offer exemptions right now. What is
arrayed of exemption? Can anyone tell me for the number of applications that we receive at the city for rent stabilization? How many? What percent of those applications are exempted? I will and there and I have more to say for the other one, but I'm looking forward supporting This amendment. Thanks. Vice PRESIDENT, other kind MR. Progress. Thank you. PRESIDENT For several just say. It is our job as council members to ask for information from the apartments. It's our job council members to suggest bring up create spaces to talk about ideas that we want brought forward. So I would just name any one of us can convene a space. We can hold an event. We can talk to our colleagues. We can ask departments or information. I just want to state that. It's on all of us to do that work day in and day out. And I
appreciate the fact that. People feel boxed in by the process. There's no one that feels more fox and by this process than be starting for weeks ago and voting on this today. So I I do think knowledge and share the level of frustration of. The pace and the the confined nature of what we're supposed to decide. But I also just want to name. All of us have responsibility to sort of raise those conversations and work with each other when we want something different to be happening. So I would just name that this decision is is the hardest of the day for me on that because I I think in a vacuum there would be a lot of logic to pursue something like this. I do thing for me all the decisions today are unbelievably tight. Unbelievably frustrating. I'll
be voting. No, mostly because as much as we talk about the opportunity this would provide to continue talking about this to have more opportunity to have this be on the table. I'm just as frustrated as having to have this fight in this conversation. Every single year year after year after year and the dream that puts on community members the drain. Puts on city staff to drain. It puts on our partner organizations that drain puts on. Our general political oxygen and the city to have the energy to try and pursue housing solutions bigger than this were ultimately talking about how to regulate privately financed properties. We could be talking about how to leverage our public funds are directly how to make changes that are giving tenants the opportunity to purchase all these different
things. So I I very, very much appreciate Councilmember Yang has appropriate approach. Directly spoken with me. She has raised this issue and it's a tough decision, but I unfortunately left to right now. Thanks asking other comments. We'll go to Billy in the Mustang is going. Well, thank you. I really appreciate your Vaxxed the about just like the frustration around tis. I do have to say I wholeheartedly. Appreciate everyone who came out and I do appreciate the question that was asked around who is in the room who has represented in this conversation and seeing that we do not have balance of renters a balance of those who have been impacted by this. And I just think, you know, often Lee as my role as a council member is to remember those conversations that's on
the doors. Remember vters, whether people voted for me or with the residents of Ward wine hear about in time and time again. I have heard from from individuals and I wore requesting for a full repeal of the rent, stabilization. I don't want that to be Lawson. This conversation around how we got here is already of a huge compromise to where I have to hold. Those who are want to invest and want to grow our tax base in our saint colors and our homeowners also on the show airing the are supporting and giving a voice to the voiceless to are renters to people who are living paycheck to paycheck. For people who have
experienced homelessness. 2 people who I just looking to, not even by choice, but looking for for housing that affordable. And now one time you have to be on is not one time. Did I hear the gratitude particularly around are the impacts around the benefits of the rent control policy. Have heard from our council members, particularly around wanting more data and this needs to be a data-driven decision. But the reality is this was a ballot decision as the organizer and always organizer. You know, I know what it takes to get people to persuade people to get to the to the ballot and make a decision. But we had failed at
the place of implementation and I had stepped into this role as a council member, ensuring that we can grow our housing stock and effective way. And it was really disappointed to find out that we're on the debate about this instead of actually having a conversation of how we can invest in finance, more affordable housing, how we can protect workers, how we can grow our tax base to create more jobs in our cities. Design a program actually implement and regularly essentially this policy that voters had trusted us to actually bring Fort. So I would not be supporting this 30 year exemption. Because I believe it doesn't actually get to the goal of growing. What's most important, too? Voters is housing availability of housing, accessibility.
Essentially, I think what this does is pushing away people who want invest in our local county homeowners. And putting the price the burden on our and on residents. Everyone who pays property taxes not only are homeowners, are taxpayers are renters. They pay into our into economy and we have got to a point where we can measure the loss economic devastation it has caused to us. But we have not been able to measure the benefits to families. I know, you know, by by saying that we want to see data. I was proud to vote last year investing $100,000 into conducting the study. I'm overly eager. It for us to invest in that study to actually know look ad evaluate the impacts of this.
But I don't think a 30 year. Exemption will rectify the issues that my residents have been facing. And primarily I I see this as a as a thaw safety that in a way to where we really want to talk about housing, affordability. Let's make sure tripling, doubling down when it comes to emergency rental assistance. Let's make sure we're actually investing and to affordable sustainable wge is let's make sure we do all those things. But we can't we can't. Can't. We can't cap are regularly our way into housing about it. So I would not be supporting this exemption. Thanks as can. Thank Council PRESIDENT. I will make afew comments here first. I really appreciate just hearing from everybody and counselor Pratt Ski. To your point about we
have council members have a role in asking questions getting information. I think you're seeing that in response to the multiple comments made at the table here me and my and I want to be really clear. Those asked have been need by council members, including our former council PRESIDENT Jalali when she was still here. And I mentioned in statements earlier, it yet to see that information. Because really glad you brought up the 100 k that the council secured on our own initiative for a study for rent stabilization because we didn't haven't been getting that data. And that's that's chief Min and also banned from the council here that I'm really proud of. And I. Also want to name that study is something that hasn't
been brought it back to life yet. It's still something that is being crafted right now. So part of me is, you as a budget chair and councilmember a colleague of farm, everybody and feeling like. Can we should just stop we each other's time. If this is something that you really cared about late, we need to follow through with it and actually put in the work you know, make that study happen. Get the information that you need and use that as the data needed for us to make changes to policies instead of just basing policy decisions off of rhetoric, off of fearmongering rhetoric, especially in our communities here. You've all me say the word that term that policy making a couple of
times today are ready. And I truly believe that we are in a position where you're headed that way with front. But with the rent stabilization. But I I'm very supportive of that study overall and would want to make sure that see that coming to fruition. I mean, you mentioned affordable wages. I hope that you will be a supporter of the prevailing wage amendment that is being brought forward by council member Camden because that is council vice PRESIDENT Kim, because that is essentially what that amendment is all about. And we know that when we are supporting workers to to make a living wage is we can support them being able afford rent and have a home over their head too. So things I wanted just name and I am ready to bring this to a vote.
Start hate. In t bowl call, it would appreciate that will do call Ys, I just want to also just share counsel her boss. I hope that that your comments for assumption those things been done. If that was the case, that's highly inaccurate. And so I just want to share with you like I took my role as a councilmember very seriously. But also to comments like that very seriously. So I just wanted to share with you how that ended with me and also to the community because there is not liked. There is not a single topic that I have not spent more time as a council member talking to my colleagues directly each and every one of you and the administration and the city attorneys and the department heads and multiple
awards. And so in a space where like I just wanted to name that because when you when you said that want it really came off as you are trying to remind me of my job. I'm very aware of election 2 very significant that I And it is actually because of the conversations that I've had, that I am sharing that my frustration has lied with the mere fact that in so many different ways as the lead author of Tenant protections. When I started the tenant protections journey, it was shared with me that these things had to move is a package in order to move And I just wanted to share that with the community because we have to be able to have ordinance language is separately. But I also want to just simply push back on that for every future comment that was made around how I should leave my role.
And I'm sure that was not your intentions. But I did want to share with you how that landed and corrected for the public. Thank you so much. Thanks, MR. Council PRESIDENT, a Kurd Councilmember Johnson and even to Councilmember Yang. That wasn't the intention of my statement. The statement is was specific to the question of when amendments get raised or are part of the conversation and specific to the point of how many cases get get suggested versus appealed. That was stated our public meeting 5 days ago. We ask signed the publicly stated it. That was the nature of my immediate reaction of these are questions we can ask. And they've been stated to the public within the last several days and when amendments get formally proposed and shop to each other. Those are the 2 details I'm speaking to. Those
are our responsibilities as councilmembers. Your point. Councilmember Johnson of if I wanted to amend this today, I would have taken it very seriously. How and when I approach it and that's why I wanted to give such direct credit to Councilmember Yang for her directly, reaching out to me twice about the proposed amendment, even with in this incredibly tight timeline, she took that very seriously. And I was named as a point respect. But to the point of justice, how amendments are brought up and whether we're allowed to or not is up to us and how we bring them and how we how we work them. And then even to the department question, a member of the public as you Remember, Council member Johnson, a member of the public asked how many of your question we get and how many have gone through. And we got those detailed answers within 2
seconds. All right. Thank you so much for the conversation I I heard the author of the Amendment ask us to take a vote. So to that now the roll call. Councilmember prevents King. Now. Yang. I. Toast know. Kim. Yes. Council PRESIDENT Maker know. being 3 in favor and for oppose those POWs being prevatt stunned council, PRESIDENT Maker the amendment is not approved. We'll go now present him for obstruction of her amendment So we heard the testimony and very appreciative that came out speaking at time line and just crunchiness a process like we really push this through together to make it happen to come to the table. Something that has been in the works for at least 2 and a half years. There were moments where felt like this could see the light
of day moments that I can't. And really appreciate my colleagues, my colleagues and their assistance in making sure that al amendments could be considered at this time, kind of recognizing that this feels like kind of the 1, 1, shot, the one opportunity that we're gonna have to bring this forward. This park has been years in the making for The previous council in this current council, I'm really proud to be. Bringing a 4 to get today. I think just to to offer small preamble that will see my comments for the defense discussion. But really, which is really guarantees workers will receive their fair wages and benefits and serve as a strong labor protections tool. We continue to add more tools to tool box every single year to think about how the ways we're protecting renters protecting workers. Well, recognize that the timing of this a plan and absences and the appointment
of new folks doesn't align all the time with scheduling. However, what would love to urge my colleagues, today's vote based on its merits. Every amendments deserves an opportunity to be seen. And while I do hear that there is cockiness and process their merits, they're strong, strong merits to this amendment. And I urge my council members Consider. So I make a motion and also my comments for the discussion. So make a motion to mke a motion to on. To prove the amendment. Prevailing which to amendment thanks, PRESIDENT. And I'll just jump in here because I missed opportunity last time like it wasn't the right moment. I just I want first of all, again, thank everyone around this table for the hard work on all of all of the amendments, everything we
brought forward and for the both passionate and honest conversation that we have around this table, that frankly is a departure from the way that I was used to the council operating before we have this new council. And so I'm grateful. Think we're having really honest, open conversation that is sometimes hard and I'm grateful to all of you for that I will just say about both this amendment and the previous I am looking at this. Policy issue from the lens of the fact that we are in a housing crisis and it is a matter of urgency. And I know that that is a few that is shared by many of the people who came here tonight. If there's one thing that unites everybody here is that we need more housing. If we don't have a housing, we don't have choice. We don't have jobs in many cases and we certainly don't of equity and I believe that in this
particular moment, which I do think is different from last year, the year before in your before that we need to send a strong clear and unequivocal signal that we are open for development and like it or not. And I don't really like it. We need investment be on the local investment. We need investment from folks who are outside of our community in order to build that the level that we need for our community. So to the point about, you know, lack of data. I don't think there's clear data on the 30 years. I don't even know if the point in time exemption is gonna go far enough to be honest. But I feel like we need to do. I need to do in this raw everything I possibly can to help make that housing happen. Even if it's not popular. And so that's that is why I'm coming to to this table, prepared to support the original version of this amendment. So I will now stop
talking and open up space us. Thank you. Council PRESIDENT Maker and think you Councilmember for your comments on tis amendment. I I think that, you know, my whole goal with this primary amendment and with my support of tenant protections is understand. We have a lot of issues we're facing. I want to make sure we're using the right policy tool for the right job and with this amendment. I just think there's a MISS Alignment here. We do already have prevailing wage or cold for city subsidized projects. It's a value that is already held their city. And I that language requires updating because I heard from a lot of folks that, you know, this is an issue with or without rent stabilization. For me, it's not even really a matter o the issue of prevailing wage. I'm more focused on what I'm
trying to do with rent stabilization. And so I think that's true. That's definitely worthy of its own conversation. Our council proudly passed a wage theft ordinance last year, which was sponsored by all of us. And we passed administrative citations earlier this year, which I probably co-sponsored with council vice PRESIDENT Kim former council PRESIDENT Jalali to enforce this ordinance and many others to protect the people in our city. So the purpose of my men, like I mentioned, is to bring the city into parity with other cities in northern cities have a prevailing wage requirement all new housing construction. But I really do care about prevailing wage and I'm very open to more direct policy tools we can utilize to solve this issue that I think
we all care about is the council because we were, too, for example, attach it to this ordinance. You know, if the ordinance where to go away, we will lose the protection that I'm hearing is really important to folks and that care bounce. I'm I'm committed to working on that issue in a more direct direct way than tying it to this because I think tying it to the rent. Stabilization binds the 2 together in a way that is counterproductive to a council. PRESIDENT Maker said, I think getting any restrictions no matter what they are. Again, I think this isn't even about prevailing wage. From perspective. Any restrictions we put on to building new housing within this ordinance will make that more challenging. And we are extremely challenge right now to build housing. I just don't
think we're in a position to add any further conditions to that. So I will be putting o this. Thanks just. Other comments, MR. Progress in the And then Thank you. PRESIDENT I strongly support railing wage very strong support our city doing our part to fight. We've I have very serious concerns about Huntsman was brought forward. So unfortunately have up to vote. No. Thank you. As you can. Thanks, council PRESIDENT, I am supportive of this amendment here. Thank council vice PRESIDENT For bringing this forward and I know you've been in communication with so many of leaders, especially like, you know this and they've been here who leading the charge on this to him. But this me. I I feel really similar to well, in just say this is not something
all right with lead had this conversation for, I would say almost 3 years now some of you who were on the campaign trail, you've even heard about this new commitments year. And it sounds like for the most part, folks, we're committed to supporting this. Man, I know at one point the former counsel that I serve with there was if remember correctly for unanimous support for it. I think that, you know, for when I think about it just overall some of the comments I'm hearing at the table like it is has a colleague of the council members here. Customers who I know are have been huge in strong labor champions support of the prevailing wage and even other initiatives related to wages, wage that they beat. These are issues that you all
have championed and let on. And so it is appalling to me to hear that there is opposition to it because mean, even with the last testify around from whitener, what I clearly heard from them is they're going to be a light by the Maya prevailing wage and their project. You're clearly hearing from a pending project right now where developers like, Yeah, this is something that we are going to be doing. The doesn't like they have a position to it. What I think is so important about this, this amendment here is that this is going to be So important for us to have because if there were a developer who didn't want to comply with it, well, they would be getting exemptions for rent, stabilization. And that is really important. Also, to, I've been up at the table here so many times. Have heard from many of you all as colleagues, you want the bad actors out of our city. We
want the folks who are going to come here. Do good the partners and developing our communities and and be collaborative. I am very I'm strongly in favor of that to happen. Even raising that that demand and also stance that I have. And so if this is a way for us to get those back, actors out great, I'm all for it. And for the good ones will line up. We would want to do work with you all. And so it is to me, it's so important You know, just to to name that and brown folks and dad, because what I'm seeing here is clearly a missile And want to be mentioned that this hear amendment, amendment doesn't MISS Alignment. Actually, that misaligned. Here is the stance that hearing from some of you who are in opposition to this. I will be voting in support
of thanks for staying as And thank you. Council PRESIDENT Size sure that, you know, I am a strong supporter of worker protections, which is why advocated for wait staff on actually. Not only was on part of my platform, but also champion at the state level for expanding the ags office and the county attorney's office, particularly to prosecute people who do commit wage staff and why I am a strong proponent strict mean r m in citations to have aquittal tool. So this is never a question around like my support and backing behind protecting workers and making sure that people do have fair wages but low as mention today, like I went in today, prepared today with the goals of how we can actually increase our housing supply
and how we can remove barriers making sure building affordable housing at an affordable rate. This policy, how it came about, I think, you know, Ken, and the way frames frames renters against homeowners and frames housing developers against construction workers. I think it overly simplifies the challenges and doesn't really address the root cause of affordability. The relationships are really key and I am so happy, particularly today having a chance to talk with counsel Vice PRESIDENT Kim and also some of our labor leaders briefly today around getting the rundown on this policy. Having opportunity to now briefly, look at the amendment. Aso having a lot of questions that I at this
point don't feel comfortable giving a support on this amendment. I actually would need more time. I think that prevailing wage is a really citywide approach, that something that should be narrowed into this discussion around how are updating our rent stabilization exemption. I appreciate now only the conversations mentioned here, but there is the conversations at the state level that want to see particularly the state, making a decision around arresting and charging companies that do commit wage staff and like how that will enter play. I represent and woodland a very divers social act flee and racially diverse community. And there's constituency groups in my word who are small developers and
who are, you I need to talk to beforehand to ensure that this doesn't hurt. Developers are developers of color who, you know, I committed to building more housing and are committed to building Maasai families housing. But, you know, wanting to make sure that this policy doesn't hinder tat. I'm not heard earlier comes memory. And you had said, hey, if people are selling wages lineup, but you know, there is also a equitable way. Look at that, particularly around when you are committed to building housing and housing that we do invest into our small developers, they come back to the table asking for waivers for prevailing wages. They come back to the table asking for us to make their development more affordable. And I am someone who represents the neighborhood
that takes great pride in African American communities and communities that bill, their homes built their businesses, creating a legacy of building community. Well, and through this decision, I wouldn't want to I wouldn't want to hinder that. And I think this needs more time for me to talk with my communities around how we all can come together is not a one crew for says other. But as all of us working together around making affordable housing, more affordable to build. So I will not be supporting this amendment as of today, but am so committed. So working with you around how we can bring forward stronger worker protections for Saint Paul. Hey, thanks. Mostly as an thanks. Council PRESIDENT. Well, Custer, Billy, I'm not sure who you have in mind
when you're talking about small developers, but this amendment here would apply to construction. That proposing units of top units or more. And so wanted to point that out because if you're thinking about develop developers who building less than 12 and this wouldn't be applying to them. And I you know, I'm seeing where the votes are in many for this. And just say generally, I'm very disappointed. I I really expected better because this is something that I don't even see as controversial. What I what I didn't really want to say is I think that we are going the wrong direction when it comes to rent stabilization in there. So many other issues that it could be bringing up all around. Why around like what I have even been hearing
about housing in in our city here and what makes housing building housing very difficult. I talked to you all at hre table are housing and redevelopment, 30 table about how how many complaints I get from developers about why is the permitting process so difficult our city? Why does it take so for me to get inspection for something that is so simple? The thing is that we have we flaws in our system right now that need to be addressed and great for scapegoating stabilization, wary eye as scapegoating prevailing wages away to not advancing in actually confronting the issues that we have in our system right now, bringing not moving nearly quick enough to be able to address these issues and seeing where are landing. I
hope that we will all make a commitment to really driving the conversations and that leaders in this space there and actually discuss these things, find a result for it. Because I tell you what, I don't think that after we will be seeing the results that you all are hoping to see, especially on those my colleagues, those of you who who have been opposing that man is brought forward by council vice PRESIDENT. And I. Thank you Any further discussion. Johnson sent to this overall, the one in support of the prevailing wage amendment. But I wanted to take the time to also think want to building trades and all of the Union partners to talk to us about prevailing wage on this aspect because all we've been talking about the rent. Stabilization is new construction exemption. While people have been talking
stabilization, I do see this amendment as separate from previous amendment I appreciate the comments just a little bit about some of the smaller developers was actually a concern that I've had up until language was changed to be limited to just 12 to like folks that are to projects that are 12 minutes or more. That different than some of the language we are doing regarding the new construction exemption, which does not have a small and large or small developer limitation. I think that one of the things that is continuing to come up is how we're inviting people to the conversation. So whether or not this passes today, I will just say, like I really want to the house and say that, you know, I was with a vocal hen the last budget cycle as vice chair of the housing Redevelopment Authority to literally put the 100,900 $1000 Council prioritize
Housing Policy evaluation in the budget. I did that because we all sat at the retreat last year into that. That was something that was really important to us to see. And it wasn't because we needed to it wasn't because we needed to do that was because that was a desire last year for us unanimously to support housing policy evaluation that would go into place to give us key findings on things that I really wanted to look at. One of those things was prevailing wage. And I just share with you that like it's unfortunate that this is time for military discussing prevailing wage. And I think that kind of goes to my previous. My previous conversation, the previous comments. We did not have a chance to fully. I feel like explore alternatives. What's in front of us when it was
proposed. And I think that that has been the biggest misstep of this entire process because it it makes it appear as if this wasn't a multi-year conversation. If this hasn't, that they haven't been multi multiple conversations, but council members with administration with the city attorney's office with Hampshire lying on their team. And so I just resent arrests in the aspect that like this isn't a new idea. The Senate just come out of nowhere. There is it was written. It was previously used by a previous council member was a longer hre. So I just it's kind of falls into that temper Texans category when talking about things that we made promises about in past that we didn't deliver on. I think prevailing wage. Hopefully eventually we can get to a
place for prevailing wage. Isn't the contact to talk about real wages and that it's some sort of. Future construction because the reality is like the way that the cost living is continuing to increase. At some point prevailing wage is going to be what's acceptable order to keep individuals to keep her safe for residents and their homes. And so that's the commission. But I look forward to having in the future. Whether it passes today are not side to share that with my union partners that are the room. I share that with our workers that are watching from home and I hope that we continue to have that conversation because to me privileges and just today's more. But I'm you know, I've continued to be a steadfast supporter prevailing wage and I was on record with doing that. I had several her supporters because of it. And my daughter of a union father. And so I will be support
supporting prevailing wage on pretty much any projects that I look forward to seeing that happen to the city. Thank yu. Thank you. Chair Johnson. That's present came in that. I think if folks are Catholics want vote, no So. Well, the just very you know, this, this vote that's happening is pro-worker pro-level talent and prevailing wage amendment is a pro-worker vote. It's a pro-worker amendment and the cities in Pakistan for workers in organized labor. The simple reason a Labor Federation unanimously adopted a resolution of support for this amendment. The simple bait building trades are here. Seiu sent a letter hopefully thought it was a touch. The record prevailing wages are living wages for construction workers ad the workers who build housing in Saint Paul to be able to afford housing in
Saint Paul. Construction workers are among the most vulnerable to wage theft and labor violations are migrant workers are particularly vulnerable and are likely to feel dissuaded from filing wage theft complaints. The current federal government's immigration policies will only make it more difficult for Myra migrant workers to file a berth after labor violations prevailing wage protections. Workers provides livable wages safe, safer, working connections can additions and reduces income and inequalities. And earlier this year we passed a wage theft ordinance. But again, I stand on this opinion. But you know what's even better than having a mechanism to punish wage theft. And I didn't believe the responses of all that will take today. It's having prevailing wage. Prevailing wage is just another tool again in our tool box and addresses waitstaff misclassification fraud and
exploitation in the construction industry which is a problem that workers law banning employers and the safe is a Stacy social safety net for Saint Paul taxpayers requiring prevailing wage will help contractors just like cry. And just like why dinner gauge. Who pay living wages to compete with that contractors who engaged that and tis classification fraud and exploitation of undocumented immigrants and low-wage workers. I just want to. Leave with a thought because I feel like all of our labor partners that are in the room really said it best. It comes from the North Star Prosperity report who I didn't realize would be hearsay. Final victim of wage theft is the honest business owners who often unable to compete with the contractors that Lilly slash labor costs through wage theft. The resulting race to
the bottom dynamic, businesses in an impossible situation either lose out on contracts or engage in their own worker exploitation remain competitive. Only government intervention can prevent this dilemma. And I believe that we have a very clear role to play I. I with I would like to mve approval and like Roll Call vote. Please. Thank you, Vice PRESIDENT And thank you again for your leadership in bringing this forward. Republic prevents know. Yang. I. Johnson. I. Council PRESIDENT Maker now. 3 in favor and for oppose those being opposed to being prevatt ski Bowie chose in council. PRESIDENT Maker to amendment is not All right. And that brings us the end of the amendments that are being offered. Leaves us with the ordinance. Its original form. I would look to
just as the chief factor for me. Brief comments can Thank you, council. PRESIDENT Makers, thank u everyone. Thank everyone that's still still here. I would just like to close by just a bigger statement about rent stabilization ordinance. Really what actually sart our day with from the Housing resolution. We know that we need to build 10,000 homes to meet the need in our city. We know that we're not doing that. We need housing that's affordable. We need housing that's high quality. We housing that is stable. Simple residents deserve that. And those are shared values that I heard during the public hearing from folks that were for or against rent stabilization. It's what I've been hearing for the last several years that we've been having this conversation. We
have too many empty spaces in our city Highland Bridge, United Village, the Heights. Sears know Westrock downtown and everywhere in between all different sizes, it's going take a significant amount of work to restore these now vacant spaces and that work is not currently happening in this has to change. And I believe our city must act with urgency. And a house in Christmas needs to be attacked from all angles. Tense deserve protections. Housing must be built to meet that need and the increasing cost of property taxes for residents needs to be address and we can tackle all those problems. And today we're going to do exactly that. In 222, as I mentioned before, council thought the 20 year exemption to our rent, stabilization ordinance would be enough to allow developers to continue their work of building homes in our community. And there
has been significant study on this issue, including comparisons to other cities near and far and when we MAY not have all of the information that we would like to parse the impacts of all the barriers to build. I believe we have enough data and the data that matters. And that's what we been seen. But that's we've seen has been happening in our city over time. The burdens of the covid pandemic and increased construction costs. High interest rates and empty downtown Highland Highland Bridge which promised almost 4,000 units of housing has been stalled for 4 years have revealed that the 20 year exemption is not enough. We need to build homes and we need to be ready to build when the market improves. When interest rates drop. We do not want to MISS Opportunities
when they come ad this amendment is response. What we've heard is a barrier to building that will allow builders continue their work with this amendment. We're leveling the playing field and surrounding cities to entice development. Constituents have made themselves abundantly clear to me where their priorities lie with the original election in 2021. And with many conversations that I've had with them over the years, people in Ward 3 disagree and a lot of different things. But they agree on a few things they want to see Highland Bridge get built and they want their property taxes to go down. They believe this is the change that will help make that possible. And my constituents, I think other constituents across the city really care about those core values of building more housing and more predictable property taxes for the future throughout this process. I've remain focused outcomes of this change for residents across our city. The 2004 date aligns with our current 20
year exemption. Buildings protected now will be projected tomorrow. Vast majority of the tenants in the city of Saint Paul retain rent stabilization decades into te future, investors will no longer have a reason to block it. Projects in our city. We will build Highland Ridge will build United Village the Heights. As I mentioned, everything in btween, we will restore downtown's or economic engine will begin to close this 10,000 unit gap. We will create more jobs by putting hundreds of folks who worked for years to come. We will stabilize our tax base. Not by cutting services expanding our tax base and welcoming more shoulders to carry the burden. Our housing crisis has gotten worse. Not better. The decision was for us as if we are going to accept the status
quo or not. We cannot stand our current course. And as a city, we cannot afford to do that. Hr situation has reached a critical point and it demands action. So we must check know. Be calling on colleagues to vote yes on this today. And thank you. MRS. Any other discussion before we take a vote. Yang and then present can these council PRESIDENT I will be voting no on this. I am still extremely heated from our housing redevelopment Authority meeting that we had today next week there's going to be a proposal coming in front of us around to changes to agreements for high Land Bridge. To me, this is not just about violent rage. It's about. Not just even about development, but it's about policies that our that makes sense that are informed by
committee that also I informed by dta to and just really are are at that at the heart of it. Equity is. But is it's centered. And to me, that's really important as somebody who is dedicated to fighting poverty as somebody who grew up in poverty myself, too. I just want name that, you know, when I think back to the meeting today mean, I hope that it is an issue and it is problematic to to the rest of you that tese agreements coming before u where already crafted in a way in a in the scenario where we approved the amendment offered by today, customer that is very problematic to me. And I hope that the rest of my colleagues that whenever we see ourselves in a situation like that be asked questions and we also pass pass on the brakes and say is this even something
that we want to continue doing to be want to continue operating this way where we as a council, we are leaders here at the table to lead in partnership with not only with departments but the mayor's office with our committee members. We want to continue doing that where it pretty must much things lke the council here isn't a place where we don't have a voice. We are here about for stamping things that come in front of us because when I look at the moments that when I look at the proposals that are going to be coming before us next Wednesday, likely do see the Council voice council represents shunt in that. And so I wanted to at that to my statements here, really because I think that what is really difficult is in a situation like that where the bull's eye creams for craft it that way. It really puts customers in a position where
we are already very cornered. We are. We are having where we sports. I would say yes. Forced to operate from a place of scarcity even if our count colleagues for bringing forward amendments. There's already this decision made prior to on. No, not open to amendments, right? Not supportive of it because here is what is at stake. Well, what problematic to me is that we have never even had that conversation, not in public, not even in private, either about the options that are on the table for us in or, you know, really stepping into our roles as leaders in the city here. And again, I hope that we ought to better that that was and unusually so I have written comments. Again. I just want bring us back to the conversation. I wish you are
having fun around boaters past in terms of the rent stabilization ordinance their mandate for the city was very clear. Housing costs are unsustainable and the remains. So today in a city where half of the residents are renters and largely working class. More and more families are becoming cost-burdened. There's no evidence or guarantee that permanently exempting new construction will lead to more development or even lead to more affordable housing. As real was reported by the Alliance whose mission is to create a more just world and they give us a lot of data. I'm saddened because renters are again being marginalized. We're witnessing Congress and the federal government's threat to millions of working class families by defunding critical
programs like Medicaid, section 8 vouchers and Social Security benefits. Housing is a human right and Saint Paul. And it's tme to stand with renters working class fmilies and ensure that families can actually live in afford to be here. Thank you, MISTER PRESIDENT. Any other comments, MR. Provides key. Thank you. PRESIDENT Maker, thank you. Councilmember Justin City staff of help Shepherd this conversation as everyone can see any policy of this kind is complicated and stressful to work on. I appreciate all that's gone into it. I continue to be frustrated at how this topic is discussed. The lack of nuance, you bring into discussions are under and stabilization in general. It's clear to me that this policy impacts a moment. Our city. It's also clear that the rise
and fall of development over time is impacted by many, many other factors like global financial markets, iterest rates, even other elements. We ourselves control as a city like the zoning code and the Basic Way review building permits. I don't expect this vote today to magically unlike development dollar making lots overnight. I don't expect it to on its own for the redevelopment of every site downtown or even in my word. And I don't expect it to make up for the uncertainty brought by the national chaos we're currently experiencing. But at some point when the conditions from all those factors are right, we will have the chance and many more desperately needed homes in my ward and across Saint Paul. And I do believe this change. They will play a small part in ensuring were able to add those homes. Those neighbors ad the neighborhood vibrancy they
bring with them. If we continue to also improve our zoning code, our permit review process ease and the way we engage the community in those development conversations, this is a difficult issue. I don't believe any of the options discussed today are perfect. I prefer we were talking about investing are public dollars in social housing, updating zoning code to dramatically increase the ability to add homes and businesses to all of our wards and spring neighborhood vibrancy by giving folks easier ways to move to neighborhoods. But if we're going to add that urgently need to homes and investment and because we're also adding much-needed tenant protections today, I believe this change makes sense. And I desperately
want our city to move beyond this year after year fight when there are so many other strategies we need to be pro actually pursuing voting. Yes, thanks, MR. Pratt's And I just want to say to that point and others have made, we can do more than one thing. I think there's been a number of issues raised tonight with which I completely aree. The many issues within our own permitting processes the need for the housing study of rent stabilization. Need to think about innovative models like social housing. I mean, all of those things are things that we are I've talked about and can do in are going to do so. I just wanna make sure that that's that's one Doesn't preclude all of those other things as well. Think Ms Johnson, them is billion that we will move to Thank I just wanted to share like, you know, from the from the tip of the conversation, I've had many
conversations with each my colleagues and with the committee members about it. And I just want to share piece really just sharing with you all that. I definitely understand kind of where folks are landing in the some of the rationale as to why I hear a very strong we where folks are looking at. Spend more time just kind of listening. This folks are speaking and there's a lot of things in it that I agree with one of the unique places that I get to be in the situation is really being able to the intentional about lifting the voice of my board at this time. And I have had many conversations around protections that are step with civilization over the last year and a half. But for sure, since the overall announcement of this exemption, I was very intentional, especially around
the outreach in the community engagement. And I'm so thankful that we allow time for that. I'm so thankful to the leadership of cast member. Joe's and council PRESIDENT Maker on ensuring that we were intentional about having both protection conversation and the rent stabilization conversation because as I said before, when I brought forward the aspect of revitalizing to the protections, it was under the condition that they move together and I also recognize that this could have a forward without protections and the conversation and it not been for the collaboration in that sense. And so I want to be able to name that make space for that and share that and both cases to me, this where the world of the council will lie at the same time for me, I did not receive a lot of 7 support from residents around
a new construction exemption. I did not have individuals calling the and begging for the support for the permit and exemption. From my word when I would go to my word conversations in my conversations with came up to me was a lot of emphasis on the but he's being more universal and guests can and must approved was actions in the safer housing policies that were created before. And so I know I've had the chance to at share with you over time, as I have had a chance to learn from and hear from more people. It remains unclear to me that I think the permanent exemption is a bit of a jump. And I think the slight misstep here is that we I think we could have done better involving renters in the to come in the
conversation. And because we are not adding prevailing wage to this amendment because we didn't even, you know, we're in a line room for that. And it's not the only reason because I know that some of the same folks at dedicated prevailing wage are also advocating for this exemption. I go back to it's really important for me. It of plicy discussions that we at entertain and fully consider alternatives. And I just didn't feel like we did that in this case. I think we kind of jumped to this is the solution. And I would be voting no today. But I also see and hear from the support. And it's mostly because right my vote is not needed for this to pass a day. I can actually in alignment to with people and I were done. I dn't have to support. The students are not going to. Thanks Johnson. It's going. Thank you. Okay. Last but not least I know I
really, truly, truly appreciate everything that was said. I know We don't all agree. And we all represent very diverse and unique residents of throughout the city. Now I want to share, too, as approaching this foe, you know, I'm thinking really deeply about the lived experience, represent of my word as a renter as someone who has experience homelessness as someone who is now a homeowner as someone who was also a landlord. 2 families who have been in and out of shelters who have experience I want a criminal. Justice system and also someone who learn and spent hours crunching numbers and spreadsheets to make development projects happen. We all put in a lot of work
and a lot of time really overall, like I mentioned time and time again. And the goal is to make sure we can actually build affordable housing at affordable rate. And I was want to echo that. That is the land. That is the goal in the last month. I have been in conversations with my community members, particularly thinking. more broadly around our housing development in our economic prices are housing crisis and I have been a book that some people MAY be familiar Ezra Klein's book caught abundance and it talks about the barriers to building mask housing at scale and also some of those barriers stems from failed government policies that try to regulate their way into more development and I lead with the question know. How do we
create an abundance of affordable and accessible housing here in Saint Paul? I really want us approach everything that we do and that in that manner. How are residents? You know, going to ensure that they receive abundance in housing options. And I strongly believe like we will never get to abundance if we make it difficult to increase housing supply, whether that is policy, whether that's rhetoric, rhetoric, whether that is, you know, not including saying people into this conversation and I already had mentioned, i do want to talk about again about since its passage. But I think no, we've had. Opportunity to not only face the music, but also grieve in the process of, you know, the past of how we got here. But I really want to echo and remind folks that this is not the
Osment and go like we have so much more work to do and committed to that break. I also represent a war that has one was one of the largest commercial corridors now lays dormant it and has lost nearly billion dollars attacks revenue that now is on the backs of property tax owners and that gap is felt by people whether or not they know it's coming from rent control, whether or not they know it's coming from housing development. So I really believe this policy is not a banding renters. It's creating a foundation for meaningful investments and housing and stronger policies and tenant protections and we need a long-term strategy to incentivize is this
conversation. It reduces the cost insurers affordability for all I appreciate all the hard work that went into it. But this is not a period. This is just a comma because we're going to ensure that we are moving forward with conducting the study looking at building wages with that, making sure that we are banning the box and ensuring that there's not discrimination. But most importantly, look in, you know, one things that I've talked about in the retreats really passionate about public options like so we can drive the market in a way to where we're not treating. Housing has only as a commodity, but housing is a public good. And particularly in my neighborhood. We have those
examples. We have fully financed subsidized properties that are owned by community that are developed by community. And we have a model that we can build upon so out. That's why I am continuing to. Remain steadfast to ensuring that we're relieving. The that tax base from property welcoming and investment is to cling to the entire country into the well. That's a positive place for you to build. Same positive for a place for you to make sure that people have housing and school options of housing. Thank you, MISS Billy. Thanks to everyone for the robust conversation. I think we're ready move to a vote. Will do a roll call. Vote and a vote. This is a I is for the amendment to rent stabilization the and a vote against us against the
Gretzky. Yes, Yang know. Johnson, no. Toast. Yes, Council, PRESIDENT Maker, I. 4 in favor 3 opposed those being opposed. Councilmembers Yang Johnson, Kim, the ordinance is adopted. Think everyone for coming for the public hearing. I know some folks will be leaving the chamber's. We have more business to attend to. So to ask people to please exit. Quietly quickly, if you're leaving, we're not going to take a final break. But I did let my colleagues know if they need to step out. They should. It's been 3 and a half hours. We've been sitting here. If anyone notices any of us stepping out, that is why. And it is completely legitimate. We will now move on to the next item. Item, 37 is resolution
final order approving skews me item. 37 is resolution public hearing. 25 Dash 49 final order approving the reconstruction of streets in the 2025 Saint Paul streets program and sales tax street projects. And this was a public hearing that was in front of us a couple of weeks ago. We laid it over until today so we could have our full quorum here. And we did keep the public hearing open to make sure that anybody who I was able to get testimony last time culd do it today. And the one of our council members comes PRESIDENT Kim could be here for that testimony as well. So this I a public If you're here to testify. Coming up, you'll have 2 minutes with your name where you're coming from. Thank you for waiting. Is necessary discover a I don't do that for every testified are thank you for being
here. I'm Sherri canoes. I live at 8.75 Parkview Avenue. For the record, an object to the special assessment. It connects with my property, but more importantly, I'd like to talk nxt a existential threat to all of Climate change. I am so disappointed to see 3 Louisville, so many trees in m neighborhood. I recognize the need to maintain our city's infrastructure. And I love the idea of making our city walkable. But in the midst of this change, you. Our representatives are supporting the removal of mature trees. That's provide cooling shade for whole city, urban streets and yards. At the same time that this is happening. The city is updating its climate plan to and I quote, enhance
urban resilience. The city claims it is taking action and I quote to keep our city resilient in a warming world. Climate resilience is not just about reducing use of fossil fuels. It also requires caring for and preserving our natural world, which naturally processes curve and as a retired person. I dedicate my volunteer tme for acting for the sake of the Earth. My church Unity, Unitarian in Saint Paul Partners with fraud town green to play young trees in the summit University Avenue. I iplore the city to explore new practices to preserve urban tree cover while also improving infrastructure. Street projects need to enhance
climate resilience by preserving the natural cooling as well as the habitat and beauty provided by Trees. Thank you. Thank you very much. And make sure to sign welcome up. Just asking for someone to start the time. Good evening. Members of the City Council. My name is Jim Sebald and I reside at age. 71. Ivy Avenue, West. I object to the proposed assessment on my property of $12,000 for the street improvement is it violates Minnesota Statute. Section 4.29. 0, 0, 5, 1, and I hope my neighbors will join me, which limits assessments to the special benefit on my property. This project does not benefit my property. It
reduces its value. The city's clear cutting of the mature tree canopy along Ivy Avenue west, which has been a defining feature of this neighborhood, significantly reduces the value research, including from the U.S. Forest Service, shows mature trees, increased property value by 4 to 15% from my home valued at $450,000 paying over $7,000 in property taxes that canopy likely added 15 to $60,000. The value my home. I've been in the real estate business for 37 years and I can cite example after example, after example, where you use trees? Many things increase and decrease value. Losing the canopy. Decrease my values. At
least $25,000. Meanwhile, the city claims the street justifies the $12,000 settlement. But under Section 4, 29.0, 0, 5, 1, The assessment can't exceed the net increase in market value. This project reduces value legally. I should do nothing. I asked the city council to reduce my assessment, reflecting the lack of special benefit. And if we do see assessment for all of my neighbors who have watched this entire canopy. If this assessment stands stand, pursue an appeal under Section 4. 29.0, 0, 8, 1, but I prefer it was resolved fairly here. Thank you for your consideration. And I. Up are my neighbors to join. Thank you very much. Make sure to
sign in and will come up. And Rita Amendola and I live on par few next. Go Sherri. everything they said. I'm here adress the more emotional aspects of this whole situation. Take up where I left off 2 weeks ago. But by the it still looks horrible on my street. Well, trees gone. I don't think going to get over it. And my neighbors still devastated. No, my lawn is burning. And not from the trees are recently brought down. But 2 trees west of me were removed in last year in 2 years. And so. The Spartans, what will happen to my neighbors lawns in the next couple of years in a launch will burn and their front gardens will burn. And we will increase our water usage to
keep them alive. The damage on park few an iv and Osage me other streets. Erroneous. Cannot be undone. And here to beg you. To be kinder and more considerate of other neighborhoods with these plans in the future. Bring back opt-out policy. You can study the sidewalks. Situation and study whether or not you really need them in a particular street ad find alternative ways of creating walkways rather destroying trees and causing more environment, environmental problems. Cory Booker said in his 25 hour filibuster, you can can lead to people if you don't love the people. So I'm asking you to have more compassion for the residents. In your future plans to make Saint Paul more walkable. - And councilmember Kim, I don't mean any disrespect. But you should think about stepping
down because your attendance record is not good. And I don't see how you can have a full time job. Plus this very demanding them put it in the comments to the item on the agenda. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else here to speak at the not, I'll take motion from is going to close the public hearing on favor say Aye. Aye opposed. 7 in favor. None opposed the public hearings. Posts. All right. Want to make comments on this his camp. Yeah. I. think the residents came to speak today apublic hearing 2 weeks ago. I've listened to your comments. I've read what's been submitted to public record as well as the ongoing communication weather office since this project began. Some of the feedback has been about why we can't do sewer and water line repair work as needed rather than
full replacement. The reality is that we've been doing repair work, but many the sewer systems from the government are over 90 years old at this point in their condition warrants replacement. We will be replacing 5500 feet of sanitary and storm Storms remain and 56 catch basins. 86 out of 156 properties voluntarily opted in for sanitary sewer service replacement. Well, also be replacing 3,880 feet of water man and 55 leawater services. This for cannot be done without open trench digging. Other feedback we've received has been around the need for sidewalks. And is the current policy approved by the City Council in 2017 that require sidewalks, piano during reconstructions wherever they're absent with some exceptions, the project carries be that's being reviewed and exceptions have
been made where the policy has allowed. And I understand that there's interest from residents and I were to change this policy to love for additional exceptions and interest in having conversations with my fellow council members and the city staff. Additionally, there has been much discussion around the boulevard trees and I do appreciate their advocacy for the loss of mature trees is always difficult. And with that in mind, some of the trees in the project area planted over utility lines that need to be replaced or the of roots that extend under the street and substantial. Her damage can be hard for trees to survive or where they were. Diseased. I am grateful for for are able to share the information with individual homeowners about why their tree was remaining or needed to be removed. And while the recently plan called for the potential removal, 90 trees,
the final mover was ultimately 75. Maintaining 135 boulevard trees in the area. Also note that replanting boulevard trees is also part of this project and as well as the planting of all of our trees on properties. They currently do not have any trees at all. The number of new trees will be planted will or exceed the number removed. In addition, 3 infiltrations trenches are proposed to enhance the water quality by filtering storm water front, really como and to further enhance water quality. 26 Boulevard ring gardens will be installed. Green cards can be designed to calm any trees at the request of the property owner. Part of my role as the council members toughest it projects and sustain that and sustain enhancer said he worked 5 project at hand tday is necessary for long-term liveability in the homes in
the area. Residents expect and deserve reliable drinking water, functioning sewer systems, street lighting and reliable roads. We deserve to have safe has to travel between our homes and public amenities. We also deserve to live in a climate, resilient city with a healthy urban canopy. I stand by the staff work that was done to from residents and build resident input into the final sign. Fire bundle has a project who vanishes poject and Forest are bringing both went above and beyond with their communication. I believe that the work of public works citing construction project team combined with the input of our community has resulted in reconstruction plan that ultimately means our city's schools. And with that, I will make a motion to prove great. Thank you. Vice PRESIDENT. There's a motion on the table
to approve. Is there any discussion of that motion? I will just say I appreciate the motion will be voting in support. And I think it's worth noting that this is an order approving the reconstruction of the streets. Believe that we will have a separate motion approving the assessments once those are complete, I'm going to step to make sure to you. Thank So I appreciate those requested information about the special benefits and about whether or not their property is being assessed in the right way. We're not actually making the decision about the assessment now. But I think the fact that you've taken the time to come out and speak, let's your councilmember know you care about this. And I think it's opportunity to follow up with your councilmember or vice versa between now and when the
assessment is done to connect you with staff to figure out if that assessment was done correctly. So this is not finally approving that assessment tonight. Also mention that the last public hearing, but I'll just say it again tonight. We are working on a tree preservation policy for the city of Saint Paul. Obviously does not help the trees that have already been taken down but is intended to specifically make sure the trees are put first and foremost in the planning process in the future. So appreciate. I think there's a lot of passion in the room and on this council, frank, the tree forward sentiments that were expressed tonight as Hey, thank you, council PRESIDENT And sorry. I was kind of like slow to ask the question. So I know after you just explain that now, my question. But as a point of clarity, sino, we this has been lead
over playing times. We have lot of focus on testimonies from in and kind of what I've been hearing understanding that now this isn't your avoiding close in proximity to understanding this. But I'm still trying to get a point of clarity around this time like there was already like there's already construction There's already done that. There's been trees that span this place and people have kind of been talking about it as a like past tense. But you hear year remarks, particularly around like this isn't the this isn't the doing. This isn't a mission the work. Kind confusing to me because this sounds like the work has already been done and people in opposition to then be assessed for its. I guess I'm trying understand, like what is the premise of this pope? Yeah. Maybe can refer to staff but essentially this is also
The there is a project. That is in Ward 5. There's also other projects that are connected to this. A part of hanging over us of Residents come speak to their council members of us here. And I was out 2 weeks ago. And so if we can speed sort of the project star Stephen see rent. Welcome back. If you can use or to speak briefly to start of the project timeline, that would be really great for the clarification of how Yeah. Face customer face of PRESIDENT 10 House members. The general timeline of the project. Such that new order to make sure the were addressed scene. But what is the law near long? Your preservation? So basically what has to happen
is in order for a project to proceed and no longer bat, it's a protected species. It's also a nearby in MAY, caves of Mississippi River. And so to line your id bats. Haber nation, period is from NOVEMBER. 1st. APRIL 14th and so basically the trees need to come Down Bay for 14th of this year in order for the construction to occur this year. So construction has not taken place, but the trees have come down. And what we're hearing about I the trees primarily and the construction assessments that have been built. Does that help us Thank you. Yeah, that was that believe this. This bill is combined with other projects as well. This inches board. 5 And yet. Thanks so much. All rght. With that. I will take a motion from. Closed hearing related to
that and prove all in favor say Aye. I'll 7 in favor. None opposed. The resolution is adopted item. 38 is resolution public hearing. 25 dash 57 final order approving the 2025 Mill and overlay program. And I believe we have a very brief staff report. Like a minute or so. Okay. members, Steve assistant city engineer. Thank you for saying MRS. Want to start with that. LeBron. So the tonight we are have mill and overlay up for review. And that's a 4th Howard fees. 4th and Howard Phase 2 going over. Lee. It's the Hatch Park will overlay those 2 projects. What we did together. They also will include in the Hatch Park area. Part of the see ad, the
capital budget in order to do some specialty, calming improvements for that area. The other projects that are on George Street, which is going to be in the first to mention our residential overlays. That meant to mention now George Street is on overly. That also will be having improvements throughout the corridor tat will include couple medians turn some cross the couple cross sections to write in right out where pedestrians and bikes can still get across the road. You know, be some bump-outs and as intersections or to make safer. Protests safer for protests Cresta road and then the last one on the list is uses street and use the street is couple
properties from a county, the overlay project that's already occurred and that and that's it's for the assessments. Thank you so much of questions. This is a public hearing. There any is there anyone here to speak on this item number? 38. Hours don't make up for it us. I think that will take a motion for mis just to close public hearing and approve all in favor, say aye posts. 7 in favor. None opposed. The public hearing is closed. And those that and the resolution is about item item. 39 is resolution public hearing. 25 dash 75 ratifying the assessment for Replacement of Lead Water Service Line and private properties. This is a public hearing. Is there anyone here speak on this item? Seeing none. We'll take a motion from is going to close the public hearing and
approve all in favor. Say Aye. Aye. All opposed. 7 in favor. None opposed. The public hearing is closed. And the resolution is adopted. Item, 40 resolution public hearing. 25 there. 76 ratifying the assessment for a pair of sanitary sewer line on private properties. This is a public hearing. Is there anyone here speak on this item? Seeing none. I'll take om lead Solder in copper piping. There are things you can do to reduce your exposure to lead from the sources. These include letting your cold water run for 3 to 5 minutes. Anytime your water has been. Risk negative health consequences of lead exposure, including children under 5 and low income populations with. I that's I think at times
like it went out at the cops. I okay. I asked know will just for the sake of the fact was the sound of a variance. Let's make sure do in thanks, everybody. You all? The best. You know to When she got up at 4 for goes Guess what? I have Limerick Center. That's it. Just 43% of together because it held everybody ready it was what's today? Called a meeting of the safest city Council back to order. Roll. Call for. That's Yang. we hear Johnson. Toast here. Kim Care Council, PRESIDENT Maker here. 7 PRESIDENT, no one absent. Yes, it was Madison that we
actually cut out item number 40. Item correct. Okay. Yes. Thank you listen But yes, she said that cut after after another at so. 41 restarted 40 or 41. Let's just different Okay. Item 4 b is resolution public hearing. 25 dash 76 ratifying the assessment for a pair of sanitary sewer line on private properties. This is a public hearing. Is there anyone here to speak on this item? Seeing none. We'll take a motion from his Johnson to close the public hearing and approve all in favor say All post 7 in favor. None opposed. The public hearing is closed in the resolution is adopted item. 41 is resolution public hearing. 25 Dash 30 for approving a renewal and Kirkland diversion for
t-Mobile Central llc Egecombe Recreation Center. This is a public hearing. Anyone here to speak on this item? Seeing none. We'll take a motion from is just to close the public hearing and approve all in favor say Aye. I'll post 7 in favor. None opposed. The public hearings close in the resolution is adopted item. 42 is resolution public hearing. 25 dash 81 approving the applications bishop bring company for to some level variances in order to present amplified sound for weakens that while Russia Friday's in MAY in JUNE event series in a week. And so I was just Saturdays in MAY and JUNE event series MAY 9th through JUNE 28th 2025. At 4.29. While the show Street self-publishing brewing company, this is a public hearing. Is there anyone here to speak on this item? Seeing none. We'll take a motion from his yang to close the public hearing and approve all in
favor. Say Aye. Post 7 in favor. None opposed. The public hearing is closed. Resolution is about to item. 43 is resolution public hearing. 25 Dash 80 for approving the application of one simple plan. Clint Roberts for a sound a little and smarter. Present amplified sound on Thursdays JUNE 12, 1926. JULY 10, 17. 24 31 0st AUGUST 7.14, and SEPTEMBER 4th, 2025. At Mears Park to 21 5th Street east everyone's excited for Laura Town. Sounds this is a public hearing that doing here to speak on the Seeing none. We'll take a motion from his ability to close the public hearing and approve on favor say Aye. Aye all opposed 7 in favor. None opposed. The public hearings close in the resolution is adopted item. 44
is resolution public hearing. 25 dash 85 amending the financing in spending plans and the police department in the amount of $100,800 for the 2023 Cops Micro Grant from the Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. This is a public hearing. Is there anyone here to speak on this item? Seeing none. I'll take a question from MR. Perfect Guy to close the public hearing and approve all in favor say Aye. 7 in favor. None oppose. The public hearing is closed. The resolution is adopted. Malcolm is Marmont. Item. 45 is a. Item. 45 is the ratifying the peeled Specialist Tax Assessment for property at 65 Min. A hive East. 25 dash. 56. The public hearing was closed in late over from 4/16/2025 this morning requesting a
two-week over MAY 21st. The request is for a two-week layover to MAY. 21st will take a motion from his Any discussion seeing none all in favor say Aye. Aye. All opposed 7 in favor. None oppose. The resolution is adopted. This moment. Is there anything else to come? The first on the consent agenda? No. The only items to be pulled were pulled already. So you can adopt this is about supposed motion vice PRESIDENT Came to adopt the bounds of the legislative can consent agenda all in favor say Aye. Aye. All opposed. 7 in favor opposed a legislative hearing. Consent agenda is adopted as amended. The good news is that we reject it.