» Good afternoon, and welcome
to the regular meeting of the
committee of the whole for
monday, august 10, 2026.
my name is you are rin
chowdhury, and I'm the chair
of this committee.
I will call this regular
meeting to order and ask the
clerk to call the roll to
verify the presence of a
quorum.
payne prent.
» Wonsley is absent.
» Vetaw.
» Present.
» Warren.
» Present.
» Osman is sbt.
» Shaffer.
» Present.
» Stevenson is absent.
» Chavez.
» Present.
» Whiting.
» Present.
» Palmisano is absent.
vice chair chughtai.
» Present.
» And chair chowdhury.
» Present.
» There are nin members
present.
» Thank you, let the record
reect that we have a quorum.
before we start the meeting,
let me ask a friendly reminder
that these meetings are
broaast live to enable
greater public participation.
the broadcast include realtime
captioning to increase
accessibility for our entire
community.
so it's important thatll
speakers be mindful of the
rate of their speech so that
our captioners can ful
capture and transcribe all
comments for the broadcast.
we ask all speakers to please
moderate the speed and later
of their comments.
colleagues, our anda is in
front of us, are there any
amendments to make before we
begin?
and we are using speaker
management, so please jump in
if you have any amendments.
okay.
I don't see any amendments.
so I will move to adopt the
agenda.
is there a secon
» Second.
» All those in favor say aye.
those posed say nay.
the motion carries.
we will start with our
standing committee report,
starting with the business,
housing and zoning committee.
and I will give the report, as
the committee's vice chair.
so the business, housing,
zoning committee will be
bringing 20 items forward to
thursday's council meeting.
item number 1 approves a
permanent expansion of
premises and sidewk way.
item number 2 approves a
permanent expansion of
premises and sidewalk café for
bills bait shop.
item number 1 a resolution
approving the minneapolis
tourism district toontinue
collecting a service charge.
item number 4 appves two
liquor licenses.
item number 5 approves 15
liquor licse renewals.
item number 6 approves two
gambling licenses.
item number 7 approves four
gambli license renewals.
item number 8 approves a
rezoning application for the
neighborhood development
center at 2941 chicago avenue.
item number.
approves an appointment to the
minneapolis workforce
development board.
item number 10 authorizes a
contract amendment for pizza
project at the convention
center.
item number 11 accepts a bid
for target sister's interior
doors.
item number 2 accepts a bid
for the convention center
concession stand's remodel
project.
item 13 approves a loan
forgivess for the lindquist
apartments at 1931 west
broadway avenue.
item number 14 auth authorizes n
ownership opptunity fund
loan for the business.
item number 15 amends a
previous contract andment to
correct the not to exceed
amount.
item number 16 grants the 2026
hennepin county transit
oriented community awards and
authorizes a
multijurisdictional agreement.
item number 17 is a resution
accept a reimbursement
donation from the
international codcouncil.
item number 18 is resolution
accepting donation from the
international association of
plumbing and mechanical
officials.
item number 19 proofs a
dwelling license reinstatement
for the property at 2131 ilian
avenue north.
and lastly, item 20 is
nominating an appointment to
the minnesota ballpark
authority.
and I'll note to members, this
was sent without
recommendation and the other
thing that I would just
highlight that would be good
for folks to take a loo at is
the resolution approvalsing
the minneapolis improvement
tourism district and the
annual report they give.
this is the first annual
report that they gave to our
committee following the
ordinance that was passed last
term.
and just wanted to shout-out
council member rainville and
council member wonsley for
authoring the improvement
tourism district ordinance.
and I think that's something
we should take a look at.
members, are there any
estions on this report?
okay.
seeing none, we will now go to
the climate and infrastructure
committee and that's going to
be given by council member
vetaw.
» Thank you, madam chair.
the climate and infrastructur
committee has 18 items to
bring foard.
item number 1 is sidewalk
repair and construction
assessments.
item 2.
the gopher garden large
block event permit for
september 3, 2026.
item 3 is the annual target
tother, core week block
event permit for september 14
through 18, 2026.
item 4 is the target together,
core week community
celebration block event permit
for september 16th, 2026.
item number 5 is the loring
alley live 2026 music festival
for august 14, 2026.
item number 6 is mode by
ickr large block event
permit for september 18
through 20, 2026.
item 7 is contract amendment
with hennepin county for road
maintenance assistance.
item 8 is nongovernmental tax
exempt partial street
maintenance 2027 assessments.
item 9 is nongovernmental tax
exempt streetlight operation
fee for 2027 assessment.
item 10 is a contract
amendment with st. Paul for
the eb spo netwo project
agreement, item 11 is a
contract withhe university
of washington urban freight
labn support of themart
grant stage 2 project.
item 12 is a contract with the
university of minnesota center
for transportation studies in
pport of the smart grant
stage 2 project.
item 13 is bid for large
diameter cured I place pipe
lining 2026.
item 14 is a contrt
amendment with z companies,
inc., for engineering and
design services for the north
side greenway phases 1 and 2
project.
item 15 is contract amendments
with moltonnd mink, inc.,
and alliant engineering, inc.,
r engineering and design
services for the 38th
street and chicago avenue
george floyd square street
reconstruction project.
item 16 is a contract
amendment for alliant
engineering, inc., for
bloomington avenue and
minnehaha parkway, safety
improvement project.
17 is a legislative directive
related to zero waste funding.
and item 18 is the 2026
through 2029 climate and
infrastructure committee work
plan and I'll stand for any
questions.
neu>> members, are there any
questions or comments?
council member warren.
» I have a question.
in our committee meeting,
there were some presentations
that we were going to take up.
how are we doing that?
is that going to happen in the
full council?
» Great question.
we aually do have it on our
agenda today.
it's item number 2, we moved
contract with oncourse home
solutions for asewer lateral
insurance program here.
an the chair for the climate
and infrastructure plan should
moved approval because it had
been ptponed and it was justgoit
slides, whh is attached to
the rca.
so we're not doing that
presentation because under the
discretion of the vice chair.
» Thank you for the
clarification.
» Yes.
great question.
we will next go to the
enterprise, labor relations
committee.
that report will be given by
its vace chair -- advice
chair.
council member whiting.
» Thank you, madam chair.
the enterprise and reb rib
relations committee has six
items t bring forward today.
number 1 is authorize an
agreement with the los angeles
organizing committee for the
city of minneapolis to serve
as the host city for the l.a.
028 summer olympic games flame
d torch relay.
item number is a contract
amendment with roshon
corporation for the police
department annex buildout
project.
item number 3 is a contract
amendment with various
entities to provide
computer-aided dispatch and
related mobile equipment
support services.
item number 4 is a legal
settment for worrs
compensation claim of heather
bithal.
item number 5 is approving the
establishment of one appointed
assistant city clerk position
to support operational
leadership within the
legislative support division.
and item number is
confirming the city clerk's
appointment of ken dahler to
the appointed position of
assistant city clerk for
legislative support.
I'll stand for questions.
» If there are no questions
for members, we will now move
to the final report of the
public health, safety and
equity committee, given by its
chair, council member chavez.
» Tnk you, madam chair.
the public health, safety a
equity committee will be
bringing forward nine items.
item number 1 and 2 authorize
a contract amendment with the
burebureau of criminal
apprehension for the human
trafficking investigators task
force, crime analyst and
investigators.
item 3 authorizes a contract
amendment with canopy roots
for behavioral crisis rponse
services.
item 4 accepts the public
health emergency preparedness
grant to support emergency
preparedness activities.
item 5 accepts the public
health resnse sustainability
grant, emergency response.
item 6 accepts the minnesota
department of public safety
for bomb disposal equipment
and training and authorizes an
agreement for the grant.
item 7, 8, 9 are gift
acceptances for staff
conference attends.
and in the committee we also
heard a report from the city
trees program annual report.
we heard a report from the
minneapolis tree advisory
commission, 2026, so that
annual report.
we also heard an update on the
policy and procedures report
from theolice department
related to allison lusher and
davis maturi.
members of the committee gave
feedback for a more thorough
presentation next time.
and then we also heard an
update from our legislative
research office regarding
public safety policies and
practices related to public
gatherings and transparency
where there was an outline of
a variety of different
recommendations.
» Thank you council member.
e there any questns on
that report?
seeing none,e wil now turn
to the two items on our
discussion agenda.
our first discussion item is
comingrom staff at cped and
it is related to heritage
park, deveping a voluntary
relocation plan.
I will have director hansen
speak more on the item.
and will just give the
director a ltle bit of time
to get set up and welcome.
» Good afternoon, madam
chair, members of the
committee.
my name is erik hansen, I am
the director of community
planning and economic
development.
and I'm here today to provide
an update on heritage park,
and specifically to present a
proposed heritage park
voluntary relocation plan
policy.
the purpose of this policy
would provide eligible
heritage park residents who
have health or safety concerns
with volunteer option to
relocate.
I'll walk through the current
situation at heritage park,
the proposed eligibility
requirements, the relocation
proces and the financial
assistance that would be
available through the policy.
befo we get started I want
to briefly update you on the
heritage -- the status of
heritage park.
as I shared with you last
month, heritage park is a
444-unit mixed rental
community in ward 5.
that was developed in fou
phases.
currently only 211 units are
occupied with an estimated
popution of more than 680
people.
living in those units.
heritage park hasoth rental
and ownership unit as a master
plan site.
the map highlights the four
phases of the rental project
components that were owned in
four subsidiary units.
mbs built the rental housing
between 2002 and 2006.
there are several important
developments that provide
context to today's policy.
heritage park continues to be
in a court order receirship.
the city continues to work
with sertis and minneapolis
public housing authority to
coordinate responses to the
conditions that I raised last
time I was here to talk to you
about this.
lamonth you approved $2.5
million for emergency repairs
and relocation assistance.
right after that the -- that
approval, the emergency
management department set up
the heritage park coordination
group.
that group focused on
identifying and respondg to
urgent household-specific
needs and working with the
mpha, -- working the mpha and
the receiver on outcomes.
starting in august, cped
resumed leadership of the
coordination group at the
process will require a
sustaine effort -- sustained
attention as we assess the
long-term plan for
rehabilitation and work
with -- work through the
process of relocation.
one outcome of this initial
work of the coordination group
was the identification of the
need for an approved policy
for voluntary relocation to
support the fdingved to
assist residents who may want
to relocate.
now I'll go through the
policy.
the policy is intended to full
an important gap.
there are heritage park
residents who may have health
or safety concerns and may
want to relocate.
but who do not qualify for
relocation assistance from
other agencies.
this policy provides voluntary
relocation assistance for
those eligibleouseholds.
there are two primary
components.
first, there's a movin
stipend to help cover the
practical costs of moving and,
second, there's a rent
differential benefit that can
help households managed the
potential increased housing
costs associated with moving
to an appropriate replacement
unit.
taken together,he estimated
support illustrated in this
policy is approximately $6,500
to $12,500 per household,
depending on household size --
household and unit si and
actual rent differential.
and I'll get into the details
of that shortly.
eligibility, eligible
residents who have health or
safety concerns can choose to
relocate and receive
assistance if they meet the
policy requirements.
choosing to receive 'benefits
from this policy is voluntary
and residen -- for residents
that are not in mpha units.
residents of mpha housing
units are not eligible for
these city benefits under ts
policy.
mpha residents will need to
continue with them on
transfers and available moving
assistance from the mpha
directly
currently of the 211 occupied
units, 128 are mpha units and
83 household would be eligible
for this policy.
cped is working to contract a
relocation consultant to
perform the work with the
residents.a household must recee
eligibility approval from
the -- from tt relocation
consultant before moving.
households receiving rental
vouchers are eligible,
although they wld need to
consult their subsidy provider
to understand whether
accepting these benefits has
any implication on their
vouchers.
there are several important
dates in this polic
a household must have legally
occupied a heritage park unit
as of july 18, 2026.
that household then must
report health or safety
concerns to the city by
october 15th of this year.
and then the household must
relocate outside of heritage
park no later than january
31st, 2027.
there is a six-month extension
that the cped director may
provide to that moving
deadline in case of hardship
to provide some flexibility.
the next component in this
dividualized relocation
assessment is the assesent
services.
eligible households will work
directly with the city's
relocation consultant to
identify an appropriate
housing option based on the
individual circumstances of
that household.
that incdes household
preferences, schooling and
transportation needs,
affordability, the
availabili of decent, safe,
and sanitary housing, andny
necessary mpha approvals.
the receiver has also
indicated a wilngness to
allow for relocating
households to end their
existing leases.
and return any security
deposits.
we will encourage residents to
seek professional legal advice
regarding the implications of
accepting assistance and
ending their currentease.
resident choice and agency
remains fundamental to this
policy and our work.
if a household cannot identifyae
housing option and it does
not -- and it does not have to
proceed with the relocation.
finally, if someone relocates
and later wants to return to
heritage park, they would need
to go through the property's
standard new resident
application process.
there are two financial
components of this policy, and
I'll get into that in depthhere.
the first is a permanent
relocation benefit.
in simple terms, this is
designed to help address the
increased housing costs that a
house head may experience when
moving to an appropriate
replacementnit.
the benefit is based on 12
months of the difference
between a household's current
out-of-pocket rent and the
rent for the approved housing
unit.
taking into consideration any
voucher benefits that they
might he.
the replacement unit must be
appropriately sized and
approved to be habitable by
the relocation consultant.
there is also a cap on the
benefit based on the hud 6
area median income standard
and 30% affordability
threshold.
the second component is a
moving stipend.
this is a flat amount based on
bedroom size of the unit the
household is leaving.
it is intended to address
practical relocation expenses.
things like application fees,
moving costs, transportation,ust
stipend ranges from $3,500 for
a one-bedroom to $7,500 for
the five-bedroom units.
and, importantly, $500 of t
moving stipend can be made
available early once the
eligible household is met --
has met the relocation
consultant and identified an
acceptable unit or when the
cped director approves other
health or safety-related
emergency needs.
give you a sense of the
calculations.
you see on this slide
il
like to speak.
we will first go to council
member warren.
» Thank you, chair.
thank you, director hansen,
for the hard work that the
city has done in organizing
this relocation policy.
and I don't have a problem
with the relocation assistance
that's being given.
I just have an issue with the
fact that the individuals who
are participating -- who are
participant of minneapolis
public housing authority are
essentially being punished for
being low to no income.
we know that individuals who
have low to no income and are
receiving public housing are
the ones who need help the
most.
and I'm upset at the fact that
for the last several months,
since the 23rd of march,
since this was placed on my
desk and I was brought to the
attention of coming to meet
with the 30 residen that
were there above the office in
the manement building that
we're talking about the
conditions in heritage park,
there hasn't been a response
of effort and those are the
people who are the most
vulnerable, those are the
people who have been crying
out for the longest, and
they've been being gas lit by
mpha, they've been being gas
lit by proper solutions,
they've been being told that
theiunits have passed
inspection, they're being told
that theyidn't need to move,
that there is not anything
that I wrong with the
conditions inhich they're
living in.
the thing that stood out to me
the most in this relocation
policy is the fact that there
are people, you say residents,
who may not want to relocate
on mpha.
there isn't a choice.
because if you're inspecting
the properties and you know
that there is mold on top of
mold, that there are floors on
top of floors, that there are
walls on top of walls, that
there's over 2,700 failing
windows in that property, that
the entire envelopes of the
buildings have to beemoved,
the stucco has to be removed,
the siding has to be remov.
and in order to do that, you
have to cut off all the
utilities for the property
itself.
the fact that I was told by
the fire inspectornd fire
chiefs that with buildings
that are boarded with one or
two residents living in there
because the campus is cut like
swiss cheese that with only
one or two residents living in
a building that it's not even
safe, that in order to service
that building in the event of
an emergency, if there was a
fire or anything, they would
have to removall the boards
from the building, which would
delay a response to a family,
it is not habitable
if they have to remove all of
the exterior envelope of the
building, it's not habitable.
if they have to depot inside
and gut the entire inside of
the building to remove the
mold, it's not habitable.
if every roof in heritage park
has to be replad, it's not
habitable.
because the water intrusion is
there.
so I don't know why mpha,
their board, their chairs,
their whoever keeps
gaslighting residents saying
that there are -- that this
place is somewhere where they
can be, and the majority --
theye taking advantage of
not just low to
moderate-income families, but
a lot of them are immigrant
families, too.
we just had the entire city of
minneapolis, through operation
metrsurge, talk about
standing up to fight for our
neighbors, and here it is the
people who need the most
dang-on protection aren't
receiving it.
no one is standing up,
fighting for them, and this is
their first tier of public
safety.
coming to the table and doing
anything they were supposed to
do as far as being right to
these people.
you make it optional, keep
lying to the board, saying
that these units are passing
inspection and they're not.
and we know, I've read the
reports, you've read the
reports, we read the reports,
do we not read the reports?
we saw 'em.
it's a real place.
this is absolutely devastating
and it's ignorant!
I've lived in public housing.
I've held a section 8
certificate.
I know how difficult it iso
find housing and I know how
expensive it is to move.
the individuals who are in
desperate need of this
assistance, the difference
between them applying for
apartment, paying a security
deposit or going out to go buy
boxes is a difference for them
having a roof ove their head
or not.
they can't afford this.
they can't.
this is not fair to them.
and happy and everything, oh,
we just built new sustainable
housing, solar panels, this,
that, and the other on south
minneapolis, but according to
your mission statement, you
said that you were there to
protect, preserve, in
partnership and all the rest
of this stuff with minneapolis
public housing.
preservation means taking care
of the stock you already got.
how you planning for tomorrow
when you didn't do anything
about today?
doesn't make any sense at all.
it's absolutely disrespectful.
affordable housing and public
housing is not a sentence.
and their health and
well-being is not discounted
because their income is low.
mpha needs to get their shit
tother.
that's all I got to say.
the end.
» All right.
thank you, council member
warren.
I ve myself in queue.
director hansen, thank you for
the presentation.
could you just, like, walk
through a little bit on how
this policy was developed with
your team and then kind of the
realtime, on-the-ground
considerations in making it?
» Chair chowdhury, good
questions.
so, if you recall, if I can,
I'm going to comment on se
of the council member warren's
observations here.
back a month ago, we were in
front of you with an ergency
situation.
and when I spoke to you about
that, we were talking about
something with incomplete
information.
we knew that it was evolvg,
the situation at heritage park
was evolving.
and we needed to make sure
that there were resources
available for peopleho
wanted to go.
I will agree with the council
member on the conditions of
the buildings.
I talked about the threshold
questi of are the buildings
worth saving or not, we have
still not been to a
definitive, can we save the
buildings or not?
I think we're on the side of
the fence where we can.
but we don't -- I can't give
you with total confidence that
we can save the buildings.
and to that point, that means
that there is no habitable
unit.
so when we were working
getting the resources -- which
I want to thank you for
trusting staff to come to you
and working through with
incomplete information in an
emergency -- we then the went
to work.
we had director sayer here at
the migrate to talk about the
coordination group that was
stood up immediately after the h
you, and that has been working
and doing some assessments
about what's happening and
that's where we uncover that
under our current picies we
do not have the authority to
provide relocation benefits
unless we come back to you
with this policy.
so that's 'the reason we're
here, and through that
coordination group, that
includes, you kw, at points
the emergency management
department, the other
ancillary departments that
were in that coordination
group, like ncr, neighborhood
community relations, or
regulatory services, or the
health department, as well as
as pminent cped leadership
and the city attorneys, and as
we were working towards the --
kind of the transition back to
cped, we knew we had to come
backith this policy.
and, so, in earnest, for a
majority of the last ten days,
up until friday when we
released this policyor you
to review, it has city staff,
workin with the city
attorneys and housing staff,
and our policy research and
outreacheam, working to
craft what we've learned from
peoplen the ground at
heritage park.
so that's why we're tryingto --e
in front of you is helping
people for a year, the extra
cost, we think, so they can
meet it, and then figuring out
what that stipend would be for
moving.
and we understand that the
smaller your dwellg unit is,
the likely -- lower cost than
the larger units so that
that's why you have a -- so
that's why you have a
graduated benefit to units.
and as we do that, we still
continue to talk about what
is the condition of heritage
park?
and I want to address, the
minneapolis public housing
authority continues to work
with the city of minneapolis
and I will agree that they
have not been as forthright,
but they are finding resources
for transfers of public
housing units within heritage
park for those that have to
move because they have decided
that - or determined that
they're not habitable units
anymore and they're worki
towards resources for those
that voluntarily want to
transfer to other units.
we have to hold -- they have
resources, we have to hope
that they're bringing those
and we have to expect that the
minneapolis public housing
authority is bringing
resources for minneapolis
public housing authority
residents.
the city is here because we
make the discretionary
decision thaheritage park is
important in this case and we
need to help the others that
don't have that path out that
mpha units would.
and that' what this policy is
about.
and I have to think about,
like, at this moment in time,
I'm thinking about what is
heritage park now?
what aree doing?
how do we effectuate the
funding in a reasonable and
manageable way?
how do we start working with
the residents of heritage park
that don't have a path out?
this provides that option.
and, you kw, get on the
ground.
we are bringing in a
relocation consultant that
will work with us, that can
sit down with each individual
household and work on, where
do you want to go?
what works for your family?
where do your kids go to
school?
what other things do we need
to think about?
and that's going to take some
time and that's wt we're
going to manage.
this helps us open that up so
that we can start working
towards that and I tnk
that's going to help, and then
we can go back to say, how did
we get here?
I mean, we're just focused, as
much as we can, on the
conditions of folks in
heritage park now and
hopefully we can get back and
then we can talk about how we
got here.
and I'm all open for that
conversation, how we got here,
because we have to learn as a
city, when we make these
substantial investments into
people's homes, this is not an
fordable housing project,
this is 400 homes that we
invested in, and we had the
front-row seat to this
development, and now we're at
this condition, we have the
same conditions we were
supposed to abate with the
const decree.
and now we're here.
so it is important and
imperative for cped to sit
down and figure that o.
we're going to work with the
other departments that are
within the city about what
went wrong so we don't have
this thing happen again.
it is not delight me to be in
front of you to talk about
th, but it is important for
the city to, when they know
something, to do something and
that's what wre here to do.
I hope I answered your
question.
» Yeah.
for sure, in part.
I want to make sure we get to
others r in the queue because
there's a number of council
members.
I did have a question, maybe
perhaps for the city attorney.
could youind of speak to the
risdictional issue that cped
came across?
that's requiring them bring
this policy forward.
» Sure.
yeah.
good afternoon.
so, essentially our existing
relocation policies, for
example, for redevelopment of
a project, which cped often
uses didn't fit with this one
because there isn't aually
redevelopment occurring at the
moment.
and, so, -- and then there's
also a separate temporary
relocation policy that is
generally used as part our
lead abatement program that is
really intended for a
short-term, you know, right,
contractors go in, remove the
lead, someone comes back
within a week.
and neither of those seemed
feasible here where the
overall coition of the
property and what the
long-term plan is is still
unclear.
and, so, looking at those
existing options, there wasn't
anything that fits squarely in
this need of a voluntary
relocation of an undetermined
duration.
and, so, that was where we
just did not think either
existing policy would work and
it would be better for
everyone and I think provide a
lot of clarity, frankly, for
folks within heritage park to
understand what the potential
befits would be and have
some clearly defined standards
and benefits for how those
determinations would be made
instead of trying to just kind
of cobble togetheromethingthrout
don't really fit this
scenario.
» Okay.
th's helpful.
I definitely think it opens up
other questions.
my last thing, then I'll pass
it on, is what I see attache
in the lims file and the rca
is not a typical policy format
that we see.
we usually see a policy
resolution or an ordinance.
could you speak to what policy
format this is?
that we are passing.
or voting on.
» Sure.
so this one was drafted and
intended so it woulde as
clear as possible so folks
both within the city and
outside of the city would get
a clear understanding of what
the benefits would be and how
the policy works.
and, so, we want this to be
someing that everyone can
see.
I think it is written somewhat
similarly to our existing
relocation polies from cped.
but in terms of whether a
resolution will be added to it
or not, this is something
we're working with the clerk's
office to finalize before
thursday.
» Yeah.
I see that this is available,
clearly, for the public to
understand.
I just- for me, it's
important that, like, we have
clarity as a legislative body
in what way we're approving
legislation, right, because we
typically have an author,
there's no author on this.
right?
and we also have a process
that shows, like, this is when
it's enacted.
I also have some questions
about, like, do whave to
pass something in order to
void this policy?
we're using the -- we're using
the term "licy" really
broadly, and up here every
time we've had a policy
discussion it hado be really
clear in terms of this is the
type of -- it's a policy
resolution or it's an
ordinance or it's this
ecific thing.
additionally, I feel like --
this isn't to speak against
this, I'm in no way doing
that.
I just think we're having a
big issue with how this is
formatted and how we are
taking this up as a
legislative body.
there's obvioly a financial
impact.
there's the $2.5 million we
passed, buthere isn't an
attached fiscal note.
so I just wanted to point that
out.
I don't know if there is
anhing from director hansen
or yourself, city attorney, in
terms of kind of those
leftover questions in terms of
policy format and then fiscal
note.
» As to the policy format, I
think this is similar to other
cped policies, but we can
certainly look at thatnd get
back to you.
» Yeah, that would be
helpful.
» On the formatting.
» I hear that you'reaying
it's similar to others.
I just -- we're voting on
something, and I know that
cped hasnternal policies.
so it would just be helpful.
but happy to follow up later.
council member vetaw, you're
next in queue.
» Thank you, chair.
director, welcome back.
just a few questions about
some of the things you brought
up in the presentation.
have you selected a relocation
consultant already?
do w kno who that is?
and when is that person going
to start on this?
» Chair chowdhury, council
member vetaw, we are working
to utilize an existing
contract through public rks,
so we don't have to do an rfp.
so we have a fir called srf
that we're negotiating a
contract with.
so it wouldn't be one person.
it would be a group of people
that have used -- that we've
used to do relocation when we
do tax projects and other cpe
projects.
» What does srf sta for, do
you know?
» Srf is a multiexpertise
firm that does engineering,
land planning, helps with
housing projecti don't know howe
them.
they used to be just purely
engineering firms.
they have now expanded their
work.
it's not uncommon for
companies like this that have
typically, unfortunately, havetf
is one that's been around for
a while.
has bought other companies
that have done some of this
work.
so they have some expertise inr.
but we need people -- we just
need -- I mean, to be honest
with you, we they'd people
that can just sit down with
households and work through
their issues and we think
that's going to expand our
ability to do that quickly.>> I.
I'm just looking to make sure
we have a trusted source,
right?
like I get it that we have a
history with this group.that's .
bui also want to make sure
that the people who live here
feel comfortable approaching
the folks who they need to
t -- I mean, housing is very
intimate, right?
like these are people that you
have to talk to about
everhing.
so I justant to make sure
at whoever you select is --
and I certainly understand the
process of an rfp a how long
that can take, in delay.
I just want to make sure that
whatever choice cped makes,
these are trusted folks who we
can rely on to be accepting
and helpful to people around
the needs they're facing,
especially when you're saying
things like, you know it's
going to be a lot of things --
I mean, it's going to get
complicated.
it's housing, right?
like these are one-bedroom to
five-bedroom units.
thesere people who may have
questions about things that
existed -- didn't exi when
they moved into heritage park.
soius looking for a level of
comfortrom whoever is going
to be this relocation
consultant.
my next question is, it seems
like the numbers changed since
we talked originally whe you
gave the presentation, and you
told us the $2.5 million would
go to assist with that.
the number was shocking, it
was over 600 people and 200
families that needed to be
relocated.
what is the number now, you
think?
» Counci member chowdhury,
council member vetaw, yes,
this is the part of the
conversation we were having
with you about having
imperfect information.
» Yes.
» And a we are putting
together -- learning about the
powers we have under theexistind
for the policy that's in fnt
of you, that's when we looked
at which agencies would then
provide assistance.
and mpha, that's where we got
a better understanding of who
was in there.
there's still 211.
one household has left since
the last time I was he.
so it was 212 when I was back
he.
that's why you heard me say
over 380 people, because I
don't know how many people
were in that household.
we said 385, 386, the last
time I was here about people
that were in there.
from o work in the last
month, we've been able to
discern that 128 of the
households are mpha units of
the occupied units and the
remaining 83 would be eligible
r this benefit.
» Okay.
and --
» And 83 households, I don't
know how many people are in
those households, I didn't do
that analysis.
I will tell you about srf and
relocation, I expect 83
complex conversations.
» Bsolutely.
» Yeah.
» And I don't know how much
staffing srf has, that seems
like a lot for 83 complicated
households.
» Yeah.
» Okay.
so we knowhat we've
identified possibly 83
households that could come
through the city program.
we don't know if they want to
do it.
» That's right.
» But we've identified 83
households that could come
through this program.
and you said that mpha is
going to relocate the mpha
families.
is there a regular meeng,
conversations with mpha t
talk about a timeline or,
like, -- because what I fr
with this is that when people
start sing the srf families
getting relocated at a pace or
vice versa, it could happen
with mpha, then there will be
some confusion, right?
like people wl expect that
they can get the same amount
of money that we're offering
to the families who can g
through the cy program
thugh public housing.
and I don't know wha that
looks like.
so who is at this table with
mpha and, like, how regular
are you all meeting and how is
this going to be communited
to the families, you know, the
differences in the programs?
» Yeah, chair chowdhury,
council member vetaw, very
good questio
one of the stumbling point
we've had with residents at
heritage parks we cannot
articulate what the benefits
are, and this is one of those
sts.
we're taking these kind of in
in order as best we can.
we're tking to the
minneapolis public housing
authority on a daily basis
about their progress, about
our expectations, about our
partnership, we're talking
with ser -- certus, the
receiver, on a daily basis,
we're talking with the
property management on a daily
basis.
as we know what authority we
have under this policy, we
will then be putting together
additional communications.
we've hosted community hours
already that we expect to do
things like that engagement
and make sure that we can
demark the difference between
transfer assistance through
mpha and voluntary relocation
assistance from the city.
so, you know, get the policy
approved, then move towards
how to communicate that to get
our relocation group in place,
then get settled, because we
don't wanto give people
imperfect information, we'll
give them the best but we
don't want to give them
incorrect information where
people will think it's going
to go quick or slow or what
have you.
we're working on that.
like I said, since it's come
back to cped, we've been
focused primarily on getting
this policy approved and then
we will go to how to engage
the community so everybody is
clear.
» Okay, thank you.
yeah, I guess I'm just -- I'm
just a little skeptical of,
like, how you move forward
with all these different
moving parts in making sure
people understand that, like,
I don't want people to feel
segregated from something,
right?
like you're coming the with
people whore eligible for
housing, but I'm not certain
that there's going to be a
representative there from mpha
to offer up something, too.
so I don't want the woman who
lives in mpha to feel like s
has to stay somewhere she
doesn't want to, but the man
who qualifiesor the city
project -- so I'm hoping to
see better coordination of,
like, how thi is launched and
how it's presented to people
in a way to help but not
divide, not to make some
people feel likthey have an
option and others to feel like
they don't.
and I guess that's wha I'm
gonna be looking to make sure
is happening because if I talk
to people from there, I don't
know, like, if they have a
voucher or -- you know wha I
mean?
you don't know who has what
and it just feels better,
like, if we go in there with a
coordinated plan with everyone
who should be at the table to
help, going in together, you
ow, hosting people at the
reception cter to come in
andet help if they need it
on all sides of this and not
feeling like theity can only
lp how many families and we
don't know what's gonna hapn
with other people.
» Yeah, chair chair
chowdhury, council member
vetaw, I agree with you on all
those pois f. We reflect
back on what council member
warren has said, information
has not been clear.
it is now important, more than
ever, to have clarity of a
message and coordination of a
message so we're working with
mpha t do exactly what you're
talking about is to have both,
we do not want to cause
segregation within the
community.
» Next we have up in queue,
council member shaffer.
» Yh, a couple questions.
is srf the srs consulting that
works closely with mprb, is it
that same organization that's
working with public works?
» Chair chowdhury, council
member shaffer, I would
suspect, yes.
» Right off of 394?
» Yeah.
» Thank you, that's helpful.
can you speak a little b to
the fund that we allocated and
what you anticipate spending
out of that fund?
it seemsike even with 83
households, if they were five
bedrooms, that's not even
million dollars yet.
so I'm just trying to
understand, you know, some of
it was for repairs, somef it
was for relocation.
can you speak a little bit to,
you know, that was kd of a
broad umbrella direction to
help you.
can you just speak to where
you areight now with, okay,
how much of that repair is
actually going to happen or is
that all going to relocation?
» Chair chowdhury, uncil
member shaffer, I'll give some
context for people because it
gets complicated.
when we presented the $2.5
million, that was a number
that was for -- primarily for
short-term rehab costs.
it was for roofing, it was for
hvac improvements, and it was
for unit turns.
and it went so quickly in the
last week before we were in
front of the council that we
added t relocation and
communicated to the council
that we've been working on
prioritizi relocation.
and, so, that money came from
the affordable housing trust
fund.
we're looking at the
discretions with cped about
where it would go.
we could not get to how much
it would cost to relocate
until we have a plan, and that
will come out of ts policy.
that will give you the
benefits.
and to your point, it's, you
know, going to probably not
exceed $2.5 million.
we will have to pay the
relocation consultant.
so thas the negotiation that
we're working on, that's goingt5
million.
undetermined at this point.
and then we're looking at th
long term.
like I don't know if we are
going to authorize
improvements, you know, we'
focused primarily on making
sure we have mey for
relocation.
after that, we could have
funding available for rehab.
unfortunately, I don't know if
that's worth it without a
global plan.
so cped has bn working on
the global plan with the
receiver, mpha, and the
property manager, and that is
going to require tens of
millions o dollars in rehab
costs.
and I think that might be our
focus.
we might be tacting towards
that focus and you might see
that the $2.5 million isn't
fully exhausted through this,
but it's still too early to be
known but we'll be reporti
out on expenses.
we're starting with
relocation.
» Okay.before thursday, I would
really like to understand what
we're paying to srp, is it a
percentage, is it a flat rate?
I mean, this is getting back
to the fiscal note that
council member chowdhury was.
so, I would like to have that
be public knowledge what we're
paying out of the fund.
and then also, is that whole
$2.5 then -- I thought it was
for repairs and relocation.
but that needs to be clarified
to the counc.
is it all now 2.5 going to
relocation, that seemsike
that's going to be more than
what we really need.
but I'd like to understand
what we've already spent on
hvac, et cetera, et cetera.
was thatot out of the $2.5,
that was a different fund?
» Yeah.
chair chowdhury, council
member shaffer, w have
$500,000 in the city's budget
for ritage park.
that is being negotiatedor
air conditioning and hvac
equipment now.
the status of the building
conditions exceed the
available cash that are in
that $2.5.
so, again, back to that
threshold question I continue
to bring up, is it worth
putting funding in it if we
don't have the global
financing package and that's
going to cost tens of millions
of dollars.
the city will potentially --
we'll be asked to participate
in that.
that will be likely, you know,
housing revenue bonds or
other, you know, financial
instruments to help with that
full thing.
when it comes to the
relocation consultants, srf
that we're negotiating with, I
will say it's in the hundreds
of thousands of dollars.
it is a fee for a service, not
a percenta, it's not as if
they find something and the
get a percentage off, it's a
fee fee for their work.
we're still negotiating that.
I can give you as best I can
by thursday.
but we won't have that scope
of work in place by thursday.
take off a couple hundred
thousand for that srf work.
we might have some available.
you'll hear fro cped, we're
not going to exhaust that $2.5
million if it means putting
money into rehab that's not
going to get to the end goal.
» I appreciate that.
can y speak to who's
responsible for the repairs?
» It's the owner o the
property.
the owner of the property
right now is mccormack baron
zal cza and they have it in
reefership.so certus financial s
operating as the
court-apinted receivership,
which means they have all the
ownership duties and
responsibilities.
but it's up to them to come up
with the property.
and they can come to us like
all other housing developers
for financing, but in my
opinion, it's not the city's
responsibility to write a
blank check to the owner of
the property.
disalz arrest.
salz cza is.
» Thank you for clarifying
that.
» It sounds like there's alegit
in ter of the estimate and I
think that should be something
that's sent to thentirety of
the body.
next we'll go to council
member whiti.
» Thank you, chair chowdhury.
and I think maybe just a
threshold question, first, to
make sure I'm hearing this
correctly, too
director, can you kind of
explain, I had the same
question that counc member
shaffer does, particularly
about the money at the moment.
so it sounds like the $2.5
million that we allocated out
two weeks ago, or wheneverthat -
» July.
» Okay, perfect.
that was specific to both
relocation and repairs?
because it sounds lik you
just said tha lot of that
has been used up already.
» Chair chowdhury, council
member whiting, there has not
been a nickel spent on th
$2.5 million.
it is being held.
we have another $500,000
that's already in the city's
budget that was appropriated
through the budget process
last december.
that funding is for hvac.
we're contracting that because
people need --hey need to be
able to, you know, they need
air comin' in.
we are focused, and I told the
council when I was in front of
you, that we will focus on
relocation and then figure out
if there's emeency needs.
because you delegated
authority to me to make some
decisions.
and o so, we're focused on
the relocation needs.
that's why we nee this
policy.
but as we learn as this comes
into more focus, we need a
global plan ofhat's
happeng.
to council member warren's
point, you know, we continue
to learn about windows and
siding and roofing and all
those sort of things.
and, so, we're not going to be
able to repair the needs of
heritage park with the $2.5
million that's bn
appropriated.
» Okay, great.
thank you.
and, so, it sounds like, so
the money that you're talking
about that was used up quickly
is tt $500,000 tt was
already attached to?
» Chair chowdhury, council
member whiting, we're sti
contracting that.
I don't think that's been
spent, no.
» So what was the money that
has be used up fairly quick
thaw mentioned?
because I -- you said that
earlier in your presentatn.
you said there was a lot of
money that's already been used
to this point.
so I'm trying to figure out if
that was the 2.5 or this
500,000.
» Chair chowdhurycouncil
member whiting, I don't
remember when I said that weuse.
» Yeah.
I think it was early in your
presentation.
» In my remarks?
» Eah.
answering council member
shaffer's question.
» Oh.
so, I'm not --
chair chowdhury, council
memb whiting, just to clear
it up.
» Yeah, yeah, thank you.
» Theity of minneapolis hasapp.
in its
budget.
that is being contracted.
it's not been spent.
in july you appropriated --
you moved $2.5 million from
the affordab housing trust
fund into this use.
and that has not been used.
if I said we've used up a lot
of money really quickly, I
apologize for that.
that was an error.
but we have not spent it.
I will tell you, though, the
expense, what we are learning
is it is becoming more
expensive and we need a global
solution about what happens
with heritage park.
and in t meantime, this
gets -- the policy gives an
option for people to relocate
and then we would start
spending money and then once
we start spending money, we'll
be communiting that out so
that people understand where
the money is going.
» Thank you.
that's helpful.
» Yeah.
» Thank you for the
clarification.
particarly, too, I thinky
first question, so you noted,
I guess, currently -- has
anyone signed up for these
relocation assistance as of
today?
» Chairhowdhury, council
member whiting, nobody has
signed up for anything unde
the city's policy because it
esn't exist yet.
that's been the -- that was
the barrier.
like we couldn't give people
relocation assistance because
we don't have the -- didn't
have the authority based on
our conversations with the
enterprise.
that's why we have to have
the communication component t
it so that we can communicate,
here is what's available,
here's how you access it, this
is the process, all of those
sort of things that are going
to become very important very
soon.
» Yea
do we know if anyone has
signed up for mpha's transfer
assistance yet?
» Chair chowdhury, council
member whiting, we are
familiar with about 32
households that have interest
in this.
that are working with public
housing.
I will say that there are four
households that have expressed
interest in the city's program
when it starts.
but I think there will be -- I
think there will be more
people that will show interest
once they know what the
program is.
what the benefit is once
the benefit is articulated, we
will hear from more residents.
» Perfect.
I guess my last question here
is, is there a reason, is
there som policy or kind of
reason why it's been sort of
differentiated between mpha
and the city of minneapolis?
why isn't that we're also --
like mpha residents an't
also able to use city-funded
dollars?
chair chowdhury, council
member whiting, I think it's
important for the minneapolis
public housing authority to
take care of its residents.
they haveesponsibility to
the residents that are in
their care.
the city is making
discretionary decision to help
folks at heritage park for the
reasons we've articulated over
the last few council meetings
with you on this subject.
and, so, I think it's the
right thing that the city is
doing.
but w need to make sure that
the mpha uses their resources
for the mph units, and then we
can provide for the ones that
do not qualify for them.
» But seems like like there's
no policy that could preclude
us from assisting with the
mpha residents if needed?
» Chair chowdhury, cncil
member whiting, I'm not
certain if there's policy or
not.
I know that the city has some
restrictions on how we are
managing or potentially
interfering with public
housing operations.
I could look at it, if there's
like a definitive choice.
I mean, what can we do say
question and what should we
do.
and I'm going to tell you the
policy that we have in front
of you is the thing that we
should be doing.
» Helpful.
I think just to both councilmeml
mber vetaw's comments,
right, if we are starting to
see some discrepancies
between, I think, certain
programs that we're seeg an
extended wait time for mpha or
city of minneapolis, kind of
the two different programs, I
think there might be an
ability, it sounds lik to
kind of assist where needed.
» Chair chohury, council
member whiting, the first
approach to that is to make
sure that we're working as
quicy as possible at the
same pace.
and hold the mpha to the same
standards that we would hold
ourselves to.
» Perfect.
thank you.
» Yeah.
» Thank y.
I put myself in queue next.
so, I was able to reference a
policy that kind of followed
the same policy framework and
this was like the perpetually
affordable housing program
changes.
so that was helpful for me to
look back on myself.
the thing that I feel like we
need on this rca by thursday
in order for me to vote on
this is a fiscal note because
there is clearly a fiscal
impact.
it says currently in the rca
that there is no fiscal
impact, but we know in this
discussion that there will be.
so if we could update an
estimate within the fiscal
note for transparency in the
work that we're doi.
is that something you can do?
» Chair chowdhury, I can
explain why there isn't a
fiscal note.
» Yeah.
» So this is a policy that is
being appended -- is the next
step from the appropriation
that you guys approved, which
does have a fiscal note, back
in july.
and, so, this is just t
policy that helps us direct
how to use the funding that
was moved from the affordable
housing trust fund into this
appropriation for heritage
park.
but we can bring thatiscal
note back up.
» I think that's really
important becau when the
public reads this, it says no
fiscal impact anticipated so
even if it's the same fiscal
note, I think it's important
because a lot of folks are
following this closely and in
the future we might need to
look back on it.
the other thing is, there
isn't a rhea attached to it
either.
and I think a race equity
analysis would be really
important for this poly.
rea.
I think as a legislati
follow-up, it's like once this
is completed whatappens to
this policy?
like what's the -- is it
sunsetted?
does the department just make
a call?
because for our perpetually
affordable housing program,
that just continues, right?
» Chair chowdhury, the intent
of this policy is to be time
limited.
you would have to move by the
31st of -- you'd hav to
tell you also by the 15th
of october and move by t end
of january of next year with a
six-month bfer for
circumstances, but then this
is tailored exactly to
heritage park relocation at
this moment.
so it would be unique to this
situation and it would not
live on after the last person
took advantage of the policy.
» Okay.
and are you able to attach a
rea to this as you have for
other programs?
» Chair chowdhury, we'll do
our best between now and
thursday.
» Yeah.
and I appreciate that you're
doing your best, and I think
we're moving this through
really quickly.
and at the same time, like,
director, you're providing us
very dense policy with very
significant financial
implications for the city and
implications for residents
here.
and, so, just the basics of
this request for committee
action are really important to
me because I think not having
it today is positing more
questions tha I anticipated.
so that's why I'm asking for
that.
» Yeah.
chair chowdhury, I would say
that I think it's important
and imperative for the city to
move.
if we're thinking about the
racial equity impactf not
acting, we're putting people
in, you know, communities of
color, black folks in north
minneapolis in circumstanc
where they cnot get out of.
» Yes.
» So we can put that into an
analysis, but I c tellou,
just off the top, this is
addressing community need
exactly where the community
needs us to be.
» Yeah.
I 100% hear you.
and I'm not debating that
whatsoever.
but there's a level of
oversight that's necessary for
us to do our work, and I'm
genuinely just struggling with
it.
this is a dense policy load
that's before us, and within
the cped department, when you
bring forward program changes,
you have a vy thorough
background analysis and
reas, you always do, and as
a committee member of the
business, housing, zoning
committee, I rely on those and
have relied on those for
agenda settings and on items
that we have to vote on
because they can be
complicated.
so I do think it's a fair ask
to say that we need that and I
don't think it's in
competition with moving
urgently, but it's like, thi
is the legislative body, this
is what we need to -- I'll
just speak for myself.
this is what I need in order
to make such a significa
change
I mean, if other members are
fine with that, that's -- I
totally understand that, but I
want to -- I want to say, I
know that there are council
members that are wondering the
same thing.
and also getting questions
from constituents,he media
at I can't answer.
that's difficult, especially
when I take an affirmative
vote on something.
» Right.
» And I think we are all in
super shared agreement on the
urgency and the need,
especially the race equity
components of it.
just having that clarity, I'm
just stating it's just not
there fully in the way that it
needs to be.
» And I agree with you, chair
chowdhury.
it is important thave
information.
this situation is not -- you
know -- the typical approach
to the way cped does its work.
we're rising to meet the
need -- as I communicated and
shared in this presentation --
we're trying to mt the needs
of community in a situation
that if we had more time, we'd
take it and we just -- we're
working with imperfect
information, we're moving as
fa as we can, and we'll get
you as much of the information
as we can by thursday.
» Yeah.
and I appreciate that.
I think, like, just the
clarity the fiscal note, so
it doesn't say there's no
fiscal impact, and, like, eve
just diving a little bit more
on that sunsetting piece and
that type of intention.
the background analysis that
cped usually does, a little
bit more would be helpful.
and I just want to say, like,
thank you for your work on
this and thank you to your
team for working on this.
I know it's not easy.
I know it's really around the
clock, I know thaw guys are
really pressed for time.
and I think that is reflective
of, like, this isn't the same
level of information that
shows in our business,
housing, and zoning committee.
so I hope you take that
feedback genuinely, I mean it,
like I appreciate it.
xt on queue is council
member warren.
» Thank you, chair.
director hansen, we talked
about a couple of -- I'm
listening to you as you're
saying wt's going on with
this relocation program.
srf firm is currently getting
ready to be paid $400,000 by
the city of minneapolis to be
a fiscal agent.
they're only providing about
two staff people to support
with the assistance in
relocation when in north
minneapolis currently,
specifically, in ward 5, we
have organizations like alma
oon, northpoint and the urban
league twice who are able to
support the residents, who are
working with the residents
because this is predominantly
a black and muslim community
so it would be beneficial for
them to work with individuals
who are connected directly
with their autonomy.
the city relocation plan
provides assessment, services
that considers schooling,
transportation, household
preferences, housing
availability, and all of these
very human-centered approaches
around autonomy, then whether
you're a resident of public
housing or not, you still
should be given that same
grace and human-centeredness,
and the ability to work wh
people that are directly
within your community so that
there is a very cultured and
human-centered approach.
I want that changed.
I'm n working with srf or
whoever those people are, if
we're going to pay $400,000 is
going to north minneapolis, we
did something else like that
already, we won't have more of
the same.
next thing with this, becse
the other component in this is
that they can't articulate,
the residents, who are having
issues around saying, yes, I
want to move, it's because
they're constantly being lied
to by everybody.
everybody keep changing the
story.
there's no consistency.
when I talked about this in
the beginning and I said,
housing insecurity is a real
thing, I don't know if you
don't get it or you don't
understand when I say it,
like, if you don't know what
housing insecurity means, that
means the difference between
being housed and unhoused, the
difference between m getting
my car towed and being able to
pay my rent.
you know, the difference
between one little mistake,
living paycheck to paycheck,
the difference between buying
diapers and eating today means
th I might not be able to
pay my rent tomorrow if I have
to spend too much or the price
goes up.
like that housing insecurity
is a real place.
the barriers that individuals
have to housing, background,
previous landlords,
individuals who are being
retaliated against in this
tuation, dealing with mpha
and property solutions now
still currently.
there are residents who are
going to court and are
experiencing housing barriers.
this $2.5 million that we
allocated towards heritag
park would essentially equate
to about $12,000 per household
for all 211 families.
instead, we've discounted, and
we're payin' all of these
additional administrative
costs.
there's not anythin that
anyone needs to do, really,
essentially to qualify to
move.
everybody is eligible.
they should be.
the truth is, it's not
habitable.
it's not anywhere that anyone
should want to live.
like it's a real place, and I
think that, yes, as the city
we can't tell people, you have
to go, but what we should do
is give them proper
information around the
implications of -- I still g
some -- black mold.
I still got some stuff growing
on my arm from being out tre
door knocking.
do you see what I'm saying?
it's still growing there.
it'sery visible.
being out there, if it's
doing this to my arm, in
addition to sitting right
underneath the herke and
everything that's going -- the
herc and evething else
that's going on over there,
all of these conditions weigh
a heavy factor on how peoe
are living in this situation.
there should not be any
gaslighting going on here.
they can't articulate it
because they're being lied to.
and the residents have a
community meeting every
tuesday.
I know because I go.
and they're working with
organization like northpoint,
like the naacp, like zur are,
holistic healthcare and
wellness, those are people
that a centered in the needs
in the community and they've
come forward, we've tried to,
you know, make warm
introductions and transfer --
because people are essentially
going to want to talk to
someone who looks like them
and understands their struggle
and where they're coming from,
not whoever the srf people
are.
I'm sure they're nice folks.
great.
thank you.
I ain't seen them not one
time.
and no information has been
even provided to me to make a
warm introduction of, hey,
community, here's some people
that are coming that are not
going to examine you like lab
rats, you know, when we're
talking about
human-centeredness and we're
talking about assessing
community members' needs, this
is not -- you know wt I
mean?
we don't want people picked
apart.
we've got folks that are
experiencing some real serious
challenges, when you're going
through transition and
transitional change, anything
could cause cps to get
involved in your life,
anything could cause anything
to happen.
right?
so the delicacy that we've
already placed and put things
in place within our community
of north minneapolis in its
exactness, it's important that
the city works with the
community in that position.
I really just -- northpoint,
black social worker network,
dr. Bravado, all of these
wonderful individuals, our
fremont clinic, you know,
north memorial hospital, all
of these individuals are ready
and prepared to do a very
human-centered and holistic
approach with these residents,
I appreciate all of this
stuff, it's great, but I don't
know who srf is and that
frightens me.
and I'm sorry I have to say
that.
and paying them $400,000 also
frightens me because that'stake.
that's over 15%.
when it was, you know, -- when
itas operation metro surge
and we gave all of that money,
it was over 3 or so million or
whatever, to -- what was it --
6 million we gave to the
agencies over south to help
with rental assistance, they
charged a 5% administrative
fee, right?
why are we paying so much
money to srf?
that just doesn't make any
sense to me.
so, the residents, the
community, have been having
meeting.
it is a division because it's
public housing and the
nonpublic housing individuals
who have housing choice
voucher stuff.
iet it.
83 households.
we have more than enough to
help 83 households.
but we also have enough to
help 211 households, too, with
$12,000 essentially per
household, 11,889 dollars per
hoehold could help them.
and if we did a 5%
administtive fee, that would
be $125,000, and we could pay
that to somebody bause all
they're really doing is paying
for accounting and
bookkeeping.
the people who need help need
public supportive housing,
things like that, application
fees, what have you.
the money is there, it's how
are we managing it, how are we
using it, but we do have more
than enough, essentially.
that would be about $4,000 a
month would be enough to help
a family stablize itself.
and I don't -- I think that
that -- on top of whatever
they're already -- whatever
their acquired income is, I
think they would be okay.
I don't see that as an issue.
if I had an extra $4,000 a
month, I would be okay, too,
you know.
so I think thile be just fine
if everybody spreads the
wealth evenly across the board
and starts using yardsticks
and whatever else because,
like I said, the 128 people
are the people who really need
the suppor
and I know mpha has a job, but
at this point, I d't even
think those people show up for
work.
I left a message at their
voice answering service -- you
know they got an awering
service, erik, when you call,
you can't reach a real person.
and they still haven't called
back.
and it's been weeks.
so, I don't know how they're
responding to the needs of
these people.
and I understand that someone
is there providing what they
call a relocation pket for
individuals who have housing
choice vouchers onuesdays
and thursdays, the city is
there, but that's not the same
as what's called a transfer
packet.
a transfer packet is what's
utilized for an individual who
is a participant of public
housing, so they can transfer
to another public housing
space or they can port out to
another city, whether it's
metro hra or ramsey hra or
dakota county cda or what have
you, they can move into
another -- if mpha is saying
they don't have the capacity.
but no one is helping them
with that, and then they're
being told that they got to
qualify and someone needs to
come and look.
it just is not making sense to
me.
and I wish that everyone would
really get their act together
because this is -- this I
ridiculous.
but I don't agree with srf.
I don't agree with giving them
that $400,000.
that doesn't make any sen to
me because I don't know what
they're doin' with it.
they should already have
accountants and people who do,
do,you know, sales force or
however they're utilizing
their client base record,
datakeeping stuff, should
already be in place, it's not
like they're buying new
software or whatever else.
if we're allowing for
something that to be done, we
should invest in putting that
in in north minneapolis,
directly.
because that is just the tip
of the iceberg.
everything else over there is
going to need some examining,
too, right, you know?
so this is just the worst of
the worst.
so it be would better to have
it in-house and get that stuff
together over there.
but this is -- I don't agree
with them at all for that.
and the residents may not want
to relocate, but we really
need to give them stern
adsement about the health.
I'm really kind of feeling the
way that our public healthdepare
forward and talked about the
public health and safety
implementations that this
living condition is having on
people.
and I would expect to have
heard more of a statement from
our public health departmen
besides the fact that there's
mold in the air everywhere
because we know that, but this
is black mold.
and black mold has a dferent
impact on your lungs and on
your body.
on your entire well-being,
right?
and I'm just thinking about
how that needs to -- that
real needs to come forward.
but if peoe stop gaslighting
the residents and just tell
them the truth, then
individuals can make a
well-informed, conscious
choice, you know, instead of a
decision to think about
whether this will be short
term or long term because this
is going to be long term.
heritage park buildings cannot
be rehabbed in six months.
not in eight months.
not in three months.
it will be more than a year's
worth of work tt needs to go
on over there in order to
bring it up to par.
and the fact that we're
spending money on air
conditioningnits and central
air units over there to blow
the mold spores around I just
ridiculous.
all of the hvac units, the 168
of them that were placed in
there over the winter when
people didn't have heat, erik,
we know have to be replaced
because they contain mold
spores.
like, this is -- we don't want
to hustle backwards.
let's not hustle backwards.
let's move forward.
my campaignlogan was moving
us forward, let's move
forward, let's do the right
thing.
you know?
let's move forward and let's
ensure that people have right
information so they can make
right choices and clear, you
know, understanding, access,
and the opportunity, you know.
don't strip people of their
autonomy.
we cannot d that.
like I'm seeing this and
literally every day it breaks
my heart.
I sat in my car for an hour on
friday, after they called me
and cried because I'm like,
these are publicousing
residents.
they're not going anywhere.
they're the ones who are being
gaslit through this whole
thing.
mpha is not doing enough.
this wasn't even our stuff.
but we stood up.
I called jacob and I said, I
need you to flex your strong
mayor muscle or something
because thiss not fair to
our people.
we give them $5,000 a year to
go towards their levy.
I'm not sayin' that they got
$5,000 sitting in a pot
somewhere, in a vault.
but I'm saying that we've
contributed a lot to help
support them.
they're not preserving people.
they're not preservin housing
stock and they're not
preserving opportunity.
no one's putng the people
first.
because this would not have
gone on for as long as it has.
» Chair chowdhurycouncil
member warren, the city is
putting the people first.
when it comes to what we can
do here.
I think we need to makeure
that we're not letting the
public housing authority off
the hook.
they do receive levy, it's $5
million.
» Right.
» Hey have resources.
and the political pressure
needs to be applied so that
they use it.
and they've been showing that
they're coming to the table.
so we have to continue to work
with them so that those 128
public housing units still get
the transfer benefits, those
transfer packages you were
talking about.
it is a very complicated
situation.
you and I have had this
conversation multiple times.
we talk a lot about heritage
park.
and, you know, I've used some
of your turns of phrases with,
you know, band-aid on a bullet
wound, and also, you know, so
you talk about the hvac units,
we should be looking at that
because some people will not
move.
back to centering to their
agency of the residents, some
people will not move.
so we have to look at the
conditions on which they're
living and if we can help with
that, then we should be
providing it.
I'm just saying to us as a
city, we should not be
throwing all of the money into
it until we have a global
plan, and that's what we're
working as hard as we can to
get to is thatlobal plan,
which is going to be, you're
right, it's going to be like a
year and a half plusr min
a couple of months on both
ends, right.
so it could be 18 months to
two years to rehab heritage
park and that hasn't started.
d with respect to srf,
they're not coming out and
talking to people because
they're not underontract.
if we would bring in
organizations from other --
that are not contracted, I
would have to go through a
procurement process.
I'd have to go through an rfp.
» Rfp would only take 30
days, correct?
» It would take 30 days, then
we'd have to contract, you
would not see relocation
assistance available until the
middle of the summer -- middle
of the fall.
and that is unacceptable for
me.
I think we need to be able to
push this funding out as
quickly as we can, and the
staff and the team have come
up with a way to do that.
it's not perfect.
nothing is perct in a
unplanned situation.
and, so, that's why we're
suggesting here that we work
wi a contract we already
have in place and if we have
community-minded supporters,
that's positive, but I want to
make sur that we can get to a
point where we can start
sitting down with households
and finding out where they are
and where they can be as soon
as possible.
and I think another two months
of waiting for a contract to
be in place is two months we
don't have.
» I hear exactly what you're
saying.
I mean, I have s many
questions for this invisible
company, ts srf.
like do you have any
experience in working with
minority populations?
that's just like me going to
go pick a realtor who I'm
choosing to go buy a house
with and he haso experience
working with a first-time home
buyer, you know?
you don't know how to -- you
don't know how to help people
with, you know, wine tasting
be money, I mean, I don't
know who these people are.
and they're taking a lot off
the top.
so, I see this as somebody
siezing more of an opportunity
than I do more a jumpin' in.
and then what happens if
they're not meeting the
standard?
what happens if the community
complains and they don't feel
comfortable or they're not
getting exactly what it is
that they need?
we gotta go to our rfp too,
then again, don't we?
what's happening?
» Chair chowdhury, council
member warren, you know, I'm
not going to opine on h much
it's going to cost, I just
know it's going to be hundreds
of thousands of dollars based
on the scope of work.
» Alfred told me --
» And that we're managing --
that's not something we've
agreed to with srf yet.
» Oh, well --
» We have to hold -- we have
to manage that contract.
we have to setxpectations.
and we're expecting to set
those expectations to meet the
needs of the community.
and, so, if srf is not meeting
the expectations, then cped is
not doing its job.
be rest assured, we're going
to be managing the contract so
that the needsre being met.
and those questions about
cultural competence is
something that we're asking as
well, like, how do you know
who -- you know, have you
worked with communities --
vulnerable communities like
this before?
and if w don't get a suitae
answer, then we might have to
go to an rfp.
but I need t-- we need as a
city to look at this option
because it gets the money
available sooner.
» I understand.
and I am agreeing with the
urgency because I, like you,
want the families to get the
help that they need.
it's been far too long.
but I don't want it to be done
any old kind of way just
because.
you know?
and I don't want them being
short-changed in the process
either because I broke it
down, $12,000 per household,
211 families, 686 people, the
math math'd, right?
so those are -- those are just
some ofy thoughts.
and I know that we're not --
and we shouldn't let mpha off
the hook.
I just really hope that we as
a city look at who we're
assigning to our boards and
that we are attentive of who
we a placing in these
positions.
you know, so that we can
ensure that we have the right
oversight when it comes to our
public housing and supporting
the residents who need the
most support, like public
housing was designed to help
these individuals and keep
th from being in situations
like this.
this is what ourublic tax
dollars go to, to support and
help the most vulnerable in
our community, who need an
extra boost and some extra
support.
you know?
and I don't -- I don't think
that, you know, it should have
ever gotten to this point and
that their humanity or their
autonomy should be discounted
for any reason.I thank you for n
this, erik, and I know we're
going to continue to tal
about this.
but those are my concerns and
my frustrations, and you know
I don't mind being vocal about
it all, and I'm not happy with
certu.
and I'm not happy with
property solutions.
just so we have that on the
record, too, as well.
thank you.
the end.
» Thank you.
the last person that we have
on queue is council member
shaffer.
» One other question around,
if you could speak a little
bit in the policy of why you
were bumping anywhere from t
current rent to the
anticipated new future rent
was anywhere from 250 to $450
for each bedroom.
can you speak a little bit to
that?
the reason I'm asking about it
is just knowing this is a
short-term fix, knowing that
12 months from now, most
likely people will not be able
to move back into their unit,
they'd have to go through the
whole leasing process again, I
am conceed that 12 months
from now we're going to be in
the same situation where
folks, because of not having
the differential of the extra
250 to 450 a month, are going
to be over their skis in being
able to stay in that unit that
we provided for them for a
year.
» Chair chowdhury, council
member shaffer, thanks for
those questions.
I put the table back up.
these are illustrative.
this is an average estimated
monthly rent based on
affordability figures based on
one-bedroom to five-bedroom.
there's an expecting that --
the reason we provide this
stipend for rent differential
is because of a shock where
you're ming from one place
and then the rent goes up and
this gives the ability for
households to stablize their
budgets, to figure out how to
control for that rental
increase in month 13.
this is typical of relocation
policies that we've had, is to
give a certain period of time
for people to make it.
and we see mostly that
households will put their
money into rent first and
other things, and then we're
trying to make it as clean and
easy as possible for that move
to take place by offering the
moving stipend which, you
know, varies from $3,500 to
$7,500, depending on bedroom
size, but that's also a way
for them to absorb that shock
of moving and make it as
smooth as possible.
» Okay.
and so you're confident a year
from now we won't be in the
me situation with another
policy?
» Chair chowdhury, council
member shaffer, we already
know that there's a
extraordinary burden on
renters in the city of
minneapolis.
the people who livet
heritage park are most likely
the same situation where
they're paying more than 30%
or higher than their income on
rent.
so it's unaordable rent in a
lot of cases.
and, so, we will still have
that problem regardless of who
we do, whether we're in
heteroheritage -- whether
we're in heritage park, I
would imagine there are people
in heritage park who are rent
burdenedow, so they will,
unfortunately, ctinue to be
rent burdened in the future.
want city,he way the
structure -- the city, the
structure, the way of housing
inequality, we're not in a
position to address that whole
problem, but it will be aproble,
not just these 83 households.
» Well, thank you for trying
to figure out the best way to
handle this and that
explanation helps me.
I would just say, with srf, in
your continued negotiations,
you know,ith that number, if
that number is correct, you
know, that's about $000 per
family, or per unit, and that
is almost equal to the
one-bedroom relocation.
and, so, maybe there's some
way we can tier it to the size
of the unit or some sort like
that.
but thank you for your work on
this.
we're going to make I
through.
we just gotta help everybody
else make it through.
» Yeah.
» All right.
thank you.
are there any other council
members that want to get into
queue?
seeing none, is there a motion
for this item?
» So moved.
» Secd.
» Great.
all those in favor say aye.
those opposed say nay.
that motion carries.
our next discussion item was
originally scheduled for the
climate and irastructure
meeting lasthursday, august
6, but was postponed due to
time.
this all item authorizes a no
cost contract with oncourse
home solutions for sewer
lateral insurance program.
I'll invite ross jon yack,
manager with sanitary sewer
division, to get us started
about this new pgram.
welcome.
» Chair chowdhury, council
members, thanks for havg me
this afternoon.
I'm here to talk about the
insurance.
you said my name but it's ross
jon yack, again,anager of
the business team for things,
sewer, infrastructure,
division.
before getting into the
program, I just want to kind
of go over the basics of the
sewer lateral and some of the
common problems that occur.
so with the sewer lateral,
it's one of those things that
I allot of homeowners don't
realize that they own a that
they have to maintain.
it's the lateral that leaves
your house, and it takesour
waste, it takes your toilet
waste, it takes your sink,
your dish wash e your shower,
your clothes washer, it takes
all of that and it conveys it
to the main that's out in the
middle othe street.
a lot of homeowners don't
realize that they do own that
sewer lateral all the way from
their house all the way
through the yard out to the
street under the sidewalk, as
well as the connection.
so, that's in city ordinance,
been existing f a long time.
some of the common issues that
exist with these had lines is
root intrusion, so all those
nderful trees, they're great
at finding moisture, so they
will go out there and they
will find moisture in the
sewe line.
so they find a crack, and they
start to develop issues within
e line.
probably the number one thing
that we get calls about is
people having root intrusions
into a line.
so cracks exist.
also the gap at the connection
to the main can develop issues
where it disconnects.
another common one that's not
in the image here, there will
be dips in the line, so at
some point the erosion
happened below the lin it
dips out, and then those dips
start to not let the graff
temporary flow of the line
occur not anymore.
most of the lines in the city,
they're orinal, right?
so they're original from when
the home was built.
majority of the homes in
minneapolis were bui prior
to 1939.
so we're looking at 90, 100,
you know, we see, you know, up
to 150 years, right?
some of these lines are really
really old.
average repair costs that we
see for the ones that kind of
co through our programs is
$13,000.
there's definitely a wide
range.
I've seen up to $40,000.
so they can get really
expensive to repair the
things.
current programs that we have
right now, we have a sewer --
private sewer lateral grant
program.
homeowners can get a grant of
5,000, 7500, or $10,000
grants.
this funding comes from met
council.
we'veeen doing the program
for three years now.
this year we had 350
applications and only enough
funding for 36 grants.
and, so, definitely a long
wait list and that 350
applications, those are all
homeowners who submitted
that -- they proved that they
had issues with their lines,
not just people saying, oh,
I'm interested in applying,
these are people that
contractors report, yup, fix
your line, heard about the
program and applied for it.
so definitely a big need
there.
definitely evidenced by the
just the number of people
applying forhat this year.
it's an assessment program.
so with this, the sanitary
sewer fund financially
supports individuals fixing
their line.
they can assess it to their
property taxes at a five, ten,
15, 20-year payback period.
in 2025, there was 116
property owners that took
advantage of this program.
at the cost to the sanitar
sewer fund of $1.1 million in
repairs.
just as we were sitting there,
we get, we have an online
application system, I got one
in, the homeowner is facing
$25,000, and they're choosing
to assess that over 20 years.
so, they can always pay it
back early buts a homeowner,
now you're having to pay that
back and it's going to be on
your property taxes.
so it's great the program
exists, but it's not always
the best thing when you
already have property taxes
that are going up as well to
have something else on there.
so private sewer lateral
insurance, so, we issued an
rfp earlier in 2026.
with this program it's 100%
optional, it's not being
forced object any homeowner,
no one needs to sign up for
it.
the city endorsing a company
allows homeowners to get a
better rate in coverage limit
than what it available on the
open market, for the most
part.
no city funds will be used
for this.
so it's not costing the city
any money.
the city will provide branding
and customer contact
information.
so, that is really kind of the
part on the city side.
you know, you put yr logo on
there, you know, we want to
stand behind a company to
provide a good service.
and many cities in minnesota,
in and around the country have
similar partnerships.
so this is nothing new.
we're not coming up with a new
idea, it very very common
around the country.
from the rfp, we've decided to
go with oncourse home
solutions.
they are endorsed by the
national league ofities.
the rate that they're offering
for the first three years of
this program is, for the first
year it would be $5.49 per
month for a homeowner.
and then after that first year
it would go up to $9.99 per
month after that, you know,
first 12 months.
the coverage limit, number 3
there, is an unlimited dollar
coverage limit for repair or
replacement of residential
sewer service lines.
that's why I w mentioning
those costs earlier, that you
get really expensive, if you
can have insurance, it's going
to cover that, versus only
covering part of it, it's a
great deal.
this insurance also has
additional benefits.
$1,000 per ourrence,
out-of-pocket restoration
costs, $1500 for hotel
accommodations or $500 bet
boarding.
pet boarding.
really that number 3 is one
of the big reasons why we
wanted to go with oncourse,
along withhe rate that
they're offering.
in addition to that they're
offering a $100,000 community
partnership fund, one-time
amount of money to come to the
city.
number 5 there would be an
annual $50,000 customer
hardship fund.
that fund would be something
where we would refer a
homeowner to them and, you
know, cover -- it could be
someone who doesn't have the
insuranc
the way these programs work,
not everyone's going to hear
approximate it, right you?
knowhere's going to be a lot
of marketing that happens, but
someone might not have heard
about it, didn't sign up for
it, didn't think they uld
afford the extra amount of
money per month but they're in
a hardship situation.
last year we got a call from a
case worker, a woman eye line
impacted up.
we have somhing who can help
but we don't have programs to
help with the cleanup that
might occur.
so something like that is
something we could refer to
this amount of money.
$50,000 probably wouldn't go
very far, it gets spent
quickly.
next steps withhis program,
we need to refine and approve
the crowd with -- contract
with oncourse.
I'm currently working on that.
outreach to neighborhood
associations, develop a city
website, just so people have a
place to go if they're
questioning what the
program's about.
approve the marketing material
that oncourse will use.
anything they send out, we'll
approve and have 100% approval
for.
and then that last thing, kind
of mentioned that, set upome
guidelines for that annual
$50,000 hardship fund.
you know, at what point do we
refer someone who calls?
and finally, yeah, just,
again, thank you for your
time.
happy to have any -- answer
any questions now or if
there's any in-person
briefings anyone wants, would
be happy to meet with you.
» Yeah, thank you so much,
ross.
this is really exciting
prtation.
kind of glad that we had it
moved into cow so everyon
could get it.
we have a couple of council
members in queue
we can go to council member
whiting first.
» Thank you, chair chowdhury,
thank you to ross and angie.
I know this has been something
I aggresivelyxcited
about, particularly here for
ward 11 being one of the
highest homeownership wards in
the city.
and this is a strong statement
coming from someone that hates
insurance, hates insurance
broadly, so anyone that knows
me, I could not be -- I could
not be in more support of a
policy lik
this I think it is helpf for
individuals to know, I think
maybe my example, I got a call
from my mom, goodness,
probably about six months ago,
particar to -- she was
extremely worried, kind of,
jamison, how the heck am I
going to retire?
mom, hold on, what's actually
happening, right?
so there was a root intrusion.
she got an estimate of
somewhere upwards of $15,000
to come and replace her sewer
line that she didn't know that
she had or even existed.
and, so, I think this is
something, you know, what she
told me, hey, can you figure
this with the city?
mom, it takes a little bit
longer than that.
thank you for putting me in
good graces with my mom.
but I can't thank you enough
for this wk, in particular,
to my predecessor as well,
counsel council member koski,
for kind of putting this in
motion, 's one of the thingsthat
initially, right, when I came
in to office here.
I know her fourears of work
to get this off the ground as
well.
and so, again, I just can't
think, public works, you all
enough for doinghis with the
level of speed, transparency,
I think accuracy for thi
I think the only questio that
I have particular to kind of
the -- oh, goodness -- the
hardship fund that we have
object here -- on here, kind
of the 50,000 and then the
community partnership fd of
the initial one-time payment,
looking at those 350
applicants, for kind of that
lateral sewer grant, I just
kind of did quick math, you
know, if we took that at the
average repair, right, that's
$4.5 million across all of
those applicantsor one year
in the city of minneapolis.
I guess the question is, how
often is this -- are we kind
of seeing these things kind of
pop up and happen across the
city of minneolis where
there's som level of lateral
sewer line replacement or
repair?
I know repairappens to
happen more oftenhan the
full replacement does.
» Chairhowdhury, council
member whiting, I don't have
the numbers for for you.
it's often.
and we see ones that arecoming d
assessment program.
there are some, they don't
come through those proams
and they're just calling a
contractor.
I can definitely pull some
numbers, we can pull the
permit numbers, how many
permits are happening.
it's a good estimate.
it's a lot.
» Yeah, no, that's really
helpful.
let us know how we can be
helpful to kind of get the
word out.
I did some more quick math,
because you can tell how much
I hate insurance, it would
take 108 years of paying into
th insurance to get to tt
average repair cost.
and, so, I think the
investment is well worth t
rub here.
sohank you.
» Thank you.
next we have council member
warren.
» Thank you, chair.
this is great.
all of the sewer lines
underneath my house collapsed
about two years ago.
where you been?
so -- [ laughter ]
it was a real place.
it was devastating.
but I know how expensive and
how detrimental that this can
be for people, and I knowhat
we also have an extremely long
waiting list.
when we opened uphe
application period for the
city earlier this year, I had
a number of residents calling,
saying, when can I apply?
how did I get -- how do I get
on there?
what do I need to submit,
send, blah blah blah, what
haveou.
and that were even having
trouble uploading photos or,
you know, inspection reports
in hopes of being chosen.
so wh this insurance, visdz
who have pre-existing
conditions, especiay our
seniors, who have been waiting
to get picked on this lottery
system that we have through
the city, are they eligible
for this insurance or, you
know, because sometimes
insurance don't cover
pre-existing conditions?
help me.
» Chair chowdhury, counci
member warren, yes, in talking
with oncourse home solutions,
we had the rfp, their
response, we had them in for
their presentation, it's one
ofur question.
it's pretty common, people
know they have root
intrusions, we wanted to make
youre sure it wasn't going
to be an exclusion.
they said it wasn't going to
be.
and when we do the contract,
we want to make sure that's
part of it as well so it's in
writing.
» Oka yeah, I would love a
report back to make sure that
individuals are eligible for
this insurance because this is
something that would greatly
befit, I know especially our
seniors, because people have
gotten injured carrying those
huge augers up out of the
basement, those 150-footers
thatotta go to try to clear
out the lines, get the roots,
yeah, that stu is dangerous
carrying it up and down, you
know, to try to -- otherwise
you goto pay so much money.
like 5, $600 to have someone
go through your main stack,
all the way out, or through
yourleanout, whatever else.
I mean, that can get very
expensive.
and, so, knowing that we have
these beautiful and amazing
tree canopies that love sewage
water in our front yards and
things, but they definitely do
a lot of damage to the
underground piping and we want
to make sure -- because
getting it sleeved can go
anywhere between $8,000 all
the way up to $50,000 to
$60,000.
I know, because when I -- I'm
telling you, they collapsed
underneath my house.
and the city sent me out a
list, it was like 15 or 16
different contractors of who
they allow to come in contact
with their lines.
because the lines from our
house go all the way to meet
the sewage line in the city.
and, so, if they got to open
up, excavate and then disrupt
the sidewalk and whatever
else, like the homeowner has
to pay for all of that.
and that isot cheap at all.
and, so, getting those
different bids and things, I
just want to make sure it will
cover pre-existing conditions
and that people will be able
to get the help that they need
if they're not eligible to
take advantage of the lottery
system.
we're trying to help as many
people as we can with the
grant program with the city,
but I know that this will give
other folks some hope, too.
thank you.
the end.
» Next we have council member
shaffer.
» Thank you, cha chowdhury.
I have a question.
thank you very much for this
work.
very excited to continue to
share this with residents.
is there any opportunity for
water lateral pipe insurance?
for water pipes.
» Cir chowdhury, council
member shaffer, in workingwith y
don't feel there's a need.
part of that is a lot of the
breaks that happen with water
lines are lead svice lines,
so they've had funding
available to replace those for
individuals.
there probably are some
extreme cases where other ones
do break.
but they felt having it
involved, would be a waste of
money for individuals, that
they'd be paying for something
that's not needed.
» Well, there's a lot of lead
pipes that are still outn
our system.
so I think people would like
to -- but maybe lead isn't a
requirement for insurance, it
has to actually break for
replacement cost.
and then can you speak to,
just briefly, any of the
condition of the city
connections?
I've heard that our city pipes
are not in great shape.
is that primarily the sewer?
is thatrimarily the water?
maybe you're not the right
person.
» Chair chowdhury, council
member shaffer, I can give you
a general answer.
we can definitely have a
longer conversation, I think.
but as a division, we do have
an asset management program
where we're looking at the
health of our system.
and this is the sewer system.
and we have an active capital
program to replace the sewer
line.
so it's something that there's
nothing to be ignored, we need
to kee doing t but we
definitely have a plan.
» Okay.
all right.
now that we have all the --
all the laterals get replaced,
we don't want to have a major
with the main.
but thank you for your work on
this, it's exciting.
» Thank you.
and next we'll go to council
member whiting.
» Yeah, sorry, council membe
shaffer, the same question
that I asked as well about the
water lines, and it's my
understanding that it's kind
of an add-on project.so it's noe
city's endorsement, but it is
something that you can add on
as part of your packa, but
it wouldn't be under the
city's kind of endorsement of.
so it's a program that you can s
individuals, go on right now
and purchase those insurances.
yeah.
and then the las kind of
question he, maybe for the
city attorney's office, I've
never done a no cost contract
before, acceptance.
will this come back to us?
since it is under the
threshold of council
authorization, does it not
come back before the body?
» I don't know if you have --
generally speaking, because
it's a nonstandard contract
form,ven though the's no
cost, it would come back to
the council because it's not
on a standard template.
so this council action is to
authorize -- enter into t
contract and then once I --
I'll defer to kind of t
timeline, but then it would
come back to approve the
contract itself.
» Chair chowdhury, council
member whiting, yes, that's my
understanding as well.
we started this process, do we
even need to do the rfp?
asked the question.
yup, it's nonstandard, we're
going to be endorsing, pigging
a company over other ones,
yeah, we'll go through the
process, yeah, come back with
the contract, yeah.
» Thank you so much.
» Thank you.
I just had a quick question.
what would be the rate if we
didn't endorse this?
do you know what t
comparable is?
and how much we're saving with
the endorsement for folks?
» Chair chowdhury, I'm
association I don't know the
exact what it would be.
I do know competing companies,
they might have a similar
monthly rate, but their
coverage limit's 12,000.
» Um-hum.
and this is unlimited.
» Unlimited, yes.
» Okay.
that's great.
okay.
that's the only question that
I had.
member is there anyone else
in queue?
seeing no one else in queue,
can I ask for a motion?
oh, sorry, council member
warren, didn't see you there.go.
» Thank you.
you said it was for unlimited
amnt of repairs and stuff?
but typically if a sewage line
is sleeved and it's repaired,
after, you know, you get that
casting put in there, because
I got mine sleed, and then
it's under warranty for the
next 25 to 30 years, like you
wouldn't need the insurance to
continue to pay it anymore.
see, I'm worried about this.
because you said it will cover
the pre-existing conditions
and then you're saying,
unlimited numbe of repairs.
but once you get your line
sleeved or you get the line
replaced, then the line would
then be underneath the service
rranty of whomever replaced
the line and did the stuff, so
then you wouldn't necessarily
need to keep paying the
premium for insurance.
» Chair chowdhury, council
member warren, in some of the
situations, they're not going
to replace it just off the
bat.
you know, they' going to try
and re-establish the flow of
the line.
» Correct.>> take the roots ouf
there.
» And that's with the
sleeving.
and even with the sleeving,
sleeving has about a 25-year
warranty on the sleeving of a
line.
so, they jet it out with over
400 or 500 psi of water, clean
out, then they're going to run
that sleeve through there,
then they're going to curate
it.
it's essentially like a whole
new pipe that is then put
through the sewage line.
I know, I watched the whole
process with the camera, it
was slick as I don't know
what, I'm telling you.
but now I'm under the warranty
of the company that put my --
so they gave me a warranty
that's good for 25 years.
so if I had an insurance, why
would I continue t pay the
premium because all of those
lines, cleanout included, are
allun through the same
sewage system, essentially,
unless this is covering the
stacking in the inside of a
home, the main stack.
no, this is just for the
lateral lines exterior to the
home, correct?
» Correct.
» Okay.
» Cir chowdhury, council
member warren, you're right.
as a homeowner, it's 100%
optional.
so if you just had it fixed,
you don't nee anymore.
so you don't have to keep --
» Right.
» You cancel it, you stop
paying.
» All these dollars and stuff
could go towards some eggs,
okay, ank you.
» Yup.
thank you.
yeah.
it looks like on the website
there's a pretty clear spot
for program cancellation,
which is really helpful.
members, I'm not seeing anyone
else in queue, so is there a
motion for this item?
» So moved.
» Second.
» Excellent.
all those in favor say aye.
that motion -- all those
opposed say nay.
that motion carries.
and thank you for the
presentation.
and seeing no further business
before us, and with no
objection, I will declare this
meeting adjourned.