[0:36] I will call this Bloomington City Council meeting to order tonight as Monday, September 14, 2026. Thank you

[0:41] to everyone joining us here in the council chambers. Thanks to everybody watching online. We will

[0:46] begin our council meeting as we always do if you are able, please stand and remove any head

[0:50] covering and join me in the pledge of allegiance.

[0:56] I pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United

[0:59] State of America and to the Republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible with liberty

[1:15] Once again, welcome and thank you for joining us this evening.

[1:20] Council, our first official order of business is the approval of tonight's agenda, and as I'm sure you noticed, it is a key fee one tonight.

[1:28] We've got a lot on our agenda this evening, and it's going to take us a bit to get through it.

[1:32] Our first introductory item is item 2.1.

[1:35] It's a proclamation for the International Day of Peace, and item 2.2 is our second proclamation of the evening for suicide prevention month and week.

[1:43] And in 2.3, we will be celebrating our 2026 Hatch Bloomington program winners and looking forward

[1:50] to that, to celebrating them and the work that they have done, item 2.4, an introduction

[1:55] of new employees, and item 2.5, we are going to make an appointment to our merit board.

[2:01] Our consent agenda this evening has 24 different items on it, council member read us, I think

[2:05] has our consent agenda this evening, thank you for doing that council member, under item

[2:10] For our hearings resolutions and ordinances, we have eight different hearings resolutions and ordinances.

[2:17] The first item 4.1 and 4.2, those are resolutions would be adopting the preliminary 2027 tax levy,

[2:24] and our 2027 general fund budget and the conceptual general fund, 2028 general fund budget.

[2:33] Our discussion about the preliminary tax levy will provide an opportunity for public comment for folks in the chambers.

[2:39] Then we go into public hearings.

[2:41] We've got five or six of them.

[2:43] Item 4.3 is a public hearing regarding our delinquent water,

[2:46] sewer, stormwater drainage, garbage recycling,

[2:49] and organic assessments.

[2:51] Item 4.4, public hearing on our tree removal assessments.

[2:54] 4.5, weed, brush removal assessments.

[2:57] 4.6 are public nuisance of bait and assessments.

[3:00] And 4.7 are public hearing for civil fines

[3:03] for property-related violation assessments.

[3:06] But item 4.8 is a public hearing regarding a rezoning for the James Avenue City Homes, and our organizational business will wrap up with our City Council policy and issues update as it always does.

[3:18] As I said, Council is going to be a busy one, so looking forward to the conversation, also looking forward to making sure that all of our comments are to the point and brevity is our friend this evening, so let's keep that in mind.

[3:29] Council on this, there are any changes or anything to add.

[3:31] I would move approval of our agenda as stated tonight.

[3:37] Motion in a second by Council Member Rivas to accept tonight's agenda as stated.

[3:42] With no other discussion on this, I will note that Council Member Carter is remote this evening,

[3:49] and so all of our votes are going to have to be roll call votes.

[3:51] I'm just going to add also to where the time we spend this evening.

[3:55] So I'm going to turn it over, Ms. Ryash, you could call it the roll please.

[3:58] Council Member Carter.

[4:01] Aye.

[4:02] Donald Sandro, aye.

[4:03] Reeves?

[4:04] Aye.

[4:05] Nelson?

[4:06] Loman?

[4:07] Robert's in?

[4:08] Motion carries 70 and we have an agenda.

[4:11] And the first item on that agenda is a couple of proclamations, and I'm going to head down to the podium.

[4:35] As I mentioned, our first proclamation this evening is for the International Day of Peace,

[4:39] and I think we have a lake in Kennedy is our youth commissioner for HRC is here as lake in here with us at 30.

[4:49] Laken is TBD okay, we will wait, we will welcome him if he arrives, so very good.

[4:55] So the proclamation for the International Day of Peace here in the city of Bloomington,

[4:59] September 21st, 2026. Whereas the shared goal of peace inspires and

[5:04] unifies people across the world as one of the humanities deepest hopes.

[5:08] And whereas the theme for this 2026 United Nations International Day of Peace

[5:13] is invest in peace for everyone everywhere every day.

[5:17] This powerful quality action honors the grassroots architects of stability, reminding us that

[5:23] long lasting harmony is built through daily, local acts of compassion, equality, and community dialogue.

[5:30] And whereas our journey of peace and the priority to create a connected welcoming community is defined and emphasized in Bloomington's strategic plan.

[5:39] And whereas in light of the ongoing repeated tragedies in our communities, including the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretty,

[5:45] Our resolve for peace takes new life and meaning amid the heartbreaking impacts on our neighbors, friends, and families.

[5:52] And whereas the year 2026 marks 19 years of civic plaza as a peace site, which represents our commitment to seek peace within ourselves and others.

[6:01] Reach out in surface, pursue environmental sustainability, respect diversity, foster inclusivity, and be responsible citizens of the world.

[6:10] Now, therefore, I, Mayor Tim Bussey, do here by proclaim September 21st as the

[6:14] International Day of Peace, day to this 14th day of September 2026.

[6:19] As the Proclamation indicates, this is an annual Proclamation that we do read and I do recall

[6:26] when the Civic Plaza was designated as a place of peace and our peace poll out front indicates

[6:33] that.

[6:34] And I think it's a good reminder every day that it's something that we can't just take for granted

[6:38] and it's something that we have to work toward.

[6:40] And I appreciate this proclamation every year.

[6:44] And I'm happy to present it on behalf of the movement.

[6:47] So in a blanket, Lincoln shows up.

[6:49] We're going to make sure a little bit later.

[6:51] Very good.

[6:52] Item 2.2 on our agenda is our second proclamation.

[6:56] And this is for our National Suicide Prevention Month

[7:01] and National Suicide Prevention Week.

[7:04] The month, of course, is September and the week

[7:05] is September 13th through the 19th.

[7:07] And so we are in the midst of National

[7:09] suicide prevention week. I believe we have with us Jen Owens, the director for programs

[7:13] for Save. Are you here, Jane?

[7:15] Come on up, please. Please.

[7:22] You can join me here and I will do the proclamation and I'll turn

[7:25] the microphone over to you.

[7:26] All right.

[7:28] Proclamation for national suicide.

[7:30] Next slide, prevention month, September 26th, and National Suicide Prevention Week, September 13th through the 19th, 2026.

[7:37] Whereas Suicide is a major community issue that requires vigilent attention and preventative action with 845 Minnesotans dying by Suicide in 2025.

[7:47] And whereas each step by Suicide directly impacts numerous family members, friends, loved ones, and by extension the entire community.

[7:55] And whereas the city of Bloomington is committed to ensuring that those in need have access

[8:00] the services by healthcare providers trained in best practices to reduce suicide risk and

[8:06] to reducing the stigma associated with using behavioral health treatment or losing a loved one

[8:11] to suicide. And whereas the city of Bloomington recognizes organizations such as suicide awareness

[8:17] voices of education or save and its own internal Bloomington cares team for their efforts in educating

[8:23] the public and providing services for those at risk.

[8:27] And whereas the Bloomington Police Department is utilizing the first of its kind in Minnesota,

[8:31] local outreach to suicide survivors, it's a team initiative.

[8:35] The loss team provides immediate direct support to people and families in Bloomington who

[8:40] have experienced the loss of a loved one to suicide.

[8:44] And whereas the month of September is recognized as suicide prevention month and September

[8:48] The 13th through the 19th is recognized across the United States as suicide prevention week.

[8:55] Now therefore I may or 10 bus you do here by proclaim September as suicide prevention month

[9:00] and September 13th through the 19th as National Suicide Prevention Week in the City of

[9:04] Bloomington, Minnesota and call upon the people of Bloomington to observe this month and

[9:08] week by working with your families, friends, neighbors, co-workers and leaders to become

[9:14] more informed of mental health issues that contribute to suicide.

[9:17] day to this 14th day of September, 2026. This is also an annual proclamation that we do

[9:23] here in Bloomington. I think it's one of the more important ones because we don't often

[9:27] do proclamations that actually directly and impactfully affect people's lives and talk about the

[9:33] need for people to step in and to support and to do what we can to prevent the terrible tragedy of suicide

[9:41] in our community. So Jen, director of programs at Save, we're so glad you are here this evening.

[9:47] I'm going to turn over the microphone to you.

[9:51] Well, thank you, Mayor.

[9:52] And thank you to the City of Bloomington for this

[9:54] Proclamation recognizing Suicide Prevention Month, the

[9:59] September and Suicide Prevention Week, which is this week.

[10:02] While September is an important time to elevate Suicide Prevention,

[10:07] I especially want to recognize the City of Bloomington for your

[10:10] support of our post-vention work through our

[10:12] lost teams that you mentioned in the Proclamation.

[10:14] A loss team stands for local outreach to suicide survivors is a community-based team that connects with individuals and families after a suicide loss, offering connection, resources and support from people who've been there. They've experienced a similar loss.

[10:30] We believe that post-fension is prevention. When we support people after a suicide, we can help further reduce isolation that often survivors feel after a loss.

[10:40] We can connect survivors to resources much sooner than they would naturally reach out for care or for support.

[10:49] And we can also connect them to ultimately helping prevent further harm that can come from a suicide loss.

[10:57] So we're incredibly grateful for this partnership.

[10:59] We have with the City of Bloomington with Bloomington Cares and the Bloomington Police Department,

[11:05] which all makes this program possible.

[11:06] We value this collaboration deeply.

[11:09] We look forward to another year of working together to support this community.

[11:14] So thank you again for this recognition and for being a part of the work to build a community

[11:18] where people can find hope, connection and support.

[11:22] If you want to learn more about Save and R work, you can head to our website Save.org.

[11:27] And then I also just wanted to highlight 988.

[11:30] If you or someone you know is currently struggling with emotional distress, thoughts of suicide

[11:35] or even issues around substance misuse, you can call text or chat 988. They're there to offer support 24-7.

[11:44] So thank you all for your time tonight.

[11:53] You're gripping green?

[12:02] Thank you.

[12:03] Thanks for being here.

[12:04] Of course.

[12:33] Next on our agenda council is item 2.3, which is our half-blooming to 2026 program celebration.

[12:44] Sean Lundy is going to come up and lead us through this and we're going to do then eventually meet

[12:48] our winners this year. I think that the video explains it if not Sean Will, but this is a

[12:54] remarkably successful program for the past three years in the city of Bloomington. Hatch is

[12:58] absolutely a success item that we can be proud of and that as I've said in the past,

[13:05] when cities do good work, other good cities copy it and we copy this and I'm Blooming, now

[13:10] other Minnesota cities are trying to copy us as well. So we're very proud of that. Sean,

[13:14] Thank you for being here this evening. Welcome.

[13:16] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[13:17] Good evening, city council members.

[13:19] As the mayor pointed out, my name is Sean Lundy.

[13:21] I am the special projects and initiatives manager.

[13:25] With the city of Bloomington.

[13:28] So I wanted to just talk a little bit about the hatch program before we recognize these five winners.

[13:33] I want to showcase the impact of the program as a whole.

[13:36] Talk about some past success stories

[13:38] and then invite them up here to be recognized.

[13:41] I'm

[14:02] going to start dancing here in a second.

[14:06] So the $100,000 Hatch Bloomington pitch competition was launched in 2024, originally to

[14:12] be in support of entrepreneurs looking to launch the retail brick and mortar space in

[14:16] the city of Bloomington.

[14:19] Under that design, we had two successful winners over the past, first two years of that program.

[14:24] As you can see in the slide, year one winner in 2024 was Scramling Egg.

[14:31] They were a food truck that was looking for a retail spot to move into and expand throughout the city.

[14:38] Year two, we had bookmother with the Founder Twilight Dang.

[14:43] That is an independent bookstore designed as a welcoming third space.

[14:47] And she is moving towards getting a retail spot open later this year.

[14:56] So this is where we get to brag a little bit about the program.

[15:05] So beyond direct financial assistance, the small businesses, the program also shapes the wider conversation about the city of Bloomington that's taking place in the media ecosystem.

[15:15] Since 2024, the program has gained significant traction across all media platforms, and it's in the media ecosystem, even as recently as this past weekend.

[15:27] So I just wanted to draw your attention to a couple key numbers that you see on the slide.

[15:33] Across online and print media to include radio, TV, YouTube, and social media platforms,

[15:40] Hatches reached an estimated audience of about 250 million eyeballs.

[15:45] This resulted in an estimated publicity value for the city of Lumington of $11.7 million.

[15:51] This coverage includes WCCO CVS, KSTP, Carol 11, Fox 9 morning news, Axios Twin Cities, the Minneapolis

[15:59] St. Paul Business Journal, and like I said, even as recently as this past week in the start,

[16:05] you'd be in red and article.

[16:09] So getting into your three, what we're here to celebrate tonight,

[16:13] the start of this year brought significant and broad economic pressure to the wider Minnesota small business community.

[16:18] exposing Bloomington's ecosystem to additional financial strain.

[16:23] So for the 2026 program, we adjusted our strategy to meet the small business community

[16:28] where they were at.

[16:30] Instead of awarding $100,000 in financial assistance to one entrepreneur,

[16:34] the 2026 hash program was redesigned to support multiple existing local businesses

[16:39] that are facing challenges or looking to expand in the city of Bloomington.

[16:43] The winners of this year's competition are here tonight and they're all sitting behind me here and we are excited to recognize them

[16:50] but first we want to play a quick video.

[17:02] We've been serving the Bloomington community for 12 years now.

[17:05] We do repair mechanical as well as anything that has to do with collision.

[17:10] This was a dream that my husband had.

[17:11] We both worked side by side until he passed us here.

[17:15] We want to keep going not only because it's something that we built with him

[17:19] but it's something now that I'm filled with my daughter

[17:21] who is my right hand now.

[17:23] We get a lot of visitors from other states.

[17:25] We get a lot of orders from the airport.

[17:28] We serve authentic Afghan cuisine.

[17:30] I own this restaurant with my brother and my family.

[17:34] We've got five greenhouses that we fill in this springtime.

[17:37] Korki is kind of the best way to describe our place.

[17:41] We wanted to feel light and fun.

[17:43] We are a brewery in tap room.

[17:45] the first in Wilmington. It has been a Wilmington endeavor. All of our investors are either

[17:51] from Wilmington originally or the current for living Wilmington. We really wanted to be part of

[17:55] the community. The next place has been around in the Wilmington community for a little over 40 years

[17:59] now. My dad and mom are the current owners. This will be our 21st year where just a more classic

[18:05] diner that offers a lot of burglars sandwiches and roasted chicken. I think some of these initiatives

[18:09] by the city are going a long way to really promote the fact that the city is open to small businesses

[18:14] encouraging small businesses. My brother told me about the hatch program and I applied for it

[18:20] because I was so convinced with the program and the way it's going to affect my business.

[18:25] So I was so excited. I really appreciated the fact that Bloomington was investing back into

[18:30] what is already here because there's so many amazing little spots and Bloomington that people don't

[18:36] know about. It's kind of exciting the city wants to keep us here. It's flattering. It feels like

[18:41] part of Loomington and people care out there, even the locals, how many people found out about

[18:47] they had. Like customers will come up and tell us, it's so nice that you got selected,

[18:52] they high-five you, and I don't know how they know. It goes to show that people follow us down.

[18:57] I know we saw our community for the last 12 years, but this last year we felt a lot of support

[19:02] from the, when she was amazing to have them stop by and just checking on us, things to everyone

[19:08] who has helped us and supported us all this time.

[19:13] There's like Mayor Busy to come down here.

[19:20] Thank you, Sean.

[19:21] And Sean said, we had two very successful hatch

[19:25] of limiting years, starting entrepreneurs, new businesses

[19:27] in the city of Bloomington.

[19:29] And we got to it this year and realized

[19:32] that we had a lot of folks who wanted to start a new business,

[19:35] but we also had a lot of businesses

[19:36] that were already here that were paying rent,

[19:40] paying employees, serving our community,

[19:42] becoming a part of the community,

[19:43] and they needed some help.

[19:44] And so this pivot to hatch Bloomington loves local really came as an understanding and an

[19:50] acknowledgement that we want to keep them to keep businesses.

[19:53] We want to keep them in town.

[19:55] We want to have them keep hiring employees.

[19:57] Keep serving our community.

[19:58] Keeping part of this community.

[20:00] And so I'm very proud of first of all the work that Sean and the rest of our staff did to pull all of this together.

[20:06] They did outstanding work.

[20:08] As I said, this is the envy of a lot of cities in Minnesota.

[20:12] would love to have something like this and to be able to do something like this. I'm so proud

[20:17] of all the businesses that applied and we're going to meet five of them tonight, but there

[20:21] were a lot of folks who applied and all of them had a definite need and we definitely want

[20:27] to support them. I also want to thank our Bloomington Port Authority. Originally, we started

[20:33] with this pot of $100,000 that we were looking to distribute to our winners and when we saw

[20:39] the value and the quality of what our winners were doing, our port authority led by Holly

[20:45] Macyk and I thought Holly was here, she was here earlier, don't need a contribute in

[20:49] an extra $24,000, so with the total budget of $124,000 we are able to fund and support

[20:57] five different businesses in town.

[20:59] So this is a community-wide effort, and I'm so proud of our winners tonight, I'm proud

[21:04] of the community that supports this, I'm proud of our past winners and staff.

[21:08] This is really something very cool and you need to the city of Bloomington so give yourselves a round of applause

[21:13] So thank you so very much

[21:17] and now we're just going to do the official formalities here get everybody up here to receive your plaques

[21:23] To do the gripping grin and to make sure that you get a chance to to for people to see who you are

[21:29] We are going to start with autos autobody collision and repair center

[21:33] Come on up

[21:50] come on up, get hold on to that. Everybody smile and wave.

[22:16] Now I will say I've not brought

[22:19] my car to your business because I've never had a car worth fixing honestly. So I just

[22:25] don't bother. So I apologize to that if I can eventually afford a car worth fixing.

[22:30] I'll definitely look you out by promise. I have also, unfortunately, not been yet, not been yet to afghan,

[22:39] dover. Join us. Thank you.

[23:08] I have, in fact, been to nine miles once or twice.

[23:13] So congratulations to Bloomington Brewing in taproom, our nine mile brewing folks. Bob, congratulations.

[23:33] And I have also been many times and spent a lot of money with our friends at the Bloomington Garden Center in landscape company.

[24:07] And I will say the folks at Zeex Place, Zeex became a special place for my family when we were going through a rough patch with my mom,

[24:17] who was sick, and we would meet a lot of times at Zeex,

[24:20] because it was kind of a central point,

[24:22] and that's kind of, it became an important place in our lives.

[24:25] So I'm happy to present this to Zeex,

[24:27] please, as well.

[24:45] Let's give all of our viewers a big round of applause, please.

[25:10] Council next in our agenda, as we have our hatch folks,

[25:16] work their way out, introduction of our new employees.

[25:18] We've got three new public work employees,

[25:21] and Tim Barrett, from our public work staff,

[25:23] is going to do some introductions,

[25:24] and we're going to say hello to them.

[25:26] It's pretty good evening.

[25:28] Good evening Mayor and council members.

[25:30] It is my privilege tonight to introduce

[25:31] three of our newest public works employees.

[25:35] I will start with Amy Hayum.

[25:37] Amy came to us from a neighboring city.

[25:40] She was smart enough to cross the border.

[25:41] I want to say which city but we can kind of imagine who it is.

[25:46] So Amy holds a certification and vehicle title in

[25:49] registration which helps process motor vehicle documents,

[25:51] which is perfect because she works in our fleet

[25:52] vision as our office sports specialist. Amy grew up in Bloomington, so she is a local resident

[25:58] as well. She loves spending time outside work traveling with family and spending time with

[26:04] your family. So, Amy, welcome.

[26:07] Hello.

[26:09] Glad to be here.

[26:10] Welcome, we're very glad to have you here. Welcome.

[26:14] In our next employee, Evelie Goldman is our equipment operator within our street division.

[26:19] It really comes with 20 years of equipment operation, experience, and most recently working

[26:24] with a local asphalt company.

[26:27] He holds a class A commercial driver's license, and when he's not working, he enjoys spending

[26:33] time exploring national parks with his wife and three kids, along with snowboarding and

[26:37] skiing in the mountains.

[26:39] Everley?

[26:40] Welcome.

[26:41] Thanks for being here.

[26:44] And third but not last is Jacob Stone.

[26:47] Jacob Stone is a service technician within our facilities of vision.

[26:50] He has over 15 years experience in facility maintenance operations.

[26:54] Some of his work includes maintaining public schools and county facilities and most recently

[26:59] he directed management maintenance at a, sorry, at a assistive living facility.

[27:08] Jacob Poles and Minnesota first class see boiler's license, the class the wire operator

[27:12] license and a commercial pool operator certification.

[27:15] Jacob grew up in Richfield and outside of work enjoy something fishing camping and hiking and pretty much anything that gets them outdoors.

[27:22] Welcome, Jacob.

[27:23] Thank you.

[27:24] Glad to be here.

[27:28] Well, thank you all for being here.

[27:30] Thank you, Jim, for the introductions.

[27:32] Thanks for joining us here at the City of Bloomington.

[27:34] We're very happy about that.

[27:36] I tell all of our new employees.

[27:38] It's a big responsibility because for a lot of folks you are the face of Bloomington.

[27:42] They may or may not know who sits up here, but they'll certainly know the people who are working out there.

[27:47] either on the streets or in our public works department.

[27:51] So it's a big responsibility, but I've got complete confidence that you're going to be able to manage it and do very well with it.

[27:56] So look forward to seeing you around town and look forward to working with you.

[27:59] Welcome aboard.

[27:59] Thank you.

[28:00] Thank you.

[28:08] Council, our last item under our introductory items is an appointment to the merit board.

[28:12] We had an opening on the merit board due to the tragic passing of John Locke.

[28:18] John was a long time merit board member and was a great leader in this community and we're going to miss him a lot.

[28:22] but we realized we needed to make the appointment

[28:25] and so we put out the call for applicants.

[28:30] And as we do with all of our boards or commissions,

[28:33] we had an interview process.

[28:34] We had, I think, officially five applicants

[28:37] and four people that we did interview.

[28:40] And the interviewers, it was Peter Zuna and myself

[28:42] that did the interview for this.

[28:43] And so it was standard.

[28:45] It was the basic things that we do as we,

[28:47] as I said, fill all of our boards and commissions.

[28:50] And I do want to say, I want to thank everybody

[28:51] who did apply. We had a nice group of applicants with, they were willing to step forward.

[28:56] They were willing to serve their community. They put the time in the process into the application

[29:00] and I appreciate that. As I know, you all know the merit board requires judgment, fairness,

[29:08] and the ability to carefully consider different perspectives from a variety of different perspectives.

[29:14] And I'm confident any of our applicants would have done this very well. I'm also confident

[29:17] they would have been thoughtful and deliberative in their approach, and after considering all

[29:22] of our applicants in Peter and I had a good conversation, I had, I believe, and we are

[29:27] making the recommendation that Page Roman is the strongest choice for the appointment

[29:31] to this position.

[29:33] For a variety of reasons, first of all, Page brings extensive leadership and management experience

[29:37] at the University of Minnesota, where he has served in senior leadership roles, overseen

[29:42] the operations, budgets, and significant number of employees.

[29:45] In this current role, he leads operations across the system with more than $250 million in budgets and more than 1100 employees.

[29:53] That experience gives him strong understanding of organizational management and the responsibilities that come with making big decisions that affect him.

[30:01] Second page also has substantial experience with labor relations, policy interpretation, and with sensitive personnel management, management and issues, which obviously plays right into the merit boards, responsibilities.

[30:14] And finally, page head six years of service on the Bloomington Planning Commission, and he would be especially valuable. I think as a merit board member, the experience means he already understands how Bloomington operates. He has first hand experience with the responsibilities of public service, obviously.

[30:29] And he knows the importance of applying city policies fairly and even the across the board.

[30:36] So I really do think that all of that experience, that background, that information,

[30:42] the knowledge that page brings, it will allow him to step right into the merit board with

[30:46] a good level of understanding.

[30:49] And again, I want to thank the applicant pool.

[30:52] I think they've done a wonderful job coming forward, and I think they would all do well,

[30:56] But it is my recommendation to a point page to the member of the merit board.

[31:02] So that's the recommendation of the interview panel.

[31:05] And as we always do, you are free as we take a vote now to vote for any one of the applicants

[31:11] and you have the list of applicants there in front of you.

[31:14] We will call the roll and everybody will have one vote on this and we will see if we get

[31:18] to four votes and if not we will take our next steps that we will decide what is next.

[31:23] So everybody clear on that.

[31:24] Very good. Mr. Raik, could you call the voting please?

[31:30] Carter.

[31:32] Page Roman.

[31:34] Talessandro.

[31:36] Alkenkar Roman.

[31:38] Rivas.

[31:41] Roman.

[31:42] Nelson.

[31:43] Roman.

[31:44] Roman.

[31:45] Page Roman.

[31:45] Robertson.

[31:47] Mayor Busy.

[31:48] At Page Roman.

[31:49] Council.

[31:50] With the 70 vote, I would make a motion to appoint Page Roman to the Mayor Board for a term

[31:55] from the date of appointment, which would be today and tell December 31st of 2026.

[32:00] So moved.

[32:02] Motion by Council Member,

[32:03] Loman and Second by Council Member Dallisandro to appoint

[32:05] Page Roman to the Mayor of Borden.

[32:08] No further counsel to the discussion on this?

[32:10] Ms. Wright.

[32:11] Carter.

[32:13] Aye.

[32:13] Dallisandro.

[32:14] Rebus.

[32:15] Aye.

[32:15] Nelson.

[32:17] Loman.

[32:17] Robert Sun.

[32:18] Merbus.

[32:19] Aye.

[32:19] Motion carries 70.

[32:20] Congratulations, Paige, and welcome to Bloomington's Mayor Board.

[32:27] Next in our agenda council is our consent business.

[32:29] Council Member Revis has the consent agenda tonight.

[32:32] Council Member Revis.

[32:48] Sorry to interrupt, but I can't hear anything.

[32:50] So I'm not sure.

[32:50] We're not quite there yet.

[32:52] Council Member Revis.

[32:53] You have any holds.

[32:55] Do you have any holds?

[32:58] Council Member Cary?

[32:59] Nope.

[33:03] I move items 3.1 to 3.11.

[33:09] And item 3.12 to 3.24.

[33:14] I'm holding item 3.12.

[33:18] I'm holding item 3.12.

[33:23] We have a motion.

[33:25] Do we have a second?

[33:26] Second.

[33:27] Motion by Council Member Rivas.

[33:29] Second by Council Member Lomond.

[33:30] And to clarify, this is to approve item 3.133.11.

[33:34] And then 3.13 to 3.24.

[33:37] 24. No further counsel discussion on this?

[33:42] Who's right?

[33:43] Carter?

[33:45] Aye.

[33:45] Talessandro? Aye.

[33:46] Reeves? Aye.

[33:47] Nelson?

[33:48] Aye.

[33:49] Lowman? Aye.

[33:49] Robertson? Aye.

[33:50] Merbusy?

[33:51] Aye. Motion carries 7-0.

[33:53] Item 3.12.

[33:55] Council member Lowman.

[33:56] Thank you, Mayor.

[33:57] I don't want to make this into a big deal.

[33:59] I just don't agree with the changes that are being suggested here with the

[34:04] loss for the advisory board of health and rules procedure. I think everybody pretty much knows

[34:10] my background on that so I don't need to elaborate on all that but I just wanted to hold this

[34:14] I could vote no. Very good. With that, council member Rivas, could you please move item 3.12

[34:22] fleet? For us.

[34:26] We need your microphone, council member. I move item 3.12. I can.

[34:33] Thank you.

[34:34] Thank you.

[34:34] Motion.

[34:34] My council member, Rivas, second.

[34:35] My council member, Dala Sando, to accept item 312 on the consent agenda this evening,

[34:41] that is to approve the advisory board of health by laws and rules of procedure.

[34:45] No further counts of discussion on this.

[34:48] Ms. Wright.

[34:49] Carter.

[34:51] I.

[34:51] Dala Sando.

[34:52] I.

[34:53] Rivas.

[34:53] Aye.

[34:54] Nelson.

[34:55] I.

[34:55] Loman.

[34:56] No.

[34:57] Robertson.

[35:00] Aye.

[35:01] position. Thank you, Council Member Rivas. Appreciate it. Moving on to our hearings, resolutions,

[35:08] and ordinances. Item 4.1 on tonight's agenda is the resolution adopting the 2027 preliminary

[35:15] tax lobby with an opportunity for public comment. Cardi Carlson from our finance staff is going

[35:20] to lead us through this one. And what the plan is, we will do the presentation and then we

[35:31] able to speak on the on the resolution. And there'll be a two minute limit per for our comments

[35:37] and then the council will take it up after that. That's Carlson, good evening. Welcome.

[35:44] Good evening. Good evening, Mayor and council. So yes, tonight I will walk through the preliminary

[35:52] 2027 tax lovy and general fund budget along with the conceptual preliminary 2028 tax lovy and

[36:00] general fund budget.

[36:09] So here's our agenda for tonight. So I will walk through basically

[36:12] what's driving the changes and some key highlights around the budget and then we'll open

[36:18] it up for a public comment and then council discussion and consideration of the resolutions.

[36:40] So before we get into the 2027, Levy, I want to provide some historical context. So in

[36:48] The preliminary levy was 9.44%, but we were able to bring that down to 6.96% by final adoption.

[36:59] And then over the last four years, our preliminary tax levy increases have averaged 10.23% for preliminary average compared with an average final increase of 8.32%.

[37:15] So, just this shows that the preliminary levy is a starting point and we will continue working to reduce that before final adoption.

[37:31] So here is the proposed twenty twenty seven preliminary city tax levity. It is one hundred point two million dollars. And that is an increase of six point two four million dollars or a six point six four percent increase.

[37:47] And you can see on this table that the largest increase is in the general fund, which will break down in more detail in the next few slides.

[37:56] And then you can also see that that increase is partially offset by a 1.9 million dollar reduction in debt payments and a 150,000 reduction in the Normandale Lake District Tax Abitment Capital Projects Libby.

[38:14] You'll also see that a forestry, we're moving that from a special revenue fund and to the general fund.

[38:21] And also shifting $200,000 of a levy from the ice carton to the community health and wellness center to help prepare for operations and opening in late fall of 2027.

[38:37] So here's a combined bloomington levy with the HRA in the port.

[38:43] So in this chart, the city levy itself is increasing.

[38:46] And the previous chart, we showed that the city by itself is increasing by 6.64 percent from last year.

[38:55] Also, when we combine the city, the H&O port levies, the total combined levies, also increasing 6.64 percent.

[39:03] And of that combined increase, the contribution from the city is 6.26 percent, or percentage points from that combined city levies.

[39:17] So now, looking ahead to 2028, and I want to stress that this is a conceptual

[39:23] levy for planning purposes, but since the reason for that is that the actual 2028

[39:33] levy will be established next year. And at this point, we're just rejecting a total

[39:39] of about 110.1 million, which is an increase of 9.85 million or 9.82 percent, and that increase

[39:49] is primarily driven by the general fund and the debt payments for tax levee. And then also

[39:55] we're projecting out an increase for community health and wellness center, just as that facility

[40:00] moves into its first full year of operations. So we'll continue, of course, for finding both

[40:07] general fund and a debt levy as we move through the 2028 budget process next year.

[40:13] And I just want to point out without that increase in debt service that the projected levy

[40:18] increase would be about 7.14%.

[40:25] And then also as a combined preliminary,

[40:29] conceptual preliminary for 28. When we take city, HRA port levy's together,

[40:34] It's about 116.5 million in overall increase of 9.5.9.

[40:41] So this city accounts for the vast majority of the increase, smaller increases for the each

[40:45] or a import that we're projecting, as I mentioned on the previous slide, a significant portion

[40:50] of the city increase is that $2.7 million increase in debt service.

[40:55] So again, without that, the city portion would be around 7.14.

[41:00] And again, to say these are conceptual numbers, and we will be refining them before that's

[41:04] next year.

[41:09] So this slide just shows how our tax base has changed over the last five years.

[41:15] So after significant growth in 2023, the growth has been much more modest in recent years.

[41:23] And then if you look at the last line of that chart for 2027, the local rate tax capacity is

[41:30] to 0.1%, and the residential values are growing 2.6%, while commercial and industrial and

[41:39] apartment values are essentially flat. So we're seeing tax-based growth, but it's also a

[41:45] shift toward residential property.

[41:52] And so, because the median value home increased by 2.9%

[41:57] last year. And the Homestead Market Value Exclusion decreased as a result. This shows how

[42:05] a 6.64% tax of the increase would translate to about a 7.75% increase for the median value home.

[42:14] And that is roughly $2.47 per week increase for a month that's $10.71 or for a year it's $128.49.

[42:26] getting

[42:34] into our budget direction. As we've talked about before, our budget mission for

[42:40] 2027 and 2028 has these two guiding principles to sustain and enhance the excellent quality

[42:48] of life that makes Bloomington an adorable and remarkable community where people want to be

[42:54] and to develop a budget that is sensitive to the economic stress and shifting demographics at

[42:59] in our community and so as we developed the budget we continue to focus on these priorities

[43:06] on finishing what we've started and improving how we serve the community staying financially

[43:11] strong and being disciplined on taxes and ultimately the goals to make sure our budget decisions

[43:17] align our resources with the city's overall priorities and

[43:27] as we move forward with our budget

[43:28] direction. We also need to stay in sync with what's happening across our workforce. So,

[43:33] personal costs do make up 74% of our general fund budget. So, changes in our workforce

[43:39] do have a significant impact on the budget. We're seeing changing workforce expectations,

[43:46] Minnesota paid leave, and other state policy changes as well as continued recruitment,

[43:51] retention, and succession planning needs. And at the same time, we need to make sure our staff

[43:55] keeps pace with service needs. So while we're being thoughtful about adding new positions,

[44:00] there are areas where additional staffing is needed, especially in the fire department,

[44:06] and also in the new community health and wellness center. So it's just part of balancing the

[44:11] service needs and supporting our workforce and then also keeping the budget sustainable.

[44:19] So one of the ways we've been talking about this year to help manage the levy is through our

[44:23] capital and debt management fund. So for 2027, we're reducing the debt

[44:29] level by about 1.89 million. And we're able to do that by using

[44:34] available fund resources to reduce the property taxes that are needed for

[44:38] debt payments for paying off eligible bonds early and also using some cash

[44:44] for capital projects where it makes sense rather than issuing additional

[44:48] debt. And so that helps lower our

[44:50] me today, while it also reduces future borrowing and debt costs.

[44:58] And then in addition to the debt.

[45:01] We've identified another $910,000 in reductions in the 2027 budget. And so, as I mentioned before, this does include reductions to the Normandale Lake District Taxes of Bateman-Levy and the elimination of the ice-guard and levy, along with reductions throughout the general fund.

[45:17] So, within the general fund, departments reduced professional services, seasonal staffing, and overtime, training and travel, technologies, supplies, equipment, and other operating costs.

[45:27] And these reductions are part of our ongoing effort just to manage the tax of the while maintaining our core services.

[45:41] So just talking about investments in this budget, so the first area of investment is really about finishing what we've already started.

[45:49] And about 1.79 million of that, 2027 budget increase as it continues investments that are already underway.

[45:57] So, the largest piece is fire, so we have nine additional positions as we continue the transition to a combination full-time and part-time department.

[46:08] Along with new equipment for the new hires and a new fire cadet program.

[46:14] We're also continuing our investment in the Community Health and Wellness Center with the facility that's scheduled to open in late fall of 2027.

[46:21] And we need to begin staffing and preparing for operations so we're ready when we open the doors.

[46:27] So we're also continuing along with that investments in urban forestry, preventative park maintenance, and climate action plan initiatives.

[46:40] And another area of investment is public safety technology.

[46:44] So the goal is to increase the capacity of our existing

[46:49] a police staff by using technology to work more efficiently and effectively.

[46:56] So we've included an additional $500,000 of both,

[47:00] 2027 and 2028 for tools such as AI and workflow technology,

[47:07] drone first responder program, and an integrated axon platform.

[47:11] And while the drone first responder program is primarily a police investment, drones can also be used for fire, public works, parks and other departments.

[47:25] There's also potential that there could be an additional 558,000 on top of that beginning in 2020-29 as this work continues.

[47:33] So this will allow us to make these investments now while continuing to just evaluate the longer term needs and longer term costs.

[47:41] So let's break down these numbers a little bit.

[47:49] So here we have the general fund revenues.

[47:52] And you can see the property tax levy is our largest revenue source

[47:56] and the general fund at over 69% of the total.

[48:00] And next is lodging and admission taxes.

[48:03] Local lodging and admission taxes are the next largest source.

[48:06] Followed by permits and licenses, grants, and transfers from other funds.

[48:10] So overall, the 2027 preliminary general fund budget is about $129.9 million in revenues.

[48:19] And here, this next slide is just a chart illustrating, really illustrating the impact

[48:25] of the general fund is on the property tax lobby.

[48:29] So nearly 70% almost seven out of every $10 of the general fund revenue comes from property

[48:34] taxes while all other revenue sources combined make up about 30% so it shows why changes in

[48:42] our other revenue sources can help but ultimately the property tax level has the greatest

[48:47] impact on our ability to fund our general fund services and then going to the expenditure

[48:54] side for the 2027 preliminary general fund budget it's also $1209.9 million. Public safety

[49:02] makes up nearly half of the general fund budget. So when you take police and fire together,

[49:07] that's about 48% of the expenditures and then public works, parks and recreation and the next

[49:12] largest areas followed by community development and public health. So the remaining departments

[49:17] make a bunch smaller portion of the overall budget is shown on this slide. You can see when you see it

[49:28] a pie chart gives you more of a visual sense

[49:31] of how those expenditures are distributed across the city services.

[49:38] So it looks like the titles

[49:39] and come over this moment we put this out here,

[49:42] but we'll fix that in the packet

[49:44] if it's not like that in the engine of materials.

[49:47] But so you can see though, what is showing

[49:49] is that police fire public works of parks and recreation

[49:52] are making up a large portion of that chart there

[49:57] and what's not showing the next kind of pink magenta slice there that's community development and then the lighter green one next to that is public health and then the next three smaller slices of that chart are finance and legal administrative city council and communication so you can see it's a much smaller portion of our overall general fund expenditures.

[50:26] And so, in the last time we were here and showing some preliminary preliminary budget information,

[50:33] there was some requests to show this tax-loving broken out in different ways.

[50:37] So these next few slides are going to do that.

[50:39] So this one is a breakdown by department.

[50:42] So this shows the 6.64% loving increase by department.

[50:46] So public safety you can see is the largest driver of the increase with fire and police together.

[50:52] county for 4.23%, and then after that, Parks and Recreation and Public Works are each around

[50:58] 0.85% of that increase, and then the smaller increases are in the other areas.

[51:05] And you can see, looking at the change between 26 and 27, that for finance legal administration

[51:13] communications is actually a very slight decrease.

[51:18] Another way to break out that 6.64% tax

[51:21] the increase is to look at it by category. So you can see salaries and benefits are low-largest

[51:26] driver. So it's almost 7% of the levy. And then material supplies and services are about 1.64%

[51:36] just a little bit of an impact from capital outlay. And but those increases then are offset by that

[51:44] 1.9 million reduction in debt payments. So that's another way to look at the 6.64%

[51:51] than I have one more.

[51:54] And so this is looking at by kind of budget drivers.

[51:59] So when we talk about what increases necessary

[52:03] for maintaining our current services,

[52:06] that accounts for 6.22 percentage points,

[52:10] we talked about the finishing investments

[52:12] that are already underway.

[52:13] That's another 1.9 point nine points.

[52:17] And then the new public safety technology

[52:20] that we're talking about adding is about half of a percentage point. And then again, showing

[52:26] how the reduction for the debt level.

[52:30] That we are using from capital and that management fund, how that affects that.

[52:36] And then just here's a graphic, just to kind of help put all of that together more visually.

[52:43] And a kind of a vertical chart there. So you can see that cost of maintaining services is really the primary driver of the increase.

[52:53] And then the investments are continuing to make in the new public safety technology add to that and then that

[53:01] that love you reduction provides a bit of an offset.

[53:07] And then, talk about some highlights here.

[53:12] So, for community engagement, we've had a lot of community engagement throughout the budget process.

[53:18] We've provided a variety of ways for residents to participate, both in person and virtually.

[53:26] So that includes let's talk Bloomington online.

[53:29] We've been at community events such as the farmers market.

[53:33] There's been there was a questionnaire and the briefing that people mailed in.

[53:38] Really the goal has been just going to meet people where they are and provide multiple opportunities for residents to learn about the budget,

[53:44] ask questions to share their priorities with us.

[53:48] And here's the map that we had in the in-person events that I have shown in the past,

[53:53] which is to show it again that we talked with people at community events and shows where they live throughout the community.

[54:00] We had a different color for each event, but you can see that we did hear from residents that were spread out across Bloomington.

[54:09] And then when we summarized the feedback across all that engagement, we've heard some consistent themes.

[54:14] residents value Bloomington, they're proud to live here in the services that the city provides,

[54:21] but definitely affordability and rising property taxes are a real concern.

[54:26] They want us to demonstrate as a city the value for their tax dollars, they want us to prioritize

[54:31] investments carefully and, you know, reassess when circumstances change and continue thinking about

[54:37] the city's long-term financial sustainability.

[54:43] And then here is the calendar that we've been working

[54:45] through for the 27 28 budget process and many of the opportunities in dates have passed, we've

[54:55] got the yellow highlight around September 14th tonight. It's color coded, I'll just say again,

[55:01] the dark blue boxes were things that city staff did. The light blue were our community budget

[55:06] information tables. The orange represents public common opportunities late tonight. It's also part

[55:12] screen because we have a representation for Council.

[55:17] And then right now, as I said, we're at the Preliminary

[55:20] Loving and Budget Stage, but there still are several

[55:23] opportunities for Council discussion and public input

[55:26] before this budget is finalized in December.

[55:31] And before I end, I also want to make sure

[55:33] residents are aware of Minnesota's property tax

[55:37] refund program, both homeowners and renters may qualify

[55:42] for a refund based on their individual circumstances. This is a state program and the department

[55:48] of revenue website, the phone numbers and a QR code are included here for anyone who would

[55:54] like more information or wants to see if they qualify. And then also I want to highlight

[56:00] there's another option specifically for seniors and the states property tax deferral program.

[56:07] So for eligible homeowners, age 65 and older, property taxes are limited based on household income with the remaining amount deferred by the state.

[56:18] And so there are additional eligible eligibility requirements, but you can ask our city assessors office.

[56:24] They are happy to help residents understand the program and whether it be maybe an option for them.

[56:32] And with that, that concludes my presentation.

[56:37] So at this point, I will turn it over to the leader.

[56:39] Thank you, Ms. Carlson.

[56:40] Once again, very informative and we'll put together

[56:43] and I appreciate the different breakdowns of the increase

[56:45] and where it comes and where it falls in.

[56:47] And I think it responds to what the council was asking for.

[56:49] So thank you for doing that.

[56:50] That's helpful.

[56:52] Council, any questions of Ms. Carlson?

[56:54] Before we get to the public comment?

[56:59] All right.

[57:00] Let us dive into our public comment opportunity here.

[57:04] First of all, just kind of, the ground rules here, anybody is able to speak, come on up and you just introduce yourself, make sure you tell us who you are, and then you can sign in, we have a clipboard here, you can sign in after you're done.

[57:17] You can have to take the clipboard and step to the side and then we'll get the next person up and speaking also.

[57:22] We have two minutes per speaker and our handy little clock on the wall will let you know when the two minutes are up and when the two minutes are up, I will stop you.

[57:30] Not because I'm a mean guy, just because I want to make sure that everybody has the same amount of time to speak and we all have a fair shot at this.

[57:37] So, and we will hold if you have specific, if you have comments, we certainly want to hear the comments if you have specific questions.

[57:43] What will do will collect all the questions and answer those questions or do our best answer those questions at the end of the public comment.

[57:50] We'll collect them all and when everybody's done then we'll try and answer those questions.

[57:55] So with that said, I will open our public comment period tonight. Is there anybody in the chambers who wishes to speak regarding the proposed

[58:05] 2027

[58:05] General fund budget or the proposed levy for next year.

[58:18] Mr. Hall, I saw you back there would have been disappointed if you didn't come back.

[58:21] You know it.

[58:24] I know for a fact, I do not have enough time to read this entire thing.

[58:27] and I, because of the great presentation that was presented, I learned some things, I do have to

[58:32] make some edits. But I came here mostly two, well, three reasons, sorry, three reasons. One,

[58:41] I actually think the love of you isn't high enough, but I think that there could be like

[58:45] exceptions and ways to move stuff around, and as you were saying with the home her, as was

[58:50] presented with the homestead, exception, clearly there's ways to make this more equitable than

[58:55] either a regressive policy or a blanket policy, but I don't believe from what's coming in

[59:03] our future in terms of Trump's policies about energy, foreign policy, the bond market, the economy

[59:14] in general, and all the other federal services that have been caught in the past few years, and

[59:19] on top of it, El Nino, which is going to change climate into the real emergency that we are

[59:28] not prepared at all to face right now. So that's that's point number one. Point number two is

[59:35] that axon is essentially the sister or the competitor to flock. And I remember last November,

[59:45] a resident spoke about the many warnings against these kinds of cameras and I distinctly

[59:50] remember the council saying that there was no budget for them and not to worry about

[59:54] it.

[59:54] That was obviously last year.

[59:55] This is this year.

[59:56] I don't know who proposed that, but if it came from BP.

[1:00:00] Indeed, who has stated publicly that they are not working with ICE, axon is a direct connection to ICE. Axon shares data with ICE.

[1:00:10] It is the same technologies as flock. It is just as corrupt towards ICE and Trump. Both of them are personally benefiting of these these funds.

[1:00:23] So that would mean that the city of Bloomingtown, Maryland, I'm afraid your time is up directly paying.

[1:00:30] Thank you.

[1:00:32] Thank you for your comments.

[1:00:35] Others wishing to speak?

[1:00:44] Greetings.

[1:00:45] Good evening.

[1:00:45] My name is Dan Bell, Longtime resident of Bloomingtown.

[1:00:49] And I have a slightly differing view on budgets and spending.

[1:00:54] It seems like it's a pretty miniscule amount.

[1:00:57] And the budget was put together very well by Miss Carlson, in terms of understanding where

[1:01:04] it's spent and how it spent, but each one of these little pieces that affect the older

[1:01:10] folks, making under $100,000, that's a pretty tough barrier to even finance a horse and

[1:01:19] live in a house with that kind of income.

[1:01:21] And so when it's booming, 10 that raises its greater, greater than the rate of inflation,

[1:01:27] Not maybe in recent years, but what's being proposed is slightly ahead of where the budgets have been.

[1:01:33] I just think that you have to think about how that money spent, how we can do it more efficiently.

[1:01:39] And it just keeps adding up.

[1:01:43] It's a little piece from booming terrain.

[1:01:44] It's a bigger piece from head up in county.

[1:01:47] It's a bigger piece.

[1:01:48] Everything time is spent at all.

[1:01:49] It's 10%.

[1:01:51] And so it really hurts.

[1:01:52] Every time you see spending go up, I'm very happy with at least the thought process that's used in terms of how

[1:02:04] our money is spent. But I look around the city and I go, wow, some of this stuff is pretty done pretty

[1:02:11] inefficiently. So I think there are some opportunities to do better. So that's all I really have to say.

[1:02:19] I appreciate your comments. Thank you.

[1:02:25] Others?

[1:02:29] Is right? Do we have anyone on the phone machine

[1:02:31] to speak?

[1:02:33] They would do not have anyone online.

[1:02:37] Last call. Anyone in the chambers?

[1:02:42] All right.

[1:02:43] With the council, I will close our public comment opportunity on item 4.1.

[1:02:48] And I appreciate the comments made by folks.

[1:02:53] And I heard comments that didn't hear any specific questions.

[1:02:55] And I do appreciate that.

[1:02:56] And Mr. Belly, I appreciate the, it all adds up context is absolutely right.

[1:03:01] And I will not deny that.

[1:03:03] And Mr. Halit, the work, yes, the work that we're trying to make it more equitable, I think we need to,

[1:03:10] we need, as a community, but we also need, on a broader scale, a larger look at things.

[1:03:16] We need to look at how we pay for things in a more equitable fashion, especially public

[1:03:19] services.

[1:03:21] And don't disagree about the climate emergency discussion.

[1:03:24] And regarding axon and flock, I don't know that they're direct, you know, they're exact

[1:03:30] cousin to brothers.

[1:03:32] I would have to get back to you on that because I'm not sure exactly.

[1:03:35] I do know that BPDs specifically would not work toward flock, didn't want flock for the

[1:03:43] variety of reasons.

[1:03:44] I don't know that whether axon is an equivalent to it, I just don't know off the top

[1:03:48] of my head.

[1:03:49] Thank you.

[1:03:51] Council, with that information to us, it's up to us now, we've had a number of different

[1:03:57] meetings on this. We've been talking about this for a couple of months now. We're looking

[1:04:01] at a resolution establishing our preliminary tax levy for the year of 2027. With the

[1:04:08] understanding, as I think we all know and as bears repeating every time, that whatever

[1:04:12] levy we set as a preliminary levy, it cannot go up, it can come down as we move forward

[1:04:19] into our budget process here.

[1:04:22] So based on what we've heard, based on what we understand where we're sitting right now at

[1:04:27] this level, appreciate your comments, Council, and see where we go.

[1:04:31] Council member Loman.

[1:04:33] Mayor and Manager, I had just a few questions I wanted to just be sure I was clear about

[1:04:38] just to kind of make sure I'm framing and understanding this correctly, in terms of the CPI,

[1:04:44] The 12 month CPIU through August is about 3.4 percent.

[1:04:49] Our proposed level is 6.64 percent.

[1:04:52] Roughly twice that.

[1:04:53] I wanted to clear our explanation so that residents could follow

[1:04:56] and understand the municipal cost drivers

[1:04:59] out based standard inflation.

[1:05:01] We kind of talked about a little bit that in there,

[1:05:03] but just so that folks could understand that.

[1:05:07] Mr. Walker?

[1:05:08] Yes. Thank you, Mayor.

[1:05:12] It's a fair question, but I would say it's probably not the best measure.

[1:05:18] CPI is really a measure of, as defined by the Department of Labor, a market basket of goods

[1:05:25] across a wire array of consumer items.

[1:05:30] At the city, we're not buying things like beef and milk and eggs.

[1:05:33] I mean, the fire department might be, but the rest of us.

[1:05:38] That was a joke.

[1:05:44] Instead, we're in the people business.

[1:05:46] You saw that 74% of our costs are in person now.

[1:05:49] So we are largely tied in our budget to things like cost of hiring and compensating

[1:05:57] our employees, health insurance, our property and liability insurance for the services

[1:06:02] that we provide.

[1:06:04] Commodities and goods for the infrastructure that we maintain or add into the city, so

[1:06:10] It's important to continue to monitor our spending the line is well taken that it all adds up

[1:06:16] But I just that's really not the best apples to apples comparison when you're looking at

[1:06:22] City spending and the cost increases behind it

[1:06:26] Appreciate that and with that being said then the service and the quality

[1:06:29] baseline as we reduce the spending to manage the

[1:06:32] levee. I wanted to confirm that we're not compromising the

[1:06:36] the service delivery and that we are holding the line and

[1:06:39] that residents satisfaction stays insulated.

[1:06:44] Yeah, I would say that as our budget core team has

[1:06:48] deliberated and we've worked with our staff across the city and

[1:06:52] getting to this point in the process and again this is not

[1:06:54] the end of the process. One of the key

[1:06:58] tenants for us has been.

[1:07:02] Let's not compromise a really good thing and in Bloomington we have really high levels of

[1:07:07] citizen satisfaction with our services, with the perception of the value that a resident

[1:07:14] gets relative to the taxes that they pay and we want to make sure that while we are continuing

[1:07:19] to look at ways to contain spending increases, it's happening in such a way that residents

[1:07:25] start noticing a decrease in the number of

[1:07:27] equality of services that they're receiving.

[1:07:29] And I think...

[1:07:30] To this point in the conversation, we've met that objective.

[1:07:33] Just a couple more here. The thing I'm most concerned about is unforeseen economic pressures.

[1:07:39] August alone, we saw gasoline prices up 3.9%. We run a plow fleet service and construction programs with different

[1:07:46] things we're building. What are our reserve conclusions and

[1:07:50] componenty costs if they spike mid-year or next year?

[1:07:54] In our budget deliberations, when we've been meeting with staff and department leadership,

[1:08:01] one of the things I think we have done a good job of is to the degree possible forecasting.

[1:08:08] Those known increases that are there and where those trends could go.

[1:08:12] So I think we struck a good balance of trying to tie our spending to some of those historical

[1:08:18] averages, but also then understanding where some of those vulnerabilities and pressures

[1:08:22] could be, and I would say, as you dig into the granular detail of the budget, areas like that

[1:08:28] that you're referencing do have some forecasted increases built into those. Of course, things

[1:08:33] are as was referenced by one of the speakers very vulnerable and unpredictable at best right

[1:08:39] now. But with the information that we have available, I think our staff have done a good job

[1:08:45] of trying to forecast and budget in a responsible way for that.

[1:08:48] Then I think finally here I'll just tie these last things together here, you know, the staff training and retention and wanted to just make sure that as we look to make these reductions that we're not cutting the pipeline development to save short term dollars in a way so that we later on have to pay higher wages later on just wanted to make sure really that we're our long term fiscal sustainability.

[1:09:14] our resources, we're not just making these short time cuts here in order to make sure that we can still sustain this type of level as we get in through the end of the decade.

[1:09:23] Good question. One of the things also that I think our staff have done a good job to this point in the development process has been to look at historical averages in our spending and find the places where maybe our budget has been higher than actual spending.

[1:09:38] and then try to true up our proposed budget this year closer to what those historical averages have been.

[1:09:46] Thank you, Manager and Marin, based on that, I think I can support this.

[1:09:51] Council Member Carter.

[1:09:54] Thank you, Mayor.

[1:09:56] I just want to thank the staff for all of their really hard work on this.

[1:10:02] I think I guess I'll just say personally, I'm kind of pleasantly surprised at where we're at for our preliminary tax levy.

[1:10:09] And I know a lot of really hard diligent work has gone into getting to this number, and I know that you're going to continue to look for those areas that we can improve efficiencies and reduce costs without compromising our service.

[1:10:24] And so really thank you so much. Oh, I also want to thank you because I'm thinking about all the feedback that we provided at the last conversation.

[1:10:31] and I think all of it is represented in this presentation tonight, so thank you for incorporating

[1:10:37] all of our desires and what we wanted to see in this discussion. I think you did a really

[1:10:42] really good job. I also want to thank the residents who showed up against tonight's testifying

[1:10:47] all the residents who engaged throughout the process. I do have a question based on the comments tonight

[1:10:53] and I was wondering it myself because of everything going on at the federal level and some of the

[1:10:59] changes that might be happening. What what would we do in an emergency situation should we need?

[1:11:07] And like we need we just need to find some additional funding to adjust XYZ, whatever it might be.

[1:11:13] Or maybe we lose a ton of federal funding because of some of the changes that might be need.

[1:11:17] Like what is that kind of emergency valve that we could pull if something did happen and we need

[1:11:24] some additional funds.

[1:11:27] Mr. Walker.

[1:11:28] Thank you Mayor.

[1:11:29] Thank you councilmember Carter.

[1:11:31] In those situations, I would say the city would be faced with really two choices.

[1:11:35] One would be more drastic, which should be, are we desiring to continue on the budget

[1:11:43] that we have adopted?

[1:11:45] And if so, then we would need to tap into the city's reserves.

[1:11:52] Consistent, of course, with our financial policies and recognizing that we need to keep minimum reserve levels.

[1:11:58] The other option would simply be immediate reduction of spending, whether that is

[1:12:05] Seizing services or hiring freezes or other things like that that would provide.

[1:12:11] Some one time relief while we got to our next fiscal cycle and then made decisions about what we wanted the city's operating budget to look like in light of those drastic changes.

[1:12:24] All right, thank you. I do also just kind of want to point out that we have had a situation like this like when the pandemic hit and we all of a sudden lost a ton of revenue that we were expecting.

[1:12:33] And that's when we had the citizen advisory board and paid lots of hard decisions and kind of did go through a process.

[1:12:41] And so we do have experience in that kind of situation. Obviously not a situation any of us want to be in again.

[1:12:48] But thank you for that explanation and kind of the reminder that we do have reserves and we do have the ability to modify our budget and our spending should something happen.

[1:12:59] So, so thank you for that.

[1:13:02] I do have a couple other questions,

[1:13:04] but the answers are not going to impact how I vote tonight.

[1:13:07] And so, I will be voting in support

[1:13:10] of this preliminary tax levy.

[1:13:13] You know, I think we're in a good spot

[1:13:15] and given everything going on in the country right now,

[1:13:18] I actually don't know if I'd want to go much lower at this point.

[1:13:22] So, so I will be supporting tonight.

[1:13:24] Thank you.

[1:13:26] Thank you, John's member.

[1:13:30] Thanks, Mr. Mayor.

[1:13:31] I want to echo the appreciation I have for the staff work on pulling this together.

[1:13:37] I think I've been an advocate for trying to make sure that people can walk out of

[1:13:41] these conversations with a clear understanding of what it costs to do what we do today,

[1:13:46] what it costs for us to make the investments we've been telling people about for a while,

[1:13:49] and then what is it on top of that that we need to consider?

[1:13:53] And what does that do to our level?

[1:13:54] So, you know, the fact that we, hopefully everybody who is here tonight listening to us can walk away answering that question in a very easy way is really important.

[1:14:04] That's the way I think about things too, right? So, so I appreciate it very much.

[1:14:09] And I know this isn't the end of the line for us. I know that you'll keep working on the pencils with the pencils and everything, so very much appreciate that.

[1:14:17] There's one question on the strategic side around our fire department work that I wanted to throw out there is something that maybe we can bring into the context of that as we continue to work on refining that investment, and that is just simply that I think we've talked a little bit about the fact that the, you know, it does cost us something to not have the full time fire department that we have.

[1:14:41] It may cost us in our insurance calls, it costs us in the potential for economic distress associated with not meeting our obligations from SLA perspective and all that kind of stuff.

[1:14:51] And so I'm wondering if there's a chance for us to look at those in comparison to say that this investment is also going to offset operationally long.

[1:15:02] So I just haven't asked that question before and it feels like something that when we think about these strategic projects, we might want to think about how why we've chosen to make the investments.

[1:15:13] I think the threat has been lost a little bit because we started the conversation on the fire department way back in 2022 or whatever about why we decided to do this.

[1:15:20] And it came down to the fact that we couldn't run a truck, meaningfully, with enough staff

[1:15:26] to meet our obligations, not just from a legal perspective or an insurance-oriented perspective,

[1:15:33] but a moral one, frankly, like an ethical one, and so how do we continue to make sure folks

[1:15:40] understand that each of these investments that we're making with their capital or operational

[1:15:45] are against that thing, right, no different really than the climate conversation or the federal

[1:15:52] conversation should we have to come back and say, here's what happened to the money that

[1:15:56] we thought we would have. It went away because of XYZ policy. Now we have to do something

[1:16:01] differently, and if we can continue to make sure that those threads are clear, you know, it's

[1:16:06] it's a, you have to agree with it, but at least you can explain it. And I think that that's

[1:16:10] an really important thing. I like to be able to walk out of here being able to say, this is why

[1:16:15] what we're doing. So happy to support this today knowing that it is not the end of the conversation,

[1:16:20] but a really well done thoughtful perspective. I'm hoping this implies that priority-based

[1:16:25] budgeting is actually working right now. So I'd love to hear more about that at some point too.

[1:16:29] Thanks. Thank you, council member.

[1:16:34] Others?

[1:16:35] That's member Robinson. Thank you, Mayor. I'll do my best to keep it brief. To echo what my colleagues

[1:16:41] are saying. I think I'm pleasantly surprised to use council member Carter's phrase.

[1:16:47] at where the number is. I'm happy to support this today, certainly saying the same as

[1:16:52] Council member Delicendro. This isn't the end of the conversation. I'm really, really,

[1:16:56] I have to say very impressed by all the work that's gone into this and this, I just have to note,

[1:17:02] on page 22 of the PECC Council packet, that beautiful graphic that I know Council member Delicendro is a

[1:17:08] huge fan of as well. For me, at least, that was a great visual to help understand where all the

[1:17:14] is going, why it has to increase it all, and I just thought that was really great.

[1:17:18] So, certainly, again, this isn't the end of the conversation, and I think bringing up the

[1:17:24] concerns about potential change in energy costs is huge and something we really need to be

[1:17:28] talking about all the time, especially with the news over just the past few days.

[1:17:33] And so, again, I think this is a good jumping off point.

[1:17:37] It's not the end of things.

[1:17:37] I think this is really, really helpful information, and I certainly appreciate the folks who

[1:17:41] came out to speak to us tonight.

[1:17:44] We appreciate your time, and so yeah, I'm happy to support this as it is.

[1:17:47] And I'm also excited to see where the conversation goes.

[1:17:51] So.

[1:17:51] Thanks, Council Member.

[1:17:57] Well, my two cents council, it boils down to actually a couple of numbers

[1:18:01] and you've heard of me say them before that 81% of our budget goes to police, fire, public

[1:18:07] works, community development, parking recreation.

[1:18:10] Those are the five absolute cornerstone building blocks of what city government should do.

[1:18:14] and 81% of our budget goes to that.

[1:18:17] And of that total budget, more than 70% goes to people.

[1:18:22] We don't make widgets.

[1:18:23] We provide services as a city.

[1:18:26] And those services are provided by our city employees and by our people.

[1:18:30] And that's where those costs come from.

[1:18:31] And that's if we expect that type of service delivery that we have come to expect.

[1:18:37] As residents, we're all residents.

[1:18:38] We've come to expect that service delivery within our city.

[1:18:42] That's what the cost of doing it is.

[1:18:44] The one comment that I would make, I'm still, to see our debt load continue to increase,

[1:18:54] but now taking the steps to reduce that debt load.

[1:18:57] I appreciate that with our new fund, and I forgot in what we renamed it, the debt reduction fund,

[1:19:03] or however we named it.

[1:19:05] I think that's a positive step forward.

[1:19:08] And I think it's a better use of that fund rather than to use it as a strategic priorities fund.

[1:19:13] I'd like that as a use of it.

[1:19:15] And frankly, I wonder if we had used it in that way

[1:19:17] over the past 10 years, what would you be looking at right now

[1:19:19] in terms of our overall debt?

[1:19:21] And it might be a little different.

[1:19:22] So I think there's work to be done on that.

[1:19:25] But overall, I think this is a good starting point

[1:19:29] as we continue this conversation and a good place

[1:19:31] for us to jump off on with an official stamp

[1:19:35] and move forward with all of this.

[1:19:39] And Council, if there's no more comments on this,

[1:19:43] Councilmember Lomit.

[1:19:46] Mayor, I'll move to adopt a resolution of a pulmonary, a levy

[1:19:54] establishment at a tax levy for the city of Blomiton for the year

[1:19:58] 2022.

[1:20:01] Motion by Councilmember Lomiton, second by Councilmember

[1:20:02] Robertson, to adopt a resolution establishing tax levy for the city of Blomiton for the year of

[1:20:16] Carter, I, Dalsandrol, I, Rivas, I, Nelson, I,

[1:20:24] Loman, Robertton, I, Merbusy, I, motion carries seven zero.

[1:20:30] With item 4.1, comes item 4.2, Council Member Loman.

[1:20:34] Merile move, resolution adopting a preliminary 27 general fund budget.

[1:20:40] Second, motion by Council Member Loman, second by Council Member Robertson,

[1:20:42] would adopt a preliminary 2027 general fund budget. No further counts of discussion on this?

[1:20:49] Ms. Wright. Carter. Aye. Thomas Hondrow.

[1:20:54] Rebus? Aye. Nelson? Aye. Loman? Aye. Robertson? Aye. Airbusy?

[1:20:59] Aye. Motion carries 7-0. And one more, council member, uh, council member,

[1:21:03] Dallas Hondrow. Mr. Mayor, apologize. I just wanted to make sure because

[1:21:06] because of the way that it was presented, we had 6.64 percent was the number, but that was 6.24

[1:21:11] plus than the HRA and port authority levies, so so if I can just get a clarification on what

[1:21:17] exactly we're passing for the city of Bloomington versus that I know that some stuff was in our

[1:21:24] consent agenda as well. So I just wanted to lay it out if that's okay.

[1:21:27] Absolutely.

[1:21:28] I can answer that question. Mayor council members, council members,

[1:21:31] they actually have to be the exact same percentage. When you do the combined and the city

[1:21:35] by itself, just how the math works out, thank you. Appreciate it. So clarification for that then

[1:21:40] six point six four as the preliminary. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Very good. We have a second half of item four point two, where we need a

[1:21:49] A motion for the

[1:21:51] Conceptual preliminary 2028 General Fund budget. Thanks. Remember moment. Thank you for clarifying that from the head and see that.

[1:21:57] Mayor, I'll move to Dr. Resolution approving a conceptual preliminary 2028 General Fund budget.

[1:22:03] Second. Motion by Council Member Loam and Second by Council Member Robertson to accept the resolution approving a

[1:22:08] conceptual preliminary 2028 general fund budget. No further counts of discussion on this?

[1:22:13] I'll just remember moment. Just so we're clear, I know I heard it during the presentation

[1:22:17] about the 2028 general fund conceptual budget that that is in itself just conceptual. It's not binding.

[1:22:26] I think that's that's what conceptual means yes.

[1:22:30] This is not a clear right. Just want to call that for the right. If we could put another wiggle word in there we would have.

[1:22:37] All right. Any further counsel discussion on this? If not, Ms. Wright.

[1:22:43] Carter? Aye. Donald Sandra? Aye. Rebus? Nelson? Aye.

[1:22:48] Lowellman? Robert's in? Aye. Mayor Bessie? Aye. Motion carries, seven zero. Thank you to our budget staff for the work on this.

[1:22:55] And as I think we have been set a couple of times, thanks for your response to the council request for different presentation different looks of things way it looks I think it's you met the council's needs and a lot of things and I appreciate that thank you to our folks who spoke this evening and looking forward to continue this discussion we'll have additional opportunities for public comment and public hearings as we move through all of this and I appreciate that we're I think had an a pretty good direction here and with more work to do certainly with more work to do thank you miss Carlson.

[1:23:24] Thank you.

[1:23:29] Council, next on our agenda, our series of public hearings regarding assessments, and we do

[1:23:34] this on an annual basis.

[1:23:36] It's an opportunity for the city to move and act on delinquent assessments or tree removal

[1:23:43] assessments and so on.

[1:23:45] So what we'll do is typically, we'll have a presentation on this, and I believe all the

[1:23:50] presentations will come as one, and yes, and we will all come as one, and then we will

[1:23:56] public hearings on all of all of the different ones. So item 4.3 through item 4.7 will break those

[1:24:03] out and have specific public hearings on that. But the presentation will be all rolled into one

[1:24:08] of the Miss Academy Scholar who has done this many times and knows how to lead us through this very

[1:24:12] well. I will be doing just that. So good evening and welcome. Good evening, Mayor and Council.

[1:24:18] With the items that you have before you, the five of them are agenda to the evening is just a

[1:24:24] quickly going through the different definitions of what the assessment types are, the timelines

[1:24:29] that we used in 2026, and then we'll go through the public hearings and as May have mentioned

[1:24:35] each of these separate hearings.

[1:24:40] So in the definitions, the delinquent utilities cover

[1:24:43] waters, sewers, storm drain, garbage, recycling, and organics. In the tree removal, and it's

[1:24:50] removal of dead or disease trees for the weeds in brush removal, it's

[1:24:55] mowing weeds in brush removal, public nuisance and abatement, property

[1:24:59] conditions to clear to be nuisance, affecting public's peace, welfare, and

[1:25:04] safety, and then civil fines, nuisance, surface calls, and the

[1:25:09] administration penalties and orders.

[1:25:15] And then the type of move, way, way,

[1:25:16] one, two, best.

[1:25:20] On the timeline,

[1:25:23] all of the assessments were mailed and sent

[1:25:25] out on July 1st, which is the State statute date right for us.

[1:25:31] On August 13th, we published in the Sun Current at the notice of all the legal advertisements.

[1:25:36] On August 26th, there was a administrative hearing held hearing at the city, and there was

[1:25:42] a neutral third party administrative judge taking care of that.

[1:25:46] And then this evening we have the Council assessment hearings, and then November 24th, we'd

[1:25:50] be the last day to make the payments on those before they get certified onto the property

[1:25:55] tax is for next year.

[1:26:02] And so we'll start with a public hearing first for

[1:26:05] selling what utilities and

[1:26:10] that would be the motion, but I'll go back one

[1:26:13] for the public hearing piece on that.

[1:26:18] Thank you, Ms.

[1:26:20] Academy Scholar. Council, any questions or comments regarding what we just

[1:26:26] heard? As I said, a pretty straightforward kind of thing. We've done this

[1:26:30] in the past. So what we will do then is go through each of the different public

[1:26:35] And everybody will have the opportunity to come up to speak if you have something in specific that you want to talk about.

[1:26:41] And we will just work our way through all of this.

[1:26:43] So when you start with item 4.3 is our public hearing.

[1:26:46] For a delinquent water, sewer, stormwater, drainage, garbage, recycling, and organics assessments.

[1:26:52] I will open that public hearing now.

[1:26:54] Is there anyone in the council chambers who wishes to speak to item 4.3 this evening?

[1:27:03] Ms. Ride, do we have anyone on the phone?

[1:27:05] May we do have someone online.

[1:27:10] caller with phone number 507. Do you wish to speak on public hearing for 0.3?

[1:27:20] I have a general comment, I'm not sure which one it is. It's regarding exhibit B on page 254

[1:27:32] and the dismissal of debt. I'm wondering why the city isn't somehow recording that

[1:27:42] to ensure that when a property is sold, that the title company or the closing company

[1:27:50] uncovers it, and should the city be doing something differently to ensure those signs are no

[1:27:59] one when a property sells, and one thing I thought of is if I assume they would find water trash

[1:28:06] We were that when they do their title search, and if that's the case, could any sort of

[1:28:16] fine somehow be added to the utility, so some to ensure any other kinds of debts show up.

[1:28:23] It just seems ridiculous to be letting someone sell a property without paying those fines

[1:28:30] or resolving them some way.

[1:28:32] That's all I have to say.

[1:28:34] Thank you. Could you identify yourself so we have it for the record, please?

[1:28:38] Marlison.

[1:28:39] Marlison, thank you very much for your comments.

[1:28:42] Officially, this is part of item 4.7, so I appreciate that you were on 4.3,

[1:28:48] and this is part of item 4.7, and I appreciate you bringing us forward.

[1:28:53] What I'm going to do, you asked a good question there, and what I'm going to do is look down the table here

[1:28:57] to our city attorneys and see if they can work on an answer by the time we get to item 4.7

[1:29:02] and when it's appropriate to answer that,

[1:29:04] we will definitely do just that if that would be okay,

[1:29:07] but I appreciate your bringing this up.

[1:29:10] Thank you.

[1:29:11] Thank you very much.

[1:29:16] Is there anyone in the chambers wishing to speak

[1:29:17] at a 4.3, Mr. Allen?

[1:29:24] So I need it some time to think about it.

[1:29:28] So for this one specifically, I feel like it's though,

[1:29:32] it feels though debt for given a,

[1:29:33] there should be a path for debt for given us on this one.

[1:29:37] Specifically, essentially copying as a policy in Denver, as a policy in a rural Colorado.

[1:29:45] Now, I think on entire state policy in Colorado, as well as several other self-western states that will pay you to convert your lawn.

[1:29:54] So it's a different program than the lottery system that Minnesota currently has for grants.

[1:30:00] And it pays you a think of like $14 an hour, or sorry, $14 a square foot to convert your lawn. And if we adopted a program that's

[1:30:11] like this, water uses usage would assuredly go down and it could build a pathway for people to do it themselves.

[1:30:21] I'm looking specifically actually what really inspired this was the stormwater drainage section. So there's actually an ability to

[1:30:30] do a curb cut for a ring garden. And if you do a curb cut for a ring garden, cost you the

[1:30:36] homeowner, whoever owns the curb or whoever is at the curb, about $800 to do. So that's a pretty

[1:30:42] steep thing, but that's also, it also essentially removes the need for watering anymore. So for residents

[1:30:51] who wanted to have an out, if they give them to debt for this, the path to debt or to remove

[1:31:01] that debt could be a payment plan or something like that, but one version of that payment plan

[1:31:06] could be to be on conversion into native plants, which is now legal. I've worked on that

[1:31:11] ordinance. I can assure anyone if you have an established native garden, you don't need

[1:31:20] to water it anymore.

[1:31:23] So that solves the problem in perpetuity after it's done,

[1:31:27] which seems like a pretty good solution.

[1:31:29] Thank you Mr. Hallett.

[1:31:34] Others wishing to speak to that in 4.3.

[1:31:40] Is there anybody new online?

[1:31:42] We do not have anyone new online.

[1:31:44] Council, we've heard from folks in the chambers.

[1:31:46] We have no one on line or on the phone wishing to speak.

[1:31:49] Seeing no one coming forward, I look for a motion

[1:31:50] to close the public hearing on that in 4.3.

[1:31:54] Motion by Council Member Dallas,

[1:31:58] 0.3. No further counsel discussion on this? Ms. Rye.

[1:32:04] Pardon? I.

[1:32:05] Rivas? Aye. Nelson?

[1:32:09] Robert's in? Aye. Verbusy? Aye. Motion carries seven zero closing the public hearing.

[1:32:15] Concentrate clown in Sirworth thoughts on this.

[1:32:18] I would turn to staff and hope they took notes on what Mr. Hallett brought forward on a possible debt forgiveness.

[1:32:24] I think it would be something at least worth looking into at least as a consideration for the city not this year obviously as we're trying to work through this year

[1:32:32] With that council, I would look for action at an end of 4.3 or questions council member Dallas

[1:32:38] I don't know if you don't mind me making a comment, Mr. Mayor, but I'm happy to move the item as well

[1:32:44] Yeah, I think the last the one of the challenges I think we've talked about in the past on this is to try to understand why this happens in the first place

[1:32:51] because I think that to, if it is about long usage, if it is about inability to pay due to economic factors,

[1:33:03] if it's, you know, there's lots of things that could come into this.

[1:33:06] I think early on in my time here, I even said, would it be possible for me to round up my utility bill

[1:33:13] and put that towards a fund to help people offset their bills?

[1:33:15] right. We've talked, I know I talked with Ms. Conneve Scholar about that early on in my tenure here.

[1:33:22] You know, there are there are absolutely ways to do this, but I, one of the challenges we have

[1:33:26] is simply that we don't know why this is occurring for people. And that's a hard question to ask people.

[1:33:31] Is that a hard question to ask? Why are they having trouble paying their bills? Some people don't

[1:33:34] want to pay them. That's fine. But some people do and can't. And, you know, understanding that the

[1:33:40] is an equity consideration to some degree.

[1:33:44] So anyway, I would encourage us to continue to look at ways we can mitigate this problem,

[1:33:50] whether it's providing them with capacity to reduce the utility use in the first place.

[1:33:55] You all know I have two rain gardens and a 20 solar panels.

[1:34:00] So I am definitely on board with that piece of the puzzle here, but so I try to lead by

[1:34:05] example in that front, but it also does make a difference to the, I have not watered my

[1:34:11] lawn this year at all. I haven't. Doesn't look great, but I don't care. You know, but

[1:34:17] it's nice and clean and you know, and butterflies and bees like it. So anyway, I just say that

[1:34:25] because I think that there are options for everyone, and a little bit goes a long way when

[1:34:30] the community as a whole is doing it. So with that, I'd be very happy to make the motion to

[1:34:34] adopt the assessment role for the

[1:34:36] link with water sewer storm water

[1:34:37] drainage garbage recycling and

[1:34:39] organics utility charges.

[1:34:42] Motion by council member

[1:34:43] Dallas, under a second by council member

[1:34:44] Rebus to adopt the resolution for

[1:34:47] the assessment role for

[1:34:47] the link with water storm sewer

[1:34:49] storm water drainage garbage

[1:34:50] recycling and organic utility

[1:34:52] charges.

[1:34:53] Don't forget the council

[1:34:54] discussion on this is right.

[1:34:57] Carter.

[1:34:59] I'm Dallas, Andrew.

[1:35:01] Rebus.

[1:35:02] Nelson.

[1:35:03] Lowman Robertson, I bear Bessie.

[1:35:05] I motion carries seven zero.

[1:35:08] We'll move on to item 4.4.

[1:35:10] This is another public hearing.

[1:35:11] This is regarding our tree removal assessments.

[1:35:17] And I will open and we do have three different motions on this.

[1:35:22] We do have these assessments.

[1:35:24] As people get their trees removed, the city can do it.

[1:35:27] And then we have options for people to have those tree removal

[1:35:30] costs spread over three, five or ten years.

[1:35:33] This I think is in response to a couple of years ago, we realized just how expensive it was

[1:35:37] to remove a lot of those dying ash trees and opted to give folks this option to be able

[1:35:43] to spread the cost out over a number of years.

[1:35:46] And that continues because we continue to remove trees and lose trees in our yards.

[1:35:50] But this is the public hearing regarding this and then the tree remove costs that come

[1:35:55] with that.

[1:35:56] So with that, I will open the public hearing

[1:35:58] and item 4.4 is there anyone who wishes to speak

[1:36:02] on item 4.4 this evening,

[1:36:04] regarding tree removal assessments.

[1:36:09] Mr. Allen.

[1:36:10] Yep, for sure.

[1:36:12] So there is a company called,

[1:36:15] oh my gosh, am I really gonna forget it right now?

[1:36:19] There is a tree company, I can't remove whole trees.

[1:36:23] So there's a tree company,

[1:36:24] sorry, there is a company based in Wisconsin

[1:36:26] and called hold, hold trees.

[1:36:29] W-H-O-L-E, I don't know why I got the fostered

[1:36:33] and I was spelling me there.

[1:36:34] So hold trees will buy your tree.

[1:36:38] It will buy your tree.

[1:36:39] Not just pay, it will pay for the removal.

[1:36:41] It will buy your tree.

[1:36:43] If it meets certain criteria that they're looking for

[1:36:45] because what they're trying to do is take a tree

[1:36:48] and use it as biophilic architecture

[1:36:50] that we could have been using for our community center

[1:36:54] or any other future type of thing.

[1:36:55] So essentially what they are doing, they're grabbing your tree, they're trying to sell it and put it into a nice looking building or a structure.

[1:37:01] It's a great thing to do. We should absolutely be doing it.

[1:37:05] It could say people thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands of dollars.

[1:37:08] That's number one. The second thing you can do is turn it into biochar or activate a charcoal.

[1:37:14] Activate a charcoal super super valuable.

[1:37:17] Great first request to carbon that we are currently wasting.

[1:37:21] And you can use it to clean water.

[1:37:25] In fact, I think I saw somebody make a poster or comment about it.

[1:37:30] How they're concerned about push-lake. Obviously there's been a huge debate about, about my, my, my, no, my, no, my, no, my, my, my, my, my, my, my, my, my, my, my, my, my, I definitely get into the, uh, the minutes of the river. Um, but all of these type of things, they don't have enough funding to really solve. It's extremely expensive to do. And, um, it's a cost saving measure that we should be taking advantage of. So, um, hold trees, activate a charcoal biochar. Do all three of them. Thank you. Thank you.

[1:38:02] Other than chambers, wishing to speak to item 4.4, Ms. Ride, we have anyone on phone, on the phone.

[1:38:09] Maybe we do not have anyone on the line.

[1:38:11] Last call for anybody in the chambers.

[1:38:14] Council, no one in the chambers coming forward, no one on the phone wishing to speak to item 4.4,

[1:38:18] or look for a motion to close the public hearing on item 4.4.

[1:38:23] Motion by Council Member Reeves, second by Council Member Robertson,

[1:38:26] to close the public hearing on item 4.4.

[1:38:28] No further counsel discussion on this, Ms. Ride.

[1:38:31] Carter?

[1:38:38] Sorry about that.

[1:38:40] Dallas, Andrew.

[1:38:41] Rivas.

[1:38:42] Nelson.

[1:38:44] Lower me.

[1:38:44] Robert's Robertson.

[1:38:46] Hi.

[1:38:46] Very nice.

[1:38:46] Hi.

[1:38:47] Motion carries seven zero.

[1:38:49] Nelson, any thoughts on this?

[1:38:50] Any conversation we need to have on this one?

[1:38:55] No.

[1:38:55] I'm just going to endorse Mr. Mayor.

[1:38:57] Everything that Matt says because I like it.

[1:39:00] No.

[1:39:00] To be serious.

[1:39:01] I do think that there's opportunities for innovation all around here.

[1:39:04] and we should be unearthing, no pun intended, all of them.

[1:39:08] I don't disagree.

[1:39:09] We take a look into things.

[1:39:10] Right on.

[1:39:11] Yeah.

[1:39:12] Yep.

[1:39:12] Happy to make the motion if you'd like.

[1:39:14] Councilmember Dallas, Andrew.

[1:39:15] All right.

[1:39:16] I'm moving a resolution adopting the assessment role

[1:39:19] for tree removal cost three year levy.

[1:39:22] Motion by Councilmember Dallas, Andrew, second by Councilmember Robertson,

[1:39:25] to adopt the resolution for a assessment role

[1:39:28] for the tree removal cost for the three year levy.

[1:39:31] Can I do all three of them?

[1:39:32] It says A and on here.

[1:39:33] I think we have to do them individually.

[1:39:35] Okay, perfect.

[1:39:38] No further counsel discussion on this?

[1:39:40] Ms. Wright.

[1:39:42] Carter?

[1:39:44] Aye.

[1:39:44] Talessandro? Aye.

[1:39:45] Reebass? Aye.

[1:39:47] Nelson?

[1:39:48] Lowman?

[1:39:49] Robertson? Aye.

[1:39:50] Mayor Bussie?

[1:39:50] Aye. Motion carries 7-0.

[1:39:52] Councilmember Dellessandro?

[1:39:53] I will move to a resolution adopting the assessment role

[1:39:56] for tree removal costs 5-year-letty.

[1:39:58] Second.

[1:39:59] Motion by Councilmember Dellessandro? Second by Councilmember Robertson?

[1:40:02] Robertson for the resolution adopting the assessment role for tree removal cost in the five year

[1:40:05] level. No further counsel discussion. Ms. Rye.

[1:40:10] I.

[1:40:11] Tell Sandra. I.

[1:40:13] Rebus.

[1:40:14] I.

[1:40:14] Lohman.

[1:40:16] Robertson.

[1:40:16] I.

[1:40:17] Maribassie.

[1:40:17] I.

[1:40:17] Motion carries seven zero and council member.

[1:40:20] Tell Sandra.

[1:40:20] Last one.

[1:40:21] Resolution adopting the assessment role for tree removal cost 10 year

[1:40:24] level.

[1:40:25] Motion by council member.

[1:40:26] Tell Sandra. Second by council member.

[1:40:27] Robertson to adopt the resolution for the assessment role for the tree removal

[1:40:31] cost and a 10 year levy. No further counts of discussion. All those in, I'm sorry, Ms.

[1:40:35] Rye. Carter. Aye. Jala Santro. Aye. Rivas.

[1:40:43] Nelson. Lowman. Robert Sun. Aye. Merbusy. Aye. Motion carries 7-0.

[1:40:49] Item 4.

[1:40:52] Item 4.5 is our next public hearing. This is regarding

[1:40:54] weed and brush removal assessments. Pretty straight forward there. I believe I will

[1:41:01] up on the public hearing at an 4.5, where a weed and brush removal assessments.

[1:41:05] Is there anyone on the council chambers wishing to speak that in 4.5?

[1:41:13] Ms. Ryan, is there anyone on the phone?

[1:41:15] There, we do not have anyone online.

[1:41:17] Last call for anyone on the chambers?

[1:41:21] Council, no one coming forward, no one on the phone wishing to speak.

[1:41:23] I look for a public, or I look for a motion to close the public hearing on an item 4.5.

[1:41:30] Motion to my council member Robertson, second by council member Rebus to close the public hearing at an 4.5.

[1:41:34] No further council discussion on this, Ms. Ryan.

[1:41:37] Carter.

[1:41:39] Aye.

[1:41:39] Dallas, Andrew.

[1:41:41] Rebus.

[1:41:43] Nelson.

[1:41:44] Lohman.

[1:41:45] Robertson.

[1:41:45] Aye.

[1:41:45] Maribassine.

[1:41:46] Aye.

[1:41:46] Motion carries seven zero closing the public hearing.

[1:41:49] Constantly.

[1:41:54] Constantly.

[1:41:55] Constantly.

[1:41:56] Oh,

[1:41:59] I'm moving it.

[1:42:00] Thank you, Mayor.

[1:42:01] I, well, I didn't know.

[1:42:03] I moved to adopt the resolution adopting the assessment role for weed and brush room.

[1:42:07] Second.

[1:42:07] Motion by Constantly.

[1:42:08] Second by Constantly.

[1:42:09] to the assessment role for the Rush from Mobile Cost.

[1:42:13] No further counsel discussion on this?

[1:42:15] Ms. Rye.

[1:42:16] Carter?

[1:42:18] Aye.

[1:42:18] Tell Sandra?

[1:42:19] Aye.

[1:42:20] Rebus?

[1:42:21] Nelson?

[1:42:22] Loan?

[1:42:22] Robert?

[1:42:23] Aye.

[1:42:24] Motion carries 70.

[1:42:27] And in 4.6 is our public hearing regarding the public nuisance of base abatement assessments.

[1:42:33] Mr. County, may you show them or explain this one?

[1:42:37] I'll send a questions on this.

[1:42:39] If not, I will open the public hearing at an end of 4.6.

[1:42:41] This is a public hearing regarding the public nuisance abatement assessment.

[1:42:45] Anyone in the chamber is wishing to speak at an end of 4.6 this evening.

[1:42:52] Good evening.

[1:42:53] Thank you for your patience with us.

[1:42:55] If you could pull the microphone down.

[1:42:57] There you go.

[1:42:58] Thank you, sir.

[1:42:59] My name is Mohammed Abdel Hafiz.

[1:43:01] I live in Minnesota for 47 years.

[1:43:06] 36 years in Blomukton, I live in a corner of 86 and Quest of Odin and 12th Avenue.

[1:43:16] For the last 36 years we've been collecting the leaf after the three like these days.

[1:43:26] We'll put them in the bag and we remove some and we keep some.

[1:43:32] We keep some using for to prevent the device from getting into our bedroom because our house is in the corner of 12th Avenue and 86

[1:43:46] So we use the live bootluck about you. Okay, could we please have you around please?

[1:43:54] The bill of the house

[1:43:57] There it is. Okay, in the house

[1:44:00] It is my house, okay, it is my bedroom, we collect some of the leaves, in a bag, in a garbage bag,

[1:44:11] like a black bag, put them in a front of the bedroom to prevent the draft getting into the house,

[1:44:19] to try to save some money for the eat during the winter. Unforge, unfortunately, last winter,

[1:44:29] about January. I had to go to Egypt. My mother was so sick, she's dying. I had to

[1:44:37] leave. So we went me and my wife, we only went me and my wife, leaving the house. We went

[1:44:43] to Egypt. And we didn't realize that can cause a lot of problems. Somehow, in respect to

[1:44:51] whatever best buy and see that he got one of their guide.

[1:45:00] I will move these bags. And he sent it to me in notice. But we were not here. If I'm here, I will move. Otherwise, that's a big block. Anyway, they sent it to me in notice. We are not here, unfortunately, we came back. And the guy at call call me, handy, self-assman. Here, a charge, $155 for nine bags.

[1:45:30] 9 bags, 9 leaf bags, you see over 9 leaf bags, and each charge 155 dollars, and as he said,

[1:45:42] the garlic to the paper here, according to the paper, he said that here, according to his

[1:45:48] paper, it's 1 and a half hour to move 9 leaf bags, that means 10 minutes for each bag, that

[1:45:58] mean you go outside this building and come back 10 minutes, okay? And that's not that only

[1:46:07] each house a $75 an hour, $75 an hour. And my 47 years I never made $75 an hour. I never.

[1:46:21] So, $75, then that means each bag is $17, $20, $17, and $20 for each leaf of bag that

[1:46:34] unbelievable. And nobody in the city asked that guy, where did he do? What did he do with

[1:46:42] one and a half? What did he do with one $55? Can you believe it?

[1:46:48] So, and now this is part of the assessment of all is that correct?

[1:46:51] Yes, it is, okay.

[1:46:52] Yes, one, two, five, Bella, four, nine, leave them back.

[1:46:56] I appreciate that we're going to finish the public hearing and then we'll discuss this,

[1:47:00] but I appreciate your brain this forward, and I think maybe we can, we can find a way,

[1:47:04] we can find a path forward here for this.

[1:47:05] But please, I appreciate your brain this forward, and we're going to draw the time now,

[1:47:09] but I'm going to have to...

[1:47:10] Maybe you feel that is the best state in the whole world.

[1:47:14] Thank you.

[1:47:15] And I love the justice here.

[1:47:17] Thank you.

[1:47:22] Anyone else wishing to speak on item 4.6 this evening?

[1:47:34] I can catch your name.

[1:47:37] So Muhammad actually inspired me a little bit because

[1:47:41] One thing I didn't get to mention or I forgot to mention was that the

[1:47:44] Organics recycling is going to be extremely important next year.

[1:47:48] His specific issue with his leaves has multiple different solutions.

[1:47:52] Obviously, I think you guys are going to talk about the policy one,

[1:47:55] but he can either leave him in the yard,

[1:47:57] Garden, Chuck him in there, but usually doesn't catch any

[1:48:00] finds or anything like that. It shouldn't, because native gardens do it all the time.

[1:48:05] It's a very common way of over wondering a any type of garden.

[1:48:11] But, and you're going to hear this in the next listening session on the map.

[1:48:14] With the risk and the brutalness of our food system,

[1:48:18] specifically with how logistics is going to work in the future,

[1:48:21] how El Nieniel is going to impact us.

[1:48:23] And there's a lot of stuff that's in the air that I'm waiting basically this week to see

[1:48:26] is to how it's going to land before I get an accurate idea.

[1:48:30] to tell you, but in his case, and we're for volunteer core, which is growing, there is opportunity

[1:48:38] to say, hey, this is organic material, we need to get it, we need to put it someplace else,

[1:48:45] it could be used for something, right?

[1:48:47] That doesn't cost anything if people can actually get connected and do that type of work.

[1:48:53] Willing to do it, and plenty of other people are going to be willing to do it, there's going

[1:48:55] to be a lot more people who are going to want to do it next year.

[1:48:58] Thanks.

[1:48:59] Thank you, Mr. Hallett.

[1:49:04] Others, wishing to speak?

[1:49:06] Ms. Raider, we haven't anyone on the phone?

[1:49:08] May we do have some non-line wishing to speak.

[1:49:14] Caller with phone numbers starting with 507-7-2 wish to speak on item 4.6?

[1:49:25] Comment, it really applies to all these points, 4.1 to 4.7.

[1:49:32] If there's been a finer assessment made, then it should be done in a way that it shows

[1:49:38] up for closing your title company searches?

[1:49:45] I'm sorry, could you give us a name?

[1:49:47] Could you provide your name for us, please?

[1:49:48] I live with Mara Lipp again.

[1:49:49] Mara Lipp again.

[1:49:50] Mara Lipp, yes, yes.

[1:49:52] OK, I do know that I think ultimately, if we have unpaid assessments

[1:49:58] that does show up and it is paid upon the sale of the home.

[1:50:02] So I appreciate you bringing that up.

[1:50:06] OK.

[1:50:06] Thank you.

[1:50:09] Others?

[1:50:13] Council, no longer on the phone and no one coming forward wishing to speak on item 4.6

[1:50:17] I look for a motion to close the public hearing on item 4.6.

[1:50:23] Motion by Council Member Dalesandro, the second by Council Member Robertson to close the

[1:50:28] public hearing on item 4.6, no further Council discussion on this?

[1:50:32] Ms. Wright.

[1:50:32] Carter,

[1:50:38] right?

[1:50:39] Dallas, Andrew?

[1:50:41] Reeves?

[1:50:42] Nelson?

[1:50:44] Lowman?

[1:50:45] Robertson?

[1:50:46] Aye.

[1:50:46] Merbusy?

[1:50:47] Aye.

[1:50:47] Motion carries 70.

[1:50:49] Council, any discussion on item 4.6?

[1:50:52] I'll just remember.

[1:50:53] Elvisandro.

[1:50:53] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[1:50:54] This is probably a comment related to this one in maybe 4.7.

[1:50:58] But this is where we are in 4.6, right?

[1:51:02] Yeah.

[1:51:03] So, there's part of me.

[1:51:06] we say at the city of Bloomington that we work towards compliance, right? The goal is towards compliance.

[1:51:12] And what I'm a little nervous about with the fairly sharp uptick on both this one and I could guess,

[1:51:19] I could say the same thing related to 4.7 uptick in the number of finds that we're going to

[1:51:23] assessments with is that that may not be working. And I want to be, I want to be, I want to make sure

[1:51:30] If we think that we should be doing something different, I'm not a huge fan as you know already Mr. Mayor of having laws we don't intend to enforce.

[1:51:40] I don't know why they're on the books if we're not going to enforce them, right?

[1:51:43] And the intent of these things is to ensure compliance.

[1:51:47] But there's a mismatch if people can not comply and paying the fines or not paying the fines doesn't necessarily ensure that they're actually cleaning up.

[1:52:00] the act anyway. And so given the uptick and the number of folks that are going to assessment

[1:52:05] here, plus the uptick and the number, I shouldn't say I know that there's an uptick,

[1:52:09] but given the number of people that have contacted me in the last year with concerns in

[1:52:14] these two spaces specifically, I don't know if we have an opportunity potentially in an upcoming

[1:52:20] year-work plan item to look at this particular section of our system and whether or not we can do

[1:52:27] a little bit better for it.

[1:52:33] It's just been something that my my my constituents have stated more often. And I don't know if people are unwilling to pay the fines, whether they're actually doing the work of compliance anyway, and that makes me a little concerned.

[1:52:52] Thank you.

[1:52:53] Thank you.

[1:52:54] Yes.

[1:52:54] No worries.

[1:52:55] Thanks.

[1:52:55] Thank you, Mayor.

[1:52:58] So just kind of looking at this situation kind of directly here.

[1:53:03] And my numbers aren't adding up.

[1:53:05] So I need a little bit of help with that.

[1:53:07] I've seen something like.

[1:53:09] If I cut the numbers right, I think I saw like 142.

[1:53:15] Maybe there's some other piece that I'm missing.

[1:53:18] maybe there's some kind of administrative piece that gets it up to 150.

[1:53:22] But if we had nine bags, and we're just, you know,

[1:53:28] a couple of us counselors are up here looking to see what that would have cost.

[1:53:32] If we had charged the bag fee, which would have been 481,

[1:53:36] which I know these are again, you know,

[1:53:38] Mayor, two different services.

[1:53:40] I know for removing something that's, you know, completely different kind of thing.

[1:53:44] But just trying to get a picture for what this might cost

[1:53:49] if our service had picked up before 81 a bag.

[1:53:53] And so if we did nine by that, 43, 29, again,

[1:53:57] just the bag picked up itself.

[1:53:59] So just trying to figure out, you know,

[1:54:03] it's certainly we could try to eliminate the whole thing,

[1:54:11] given the circumstances that he was in.

[1:54:16] And his family was in and when they've gotten the notification anyways,

[1:54:19] and I think there's some good sense to kind of do in that.

[1:54:23] Or, you know, alternatively maybe another way to do it as well.

[1:54:26] Yeah, that's true, but, you know, there is a cost to do in doing this.

[1:54:31] So maybe a one way to go would be that to the 481 per bag.

[1:54:36] I'm kind of open both ways, but I wanted to just kind of throw a couple ideas out there.

[1:54:40] So we could kind of kick around and see what kind of makes sense before other thoughts.

[1:54:49] Let's remember Nelson.

[1:54:51] Yeah.

[1:54:51] Thanks, Mayor.

[1:54:55] So am I right to understand the bags were just sitting in against the house?

[1:55:00] They were.

[1:55:04] They were.

[1:55:05] I don't know if you could see the picture.

[1:55:08] You could see the picture.

[1:55:09] The bags were like preventing.

[1:55:12] Yeah, no, but they were put on the party afterwards from what I understand.

[1:55:15] The bags were actually in the bushes preventing the wind from blowing doors

[1:55:19] house. That's what the purpose of the bags being at the location that he had him. What I don't

[1:55:24] understand is how one of the bags are still there and four of them are at the door.

[1:55:31] That's the

[1:55:31] one part that I didn't quite get and I don't want to do it. And that's what I've done to myself.

[1:55:37] It's also going to have the photo at the end of the door. That's what I understood it to be as

[1:55:45] So, yeah, you know, I'm sympathetic to the situation, and I think there's a reasonable way to work this out.

[1:55:52] I also would just note that maybe we should connect him with our team that can get him in touch with Excel

[1:55:58] because they will come and do an energy audit and they will provide you things to stop that when to weatherproof that door

[1:56:06] and help you out with those things who get a more permanent solution than utilizing your leaves and stuff.

[1:56:11] And it's a, you know, it's a good way, it's a good thing to do for your entire home.

[1:56:15] But there are programs that will help you with that.

[1:56:18] And so I just want to make sure.

[1:56:19] He's aware of that.

[1:56:20] I think we can help with that.

[1:56:22] You know, I was looking out with councilmember Loman and, you know, I mean,

[1:56:26] if we sent, if he had been in a position to make the phone call to get those

[1:56:31] bags picked up, it would have cost him $4.81.

[1:56:34] That's a bag for the city service to do that.

[1:56:37] And somebody did come pick them up, but I don't know why we're allowing somebody to

[1:56:41] more than what our our FES for picking up a leaf bag.

[1:56:48] Don't disagree and I and I also question why this became such an urgent issue.

[1:56:53] It looked like that that bill was marked in March.

[1:56:55] I don't know why it's an urgent issue to be picking up, you know,

[1:56:59] bags in March.

[1:57:01] I would agree.

[1:57:03] I'm sympathetic to this also based on the circumstances.

[1:57:06] I do understand from staff that the fine was was waived.

[1:57:09] has already been waived, but I do think it might be appropriate to waived at the cost of the

[1:57:17] removal as well, because I just, I think, extend your waiting circumstances, and I guess

[1:57:22] I'm not exactly sure why this became an issue in March of the year.

[1:57:27] So, we go with that.

[1:57:30] So what we will do then, staff, I'm going to make the motion that we adopt the Residolution,

[1:57:36] adopting the assessment role for public nuisance abatements,

[1:57:44] exempting the assessment at 87-24 Crest Road.

[1:57:51] I will make that note.

[1:57:52] Second, motion in the second by council member,

[1:57:55] by council member Loman,

[1:57:57] to accept the resolution for the assessment role

[1:58:02] for the public nuisance abatements,

[1:58:04] while exempting 87-24 Crest Road. Any further counsel discussion on this? Hearing none, Ms.

[1:58:12] Wright. Carter, I, Dallas, Andrew, I, Rebus, Nelson, Blooming, Robertton, I, where

[1:58:21] Busty, I, Motion carries 7-0. Thank you very much.

[1:58:29] Our last public hearing on this topic is

[1:58:32] item 4.7. This is regarding civil fines for property-related violation assessments.

[1:58:37] I will open the public hearing and item 44.7 right now.

[1:58:41] We're getting civil fines for property related violation assessments.

[1:58:45] So anyone in the council chamber is wishing to speak to that in 4.7 tonight.

[1:58:54] Ms. Ride, do we have anyone on the phone?

[1:58:56] May we do not have anyone new online.

[1:58:59] Last call for anybody in the chambers.

[1:59:02] If not, council, I will look for a motion to close the public hearing and item 4.7.

[1:59:06] So move.

[1:59:08] Motion by council member Loman, second by council member Rivas to close the public hearing and item 4.7.

[1:59:12] No further discussion on this, Ms. Rye.

[1:59:16] Carter?

[1:59:17] All right, Dallas, Andrew.

[1:59:19] Rebus?

[1:59:20] Nalton?

[1:59:21] Lowman?

[1:59:22] Robertson?

[1:59:22] Aye.

[1:59:23] Mayor Bessie?

[1:59:23] Aye. Motion carries a seven zero.

[1:59:26] That's what I need to add to that.

[1:59:27] I just wanted to make sure that the caller, I think,

[1:59:32] I think the reason the caller said what they did.

[1:59:35] Mr. Mayors, because in the packet, it states clearly that

[1:59:39] the reason behind the waiver of the assessment in certain cases was because the prior, it was

[1:59:48] assessed by the prior owner and the new owner didn't know anything about it so we weighed it.

[1:59:53] Which implies that it isn't getting dealt with that title. And that's why I believe that

[1:59:58] the question was asked. So I would like for a-

[2:00:00] Just to potentially just take a deeper look at that and make sure we understand how that works and

[2:00:04] this council has a thought.

[2:00:07] I think that's a good point, council member, Ms. Mayer, members. This is largely a timing matter.

[2:00:15] So when assessments are in their pending stage, what is very common practice in the

[2:00:20] industry is that the realtor or the telecompanier, someone calls the city, and we tell them.

[2:00:24] We tell them what all the different pending assessments that might be on the property.

[2:00:29] And they do what they do with that information.

[2:00:34] And so often those are gotten captured and reflected in the final paperwork.

[2:00:40] When that comes on later in the year, it gets picked up in this part of the process.

[2:00:45] But there is a period of time just based on the assessment schedule where some of those charges are sitting there pending.

[2:00:50] So we do our best to share all that information, but they have to reach out.

[2:00:54] We can't keep track of every single sale that's pending.

[2:00:57] understood is there an opportunity for us to add any details around this to this time of sale

[2:01:03] disclosures that we do I know we do it for energy disclosures today or whatever I was curious

[2:01:07] whether or not I mean is it is it I agree with you that it's the burden shouldn't be on us to get

[2:01:14] that and so what you're basically saying is there's no requirement that that's disclosed we will

[2:01:20] close it to the purchaser if they request it, but we are not under obligation to provide

[2:01:27] it.

[2:01:28] Yeah, Mayor members, we would certainly always provide it.

[2:01:31] Whenever we were asked, we just don't know when there are pending shorts.

[2:01:35] So they reach out, we always share the information, and then it's reflected typically in the

[2:01:41] closing statements, and it gets sorted out in the closing process.

[2:01:45] So we share everything we have.

[2:01:47] We can certainly look into whether it's possible to put something specific in the time of sale process if it isn't already there.

[2:01:54] I haven't had the opportunity to look short.

[2:01:56] I might be awaited to do that.

[2:01:57] The open question would be whether or not the city deserves to recruit those dollars in which I think we're saying we do,

[2:02:04] which is why we do this in the first place.

[2:02:06] Thanks Mr. Mayor.

[2:02:07] Thank you.

[2:02:09] That's Premier Nelson.

[2:02:11] I'd point out that in a real estate transaction,

[2:02:14] the sellers obligated to provide all material information and I would think that would be all potential

[2:02:21] assessments and costs and things like that. They have a affirmative duty to do that. So if they

[2:02:29] don't do that, that's on them not us. Thank you, Councilmember.

[2:02:34] With that aside, Council. Any other

[2:02:37] questions? Comments on this? If not, I look for action on an 4.7. Sure, happy to make the

[2:02:45] So moving a resolution adopting the assessment role for unpaid civil penalties and fines.

[2:02:51] Motion by Council Member Dahlisandro, Second by Council Member Robertson, to adopt the

[2:02:54] assessment role for unpaid civil penalties and fines.

[2:02:58] No further counts of discussion on this.

[2:02:59] Ms. Rye.

[2:03:02] Aye.

[2:03:03] Dahlisandro?

[2:03:04] Reeves?

[2:03:05] Nelson?

[2:03:06] Lowman?

[2:03:07] Aye.

[2:03:07] Robertson?

[2:03:08] Merbusy?

[2:03:09] Aye.

[2:03:09] Motion carries 7-0.

[2:03:12] Thank you very much for that, Miss Academy Scholar, and thanks for our staff who stuck around to lead us through this as necessary.

[2:03:18] We will move on to item 4.8, and thank you for the patience of the folks who are here for that item, and I know there's more than a couple of you.

[2:03:25] What I'm going to do, Council, because I know this is going to take us more than a half hour, I'm going to move that we extend our adjournment time to no later than 9.30 this evening.

[2:03:34] All right, we'll make that motion.

[2:03:37] Motion in the second two extend our adjournment time to no later than 930.

[2:03:41] No further counsel.

[2:03:42] Discussion is right.

[2:03:44] Carter.

[2:03:46] Aye.

[2:03:46] Talessandro.

[2:03:47] Reverse.

[2:03:48] Nelson.

[2:03:49] Lowman.

[2:03:52] Lowman is stepped away.

[2:03:54] Robertson.

[2:03:55] Motion carries 6-0.

[2:03:57] Extend to no later than 930.

[2:03:59] With that, we will move on to item 4.8.

[2:04:02] This is a public hearing regarding the James Avenue City Homes rezoning.

[2:04:05] The final site in building plans.

[2:04:07] Plating for 9025 and 9033 James Avenue.

[2:04:12] Miso day, you're with us once again.

[2:04:13] Regarding one of these, thank you.

[2:04:15] Yes, thank you, Mayor.

[2:04:17] In city council members, the last public hearing on your agenda is for

[2:04:22] James Avenue City Homes.

[2:04:26] The subject property address is 9025 and 9033 James Avenue.

[2:04:31] South, just located off 90th Street and James Avenue, just a little bit north of City Hall here,

[2:04:38] surrounding land uses, are mostly single family dwellings with a place of assembly directly

[2:04:44] to the East and some industrial properties further to the South. So the applicant is requesting

[2:04:51] a series of entitlements, the first including a rezoning from R1 to R3,

[2:04:57] Funnels that imbilling plans to construct nine detached town homes and then a flat

[2:05:03] to replad two single-family residential lots into nine detached town homes lots and one outlot.

[2:05:12] So the subject properties are guided as medium density residential in the

[2:05:15] compound. The subject properties have been guided this way in multiple

[2:05:19] comprehensive plan iterations going back as far as 1981. The guidance allows a minimum of five units

[2:05:27] in acre up to 15 units in acre and the proposed density is 9 units in acre.

[2:05:36] So, the two single family homes are currently zoned our one single family residential.

[2:05:40] The applicant is choosing to rezone to R3, which is consistent with the land use guidance.

[2:05:48] So, staff reviews the purpose and intent of the R3 zoning district.

[2:05:54] And so the R3's on and district allows up to 12 units in Icar, it's consistent with the existing land use guidance.

[2:06:02] Detached town homes are similar in design with single family dwellings, so therefore it's compatible with nearby low-density residential.

[2:06:11] These properties are closed in proximity to 35W, as well as 90th Street, is a close proximity to Logan Playlot.

[2:06:19] And then about directly to place of assembly and industrial area to the south, and it's also worth mentioning that

[2:06:26] 90th and Penn and 90th and Lindell are also very close by.

[2:06:34] So the one evaluating resounding applications, there are no state statute findings.

[2:06:40] Therefore we kind of evaluate the request based on the consistency with the comprehensive plan and public benefit.

[2:06:47] The goals and strategies in the 2040 comp plan include providing a range of housing options and identified new areas for housing.

[2:06:55] Recently adopted missing middle housing ordinance was recently adopted earlier this year and so this provides a missing middle housing type.

[2:07:05] So getting into site photos that were taken earlier a couple weeks ago, the property at

[2:07:12] 1995, James Avenue, the home was demolished, I think, about three years ago, but the property

[2:07:18] at 93, James Avenue is still standing.

[2:07:24] So getting into the site plan, there'd be one curb cut

[2:07:27] off of James Avenue, nine total.

[2:07:30] Total detached shone homes, five would be on the north side, a four on the south side with a private driveway, and the end of the private driveway would end in a cul-de-sac, with two gas spaces, located just south of the cul-de-sac, and plans identify two stalk rages with a double-eye driveway. The applicant is also proposing a boven blow-ground infiltration systems.

[2:07:56] Getting into a little bit of the traffic, the project is anticipated to generate 85 trips a day,

[2:08:04] which is in that increase of 66 trips when you take away the trips from the single family dwellings.

[2:08:09] James Avenue has a standard width of 32 feet, with a sufficient capacity to handle the increase,

[2:08:18] and has James Avenue has no parking restrictions.

[2:08:24] So, the applicant is not pursuing any vertical construction at this time and is developing

[2:08:31] the lots for sale, but building plans are required to be submitted for a final-same

[2:08:37] building plan applications, so the plans that are provided with the application are conceptual,

[2:08:43] but the plans do show that the structures of B20 feet tall, floor plans show one bedroom,

[2:08:48] 750 square feet, building materials will be made out of stone veneer and lap sighting.

[2:08:55] So the design will likely change, but the plans must be code complying.

[2:09:02] Getting into parking and sidewalks, two stalls of unit are acquired and they're showing it.

[2:09:10] Excuse me, two stalls of unit are being proposed and then two guest parking spaces are provided

[2:09:16] on the southeast corner, and then as far as public sidewalks, a six-foot wide public sidewalk

[2:09:22] is required along James Avenue.

[2:09:26] Then getting into the landscape plan, 18 trees and 54 shrubs

[2:09:32] are required, and that's what's being shown on the plans kind of scattered all throughout the site.

[2:09:38] And then this project is not required tree preservation, so just to note about the tree removal

[2:09:48] And then lastly, getting into the plat, which just shows the individual lots, and the outlots for the private driveway, just to note that the stormwater sidewalks and other site improvements must be completed with the plat approval.

[2:10:04] And lastly, just getting before the recommendation, just to note that plenty commission reviewed the application at the August 20th meeting and ultimately recommended approval with the addition of a construction management plan condition.

[2:10:18] which followed concerns raised by the Planning Commission and the public.

[2:10:23] The management plan with specifically address items like project phasing,

[2:10:28] contractor parking hours of construction,

[2:10:31] desk control, signage, equipment deliveries, and storm water in a

[2:10:35] region control.

[2:10:36] So with that, Planning Commission and staff are recommending approval

[2:10:39] and I know the applicant is here for any questions.

[2:10:43] Very good. First council any questions for Miss Oday.

[2:10:52] Questions? I know that the applicant is here. I ask if anything like to add. Mister.

[2:10:59] For a long.

[2:11:02] Well, I'm sorry.

[2:11:04] Council member Carter is the question of Miss Oday on this one.

[2:11:09] You know what I accidentally raised me in. I do have a question, but I will wait until after.

[2:11:13] I have written hand. Very good.

[2:11:16] This is for a long day, Dad.

[2:11:18] Yeah, it's a good evening.

[2:11:19] Council members, Mayor Busy.

[2:11:20] Thank you for hearing this application.

[2:11:23] So our intent here obviously is to create places for new homeowners to build a house.

[2:11:28] Kind of new, kind of a new thing for Bloomington.

[2:11:32] Brief history of the site here.

[2:11:34] So we acquired the single family home in 1925,

[2:11:38] James, about four years ago.

[2:11:40] It was uninhabitable.

[2:11:42] and so we raised that structure and since then we're looking for plans to

[2:11:47] redevelop this site and I had a neighborhood meeting about three years ago to

[2:11:52] talk about ways we could use that one single parcel maybe build a twin home or

[2:11:56] a duplex something like that and then the opportunity for us to acquire 93

[2:12:00] three James came along making the site the full acre that we're discussing

[2:12:06] this evening.

[2:12:09] So, the financial feasibilities are developing this site. We're not great. We looked

[2:12:13] at twin-home plans. We looked different ways to create different layouts and nothing really seemed

[2:12:18] to pencil out very well on a pro-forma until the missing middle housing ordinance was enacted.

[2:12:25] And that allows us now to present this plan if the site is to be rezoned to our three

[2:12:32] where we can make this financially feasible and doing it as lots reduces our capital burdens

[2:12:39] that reduces our risk and it offers the purchasers of these and opportunity to create a home

[2:12:46] for themselves that is more attainable. And so I think for those reasons it's a great plan.

[2:12:54] A few notes from planning commission that I picked up a question was raised about these

[2:12:58] becoming rentals. We're not going to prohibit that, but the intent here is not opportunity

[2:13:03] if someone to buy a lot and build a house for themselves. So we're not looking to build

[2:13:07] this out as a rent rental build out. So that's not the intent. Another question was if what

[2:13:15] if one house gets built, what happens? Well, the developer is going to maintain control the site

[2:13:19] until all nine lots are sold. So we'd be responsible for maintaining the site until it's completely

[2:13:25] developed. The construction management plan so I learned something new every time I come up with one of these

[2:13:32] and this time was in this site due to the size and the number of units I can't imagine having nine

[2:13:40] homes under construction here at the same time. And I told the commissioners a planning commission

[2:13:45] will let the builders figure that out but I don't I don't I don't think we want to do that so I think

[2:13:50] the construction management plans are really good idea and maybe something along the lines of

[2:13:55] after discussing with staff here and thinking about this.

[2:13:58] And I think about this house down the street

[2:14:00] for me that had a new roof put on last this summer.

[2:14:03] And just how that was, disruption in my day,

[2:14:09] I think it makes sense to probably limit us

[2:14:11] to maybe three shells under construction at one time

[2:14:15] is probably feasible to minimize the impact

[2:14:18] in the neighborhood.

[2:14:19] And then have that be a first come first serve

[2:14:23] on the permit process, so I'll create some construct around that so that we don't have

[2:14:30] nine different framing crews in here all at the same time trying to build nine houses,

[2:14:35] all at once in this space. I don't think it will work. There were some other questions too

[2:14:39] about group homes in the neighborhood. We're not talking about group homes to be constructed here.

[2:14:43] I don't know what that is, but then traffic, it sounds more like there was a routing of traffic

[2:14:50] to this neighborhood is more of an issue than what this development will create as you heard

[2:14:55] from missile day, the new trip generations only 66.

[2:15:00] I do have something additional to add. We're talking about money earlier this evening, and there's this new federal innovation fund that I spoke in with staff about this. And the basics of this are, the federal allocation is an annual $200 million to municipalities that adopt forward thinking housing policies that yield creation of additional housing units.

[2:15:28] And Bloomington's already well underway on this and so I think a project like this, what the HRA is doing, the town homes in 86th street, all those things, I think that lines up Bloomington very well, first from additional CBDG funds and I know that we could use some of those dollars for sewer infrastructure, so that's something else I'm thinking about.

[2:15:53] The last thing I have, unless you have questions for me,

[2:15:56] is I'm not a far off corporate capitalist.

[2:16:00] I've been a resident of Bloomington for 23 years.

[2:16:03] I do this for fun largely, which I usually get laughed at.

[2:16:06] Like, why would you do this for fun?

[2:16:08] I thought about this as if I'm a neighbor,

[2:16:10] and I want the neighborhood to know that I'm available

[2:16:12] through this process.

[2:16:14] I recently mailed out my contact information

[2:16:17] to everyone in the neighborhood again.

[2:16:19] Please call me with questions.

[2:16:20] If we gain approval and we're under way, the neighborhood's always welcome to reach out to me.

[2:16:25] I'm happy to be available.

[2:16:28] Thank you very much.

[2:16:30] Thank you, Mr. Furlong.

[2:16:31] Council any questions, Mr. Furlong?

[2:16:33] Council member Loman.

[2:16:35] Just a real quick one.

[2:16:36] You had mentioned with regards to your financing and how many you placed on that particular couple of parcels there.

[2:16:47] could you talk a little bit more about that in terms of you know why nine is the number and you can't do

[2:16:53] eight or four and oh that's a question that just typically been raised what it would take to kind of

[2:17:00] and again I don't I'm not trying to you know be a developer up here but just want to ask that

[2:17:05] question so that I understand that and so that the public has the better understanding of what that means.

[2:17:10] Councilmember Loman, Councilmember Mr. Mayor, excellent question. Be happy to take

[2:17:15] anyone who would like to through a pro-forma and show you what it costs.

[2:17:20] This site seems relatively simple. You look at the site plan. It's a single drive. It's

[2:17:24] nine lots. There's a cul-de-sac at the end. What should it take? Maybe a bulldozer? A few hours.

[2:17:30] The car of this thing out. No, it's $400,000. Just to put the street curb gutter and pipes in.

[2:17:36] And that's before a single house gets built. So that in itself is almost $50,000. And then

[2:17:43] to acquire 93, I'm not buying that property at a discount,

[2:17:48] I'm buying it at Market Value, and the cost that we already have

[2:17:52] into the civil engineering, the planning, the serving, the planning,

[2:17:58] the document creation, all those things, our costs are likely to be

[2:18:04] about 100,000 a lot or more.

[2:18:08] And so if you take a lot away, now you have to increase the price

[2:18:13] of each one of those additional lots to make up for that and so it's this is a risky business

[2:18:19] and one of the first things one of the planners told me when I came into this building 15

[2:18:24] years ago is I've seen many a very good developer go bankrupt and this business will be

[2:18:30] careful what you're doing but I think the risk is worth taking because of our community we

[2:18:36] desperately need more housing we need opportunity for people to build a house in our city and

[2:18:41] Right now there are about one, I think it was about one opportunity for someone to buy a lot

[2:18:47] and build a house themselves.

[2:18:50] So I'd be happy to run through a poor form, although it's nine as a necessary number in order

[2:18:55] to spread the horrors of the past out.

[2:18:58] So we can keep our lot price as attainable as we possibly can.

[2:19:04] Thank you for clarifying that in terms of the attainability and the affordability of the

[2:19:07] Thank you.

[2:19:09] And I might have missed it in your statements.

[2:19:11] What is the expected list price for these homes?

[2:19:16] Mr. Mayor, council members, as an excellent question, to want to do not have an exact precise answer for at this point.

[2:19:24] I will say that there have been single family lots in Bloomington that I have been able to sell for under 120,000.

[2:19:31] And so just simple ratios, if the cost of a lot is 20% of the overall build price,

[2:19:40] the expectation is that you should be able to create a housing unit for if the, if the

[2:19:46] lot is 120,000 a housing unit for under 600,000, which sounds expensive, but when you look at the

[2:19:53] broader south metro, there isn't a new construction single family detached home for less than a

[2:19:58] million until you get down to like new market.

[2:20:03] So for someone acquiring one of these lots to build a house for themselves, they eliminate

[2:20:07] the builders' risk, the builders' profit margin, the builders' carrying costs, and you

[2:20:13] might be able to create a new housing unit here for 400,000 if you did it, right, potentially.

[2:20:19] So just to be clear here, so you won't be building and developing the homes, you'll be selling

[2:20:23] the lots.

[2:20:24] Is that correct?

[2:20:25] Mr. Mayor, councilmember, is that correct?

[2:20:28] Very good.

[2:20:28] I, when I heard development, town home development, I thought perhaps you would be constructing

[2:20:33] and then selling.

[2:20:36] But even though it's, you're not building the style of home, the look of the home, it has

[2:20:41] to meet the standards of what you prescribe, is that correct?

[2:20:45] Mr. Mayor, council members, that is correct.

[2:20:47] It would have to meet anything that's within the association bylaws for requirements,

[2:20:53] which are intent to secate minimal.

[2:20:55] and secondarily it has to mean all city code and all state building code and course

[2:20:59] arguments. Okay, thank you. Other questions council?

[2:21:05] Why don't we, we'll save the

[2:21:07] comments what we'll get to that eventually. Let's get through the questions in the

[2:21:09] public hearing and then we'll make some comments about that. Any other additional

[2:21:13] questions or questions of Ms. Odae on this one? I have a quick question. Yeah, I

[2:21:18] can't remember. Curt. Yeah, so I guess at least in my time on council, I don't

[2:21:24] we've had a proposal like this, brought forward, and how common is it to, you know, just

[2:21:30] like have lots that people buy and then they kind of build their own town homes within

[2:21:35] kind of the constraints of the HOA and obviously city regulations and state regulations and then

[2:21:44] have an HOA. Like I guess I'm just kind of, I'm wondering how typical this model is.

[2:21:50] And not saying I'm not supportive of it, if we move it forward, but I just am curious.

[2:21:53] It's for a lot, Council Member Carter, Council Member Mr. Mayor, it's not that common.

[2:22:00] Typically in cities where we have a lot of single-family developments like what we had in Lakeville

[2:22:09] and other South Metro communities, a developer would create a subdivision and then sell a

[2:22:16] block of those locks to builders.

[2:22:18] and that could be the case here. I would certainly entertain builders wanting to acquire

[2:22:23] two, three, four of these lots and maybe build a speck home and then offer the others.

[2:22:29] That's common.

[2:22:30] So, a builder might own four lots, build one spec home, model home, and then allow the home owners to come in and acquire the other three lots and have that builder build a house for them.

[2:22:45] So, this isn't that far removed from that type of process, where a homeowner to be would purchase a lot from us, contract with a builder of their choice and have the home build.

[2:22:58] Okay, thank you.

[2:23:00] I have one other question and this might be from a so day, but if we were to make this

[2:23:06] zoning change, and let's just say worst case scenario, there's not a lot of interest

[2:23:13] in building on the different lots and maybe Steve decides, you know what I want to put up

[2:23:19] just like a one big house or a couple, like whatever.

[2:23:22] But would that be allowed to be a minimum amount of units that have to be created once

[2:23:26] to make the change, or is it just a maximum?

[2:23:29] I can't remember.

[2:23:37] Thank you, Mayor, the minimum amount of units is zero,

[2:23:42] but the maximum, what do you say is five?

[2:23:46] Sorry, different.

[2:23:48] I think it was, yeah, and I was more curious about the minimum.

[2:23:51] I didn't think we had a minimum,

[2:23:53] so if it sat empty, if it was just sat empty for a while,

[2:23:56] let's, it is what it is, right?

[2:23:59] Yeah, Mayor, council members.

[2:24:01] So our three doesn't have a minimum.

[2:24:03] The conference of plan has a minimum of five units to the acre, and that's the guidance today.

[2:24:08] So any subsequent entitlements or zoning actions, we would be evaluating it in terms of its consistency with the comp plan.

[2:24:15] So that could present a wrinkle in terms of, you know, what are minimum expectations are for unit creation in that.

[2:24:20] They'd have to go through back through an entitlement process with the preliminary and final plan.

[2:24:25] You certainly have to move those lot boundaries if the plan was recorded.

[2:24:28] So we'd basically be going back to the drawing board, I would say.

[2:24:31] Okay. Okay. All right. Thank you. I don't have any more questions. Thank you.

[2:24:35] Thank you. You can't remember. Councilmember Lomen.

[2:24:39] I know this will probably have other parts in here, but I just had a question in terms of the discretion that we have with regards to these four motions that are here.

[2:24:49] I just want to be sure that as we're kind of working our way down this, I see I see a plating on here and I'm just a little bit nervous about

[2:24:58] And what which one fits with that just want to make sure I'm clear in terms of what we need to be concerned about as we work our way down through this.

[2:25:07] We are.

[2:25:09] Staff is checking on that one.

[2:25:11] One we want to keep this moving along and we can double back to it if we could.

[2:25:15] How about that?

[2:25:18] I can take a crack at it if the city attorney wants to kind of affirm what I'll share with you.

[2:25:22] But I didn't mean that like a bad way.

[2:25:28] Sorry, oops.

[2:25:30] The rezoning is a more discretionary action.

[2:25:33] You're looking to the guidance of the comprehensive plan

[2:25:35] and those things, the platt and the final site

[2:25:37] and building plans is quasi-judicial.

[2:25:38] That's where your subject to findings of fact

[2:25:40] in the city code.

[2:25:44] That's great.

[2:25:44] And the fourth motion is just a resolution

[2:25:47] of summary publication, which is at your discretion.

[2:25:50] And I'm related to the rezoning action.

[2:25:54] Thank you.

[2:25:57] Thank you.

[2:25:59] All right, Council, we ready to get into the public hearing here?

[2:26:03] Let's do that.

[2:26:04] We're going to open the public hearing at an 4.8 this evening.

[2:26:09] This is a reminder that what I mentioned earlier stands here as well.

[2:26:12] You'll have an extra minute.

[2:26:14] So you're up to three minutes for your comments,

[2:26:16] but I will cut you off at three minutes.

[2:26:18] As you come up, please do state your name.

[2:26:21] And then be sure, as you finish up,

[2:26:23] If you could sign in, and I think our clipboard is up here somewhere, so you can find the clipboard and sign in.

[2:26:28] We will hold all questions until we get to the end of the public hearing, and we'll try to answer the questions best we can, and everybody gets one bite of an apple.

[2:26:36] So that's what we do.

[2:26:37] So I will open the public hearing on item 4.8 this evening.

[2:26:41] This is a public hearing regarding the James Avenue City Homes, the rezoning, the final sight and building plans,

[2:26:46] planning and this these addresses are ninety twenty five and ninety thirty three

[2:26:49] James Avenue. When the council chambers would like to speak tonight.

[2:26:59] We are we are

[2:27:00] plenty patient.

[2:27:16] It's my bedtime. I am Kathy Jones and I have the pleasure of living

[2:27:21] next door to where Mr. Furlong wants to do this project. So I would like to start with

[2:27:27] do we have to change it to our three? Is there a reason it can't stay our one and still

[2:27:32] meet some of the middle housing hole that Bloomington has in its system, because my understanding

[2:27:41] is our one keeps us too little smaller profile home, which is the conceptual design that

[2:27:46] he's proposing, excuse me, and would maybe let grass grow in my backyard instead of having

[2:27:53] mini mansions over towering my yard.

[2:27:56] My other concern that I have, Steve, if it's too expensive, don't buy 93, just build the

[2:28:04] half that you already own, and keep that cost off your books for having to come up with

[2:28:10] more money.

[2:28:11] I believe there are little math that they have for 85 cars, or 66 additional cars coming in

[2:28:18] and not a James Avenue.

[2:28:20] That's all great if they think they're just going to go 300 feet to 9.5, but you'd

[2:28:24] surprised how many people cut through our little 12-block neighborhood and go out on 91 and

[2:28:29] a half street because you can't get out on 90th. So it makes a huge difference not being able

[2:28:36] to just shoot down the street and turn. You have to go through the neighborhood and it's very,

[2:28:41] very annoying for the other people who live there. The other thing that I'd like to add are we going

[2:28:49] to end up with an empty lot of sounds like there's a chance we might, if the lots don't sell,

[2:28:55] It'll sit like 86th in pen, which has been in limbo since 2019, and I guess I'd be okay with that

[2:29:01] Because then I don't have to worry about having many mansions next door to me. Right now

[2:29:05] I've got an empty lot that's been next to me for four years and I've learned to adjust to that being empty

[2:29:11] So I think that's a big avenue and of course, you know, you sit and you write down all this stuff and you think you got a good notes, and then it's like

[2:29:21] but you know it's it's just really challenging because it's going to take the population on my half of the block

[2:29:27] it's going to increase by 140% by putting in nine homes on that one acre there's only going to be five homes on one side

[2:29:35] and we're going to take it up by 140% and I don't think it's only going to be 66 trips up and down James per home

[2:29:42] I think it's going to be a lot more than that so

[2:29:46] Only get one bite of an apple and I got 30 seconds to go. What else do I want to see?

[2:29:51] I'm just very concerned. I want to make sure that Steve gets to

[2:29:56] celebrate being a bloomington resident and do what he can for the sake.

[2:30:04] So I would love to see him develop 9025, put a couple of homes on 9025, leave 9033 alone. Keeps his cost low. Let's

[2:30:14] everyone still get a little bit of something and I also want to take a few seconds and say thank you,

[2:30:19] She, um, I sent her an email.

[2:30:21] We asked her to come and she worked on Habitat for Humanity One Day.

[2:30:24] Came over to my home and met with a handful of neighbors and answered a few questions.

[2:30:29] And then she even responded back to an email.

[2:30:32] So she's been very supportive and I appreciate all that.

[2:30:34] Now if we can just tell me why we just stay our one.

[2:30:38] Our time is up, but thank you very much.

[2:30:40] So that's my question.

[2:30:41] That's a question before I go home.

[2:30:42] We got that.

[2:30:43] All right. Thank you.

[2:30:43] Thank you.

[2:30:45] And I'll sign in.

[2:30:46] Please.

[2:30:47] Yeah.

[2:30:48] I'm slow.

[2:30:52] I'm up here alone.

[2:30:56] Hi, my name is Louin.

[2:30:59] Louin, thank you.

[2:31:00] Thank you.

[2:31:01] Thank you.

[2:31:02] I would like to address the traffic analysis that James Avenue has sufficient capacity to accommodate the additional trips and no significant impacts to the Jason traffic patterns.

[2:31:20] I feel that we've addressed the concerns on the August 20 meeting and the amount of current

[2:31:27] traffic flow in 90th Street, James, since 92nd have additional 80 approximately 85 more

[2:31:33] trips.

[2:31:34] So on the meeting, Julie had said that they use the generation manual calculator, which

[2:31:41] averages 90 average trips a day.

[2:31:44] I use the calculator for James' total traffic with proposed town homes.

[2:31:50] There are 17 homes, 17 signs, 9 is 153 trips, 85 daily trips per proposed development,

[2:31:59] making it 238 daily trips.

[2:32:02] This is just the people that live on James.

[2:32:05] That does not include Amazon FedEx, food delivery,

[2:32:08] of us at garbage recycling yard waste trucks mailed delivery daycare's group homes.

[2:32:14] James is a two-block street, start set 90 a street, which is the entrance and exit

[2:32:19] for James, because James ends at 90 second.

[2:32:25] How could a two-block street have sufficient capacity to handle approximately 238 daily trips

[2:32:32] Just the people that live on it plus the added other traffic that I just mentioned and have no significant impacts to the Jason traffic on 90's

[2:32:43] 90's street is the entrance 90's is a feeder to the 35 W during different times and backs up and blocks off James

[2:32:52] Because it's close to the freeway getting across all four lanes can be a real challenge to stop lights at 35 W

[2:32:59] backs up front of James and light goes to get go forward.

[2:33:05] On West Nineties and East of Pan Avenue, very close to our neighborhood, there is 30

[2:33:11] Penn Village town homes and one apartment building and the only entrance is out

[2:33:17] on to Nineties Street. All that traffic goes up and down Nineties Street, past

[2:33:21] James and past our area. So a little boundaries of our neighborhood east to

[2:33:27] It's one 91st and a half street, two James, and 90th street to 92nd street is 2 blocks.

[2:33:37] 92nd is a tea street that runs along Oliver Newton, Morgan Logan, Knox, and James,

[2:33:44] and it feeds out to 91st and a half street, which goes out to Penn.

[2:33:49] There's four entrances into our little neighborhood,

[2:33:52] east side, no entrance, south side, no entrance, west side,

[2:33:57] 90 first and a half street, only one entrance on to Penn.

[2:34:01] This McGill, your time is up, I'm sorry.

[2:34:04] It goes fast, doesn't it? I know, I'm sorry.

[2:34:13] Others,

[2:34:16] don't forget to sign in, please.

[2:34:21] Hi, my name is Jan Miller.

[2:34:22] I live across the street from the possible development.

[2:34:27] I agree with the two previous people about the traffic,

[2:34:32] especially. And also the need for rezoning, I don't see the need to change it from the R1,

[2:34:41] where he can develop that vacant lot. I would also like to keep the home that is there at

[2:34:47] 93-3. It's always well maintained. The people have lived there for a number of years and have

[2:34:55] bit well into the neighborhood. The R1, with my understanding, the difference is like the

[2:35:05] setbacks and I think R1 is more compatible to the current neighborhood. We're not, our

[2:35:14] homes are not right on the street. We all have pretty decent front yards. If you have an R3

[2:35:21] And you're able to build closer to the street.

[2:35:27] It just is not compatible with the neighborhood.

[2:35:31] And I think that many homes that number is far too many

[2:35:37] for our small neighborhood.

[2:35:39] So I do not see a need to rezone the building on what

[2:35:45] he can and wants on the vacant lot.

[2:35:48] I would prefer that he keeps the other home there, and I guess that's it.

[2:35:56] Thank you Ms. Miller.

[2:36:11] Dan Belligan could be talking to you.

[2:36:13] This is the issue that that concerns me the most.

[2:36:17] We have a property on 91.99.

[2:36:20] And when people talk about traffic and winding through and you can't get out on 90th

[2:36:26] during rush hours, so you can just see the people that will be coming up and down the street and again it's a natural.

[2:36:36] I mean, most of our lots, the way neighborhoods are currently constructed are a quarter of an acre.

[2:36:42] So even if you said, you know, for, you know, the offsets to the street, it wouldn't fit in.

[2:36:52] I wasn't quite sure on some of the numbers that were given to us that the low number was

[2:36:58] 400,000 producing.

[2:37:00] Mr. Bell?

[2:37:00] I don't think if you could address that.

[2:37:02] Lower cost was 400,000 up to 500,000, and we're calling it affordable housing.

[2:37:11] I'm telling you, if you do the mortgage payment on something like that, you're not going

[2:37:16] to be living in a 400,000 dollar house.

[2:37:20] You're going to be able barely be able to afford rent, you know?

[2:37:27] I mean, a payment when you figure the asset.

[2:37:30] As tax value and all the other costs, I don't see how that's solving much of a problem anyways. And to change the whole makeup of the neighborhood, change the traffic pattern.

[2:37:41] I sure wouldn't want that next door to me like this for a woman's having. And there's this new, there's this twin home that was built on 9-Death. And I know there's rules and regulations about how many cards you can have in the driveway.

[2:37:57] but I swear I don't there's at least five or six it's right across from the new

[2:38:04] bike park there's five cars in that driveway or more on a pretty regular basis

[2:38:10] plus two in the garage and the next one and I can just imagine that I did

[2:38:16] here they were single family I mean single single family but I don't know if

[2:38:22] they're single room multiple room I don't know how big these houses are

[2:38:26] planning to be with square footage and you know they are and the design is a little bit

[2:38:32] uncertain so to me the only way you could do is go up and you have to bait for the storm

[2:38:40] and all that other stuff that adds a tremendous amount of cost is just a natural to the

[2:38:44] whole neighborhood and I would just like to echo the fact that switching it from R1 to R3 just

[2:38:53] seems over the top, and I understand the goal of trying to provide affordable, livable housing

[2:39:01] for the middle class, but I don't see this providing that solution either when you do

[2:39:07] the numbers on a mortgage on a $400,000 house with taxes insurance and everything that goes

[2:39:13] along with it.

[2:39:15] Thank you, much.

[2:39:18] I'll sign it again.

[2:39:25] Others wishing to speak tonight.

[2:39:41] What do you think?

[2:39:42] Good evening.

[2:39:44] My name is Scott Thereves.

[2:39:45] I live on 90th Street.

[2:39:48] My backyard walks up to the journey in property.

[2:39:53] I've been in resident.

[2:39:57] I've lived in that home 47 years.

[2:40:01] I'm not sure if you people understand,

[2:40:03] But what the plan shows is that the first house on the property will be 40 feet in front of Kathy's house, and it'll be built 10 feet away from Kathy's property line and vice versa on the other side.

[2:40:27] Um, I can't believe anyone would ever want someone to have a house that I close to.

[2:40:37] Um, we're, we're not in Minneapolis where people are squeezed in and we're, that's

[2:40:43] why we bought in the suburbs.

[2:40:46] I

[2:40:51] also did watch the development on 80, 6th Street or whatever it was and that you all voted

[2:41:04] for it, so I'm very concerned that this is going to happen.

[2:41:12] I do want to know if is there a privacy fancy need it to be put if this happens between

[2:41:28] R1 and R3 development and if so why not I mean if you don't have it why not and if so

[2:41:40] I would think the developer would be in charge of putting up the fence because he's asking for the

[2:41:47] rezoning. And then I guess we found out about the possible management plan and so and then

[2:42:02] according to some of the literature that was sent out in the packet,

[2:42:11] So we need to be sure that the deliveries and stop are done between the hours of 7 and 10 and

[2:42:23] no construction parking on the street is part of what it said on the stipulations.

[2:42:30] So I don't know how it's some of it said in that packet said, all construction and post construction

[2:42:37] park in and storage of equipment and materials must be on site use of public streets and private

[2:42:45] construction park in which there's your time is up. I'm sorry. Thank you.

[2:43:03] My name is Sue Winchester. Going up what he said. They're saying anyone who buys a lot can

[2:43:10] build take their own builder. That could be nine different builders. We don't know how many are

[2:43:20] And there's going to be no room to move in there unless they there's poor houses built.

[2:43:26] Where are these construction vehicles going to park but on the street?

[2:43:31] And all the people that have to come there to work, they're going to be parking on the street.

[2:43:35] When people move in, they're going to have company, they're going to have parties, somebody might be running a daycare.

[2:43:41] That's all extra traffic, all extra people coming into our neighborhood.

[2:43:44] right now we have 128 homes of their neighborhood, not counting the nine times nine trips that was

[2:43:53] 1,152 trips a day just in our neighborhood. They're talking also about one bedroom house. Nobody's

[2:44:04] going to buy a one bedroom 750 foot house for $400,000 with no yard. It's going to be two story

[2:44:12] houses, they can build up to 50 feet they sat last time, which is more people are going

[2:44:22] to be there, more cars, people visiting, it's just going to be a mess for the whole

[2:44:28] neighborhood. Would you want to sit in your neighborhood? Would you want this across the

[2:44:32] street or next door to you? No, why build it right in someone's neighborhood? In the middle

[2:44:37] neighborhood. Most of us have been there for 40, 50, 60 years. And you're driving people out of

[2:44:44] Bloomington. People are talking about selling in their homes because of what's going on. And I

[2:44:50] think it's totally ridiculous.

[2:44:57] Thank you Ms. Winchester.

[2:45:02] No, you cannot. Doesn't work that way, sorry.

[2:45:09] Anyone else?

[2:45:17] Mr. Hall, it's going for a new indoor record, I think tonight.

[2:45:22] So here are a lot of good points, and I don't want to invalid anyone's point. I just want to offer a couple of suggestions.

[2:45:28] So,

[2:45:31] I don't know what's talking about the major structural differences between the different types of zoning,

[2:45:37] but what I do remember asking the plane division about how this could potentially work as a general concept.

[2:45:45] My ideas were stemming from eco villages such as Kalash in Portland and there's another,

[2:45:51] I can't remember the one in Arizona, but the one in Arizona is actually really important because

[2:45:55] I took a, like, while everyone was speaking,

[2:45:57] I took a really quick look at Google Maps

[2:45:59] and there is a seek center, literally right behind the lot.

[2:46:04] And we keep running into time to come with this community center

[2:46:08] or any other structure that we're building.

[2:46:10] We keep running into the problem of parking minimums.

[2:46:13] And I know this is saying that building commission

[2:46:14] is currently working on that.

[2:46:15] In fact, there's a whole bunch of stuff

[2:46:17] that I would love, after this meeting,

[2:46:19] I'd love to talk to you about this stand building commission

[2:46:21] because there's a ton of people

[2:46:22] of wealth of knowledge to help make the buildings more

[2:46:25] sustainable and more affordable affordable.

[2:46:29] There's a concept called the street car suburb.

[2:46:32] I believe I heard and when the presentation was going on

[2:46:35] that there's a sidewalk being built

[2:46:37] because I looked at the map, James,

[2:46:40] or I think it's sorry, James Rojo, James Avenue,

[2:46:43] goes directly to City Hall right here.

[2:46:46] And from here, there's buses.

[2:46:48] So that means that there is access via again,

[2:46:53] another protected bike lane. Going down James Road, sorry, Avenue, I can't believe I'm messing

[2:46:59] up the Holy Street names. Another protected bike lane. Get ourselves off of this continuous

[2:47:06] cycle of continuously forcing more cars in and becoming more and more problematic while solving

[2:47:14] all these other issues of the middle housing and respecting people who already live here.

[2:47:20] I'm from Richfield. I've already gone through all this. I can tell you that there's definitely

[2:47:23] a wrong way of doing it and a right way of doing it. I've seen both happen repeatedly

[2:47:28] and middle housing in general is not the enemy. It's just how it's done. Washington, DC,

[2:47:36] also has the most green risk-based adoption in the country because of the stormwater policies

[2:47:41] and this also this whole thing of ripping up the curb and all this other stuff that was talking

[2:47:45] about the stormwater goes right back into the ordinance

[2:47:49] that I was talking about essentially

[2:47:51] of the question of what does restoration mean.

[2:47:54] And if we build an eco village,

[2:48:00] use better materials.

[2:48:01] I personally didn't like the architecture.

[2:48:04] I believe it's probably something kind of like it

[2:48:05] extends from the suburbs of Lakeville,

[2:48:08] rather than the street car suburb,

[2:48:10] which I find much more appealing and easier to do

[2:48:15] Eco village style stuff where you wind up with more food. Oh, I'm not taking it running a time anyway

[2:48:22] That's it. Thank you, Mr. Hallett.

[2:48:29] Anyone else

[2:48:33] is right?

[2:48:33] We have anyone on the phone wishing to speak to this topic. Where we did not have anyone online

[2:48:39] Last call for anybody in the chambers

[2:48:43] Council no one coming forward no one on the phone. I'd look for a motion to close the public hearing and I know 4.8 to see so moved

[2:48:50] Motion by Councilmember Lomann Second by Councilmember Robertson to close the public hearing and I know of item 4.8.

[2:48:56] No further council discussion on this? Ms. Wright.

[2:48:59] Carter.

[2:49:01] I'm Dallas, Andrew.

[2:49:03] Rivas.

[2:49:04] Nelson.

[2:49:05] Lomann.

[2:49:06] Robert.

[2:49:07] Hi.

[2:49:08] Motion carries a seven zero closing the public hearing.

[2:49:12] If we could answer a couple of questions, I think about that.

[2:49:14] we're brought up. And I'll just pick them off here. The Ms. Jones asked, is there a need to

[2:49:21] resume to R3 or is it somehow doable in R1?

[2:49:27] Ms. McHale talked about a traffic analysis

[2:49:29] and a calculator. Is there actually a calculator out there? Somewhere that you can access

[2:49:34] really. I didn't know that. That would be interesting. And the trip numbers differed from

[2:49:38] the trip numbers that we had been talking about. Privacy fences between R1 and R1 and

[2:49:44] are three. I think there were questions about construction management plan. Other questions

[2:49:50] that we had heard, who wants to tackle some of these. I know you were writing them down

[2:49:54] as well.

[2:49:55] I will start Mayor and Council. So the main difference between R1 and R3 are the setbacks.

[2:50:02] So the minimum setback in R1 is 30 feet for a dwelling. R3 is 20. So if this were to be kept

[2:50:10] as R1, I imagine one or two lots would be eliminated due to the increase

[2:50:16] setback in R1. As far as Fencing goes, it's not identified on the plans. I know that

[2:50:25] Steve may be addressed at Planning Commission that it's potentially an option. I defer

[2:50:29] to him to speak to the Fencing. I heard traffic. I defer to Kirk Roberts. Robert,

[2:50:37] Let's do a little bit of pull-up to find.

[2:50:39] Yeah, okay.

[2:50:44] Mr. Roberts, there's a lot of questions about traffic.

[2:50:47] The actual number of cars there,

[2:50:49] what the capacity might be, backups on 90th and diverting traffic

[2:50:57] through.

[2:50:58] Mr. Mayor, council members, yeah, there were.

[2:51:00] And so let me run through these with you.

[2:51:02] You know, be brief about it.

[2:51:05] In terms of the traffic calculator, that is me.

[2:51:07] I am the traffic calculator.

[2:51:08] They're all the way.

[2:51:09] I will say, this is Mick Hale's traffic calculation for pretty good, and I really appreciate

[2:51:14] that.

[2:51:14] Anyone that's willing to calculate traffic in his, I have a connection with.

[2:51:20] One of the first things I want to touch on is the residents didn't see road tubes out here.

[2:51:25] We rely less and less on road tubes.

[2:51:26] We actually have data providers that we can get this data from using like GPS devices and

[2:51:32] things like that.

[2:51:33] So we do have traffic volumes for the local roadways here.

[2:51:36] James Avenue, which is the hot topic tonight, has about 200 cars a day, all of the roads

[2:51:43] in this area are about 300 cars per day or less. And in terms of context, that's a pretty quiet

[2:51:50] local street. We don't even start thinking hard about streets until they're over 500 cars a day

[2:51:56] for a local street. And those the volumes can range 800 or more. And in how that affects residents,

[2:52:07] people's sensitivity to traffic varies, but generally if these little volumes, we don't

[2:52:10] hear a lot of complaints.

[2:52:11] We don't get a lot of requests for traffic calming.

[2:52:14] It's not to say that there isn't somebody that makes everybody in the neighborhood really angry

[2:52:17] because they drive faster.

[2:52:19] That every neighborhood has somebody like that.

[2:52:21] But in general, in these neighborhoods, the traffic is fairly quiet.

[2:52:27] And so, moving up.

[2:52:30] In the volume numbers here, 90th Street, 12,400 cars a day, there is your approach, 35W. Penn Avenue is a lower volume, 800 vehicles per 8,000 vehicles per day on Penn Avenue.

[2:52:41] You remember the 86th Street town homes? We were looking at that. That was about 5,000 cars a day. So this is a much higher volume situation. That's a three lane collector. And this is four lanes to handle that volume as you approach the freeway.

[2:52:55] Now, the question, and one of the points we heard a lie is, James Avenue is difficult to

[2:53:04] use sometimes in that peak hour, and I believe that the traffic approaching 35W, you

[2:53:08] get those cues that build up. It is probably some residents already likely divert to other

[2:53:15] roads, just depending on where their destination is by its time of day, in those morning

[2:53:19] and evening peak hours. That happens pretty much in every neighborhood.

[2:53:24] as people sort of select based on their trip and where they feel comfortable going to.

[2:53:30] And so this new development is going to generate about 66 new trips.

[2:53:35] And what does that do? How does that affect neighborhood traffic?

[2:53:38] Well, it's going on to James Avenue.

[2:53:41] Most traffic in Bloomington wants to take the shortest route to the highest, the highest status road.

[2:53:46] So in this case, that's going to be most traffic is going to want to get up to 90th Street.

[2:53:49] If I were real serious about these numbers here, I would probably put two thirds of the traffic wants to go out to 90th and then another third is going to

[2:53:59] I want to remove through the sort of weave through the neighborhood or to pin out a new use 90 first and a half street.

[2:54:06] And what happens to traffic when they do that?

[2:54:10] So, worst case, you add about 50 trips on James Avenue and you add another on some number of trips to 90 second street.

[2:54:16] You are still looking at very low volume local streets

[2:54:20] that look like the majority of streets in this city.

[2:54:24] So in other words, there are 300 cars a day or less.

[2:54:27] They're well under that 500 car a day threshold.

[2:54:29] So we're not real concerned about the need

[2:54:32] to do traffic calming traffic mitigation, traffic management.

[2:54:38] Go ahead and do my comments.

[2:54:44] Yeah, I think I covered most of the comments.

[2:54:45] Council, there's others that you want me to touch on.

[2:54:47] Please let me know.

[2:54:48] But in general, the trips generated by this development,

[2:54:54] the proposed development, one other thing that's

[2:54:58] we're touching on is the context, that's the other thing

[2:55:00] that if you have a business inside of a residential neighborhood,

[2:55:06] or you just have straight up cut through traffic,

[2:55:08] where it's coming from outside the neighborhood,

[2:55:09] through the neighborhood and back out,

[2:55:11] that's the kind of thing that really drives people crazy.

[2:55:14] This isn't that.

[2:55:15] It's residential traffic.

[2:55:16] This is your neighbors.

[2:55:17] that doesn't tend to generate the kind of complaints that we hear about when we have straight

[2:55:21] up cut through traffic.

[2:55:23] And that's why I think probably James Avenue has a nice, the curves there, the diverters

[2:55:28] is because everything to the east is industrial, so it's a traffic, and then everything obviously

[2:55:35] up.

[2:55:35] James Avenue to the north is all residential, and so they just divided those up to eliminate

[2:55:40] the issues that you sometimes hear about.

[2:55:42] So that's what I have for traffic and transportation.

[2:55:44] If there's other questions, I'm happy to answer them.

[2:55:45] Does member Rivas?

[2:55:50] Quick, quick.

[2:55:52] I'm just curious.

[2:55:54] I have never heard you or anybody from the city actually have had an actual traffic

[2:56:00] study.

[2:56:01] Like you would see on the highway when you drive you have to do this.

[2:56:04] The cable sensors across the road, and then when cars actually drive over those, they're

[2:56:10] counting cars.

[2:56:12] And also they are using GPS sensors above that.

[2:56:16] So, have we ever had an actual study like that in the city that you can bring to us?

[2:56:23] I've always been curious about that, I mean, because I've never seen the cables outside,

[2:56:27] and I've never seen the GPS sensors out there either.

[2:56:31] So, can you kind of enlighten me on that either, please?

[2:56:35] Yeah, Mr. Mayor, Council Member Rivas, we do the two counts all the time.

[2:56:38] We have an entire program throughout the summer to do those two counts.

[2:56:42] A lot of that is to report back to our state aid.

[2:56:45] As for our allocation of the federal gas tax, we have to report back on the volume on most of our local and arterial roadways.

[2:56:53] You don't see that tube counts done as frequently inside neighborhoods, just because we have fewer questions about those and those don't have to be reported the same way.

[2:57:03] But we do indeed do studies using tube data and we collect tube data pretty much continuously throughout the summer months.

[2:57:12] Often the studies that we do now, if it's a very specialized thing like this, will engage the services that we can solve in just for workload, especially the larger studies that we do like the corridor studies, and they do that, more and more that tubes are being also replaced by video.

[2:57:28] And so when we want that accuracy, they'll put video cameras up, and that's an automated system that just counts the traffic using that.

[2:57:37] Thank you.

[2:57:38] Also, despite our best intentions, I'm a new make-a-motion that we adjourn

[2:57:42] no later than 10 o'clock. Let's see if we can get our work done.

[2:57:45] Second. Motion to extend until no later than 10 o'clock. Second by

[2:57:48] Dallas, Andrew. No further counts at the discussion, Ms. Rhyme.

[2:57:52] Carter. I, Dallas, Andrew. I, Rebus.

[2:57:56] Aye. Nalton. Lowman. Robertton. Aye. Where are bussy?

[2:58:00] Aye. Motion carries 7-0.

[2:58:02] Let's go on, so any additional questions that we need answered based on the questions that

[2:58:07] you heard from residents or questions that you had?

[2:58:12] That's Maradelle Senator.

[2:58:13] Yes, Mr. Mayor, thank you.

[2:58:15] I would like, I don't know if, Mr. Mayor, Mr. Johnson can answer this question.

[2:58:21] But one of the conditions that we put in here is the construction management plan.

[2:58:26] And it came out of planning commission trying to provide a mitigation for some of the resident

[2:58:35] concerns around what does it mean to build in the neighborhood during the period of time, etc.

[2:58:40] But what we're looking at right now doesn't tell us anything about what's in that construction

[2:58:45] management plan. And so my question would be, like, what can we expect from a construction management plan?

[2:58:52] has this ever been done before, number one,

[2:58:54] putting a condition of approval on this like this.

[2:58:59] And then what is it going to look like

[2:59:00] so that we can have some understanding

[2:59:02] of what it is we're expecting to be supporting

[2:59:05] if we choose to support it.

[2:59:07] Mr. Johnson tells about it.

[2:59:07] Yeah, Mayor Concemer, we'll send her a thank you for the question

[2:59:10] and actually it's really helpful

[2:59:11] if the council kind of voices or shares their ideas

[2:59:14] about what they would like to see in that document

[2:59:16] because we have done it for other larger scale projects.

[2:59:19] We haven't done it as frequently for smaller

[2:59:21] middle-scale projects. But the things that are typically in it have to do with kind of the

[2:59:26] Cummings and goings of all of the contractors and staff who are constructing the project.

[2:59:31] On the front end of things, that's the roadway that's the utilities, those things. A lot of times

[2:59:35] they can create a construction parking area or a lay-down area for all the equipment and materials.

[2:59:40] But then you'll have the vertical construction of the homes and the concern that was raised around

[2:59:44] having multiple crews going at one time. I mean I heard the applicant tonight say that

[2:59:49] He would find it acceptable if there was limitations around the number of homes being construction under one time, so that's something that's certainly under consideration another construction management plans we've done I can think of

[3:00:00] Friendship Village, the large expansion that happened at Friendship Village. Public works actually didn't allow parking on the public street on a highwood.

[3:00:07] So the number they had to either park within the campus itself during construction or they actually had to shuttle some staff in for the construction of those buildings.

[3:00:15] Obviously that's a much larger project than what we're talking about here.

[3:00:18] But these are the kinds of things that if there's some sensitivity or some impacts that could be visited upon adjacent property owners that we would take a closer look to figure that out.

[3:00:29] In terms of the staff teams that would be involved in informing the contents of that document,

[3:00:33] which I won't public works, the building official planning staff, in some cases in

[3:00:37] environmental health because they're doing the enforcement on noise or other things.

[3:00:41] So we try and pull a team together and try and think through okay what are all the potential

[3:00:45] impacts that could cause harm to adjacent properties during the construction.

[3:00:49] And we try and mitigate that through the contents of the management plan.

[3:00:53] But we actually invited planning commission to give us their thoughts when they added this condition.

[3:00:57] So, the more things you can put on the record that gives us more than just our own expertise,

[3:01:03] it kind of helps.

[3:01:04] And the applicant being in the room, it helps set the expectation of what the city wants to see,

[3:01:08] as far as being sensitive to the neighboring private owners.

[3:01:11] Okay.

[3:01:12] So, thank you for that.

[3:01:12] So, a follow-up question to that.

[3:01:14] Does the construction, has the construction major or can the construction management plan also include,

[3:01:22] you know,

[3:01:22] of some of the limitations that bridge the gap between what is being proposed as concepts

[3:01:30] here and what actually is allowed by the ordinance.

[3:01:35] Most specifically, I'm thinking about the fact that what we are seeing in front of us

[3:01:39] here today is houses that are 20 feet tall and yet in R3 should we pass those own changes,

[3:01:44] it could be up to 50.

[3:01:46] We don't want that, like I heard it very clearly, the residents don't want 50 foot tall buildings

[3:01:51] in these areas. It won't be preventable, but if it was a condition in the construction management

[3:01:57] plan, we could add that. I just don't know if that's the kind of thing you can put in a

[3:02:01] construction management plan. That's why I'm asking the question, because it will help me understand

[3:02:07] what the boundaries of that are. I appreciate that. So, Mayor Concerning, I would say no,

[3:02:11] and the reason being is that the construction management plan is really focused on the

[3:02:20] term following its construction. So that's kind of the boundaries of that document. If you

[3:02:25] well, now certainly you have the right or the question to impose other conditions of approval.

[3:02:31] So long as it meets an essential nexus, the issue that we have sometimes is that if you're

[3:02:35] imposing conditions on a code complying application with respect to a project that meets our code,

[3:02:42] that does take some back and forth or some collaboration with the applicant in terms of whether

[3:02:46] not they're willing to entertain those types of conditions. So I would certainly invite them.

[3:02:51] If you're thinking along those lines, I would invite them to at least raise that with them

[3:02:55] to see if they're open to a condition along those lines specifically to structure height.

[3:03:00] One thing I would say just to clarify that issue a little bit is it's true that the height map

[3:03:04] allows structures up to 50 feet. I mean, I invite the applicant to speak to this and I know we

[3:03:09] did have the townhome project on recently, so I'm sure that's a top of mind a little bit.

[3:03:13] But in terms of what we see for new single-family home or villa law construction, where the market typically does not build a three-story villa

[3:03:21] I don't see that product very often. In addition to that, specifically for the lots that are closer to single-family homes and to the south of them, that's when you have the greatest impact from a structure head standpoint

[3:03:33] is your casting shadows. Our code does have provisions in it that does offer protections that if

[3:03:38] you're casting shadows at both in the morning and the afternoon and it's most impactful in the winter

[3:03:42] months, of course, when the sun is lowest, you're not allowed to do that. And so in those particular

[3:03:48] lots, it would be staffs expectation that the architect is providing a shadow study for their

[3:03:54] specific home to ensure that those shadow components are being complied with in our code. So that's a

[3:03:59] bit for you to chew on and don't know if it resolves the question.

[3:04:02] No, it helps and you know Mr. Johnson, you're always super thorough and I totally appreciate

[3:04:07] that no one to thank you for being willing to address my concerns.

[3:04:13] You know, I guess from my perspective, I guess the last question I would have is we are being

[3:04:21] provided with conceptual studies here of what houses might look like and I could choose to say

[3:04:26] like them, or don't like them, but they're based on, we've been asked to look at a table

[3:04:34] that says, here's the requirement, here's the proposed thing, right, over and over again,

[3:04:40] except they're not the proposed thing, because as soon as this is over, that could be something else.

[3:04:44] And that's the thing that I'm trying to have struggling with. So I guess the third question I would ask

[3:04:49] is, what is there within our framework?

[3:04:54] Can we do, to say, these are the home plans

[3:05:01] that you can build in this area.

[3:05:04] It's almost like a planned development, right?

[3:05:06] Where it has sets of conditions, and it has pre-approved,

[3:05:10] if you will, construction concepts.

[3:05:14] Um, you know, it just, so that we're not at a point where, you know, two years down the road,

[3:05:20] two of the homes have been built kind of sort of an alignment with what we've seen today.

[3:05:24] And then somebody comes in and, you know, is a completely off, completely outrageous.

[3:05:29] I don't mean to be like, I like lots of different kinds of architecture.

[3:05:33] So I'm not necessarily going to be the guy that goes, what in the world you built a castle.

[3:05:37] Um, but, I mean, somebody might try to build a castle, like, you know, a really tall castle with turrets.

[3:05:42] and they can't we can't really say no at that point and that's I'm trying to just understand

[3:05:47] what what we can be doing now to put bumpers around what looks reasonable for these property

[3:05:52] owners that are adjacent to this to this neighborhood. Yeah first mayor first I'd say like all

[3:05:58] this discussion is really helpful for planning step because we're taking notes we're taking

[3:06:02] note of your conversations around what our standards should be in these particular instances and

[3:06:06] that's going to inform future policy work that we do right so I appreciate it comes from Nelson's

[3:06:11] months, maybe at the end of the last meeting, or if our standards are on, let's change our standards.

[3:06:17] So that's just kind of my first more broad comment to that. As far as the imposition of

[3:06:22] additional height conditions on it, no I don't think that we can say that it has to be this style,

[3:06:29] or this design of the home, that's typically what HOAs do, and as they were mentioning kind of

[3:06:35] mass builders, yes, they give you five options and you pick one, and that's how they do their work

[3:06:39] as that scale. This is a different situation, but I think we're finding that in the space of missing

[3:06:44] metal housing, it's going to take different types of developers to deliver that product because

[3:06:48] there isn't the scale of the national builders or the big builders use. So to back to your question

[3:06:55] about what conditions you can add, again, I mean, I invite the city attorney to speak to this to a

[3:06:59] little bit, but every condition you impose on development should meet some essential nexus is the

[3:07:05] that it's called. So what is the condition doing? Is it reasonable to solve the problem that you have

[3:07:12] identified? In this particular case, the city code allows 50 feet if the site is rezoned to R3.

[3:07:19] And so that's where I mentioned that I think it does necessitate some discussion or some invitation to the applicant to see

[3:07:25] what they're willing to, what their appetite is to allow for additional.

[3:07:30] Conditions around structure height. If that's of, if they're amenable to that and the council wants to do that, then I think you're kind of a kumbaya and you're in a good place and then maybe you add that condition, but if they're not amenable to that, that's kind of where you have a, it's a trickier question to answer because it is coat complying.

[3:07:47] Minus the shadow issue that I mentioned before.

[3:07:50] Thank you. Appreciate your help.

[3:07:53] So I heard Mr. Furlong say something about an association and is that basically what we're talking about?

[3:07:59] I mean, the association determining heights and styles and that kind of thing to help limit or determine what a different house could look like.

[3:08:15] But Mr. Mayer, I thought I thought that the whole idea because these are nine individually developed places and yes, there would be a requirement for an HOA.

[3:08:25] I guess for a common space in area, but it wouldn't necessarily have the whole standing on the building.

[3:08:32] And I'm here in Councilor Dalson, just to clarify,

[3:08:35] state law doesn't allow us to require an HRA any more.

[3:08:39] Enjoy.

[3:08:40] HOLA, excuse me, but it's my understanding that

[3:08:42] is they're planned to have an HOLA.

[3:08:43] Yes, they can have private rules,

[3:08:45] but the city can not enforce an HOLA's private rules.

[3:08:48] So I think what I'm talking about,

[3:08:50] what I think you're talking about is some type of condition

[3:08:53] of approval on the final site and building plan approval.

[3:08:57] But again, when you're in a situation where the code says

[3:09:00] that you're allowed to do that,

[3:09:01] I think that takes some given takers,

[3:09:03] some discussion with the applicant on whether they're

[3:09:05] amenable to that.

[3:09:07] Let's move on to moment.

[3:09:09] Thank you, Mayor.

[3:09:10] I guess I'm a little confused.

[3:09:13] So

[3:09:16] we're trying to go from R1 to R3.

[3:09:20] But it seems like the building that's going to be built

[3:09:23] is built in a style that's an R1.

[3:09:27] And this is where I'm having a difficult time

[3:09:29] trying to ascertain or just figure that out.

[3:09:33] that's a really confused with that. So that's kind of my first question. I'm confused about

[3:09:36] that if you could help me kind of understand that. In a secondary thing that I'm trying to

[3:09:41] understand is, you know, we have a comprehensive plan in this space where this area is guided towards

[3:09:47] R3. Is that my understanding or guided towards a part of me towards a higher density?

[3:09:54] Yeah. Mayor Combsman to Loman. So the R3's only district was designed to be

[3:09:58] that gentle density district, it was designed to accommodate missing middle types of different

[3:10:02] forms, not kind of more higher density medium, like a multiplex or a small apartment building,

[3:10:10] but detached townhomes, cottage courts, townhomes, attached townhomes. That's what our three

[3:10:15] can accommodate. So is it a medium density residential district planning staff would actually argue that

[3:10:20] If it's in both the high end of low density residential and the high end of low density and the low end of medium density. Does that make sense?

[3:10:33] So I think I just confused you more. I get your point.

[3:10:36] The point is is that you can build some of these missing middle types if you recall the missing middle policy, but there's subject to different standards. There's greater restrictions on height and there's bigger setbacks if it is our one.

[3:10:47] I don't want to speak for the developer, but I think from following this process along, the reason they've decided to seek

[3:10:53] rezoning to R3 is based on two things. One, the site is guided, medium-density residential, and two, it offers them reduced structure setbacks,

[3:11:02] which allows them to gain more units back to the point he made about the pro forma. So that's just my analysis of it. I'm not trying to be objective for neutral in that

[3:11:12] I appreciate that. And my understanding that correctly with the R1 to R3.

[3:11:17] So that's what we're trying to do. So there's first couple of motions here trying to get us into that thing.

[3:11:22] I guess the dilemma I'm having is, I don't know what it is that's going to be there.

[3:11:31] And so I just, I can't, I'm having a hard time figuring out.

[3:11:34] And I get what's, you know, the developers trying to do a thing is trying to make it so you can basically build your own home.

[3:11:41] But if you want to build your own home, what's the restriction from stopping you from going and building it all the way to the R3 standards?

[3:11:52] Right, so Mayor Council member Loman, there are structure setback requirements in R3. You have to have a minimum 5 foot separation or 10 foot separation between each dwelling, which effectively is a 5 foot side guard setback on both sides.

[3:12:05] So there are standards within the code, when the building get that, but there's a level between

[3:12:12] what I'm hearing being proposed and what the final person that's going to, since they're

[3:12:18] not controlling that, can do with that.

[3:12:22] That's where I'm a little bit hesitant to do that that are three parts, because they just don't

[3:12:35] that we're trying to achieve, and that's the part that I'm confused with is that, you know,

[3:12:41] and then they could do whatever they want. So there's no real restriction here. So I'm reluctant

[3:12:46] to want to make that move to the R3 until I have a much better understanding of that. And there's

[3:12:50] some other things that are here that are going on here to the sewer and some other things through

[3:12:55] that I have questions about. So I'm just, you know, I've never done this before, so I want to do

[3:13:00] this right. And so I'm just at this point, Mayor, when I look at this today, I'm not ready

[3:13:08] to make this decision tonight. You know, I want to kind of have a little more understanding

[3:13:13] in terms of what this R3 thing looks like. And I think it's a great innovative idea, but

[3:13:19] this could be a lot of different things in that neighborhood. And I don't really know what that

[3:13:25] And it's one thing if you're coming back near goal here.

[3:13:27] This is exactly what it is, and it's going to be two stories.

[3:13:33] And by just, again, I asked the question again,

[3:13:37] a $600,000 house for one bedroom, that didn't seem

[3:13:41] to quite fit what's going on here.

[3:13:44] So there's something's not making sense to me here.

[3:13:46] So I'm just trying to make this make sense to me.

[3:13:50] So if, you know, I'm not ready for this right now.

[3:13:53] and the way this is presented to me.

[3:13:56] Thank you, Council member.

[3:13:58] Council member Rivas.

[3:13:59] I had a comment to make.

[3:14:02] My only common is, I like the fact that the builder,

[3:14:09] or the developer, stated the facts, why, nine, and not 304.

[3:14:14] It all comes down to money, and the realities

[3:14:20] for an investor to put their capital into anything and they had to look for profit.

[3:14:28] We live in this world that is the capital of this world, so you know that said, I did

[3:14:35] like your explanation, you know, that's reality and it's good for the public to hear that.

[3:14:43] That was my comment and I do understand what's going on with the amount of land and how

[3:14:50] you can make a profitable and fit as many units as possible because of the 30 to 20 is a yard chip.

[3:15:00] What is the yards, right? Feet, actually, for two to three to twenty feet, right? I understand all of that. My only question is, it comes down to, there are going to be, whoever the builder is, even if they are all, the council is there, they have guidelines already from what I understand that they will have to follow, even if let's say I buy one of them and I build something, the interior could be very different than the others, but the outside would have to assimilate the other.

[3:15:31] You know, it's right or correct me if I'm wrong from what I understand

[3:15:37] Go ahead, Mr. forgive me. I can't remember you asking me to describe that question

[3:15:41] one more time. What I'm saying is that the, you know, within the guidelines the guidelines that the city has and everything that we have in the ordinance is right

[3:15:49] Even if there are nine different builders in there the outside of the builders will be very similar

[3:15:55] The only things that I can think the owners would do almost in any like in any other development

[3:16:00] And you only design the inside of a home as a private owner.

[3:16:06] You go in and you ask your architects or engineers to do whatever you want.

[3:16:10] And they set up and that you want in the interior of the house.

[3:16:14] But the other side has to follow standards, right?

[3:16:16] Yeah, maybe Mayor of Constable, maybe I can answer address.

[3:16:21] Constable Roman's question and your question together, if I can, is when we have a lot

[3:16:26] in Bloomington, it's just a typical single family lot, right?

[3:16:28] We get a building permit.

[3:16:29] We review it to meet all of our zoning standards, height, setbacks.

[3:16:34] The building code has requirements around exterior materials.

[3:16:37] We do have zoning standards for exterior materials, for our commercial industrial,

[3:16:41] our high density buildings. We don't have exterior material requirements for

[3:16:45] a single family homes or detached town homes or villas, whatever you want to call these.

[3:16:49] And so to the question of, you know, to the question of, we're not knowing kind of what's going

[3:16:53] to happen here or what exactly is the application seeking.

[3:16:57] And every single one of these lots, if a building permit comes in, for a new dwelling, we

[3:17:02] will review it according to the standards of the zoning code, just like we would a typical

[3:17:05] single family home, setbacks, height, all of those things that we typically impervious surface,

[3:17:12] all of those things that we typically look at, make sure that it's meeting our parking

[3:17:15] requirement.

[3:17:16] So I know it's a little bit different that this is conceptual in terms of the building plans

[3:17:20] that they've provided to you in the packet, but it's very similar to actually if you were

[3:17:26] just subdivide if you were to subdivide one lot into three single family lots. We would review the

[3:17:32] building permit of each individual three single family homes according to the requirements of

[3:17:37] our zoning code through the submission of a building permit and that building permit would not

[3:17:40] get issued until we verify that it complies with our zoning so it's very similar to that process.

[3:17:46] I don't know if that cleaned anything up or clear anything up maybe not but that's to me thank you.

[3:17:52] Council, based on a discussion, I can't tell which direction we're going to go here.

[3:17:57] I don't know that we've got an answer one way or another.

[3:18:00] But what I hear is all kinds of confusion and misunderstanding or lack of understanding

[3:18:06] of what we're voting on, to be honest.

[3:18:09] I think it might be prudent for us to table this, ask staff to maybe regroup a little bit

[3:18:15] and come back to us and get a bit more information, wherever we want to go, however we want

[3:18:21] to go with this.

[3:18:21] I don't it's it's up to this group, but I want to at least make sure that we understand what we're voting on what we're talking about here, and so and I don't hear that right now in the questions that are being asked in the discussion that we're having.

[3:18:32] So I don't know I would look to staff are we we're not on any under any time constraints or maybe we are.

[3:18:41] The one twenty day is November 12th.

[3:18:43] Oh, so we do have a time.

[3:18:45] I do think Council that that makes the most sense right now because I'm not hearing

[3:18:51] understanding or comfort in this decision that we're making either way that we're making

[3:18:54] and I don't hear comfort in that.

[3:18:57] So, Councilmember Nelson.

[3:19:00] Yeah.

[3:19:00] Thanks, Mayor.

[3:19:00] Can I just address a couple of things.

[3:19:02] I don't disagree with your direction.

[3:19:04] But just quickly, construction management plan, city of Minneapolis has one St. Louis

[3:19:09] part that could be templates, I happen to very for different reasons, help write the Minneapolis

[3:19:15] one. So it's probably not that good. And in terms of an HOA, I mean, they're very flexible.

[3:19:25] I think Mr. Furlong indicated be fairly limited, so they could put all sorts of requirements

[3:19:29] in terms of aesthetics and extra stuff. And you hear the horror stories of HOA and you can't

[3:19:34] pink flamingo's out or whatever, but you can make it much more limited and it's just a group

[3:19:41] that takes care of road maintenance, trash, hauling, utilities, that sort of thing. So that can be very limited.

[3:19:47] In terms of if this is rezoned to R3 anything that meets the standards of R3 could be built.

[3:19:54] I mean it would probably have to be replatted because of the plating, but anything that meets any of those standards

[3:20:00] could be built if it's resound. So I mean I understand that they have conceptual stuff. It could go

[3:20:07] my wrong. Can I address that just one second? I'm Mr. Johnson. This is exactly what I'm talking about.

[3:20:12] Here comes the question. Maybe we should just, maybe we should just put applause on this.

[3:20:17] It's getting late. I think there are more questions in answers right now. There's more confusion

[3:20:20] than understanding. If we back this off until October 12th, perhaps? Or we could do it maybe the

[3:20:27] Monday that I'm in Kansas City.

[3:20:28] Maybe we could do it that way.

[3:20:30] So thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[3:20:36] I appreciate the willingness to send that to me

[3:20:39] for acting Mayor, Deities.

[3:20:41] I'm going to move that we table item 4.8 until I

[3:20:46] took the October 12 meeting.

[3:20:47] Direct staff to direct counsel to forming

[3:20:51] questions and get to staff and get your better understanding

[3:20:54] and direct staff to see what we can do to try and make a better

[3:20:57] sense of this and so we can come to a decision based on an understanding of what we're making

[3:21:02] that decision on.

[3:21:04] Motion in a second.

[3:21:05] Any additional questions or conversation on this?

[3:21:09] Mayor, just to note that the public hearing is closed, so there will not be a subsequent

[3:21:13] public hearing.

[3:21:13] Very good.

[3:21:14] October 12th.

[3:21:15] And again, October 12th.

[3:21:16] Unless we want to go to September 26th, it's a 28th, no, very good.

[3:21:22] We have a motion in a second to table.

[3:21:23] and tell our October 12th. No further discussion? Ms. Rye.

[3:21:27] Carter. I'm Tala Sandra.

[3:21:30] Hi. Rivas. Nelson.

[3:21:33] Loman. Robertson.

[3:21:35] Hi. Mary Busy.

[3:21:36] Hi. Motion carries seven zero.

[3:21:38] Thank you for your patience.

[3:21:40] Both the developer and neighbors.

[3:21:41] Thanks for the patience.

[3:21:42] I want to make sure that we understand what we're talking about.

[3:21:44] We get this right.

[3:21:45] And so appreciate your patience.

[3:21:47] Appreciate your sticking it out with us.

[3:21:49] This laid on to a Monday night.

[3:21:50] but you're seeing the sausage being made.

[3:21:53] I hope you enjoy it, it's how it works.

[3:21:54] So, thank you.

[3:21:57] Council, that concludes our agenda this evening.

[3:22:00] We are up to Council Policy and Issue Update.

[3:22:02] We didn't have a listening session,

[3:22:04] so I have no listening session to report on.

[3:22:08] Mr. Walker, do you have anything tonight?

[3:22:09] Very quickly, Mayor, some good events.

[3:22:11] The community should be aware of this Saturday,

[3:22:14] September 19th from noon to 4 p.m.,

[3:22:17] there will be the 50th anniversary

[3:22:19] of the Norman Dell Japanese Garden at Norman Dell Community College, believe the program

[3:22:23] itself starts at noon, but there are events throughout the day. Also Saturday, keep the fun.

[3:22:30] We're going at the Bloomington Street Arts Festival in 9 Mile October Fest. That runs from 10 AM to 6 PM. And then on no meeting next week, but there will be a boards and commission, connect opportunity for council and our board and commission members to get together and update and dialogue that'll be from 6 to 8 PM here in council chambers.

[3:22:52] Very good. Council anything to add? Hearing none, I would entertain a motion to adjourn.

[3:22:58] Motion by.

[3:22:59] Mr. Dales-Handro, second by council member Robertson to adjourn.

[3:23:02] No further discussion in Ms. Rye.

[3:23:04] Carter?

[3:23:06] I, Dales-Handro.

[3:23:07] I, Rivas?

[3:23:09] Nelson?

[3:23:10] Loman?

[3:23:10] I.

[3:23:11] Robertson?

[3:23:11] I, Mayor Busy.

[3:23:12] I, motion carries seven zero.

[3:23:14] We are adjourned.

[3:23:14] Thanks much everybody.

[3:23:15] Thanks for the conversation tonight.

[3:23:17] Thanks to our neighbors who joined us.

[3:23:18] Thanks to staff.

[3:23:18] Well done. Have a good rest of your week.

City Council Meeting: September 14, 2026

Transcript