It is 630 p.m. and I call this meeting to order, please stand, and we will recite the pledge of allegiance.
Good evening, everyone. This is a regularly scheduled meeting of the Winona City Council tonight. I have one announcement, and we will get started. At this time I would like to recognize Eric Semling of Cotter High School for his individual achievement as the Class A boys cross country state champion.
I have to read a little bit more. Everybody can keep clapping all this read over. Eric, as you may recall, I predicted that we would recognize you again before the end of your high school career, and here we are.
I predict we will probably see you every spring and fall for the next three years here as my guess, so we are excited about that.
For the congratulations on your repeat class A state championship title earned on November 1st with the time of 15 minutes and 19.7 seconds that is crazy crazy fast that time was faster than your championship run last year by almost four seconds and you set a new class A record time.
Prior to the state meet, you earned the three rivers conference championship title in the MSH SL section 1A title. You're an exceptional athlete. I also hear that you're an exceptional human and we are proud to recognize you for your continued dedication and hard work on behalf of the entire city of Winona City Council members. We send our congratulations to you on your back to back stage championship achievement.
Thank you.
That is always exciting congrats again, Eric. Thanks for coming down tonight. Appreciate it.
With that, that's all I have an old pass along the city manager.
Mayor and council would like to recognize city employee for her volunteer work and recognition received during a recent Minnesota state high school league football playoff game.
Jean Meyer is an administrative assistant in the community development office and is volunteered for the cutter high school chain crew for all the home football games for the past 11 years.
In her other chain crew members of Ron Olson 28 years of volunteering. Bill Ortega eight years of volunteering in Lori ortega six years of volunteering. We're selected to be the auxiliary marker crew during the nine man playoff game last Thursday November 13th at US bank stadium.
Jean said it was a great experience and she's ready to go again next year. Always like to recognize and city employees are doing, of course community worker volunteer work for the community.
That's it for this evening.
Thank you.
With that, I'll ask city clerk to take roll call.
Mayor Sherman.
Councilmember Young.
I'm on.
Yeah.
Thank you.
Yeah.
Thank you.
For each public hearing staff will make a short presentation and then I will ask if anyone from the public was just to speak to the matter.
Please stay your name and dress clearly. You'll be given up to three minutes to make your testimony.
I will call three times for public comments.
Once the hearing is closed, the public may not participate in the discussion by city council.
Under the required public hearings.
Item 2.1 is a public hearing for the wetland replacement plan at 1222 West service drive.
evening Mayor Council.
The first public hearing tonight has to do with a wetland replacement plan for 1222 West service drive for a parking slash vehicle sales area expansion.
The vehicle sales area is needed to do need to do to combination of the Chrysler and Ford dealerships at 1222 West service drive and 1244 service drive.
The wetland area that is proposed to be replaced is shown on the screen in yellow there.
It is approximately 0.1.8 or I'm sorry 0.1891 acres of wetlands.
Those wetlands are proposed to be replaced with double that 0.3782 acres of wetlands from the granter wetland bank in Wavishaw County.
Filling and replacement of wetlands at a 21 ratio is permitted pursuant to the Minnesota wetland conservation act.
The project was reviewed in October by the city's wetland technical evaluation panel and it was given approval.
Given approval from the technical evaluation panel staff would also recommend approval.
Should Council concur a motion to adopt the resolution in your packets would be in order.
I'm here for any questions.
There you go.
Thank you.
With that of open the public hearing.
Designed by from the public was just speak during the required public hearing for item 2.1 wetland replacement plan 1222 West service drive.
Hearing no one.
I will close the public hearing.
The council would adopt the resolution.
A motion from Steve second from George any discussion.
Hearing none all those in favor say aye.
Opposed.
Motion passes.
I'm two point two is a public hearing for the comprehensive plan map amendment for St.
Cajumers church properties at 614 and 624 West 6th Street.
Look we'd like me to state item to be heard.
Okay.
The comprehensive plan map amendment before the city council today deals with the proposed neighborhood of mixed use land use designation at 614 and 624 West 6th Street.
The former St. Cajumers church properties.
The discussion and comments this evening should be your main to the land use designation and potential impacts that land use designation may have on the property as it relates to the comprehensive plan.
Changes that have occurred since adoption of the plan and the proposed land use designation impact on the health safety and public welfare of the community.
Thank you.
Thank you may or thank you members of the council before you today as stated by the mayor is a proposed change from the traditional neighborhood to the neighborhood mixed use land use designation located at the former St. Cajumers church properties.
This request would facilitate an end goal of the overnight shelter and long term associated supports services to be located at these combined properties.
The required procedures require a first step the comprehensive plan map amendment which is before you this evening and already went through one public hearing with the planning commission which we will cover later.
A second step which is a unified development code map amendment commonly called a rezoning and then a third step which is a conditional use permit which will address the individual specifics of that type of use at this location.
Before you today are three review considerations.
The first is is the amendment consistent with the policies and objectives of the comprehensive plan.
The second is the amendment being requested due to changes which have occurred since adoption of the comprehensive plan.
And third will the amendment have an undo or excessive impact on the public health safety or welfare.
It's helpful to understand what land use designations are in the context of planning and zoning and comprehensive plans.
Land use designations represent the communities long range intentions and preferences not necessarily the current regulatory environment for an individual parcel or property in the city of Winona.
The unified development code and the zoning map are that implemented and based on future land use designations found in the future land use map which you are considering amending here today.
Many potential uses that may be proposed for this specific location would require a change to in the comprehensive plan map amendment process and then a subsequent rezoning order to address things like a commercial daycare in mixed use development housing developments of more in five units.
Emergen zero overnight shelters like the what is proposed in the long range here as well as things like restaurants grocery stores pharmacies clinics art studios and other elements you'll note that some of these potential uses would also require additional procedures like a conditional use permit.
The specific properties in question today are located in approximately the west portion of the core of Winona circled in black on the map on the map included here this is found on page 46 of your agenda packet.
They are surrounded by a mix of other land uses including traditional neighborhood neighborhood mixed use as well as public institutional as well as urban neighborhood and downtown fringe and industrial to the further east and northeast.
The existing land use designation of traditional neighborhood is designed to provide a mix of housing options including middle density housing of one to four units untraditionally sized city lots.
This can include things like townhouses triflexes and four plexes do plexes and twin homes as well as facilitating other elements like neighborhood parks schools and semi public institutions like the now closed church on this property.
You'll note here as we look again at the surrounding land uses in the found in the future land use map that the subject property has a range of different land uses around it.
including two blue dots that are included here which are residential daycares nearby the subject properties as well as a school to the south west as well.
It is not simply a collection of single family homes and that this leads to the contingent nature of the expansion of the neighborhood mixed use in this specific area.
Located to the north and northwest of this property are properties that are already designated for neighborhood mixed use in fact in our comprehensive plan we use the two adjoining properties to the north as example pictures.
Here in this case we show that we want to see neighborhood mixed use areas feature small to moderate scale commercial businesses offices and studios medium housing densities and heights housing above neighborhood commercial as well.
And it may be maybe challenging for some of these types of institutional uses and higher density housing uses and mixed uses to go into the existing lots.
Again, we can see that our neighborhood mixed use properties adjoining the subject properties to the north and north west as well as other neighborhood mixed use nodes approximately 0.3 miles to the east and to the west of the subject properties.
Here we can observe that well we have two addresses under consideration and two specific tax parcels there are actually five underlying plated lots that are being considered.
As the consideration for potential reuse of the same casemars properties considered by the city council things like future rezoning and future uses and the associated setbacks lot dimension standards and sight dimensions standards would also apply to these lots as they are developed or redeveloped or reinvested in.
The neighborhood mixed use proposed land use designation allows more flexibility on small typical city lots plated like these here before you today.
Moving on to the overall criteria before you the first is is the amendment consistent with the policies and objectives of the comprehensive plan.
This can be found in further detail on page 35 of your agenda packet first we can look at the land use and development section of the comprehensive plan.
Specifically section 1.2 which talks about facilitating the reuse of underutilized properties such as a closed church as well as associated parking lots.
As well as item 2.1 which is reducing the number of variants is especially related to reuse of existing structures which moving to a different land use designation like neighborhood mixed use may help facilitate.
Moving on to page 36 in your agenda packet we can look at goal for the land use and development section.
Here we note that specific strategies 4.11 and 4.12 allow for clear and predictable zoning standards through form based code application and neighborhood mixed use implementation in neighborhoods also providing buffers related to neighboring uses.
The neighborhood mixed use land use designation is one of the few land use designations currently allowing facilitating the rezoning to a form based code zoning district in the city of Winona which could be potentially the mixed use neighborhood zoning district which would allow that standard application of form based principles as well as require buffering between neighboring uses and the existing properties.
Moving to the next section we can look at page 36 and 37 of your agenda packet and we're moving into the homes and neighborhood section of the comprehensive plan.
In goal 1 we look at the balance supply of housing choices as specifically objective 1.2 deals with increased housing density in our community.
And specific strategy 1.2.2 calls for new housing choices and increased density, including those available to address homelessness, supportive, and transitional housing. Additionally, under goal 2, which is integrated mixed income neighborhoods that reduce segregation, we see specific strategy 2.1.1 calling for scattered site development of support of homes throughout our community.
remaining in the homes and neighborhood section of our comprehensive plan, this is now in page 37 of your agenda packet.
We can look at goal number 3, which talks about expanding housing development options, specifically objective 3.1, which talks about reinvesting and underutilized buildings and sites for potential housing development, such as for closed institutional uses, like St. Casimir's Church.
Specific strategy 3.1.1 discuss prioritizing infill and redevelopment for increased housing choices, and 3.1.2 deals with higher density in your commercial nodes and activity sensors, similar to the contagious land areas to the north and north west of this property.
3.1.5 promotes the reuse and renovation of existing buildings for housing development, something that would be facilitated by transitioning the land use designation in this specific location.
remaining in the homes and neighborhood section of the comprehensive plan, we can move on to page 38 of your agenda packet, and we can look at section 4.2.6, which calls for the allowed flexibility to meet changing market conditions and community housing needs.
As well as 5.1, which is about fostering housing support programs, and specific strategies 5.1.2, 5.1.3, and 5.1.4 directly call for community partnerships and working with nonprofits to address homelessness and those in need of emergency transitional and supportive housing, which this applicant is a trusted community partner for.
The community services and institutions section of the comprehensive plan.
This was a section of the comprehensive plan that was added at the request of the public when we heard from approximately 10% of all residents of our community.
They said that they needed to be a connection for community services and institutions in our community.
The community of one owner does not operate a health and human services division, the ability to address land use concerns and bring forward changes in land use designation is a way to foster connection that the city felt was the appropriate approach to address community services and institutions in the comprehensive plan.
The second element to consider is whether or not changes have occurred at this site since the adoption of the 2045 comprehensive plan.
Since the adoption of the 25 comprehensive plan, St. Casimir's church has been closed and was closed earlier in 2025, and they're seeking adaptive reuse opportunities.
And lastly, will the amendment have an undue or excessive impact on the public health safety and welfare?
The applicant's proposal does address a number of elements of concern both directly and directly that are found within the comprehensive plan that will advance public health safety and welfare outcomes in our community.
The neighborhood mixed useful allow for a return to small and moderate scale mixed development consisted with the desired traditional development patterns of Winona using that form-based code element.
As well as additional concerns are allowed to be addressed to the conditional use permit process which is required should this use move forward through all of the public procedure.
As was mentioned at the start of my presentation to council, this is the second public hearing for the first step of these processes.
On October 27, the Planning Commission also held a public hearing and the Planning Commission after hearing from members of the public voted unanimously to recommend approval of the proposed comprehensive plan map amendments.
The full meeting minutes for those who would like to peruse it can be found on pages 47 through 54 of your agenda packet.
The Planning Commission made four specific findings in its recommendation to the city council.
One that the amendment facilitates an adaptive reuse of an existing building for housing development and to create housing for underserved homeless populations in accordance with the land use and development homes and neighborhoods and community services and institutions sections of the 255 comprehensive plan.
Two prior to the adoption of the 2425 comprehensive plan the subject property was being used as a church.
However, this use has ceased in 2025 and the building is no longer being used.
Third, the proposed neighborhood mixed use land use designation will allow for small and moderate scale mixed use of the property.
Fourth, the proposed neighborhood mixed use designation will have a beneficial impact on the health safety and welfare of the community by facilitating use of the subject properties to alleviate homelessness and improve community well-being.
These are all found in attachment A pages 25 and 26 of your agenda packet, which is a resolution for consideration.
Which brings us to city council's options here this evening.
The first option that the city council has before is to approve the request adopting the resolution and attachment A in your agenda packet as recommended by the Planning Commission.
This action would require a two-thirds vote.
The second option before the city council today is to deny the request if denial is recommended specific reasons should be stated into the record and in this case the motion should be made to postpone further consideration and direct staff to bring forward a resolution of denial at the next meeting.
And third, the city council may choose to table the request in which case a motion to postpone the meeting until a specific date for purposes of additional information or considerations should be made.
The third reason stated during this process should pertain to the comprehensive plans directions changes that have occurred to the property since adoption of the comprehensive plan and impacts on health safety and public welfare.
And with that I'm available for any questions or concerns.
So, look, with these types of things, when they come with a comprehensive plan amendment,
if, for say, it's just for argument sake.
If this is not past this evening, you can bring another one, either this entity or any
other entity can bring the same thing again for a different use, is that correct?
Correct.
Well, we don't have a specific timeline for when that could be brought back, any substantive
change would allow for an applicant to return before the Planning Commission in City Council.
So, if they came back with a use other than a homeless shelter, that would be easily
considered before the Planning Commission in City Council.
That could be correct.
Thank you.
Any other questions of Luke?
Good.
Senior Planer Sims, I understand that the agenda item today is to focus on this comprehensive
plan map amendment, but can you remind all of us what is the role of the conditional
use permit in this process, since that is what we are moving toward?
The conditional use permit is a specific land use permit that we provide to properties for specific
land uses.
As I mentioned, as we went through a brief overview of potential other uses that the neighborhood
mixed use would usher in, a number of those have specific criteria and general criteria that
need to be addressed that are set within the comprehensive plan.
While I don't recommend that the City Council looks specifically at the CUP criteria this evening,
I will note that the CUP criteria found in the Unified Development Code for an overnight shelter
is a fairly extensive list that also requires operation plans that be followed in year
two.
If they are not in the specific criteria of a CUP or not met, there is revocation procedures
that flow through City Council that can be pursued.
Thank you for that.
So if I'm understanding right, even though a conditional use permit is allowed and an overnight
shelter would be allowed in this designation, we know that it needs additional review and
additional standards already as a part of this process.
Correct.
Thank you very much.
Any other questions?
Okay, very good.
Thank you, Luke.
All right, I will open the public hearing in a minute here.
Hearing shall be opened and entered some persons upon giving their name and address or invited
to speak to the City Council.
I would remind Council members that you are allowed to ask questions of people speaking during
the public hearing.
But anything other than a question may be ruled out of order.
So please keep it to questions only until the discussion after the public hearing has been closed.
Here again, thank you.
With that, I will open the public hearing.
Everybody ready?
I will.
When you come up, I'll ask that you give me your name and address.
You don't have to come in the order that you signed up on that sheet.
I'll give you three minutes.
If you can keep it shorter, I bet you everybody in the room would appreciate it.
So if we get super, super, super repetitive, where it's just the same thing over and over and
over again, at some point, I might stop it and just say, all right, how many, how many, how many
against?
Okay, if this goes on, like, two plus hours, I am going to add some point to say, got it.
Thank you.
Let's do a show of hands and kind of move along.
So we'll see how long the stakes with that will open the public hearing.
Does anybody from the public wish to speak during the public hearing for item 2.2?
Good evening, Colin Sol, I appreciate having the chance to speak.
I have some of you, my trader, 613 West Broadway.
Thank you.
Here we are, welcome.
I've sent emails with some statistics, studies to all of you already, but tonight, I'm going to talk
about testimonials that we've received from citizens here.
One of them was my, well, not from my son, but my son went to a birthday party.
One of his friends used to work at the shelter here in town and he knew that.
So he mentioned this all going on in his parents and living across from it.
And she mentioned that the reason that she quit working there is because she was tired of
being physically accosted by the patrons.
That's just, that's the story, just that.
So that's just an example of the behavior.
Another one is from Kelly Sue.
She's a business owner couldn't make it here tonight, but she said, I am a business owner that
was very close to the day center downtown.
Myself and staff would keep our door locked at times due to feeling uneasy around patrons
that hung out on the block.
We had frequent screaming, fighting garbage.
People sleeping in doorways, individuals with genitals out and urinating.
I would never want this near my home, especially with the young children.
I myself, never parked in the space where I would need to walk past the individuals because I would
be yelled at with obscenities.
I paid parking tickets instead of moving closer to that building.
Another landlord who's actually somewhat nearby the current temporary location mentioned to us
that two of his renters have had a call or was renters had a call of cops twice in one week
because they were a little fearful because there was some unruly activity by a couple
of the homeless population.
So just a couple examples.
I'll also show some pictures that we got from some business owners.
This one is of a lady, half naked, urinating.
Show everybody here.
This one is another business owner who found human feces at his doorstep of his business.
And then, of course, your general picture is of people out on the sidewalk, another person
damaging a car, so forth.
Extremely sad, don't get us wrong, fighting against this location.
There needs to be a shelter somewhere we understand that.
We're not against a shelter in general.
But to remind of the one rule, it needs to not show any undue risk to health, welfare,
and safety.
I think this kind of shows that what we're going to deal with in our neighborhood, shelter, and
and all shelter.
It's just unfortunately, hard facts, and we can live in a world of rainbows and unicorns, but this
is the truth what happens out in the street.
And we have a school, it was mentioned that that's part of mixed use, well, I think that makes
it even worse because there's an elementary school there.
And you're going to have this kind of activity out amongst the residents.
So we ask you, cordially, to use common sense, and deny this location.
Thank you.
You're good?
Thank you.
Could I ask the opponent to come up, please?
Good.
My name is John Myers on the Executive for County Charities.
And technically, you'll have up to 10 minutes to speak.
Okay.
So just to, again, get back to one of the main reasons why we're here tonight about the Com plan
adjustment.
So St. Cansbury is a property that is owned by the diocese of Winona Rochester.
It's a property that, as was mentioned, was being used as a church, but now is closed.
We were offered the opportunity to look at the site to possibly bring activities for Catholic
charities to that location.
Obviously, what was top of my mind was trying to find an overnight and day center for some place
in Winona.
And as walking through Cansbury realize that there was a lot of opportunity there for overnight
and day center.
But I also saw there was a lot of opportunities for other services that we could offer to a community
services such as for those, you know, 55 and over.
We already have some exercises, but we wanted to do other kind of services for the aging population
in the community.
Ways of addressing loneliness, things for meals, maybe move some of our office base over there
as well.
So there was a lot of discussion and thought of how that property could be used for other services.
I know when I put the plan forward and that was, that is the primary thing was to be an overnight
and day center.
But at the same time, we had a lot of other thoughts that could be used for the site.
So what's before you to the proposal, I don't know what to say, what you guys would say
if this gets the night tonight, what does St. Casimir become to the city of Winona?
With that I would, you know, if I can offer Father Thompson to come up as well, who is the owner of the
police.
Yes.
Good evening, Mayor, City Council members, my name is Father Will Thompson, I'm the thicker general
for the diocese of Winona Rochester, speaking on behalf of the owner of St. Casimir's properties.
May I address as well?
May I address, please?
Yes.
2907, Jeremiah Lane, Northwest, Rochester.
Very good.
Thank you.
It is our intention as trying to be good.
Good neighbors to be transparent about our ultimate goal for this property. And with that goal, we believe
that's with the diocese owning the property and catheterities staffing and using their resources
to fill out the purpose of the property that we would have a very unique opportunity and
ability to help the city fulfill goal number 5, especially objectives 1.3 and 1.4 of the
comprehensive plan. If the council denies this request, I do believe that the property would be
underutilized in the future, seeing a former church building, I believe it would be limited to a single
family housing units. We do have three parking lots or three lots used for parking right now.
Those could be potentially rebuilt, I believe, under the current zoning as individual family homes.
However, if the council voted to amend the comprehensive plan as requested, we believe that there would
also be opportunities to fill fill objectives 1.2, 2.1, 3.1, 4.2 and or increase neighborhood businesses in
this area. So as we are requesting, in this meeting to amend the comprehensive plan by rezoning
these five lots, we believe that there's a significant advantage to voting in the affirmative,
so that there would be more conversation, more specific conversation in later meetings about how
those properties would ultimately be utilized in the relatively near future. Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you. Let's hold the question. So after public hearings, let's thank you.
And I can bring you back up at that time. Thank you. Thank you. As anybody else from the public
wishes speak during the public hearing for item 2.2. My name is Tom Parlin. I'm an 853 west
Mark Street. And our community, our Winona community will be judged and be a place where
how well we treat the poor and the vulnerable. So and I was the first director of the shelter way back
in 2017. And our relationship with the city was very good. There was a really good
work together on this. There was some real need and there was no shelter before this shelter opened in
2017. My the one way that I think things will be different is that we have not had 247
shelter in this, you know, within our system. And I think that creates loitering when you don't
have when the hours aren't covered. Right now the way it's working out, it's 247. And so
so people who are homeless will have a place to go at any time of the day and they won't be in the
public urination or any other places like that because they will have a place they will have a shelter
to go to whether it's the day center or the overnight shelter. And so I think that's how things could
me different. And I think everybody agrees we need a shelter. It's a system and nobody wants it
and their neighbor would understand that. But it is a need and I think St. Casimir is really the best
option for this place. It's free for catheterities and it is a very good space and there is a
little bit of a buffer, you know, with the wall and the north side with the rectory, the east side of
the building and streets on the west and on on the north. So thank you. Thank you.
Does anybody else from the public wish to speak?
Robert Spence, 611 West Broadway, 700 West Fits, 704 West Fits. I will say half of the pictures
that Mike showed happened during operational hours at the current facilities that were downtown. So
while we would think a 247 shelter would prevent that it doesn't. If there's anything that's going to
make me get a haircut, it's the camera. It's terrible. So the catheterities are proposing to
dump a warming shelter and homeless shelter into our neighborhood. And kind of on short notice,
without a lot of, you know, leeway, I think I got the first notice the Saturday before the Monday of the
first meeting. I called Luke on that. Maybe fact check by self. Found some people I got it.
Now, who were expected to not a long and expect that this will be controlled and peaceful, neatly managed
operation and it's not going to be because 247 coverage doesn't mean that there will always be 247 coverage.
Everyone on the room knows that I'm not going to sit here and pretend otherwise just to make people feel
better. Now, I could talk about my business, but my priorities, my family, my children.
They're not an experiment. They're not a charity's wishful thinking. They're not your political image.
People of attack me online telling me I should let my kids see the real world, but they don't know me.
So that's ignorant. My kids have seen plenty. I take them to a bar because I own it.
What we don't need is instability placed on our doorstep because the Catholic charities couldn't be bothered
to find a more appropriate location within the city. Let's be serious. This will bring chaos,
this will bring crisis, this will bring constant unpredictable, high risk behavior.
I spoken with the business owners in the area of downtown. I spoke with people that deal with
these situations every day. I even had a first responder from Rochester reach out to me to tell
me I don't want this in my neighborhood. He said keep fighting against it because it's nonstop
background for overdoses fighting, stabbing, stealing and emergency crews on repeat. That's the reality
behind this sanitized image that it'll be safe. And you want it here in the neighborhood,
packed with toddlers, one of mine, kids walking to daycare that'll encounter drug activity,
that'll encounter drug dealers because drug dealers are good salesmen. So it wouldn't be that many of them.
They go to where the business is. You want elementary schoolers playing in the yards with adults that
have full mental crisis going on, like, right in their front yard. You want parents to just hope
nothing like this happens. That's kind of outrageous. Individuals keep trying to sell this fantasy
that everything will be supervised orderly and perfectly maintained, but that model doesn't exist anywhere.
Doesn't exist here, doesn't exist in the state, doesn't exist anywhere in the nation. There's always chaos around shelters.
Shelter's deal with addiction, mental illness, desperation, volatility, and that's what no one is talking
about. You want to push this through and you're intentionally potentially placing our children at risk.
Again, our children, the most important things of our lives. The Catholic charities is trying to choose
the most vulnerable population and put them exposed to some of these risks on a daily basis.
For me, it'll be every morning, noon, and night because I'm in the neighborhood all the time.
I'm just repeating this would be irresponsible. It would be reckless, it would be a complete failure of
leadership. Should we allow this to proceed? Thank you. Thank you.
Good evening. My name is Katie Mueller Free Tag. I live at 267.43 County Road 15.
Here today to voice support for our Catholic charities move to St. Cashmers.
When I first noticed the day center downtown in Winona, I was surprised by what a welcoming spot
it was and how accessible it was. As someone who has dealt with homelessness and used shelters throughout the country,
I found it really accessible and welcoming. I also found it low barrier, so at some facilities I've used.
I've had to prove certain things or do certain things to use the facility and I didn't see that at this one.
And so I just always felt like it was a welcoming space. Since it's been in town, I've
well, right when I noticed it, I checked it out to volunteer, but that didn't work with our schedule
because I have a young child. And so we would do other things like bringing goods that they needed snacks,
socks, boots, coats, things like that. And then once the warming center opened up, we signed up to
do meals, provide meals for that. And I have my child do that. Those things with me, they drop off things at the
day center. They help cook for the meals at night. And I think it's a really valuable resource in our community.
I think the potential to use sink cash mirrors as wrap around service is amazing. I didn't know about
the other ideas to include other services for the aging population, but I love that too because there's a lot of space there.
And I think that it follows a lot of the things that the comprehensive plan has laid out, which many of us
have spent time filling out. Carlos and Luke did a great job putting the report together and I appreciate
how Luke lined it out tonight. And so I just want to voice my support. And hope that it passes.
All right, good. Thank you.
Does anybody else from the public who should speak?
Good evening, everyone. Bryce Byrely, 725 West Broadway. I've just got a little pre-written piece here.
I'm just going to read to you guys. To probably homeless shelter or a warming shelter on top of an existing
rehab house in this neighborhood isn't providing services. It's dumping the city's burden into one
community and pretending it's fairness. It is careless, it is lazy, and it is completely unacceptable to
expect one neighborhood to absorb every problem the city doesn't want to deal with elsewhere.
And let's talk about that rehab house real quick. We supported that because it was structured,
supervised and designed to help people rebuild their lives. That was a responsible program and we
accepted it because it had rules, accountability, and a path forward for the people inside it.
So why would Catholic charities turn around and drop a high risk, high instability, warming
center, one block away from people who are actively trying to stay sober? Why would they put temptation,
triggers, and chaos right next to individuals fighting to get better? How does that make any sense in
this universe? If you try to care about people rebuilding their lives that you don't put the very things
that they're trying to escape directly next door, you don't undermine progress and you should certainly
don't shove that risk on the families who already opened their doors to one facility in good faith.
This neighborhood has stepped up once and we did our part and now the city and Catholic charities want to
punish that goodwill by loading us with even more and I think so. It's time for the city to respect what
this neighborhood has already contributed and stopped treating us like the dumping ground for every
solution that they don't want anywhere else. Thank you. Very good. Thank you.
Who's next? My name is Matt Starks. I live at 710 West Fist Street,
Winona Minnesota. This is my wife. We just bought a house three months ago. We just bought the house there.
We were never notified of that. We would not have purchased the house. Had we have known that you guys
are planning on putting a homeless shelter next to where we live. We want to have a family. I want to have
a family. I want to raise children there. Thankfully, I don't have any children yet. So I can choose to
move if I need to. If this is passed, I strongly oppose this. And that's my opinion.
Very good. Thank you.
Good evening. Many have said race. I live at 711 West Fist Street and in the neighborhood for years,
along with my family, you built my home in that area. Always been a peaceful, nice neighborhood.
I like it that way. I'm off for places for homeless people to go. Although I think there is better
uses for that particular area. Maybe child care? How about pregnant mothers?
Some place for them to go that don't have a home. Anything but a warming shelter. I also believe
that site has historical value in the sense that it is a Catholic historical site and related to
St. Stance in case you didn't know. I don't believe that area should be molested in any way. Thank you.
Good evening, Michael handwriting. I see a first hand of decision is grounded in data and
evidence consistently lead to better outcomes than those driven by fear or emotion. Tonight,
I urge you to apply the same principle to the comprehensive plan, map amendment for the former
sake as church properties. When we look at the data, the case for the amendment becomes even stronger.
The data shows that emergency shelters are critical part to any communities response to homelessness.
According to the National Alliance to End Homelessness Shelter's Save Lives,
prepared for a pre-reality deaths from exposure and providing immediate safety.
Communities without adequate shelter capacity see higher rates of unsheltered homelessness,
which leads to more police calls, more emergency room visits, and a greater strain on public systems.
Research also demonstrates that shelters reduce the visible impact of homelessness in neighborhoods,
a well-managed shelter like Catholic charities provides a supervised safe environment which decreases
our shelter to cabinets, and improves public order. This is not speculation that it's documented in
national studies and the experience of cities across the country. The 2045 comprehensive plans specifically
calls for adaptive reuse of underutilized properties, redevelopment, and preserve neighborhood character.
This housed the end housing diversity that includes supportive and transitional housing.
To some end, it directly advances these goals. It takes a break at
Church, and reuses for housing and services exactly what the plan of vision.
Unsheltered almost this leads to expensive emergency rivets, police interventions and crisis services,
by providing a safe, supervised place for people to go, shelters reduce those costs, communities
that invest in shelter capacity, spend less than emergency responses, and see better outcomes
for public safety and health. Let's address the concern I've heard from some of my neighbors.
They support services for the in-house, but not in their own neighborhood.
I understand that fear, it's natural to feel protective of our community,
but the data tells a different story. HUD and urban institutions to its studies show that well-managed
shelters and housing do not increase crime or reduce property values. The planning commission reviewed
this proposal and unanimously recommended approval finding a consistent with the comprehensive plan the
reason we're here tonight. Vacant buildings dragged down neighborhoods, active supervises, strengthen them.
St. Casimir's has always been a place to service. This plan continues that legacy,
keeping the property active in a line with a neighborhood scale. If we say we want services for the
in-house, but refuse them in our own neighborhood, we are simply pushing the problem onto someone else.
True community means sharing responsibility. This amendment is about compassion,
practicality, and fairness. I urge you to approve the comprehensive plan map amendment for St. Casimir's
search. Let's choose compassion, practicality, and evidence-based decision making to build a
stronger phenomena. Thank you. Thank you. Michael, could we get your address again? Michael.
Very good. Thank you.
Hi, Marcus Jones. I live at 552 West Wobbyshaw Street. The reputable research that I found in the data that I found
does show that crime does go down overall in the city, but in the immediate vicinity where a
warming center is placed, crime increases, including disorderly conduct, trespassing, big-rinsy, and drug use.
I'm opposed to rezoning due to the applicant's suggestion of the land use. I'm opposed to Catholic
charities suggestion for a warming house that would not be a benefit to the residential area. The family should
be prioritized in a residential neighborhood. I do not want to be part of an experiment. My family
safety is more important to me than that. Thank you.
Hi, my name is Amber Beeman. I'm co-owner of M. G. on 5th with my family located at 500 West Fist Street.
Just a couple of things. Sorry, I'm very nervous right now. Number one, the new location isolates
people from critical resources, safe cashmeers is on the opposite end of town from the current
warming center and from mental health services, addiction resources, job opportunities and basic
necessities like stores. Many people experience homelessness struggle with addiction, mental health
challenges and lack of reliable transportation. Moving the shelter from so far from these services,
we make it harder, but it's also just bandaging the problem that we're having. Within the residential
area, there is daycare schools and family homes. Obviously, we know that. Well, I'm just going to go off
script here. I personally have been encountered with homeless individuals. I've seen it firsthand
where they're in front of our business year and evening. Of course,
basically trying to make me scared, following me to my car, and I understand you're going to say,
oh, well, it's end of closing times this is in that. It doesn't matter what time it is of the day.
They will come, they will be there, and they will make you scared. I've had them come into the business.
I've had them panhandling, asking people for money, and I understand, and I'm very compassionate with this.
But it's not the place, because I also, as well, bring my children to the bar because it is a family
bar. And that's just how it is. We need solutions to lift people up and not simply relocate them.
The goal is to have long-term healing and rehabilitation not to just temporarily put them in housing
to help them when they truly need more help than what we can as a community give them. Thank you.
Thank you.
Good evening. My name is Charles Lobdell. I live at 226 Can to Street here in Winona.
I support the amendments to the comprehensive plan, because based on my reading and the comprehensive
plan, this compiles with the requirements of it, I think first of all consider St. Casimir,
it's no longer church. The property needs to be redeveloped, has to be used for something.
I think you go up and down, broadway, in other areas of Winona, you see other houses of worships
and have closed down, been retired. This is going to be an ongoing problem for Winona, and I think we
have to start addressing it. What are we going to use these properties for? Now, at least changing
the designation around the church itself, because it options, I'll remind you what's
me is later on, but at least because it's options to the church as to where to be used in the neighborhood
itself, and also as a president, how other churches can be used to redevelop another neighborhoods.
I'll support now that you yourself in the map. Tink his mirror is not a little island surrounded by
a bunch of quiet residential areas. It already have butts and next used neighborhood. It already
butts commercial property. It's next to commercial ongoings. Second thing is it's not a quiet
little neighborhood. I mean Broadway. It's a fortalling highway to the mill of town. That's what St. Casimir's
on. It's like people make their comments without other comments. So. So, I think, and the
amendment to the complaint is not effect the other starting property. The effect is just the block
or it's even the four or five lot for St. Casimir's. It's not changing anything else in the area.
It will allow more options to property itself, which I think is what the compliance desire to do,
and it gives more options for people that want to come in and develop that area. In addition,
I'm going to see how it affects health safety and welfare, because just by changing designation,
we're not looking at the actual use. We're just looking at change and designation itself,
because it doesn't change the use of it. It's not effecting health safety and welfare at this point. That's
some for a later discussion. For those reasons, I ask you to vote yes on change to the
complaint. Thank you. There you go. Thank you.
Good evening. My name is Debbie Rigdon. My house and I live at 6.53 West 5th Street. On Saturday
afternoon, a seemingly homeless man was walking by our house, barefoot pushing a shopping cart,
and like he was looking to check his appearance in the car windows of our neighbors. He wasn't
checking his appearance. He was looking for things to steal. I'm afraid if this proposal goes through this
is going to be more and more common in our neighborhood and nobody wants that. Also, if people
are turned away from a homeless shelter or emergency shelter because they're too high or too drunk or
where will they go? Will they go into our grudges, break into our cars, break into our homes?
I think our safety should be number one. I'm opposed to the plan for St. Cass from your church because
of the safety of my neighborhood and for those that innocently pass or visit our neighborhood. Thank you
for your time. Thank you. Hi, Brittany Hennessy, 851 West Wobbysha. I also operate a business
for blocks away from St. Cass Mears and they live three blocks away from St. Cass Mears and I want to
really ground my conversation in the fact that per Luke's presentation. This is not the only step.
This is a complement amendment. This is not a vote for the conditional use permit or the actual
rezoning of this. Okay, so complement amendment. We're simply changing what the use could be. I think
I have that correct that it could be used for other things and what it is now. So I want to kind of
ground this in the fact that yes, catheterities submitted this application because they have the idea of an
overnight shelter. That requires a conditional use permit. That's not this vote. At that point,
you would get ample more material safety plans. Did you meet with your community? Have you done the right
reconstruction? Doesn't meet all of these requirements? That is not tonight. What tonight is
is looking at what can this building be used for? Should it be used for more things than what it is now?
And I want to also center this in the fact that catheterities does more than shelter work. I know right now
that they have active aging program programs there. I think there's like a hundred plus seniors
in a week that are going and doing exercise programs. As a community, you can say no to a shelter if
you really want in the future. When you go and you get that conditional use permit, but this is to say
can catheterities use it for more. What if I want nutrition programs in my backyard?
What if I want to go to a grief program because I lost my dad to cancer three years ago?
And I don't have a place to go to do that. So I urge you all to think about where we are in this phase,
which is just saying can these lots be used for something else? And as a community, think of
can catheterities bring something else positive to our community? Can you open up that conversation with them?
Because there are other programs that they do. And if you say no to this tonight,
based on the R1 designation, they cannot expand their programming, pass their exercise programming
right now. So just want to re-center in the fact that this vote is for a complement amendment.
This vote is not you saying yes to a shelter. By any means, that is two steps down the road. And I urge
you all to have more community conversation about what that means. Thank you.
There you go. Thank you.
Does anybody else from the public wish to speak tonight?
Hello, Mayor and council, my name is Scott Knox, the next I live at 156 East Broadway.
I was actually a member of the transformative projects subcommittee and coming up with the comprehensive
plan for the city. And one of the key projects that that subcommittee decided to prioritize over a lot of
other things we could have seen is actually transforming and influencing the future of this committee
was additional housing options. And I went back and re-read the comprehensive plan from that subcommittee
today. And it starts by saying this. Having a place to call is a basic human need. And it's
being able housing is a foundational element, it's sustaining a successful city. Throughout the creation
of the 2045 comprehensive plan, the need for increased housing choices in Winona has been a common
theme among all participants. General public subcommittees in the steering committee. People want to live
in Winona, but many have a hard time finding a home. Comprehensive plans are not simply
a document to dictate the bureaucracy or the zoning regulations of our community. They're actually
a vision for where we want to be morally as a community for the next 20 years. It's shocking that in
the comments tonight about what we want to do for a neighborhood mixed use permit. No one actually
recognizes the Christian doctrine of the building that used to be there. I don't remember a kind of
Christian doctrine saying we should just neglect our neighbors because it's uncomfortable for us. I don't
remember parents in this community saying I want to protect my children from the animals that might live
in our neighborhood because that fulfills the Christian beliefs I might have. When I worked on the
comprehensive plan, I saw it as a moral doctrine that we could use to better our community. I asked
that we would have mental health and addiction services built in our community, but that really wasn't
a priority. I asked that the city would actually support more affordable public housing in our community,
but that wasn't put in the comprehensive plan. The one thing that was actually codified in the comprehensive
plan was that we could do exactly what we're voting on tonight. It makes small changes into the zoning
codes and regulations of this city to make life a little bit easier for the people who don't have it
very easy. And if you would ask the county housing supervisor about the residency rates in this community,
it's worse than it is in New York City. It's harder to find a home than it is in some of the most
populist places in this country. And if we basically say I'm sorry, your messy life can't be a part of my
nice life and we've just basically turned our back on the moral future of what this comprehensive plan
is supposed to be. As others have said, this is not the final decision-making point, but this decision-making
point says we are not giving up on the possibility for a better future in our community. Thank you.
Very good. Thank you.
Anyway, else from the public wish speak.
Good evening. My name is Stacey Owecky. I met two, two, six Kansas Street.
And thank you for this opportunity and thanks for all the service you do. This is a tough decision.
But I approve the change to the comprehensive plan and what St. Cashmeers will be used for.
What I'm worried about is the possibility of St. Cashmeers being torn down if it's not used for another
purpose. I've known as other Catholic organizations in this.
City, we've torn down the schools at St. Stan's, we tore down the school at St. Mary's, and they tore down
Lord's Hall, which is kind of like tearing out a little piece of our hearts. So I would think, I would
hate to see this happen to St. Cajumiers, and I don't see anybody up anyone other people up here
wanting to use that building, and it does fit into the comprehensive palean to reuse these
churches for other purposes. We know that church attendance is decreasing, and we have to do something
to these buildings. And I think housing, the poorest in our community, and taking care of them
is a very important issue. Also, I think St. Cajumiers would be good, because if you look at that,
there's a buffer on each side of that building. There's two large parking lots. There's also a concrete wall
on the back of it to kind of buffer it from the rest of the neighborhood. And I have a lot of faith and
catheterities that there'll be rules and regulations, and it will help to protect whatever they do in that
building to protect the community. And I must admit, every time you have people, you do have
problems. So I do sympathize with the neighbors, but they have a bar in that neighborhood. What kind,
and they don't ever see people, you know, causing problems outside that are or the other. Other businesses
there, if you have people, you have problems. And a lot of the homeless do, they have drug problems,
and alcohol problems, and mental health problems. But a lot of people in our community do have those
problems, but they have money. They have money to buffer them from living on the streets. I think the biggest
problem with these people is poverty. And we need to do something to help eradicate that. Thank you.
Don't knock it off here. Okay. Good evening. My name is Chris Anderson, and I'm here on behalf of the
school board at St. Matthews Lutheran School. Located at 7.56 West Wobbysha street. I am here tonight not to
oppose the goal of compassionate aid and assistance for the homeless people in our community, but to
speak against these specific location being proposed. My primary concern is student safety. The horrific
events on August 27th at a non-se Station Catholic Church in school in Minneapolis.
Started our school year off with a darker minder of just how vulnerable schools are. It forces
to rethink our school's security and overall well-being. Locating a facility like this, less than
a thousand feet from our elementary and middle school, with an enrollment of just under 100 kids.
Creates an undue and immediate increase in risk that cannot be ignored. If Madison elementary school
was still operating, I wonder if this location would still be considered. The presence of any
shelter inherently creates complex challenges, including issues of mental health, substance abuse,
and transient populations. All of which require special considerations and distance from our
most vulnerable and valuable residents or children. The Catholic Church charities of Southern Minnesota
website describes a current overnight shelter as a low barrier shelter. Low barrier homeless
shelters generally defined as a type of shelter that minimizes requirements for entry to make it easier
for people experiencing homelessness to access the place to stay. These shelters often allow guests to
stay while under the influence of substances and to have very few other requirements for admission.
While comments have been made about current policy being to turn away people who appear to be under the
influence before they are allowed in for help, where do those who are turned away go and they're potentially
compromised mental state? With this proposed facility being located in the middle of residential housing,
near multiple in-home daycares and our school, that doesn't sound as reassuring as it is intended to be.
The Catholic Church charities website also states that admittance after checking cutoff time,
which is 9 pm can be facilitated through local law enforcement. If there isn't a safety or
security concern, why is law enforcement required forcibly checking in? Sorry.
So, Director John Meyers who spoke earlier, mentioned that the goal would be to have
the center become the day center and warmest shelter during the winter. With this being the goal,
the end goal of the new location, it only increases the level of concern for the safety and
wellbeing of the residents, businesses, and schools in the immediate area.
Rather than choosing a location simply because it is empty and needs a new purpose,
what encourage all of those involved? I would encourage all of those involved to consider a location closer
to the other services and programs intended for this at-risk portion of our community.
To address homelessness, responsibly means finding a site that provides effective services without
creating an immediate and undeniable conflict with the residential neighborhood. I strongly urge
you to uphold your duty to the students of the community as well as the residents of our neighborhood.
We ask that you won't know on the current proposal, rather than delay a final decision to a future
rezoning vote. Very good. Thank you.
Hi, I'm Shelby Spence. I live at 6.11 West Broadway Street.
As a nurse, oftentimes my job requires me to connect patients with resources. They may need
for various reasons. Many of these services which provide medical care, addiction treatment, mental health
services, or even jobs are essentially located or even more downtown in Winona.
Many of these people don't have transportation. We're struggling to get places and the buses only run
at certain hours of the day. So, moving the shelter to St. Casimir's would really be less an ideal
location for this population in need and would really be providing them a disservice.
When what they need is a pathway recovery and these services which are located downtown can help provide
that for them. If I were truly doing my job as a nurse, which is to be an advocate,
I would be doing greater harm than good by voting for the homeless shelter to be moved to St. Casimir's.
I think that's sticking with the Wesley Church as a good option as well as the diocese building.
As these are keeping the population, this population in the location that would be most beneficial for them.
I know these buildings cost money and require some work, but now would be a good time to start funding
and coming up with the plan for that for next year. Thank you. Thank you.
Same by else which is weak.
That's stroke. 423 West Viv. I disimply oppose the proposal.
Okay, there you go. Thank you.
I'm Debbie Nebore. I live at 571 East Howard Street and I would urge the City Council tonight to also vote
to amend the land use comprehensive plan, whatever it's called. I agree with that this is not the
night we're going to decide on the designation of that building. Catholic charities has outlined
some of the very good services they would like to put there, but as somebody else stated there's a lot of
steps before that happens. So this is the first step that gives Catholic charities some options
to use a church that is totally empty. They would like to use it for some other
things that they feel are in line with their Christian philosophy and I would vote that you follow that.
Personally, I volunteered at the warming shelter from the time it opened until COVID.
My shift was I's 830 at night till 230 in the morning. I felt very safe there. Every single time
I was there. I was not threatened. I was not costed. I stopped volunteering there only because of COVID
and because I'm older. I didn't want to be around a lot of people to possibly catch COVID. This is
pre-vaccination. At that time I switched to packing groceries for homeless people at the Catholic
worker house. I did that for 18 months. I still volunteer there once or twice a week. I make breakfast,
lunches for 20 to 25 people. I am not saying that there's never any bad behavior or there isn't any
problems. That's unrealistic. But I do want to say is that meeting the people at the warming shelter
and at the Catholic worker has been one of the richest experiences of my life. The people have
been kind. We've seen lots of people turn their lives around and it has enriched my life. Please vote to change
this plan. Good. Thank you.
Good evening. Tracy Tim 6161 West 7th Street. I've lived in the neighborhood there for approximately
30 years. Six years ago my husband and I sold our house in one of our separate ways and when I moved I
chose 6161 West Wavishaw because it is a secure building. For myself, my safety, I have grandchildren,
it was just secure and I like that. I work full-time at RTP, but I also work part-time at 700 West 5. The
bar that was referred to. I would challenge anybody here in the 15 years that I've been going there working
there to see how many police calls that facility has actually made. You're going to find that it's
nothing or very minimal. And if it was, it was for unreliable patients. Not even a customer. One instance
I was in there and said meth person who admitted it to me passed out in the entryway and was screaming
and screaming for help so we called 911 as a good bartender would. They got there and said I'm sorry
there's nothing we can do. He's not harming anything. So there he was lying. We finally got him to go
sit outside. But this is the kind of stuff we don't need in our neighborhood. I'm just strongly opposed to it
because like I say 30 years in said neighborhood I would hate to have to leave what I've known my
whole life. I see now there's a house for sale that's right across from the church now.
There's a reason they want to sell that I'm sure because they don't want to deal with it also.
I have like I say three grandkids they come to grandma's house. I want to take them on a walk. I don't
want to walk in past drug addicts, needle ridden streets, they live out of town, two in Russford,
one on Garvin Heights and my kids chose that because they have clean freedom. I'd like them
to be able to have that at grandma's house too. So I just please hope you say no to this just for the
people in our neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
Anybody else care to speak? I'm on the same side. You can say whatever you like.
Yeah. I mean no swearing and stuff. No swearing. Yeah. I promise no swearing.
My name is Joyce Tolugin. I live at 220 West Fifth Street here in Winona. Ironically I can speak first hand
and dealing with unfortunate people. I'll put it that way. I also want to say I don't believe there's
one person in this room that isn't concerned for the homeless. I believe we all are. But it is in the wrong
place where we're trying to or you're trying to put them I will say. I live right across the street from
the new theater that is going up. Because of the houses that were left vacant I dealt directly
with. I'm very sure some of the people that were referring to and let me tell you they are not nice
and they are stubborn and they went into a house that they were not supposed to be and they were moved.
They were removed four times and they came back every night. Put jeans on a ceiling fan and turned it
on high. The house just about caught on fire and did at one point. I don't know if it was because
of anything having to do with them. But what my point is is let's work together. Do you really want to
go against the taxpayers that have been maintaining these homes that have children that have been working
to maintain their properties? Seriously? I think we can come up with an alternative plan like the
diocese building. What would be wrong with that building? It's right in the center of town and I do
have something if you would like a leave it with Luke. A very quick Google. I googled where our homeless
shelters typically placed. Homeless shelters are generally located in or very near business districts
and urban cores. And why? Because they have access to services. They have transportation issues.
They have walkability. It's right here and I also checked into lacrosse. What does lacrosse do with
theirs? Nobody is nobody wants anything to happen to these people in a negative manner. But let's proceed.
Lacrosse, their people are located. General downtown area. I can leave this with you or you can look it
up yourself. But let's really please. I ask.
This is for consideration for the business owners and the homeowners of that area. I know we can help
these people. I have helped these people. But I think this is the wrong location with all due
respect to St. Kazmer and Catholic charities. St. Kazmer is of which I belong to for many
many years. But I'm asking you to please consider this. I think it was a hasty decision. I
don't know why they picked that area. But now you know what our stance is and I'm asking you, please
consider this. And does anybody have any questions for me up there? You're not allowed to ask questions
during the public hearing. Well, that's really too bad because you could learn a lot for me. I'm just kidding.
All right, that's all I have. Thank you. I'm sure we could. Thank you.
Is anybody else suspicious?
Oh, sorry. Hi. My name's Dana Walker. I love at 68 Center Street. Other risk of just, you know,
parody and whatever one else has said in approval of the comprehension plan of my men going through.
I feel like we're kind of for gain this idea of, and you know, if we want to go back to like
Christian doctrine, which you know, this is a Christian building was a church. Love guy neighbor is pretty good here.
These people are neighbors. The homeless people are our neighbors, but they're not like it.
I feel like a lot of the rhetoric that has been saying like, oh, this is the wrong place or oh, there's
by our places. That's going to be repeated no matter where we put this. I also think that, you know,
if we do this amendment, it can just be used for a lot of great other things whether or not we decide whether or not
the city, whether or not the community, don't know exactly who says yes to that, whether or not it is
was it actually designated as a full time, you know, they center warming shelter.
There's a lot of things that we can do with that building, but you know, I just think that these people
are neighbors, you know, love their neighbor. We should want to help them. You know, we can get into
what else we can do to help them like, you know, increasing transportation of our city buses, you know,
having more mental health resources, a lot of things that we can do, but right now we do need to fix the
problem of, hey, you know, there's, actually, I don't know if there is a permanent place for the
day center and warming shelter, but, you know, we'd be great if there was like natural permanent one.
Anyways, before I start randomly, thanks. Very good. Thank you.
Is anyone else wish to speak this evening?
Dick, I'll get you next, okay?
Do you want to go first?
I'm Diane Luke, Ed Monson. I live at 516 Dakota Street, which is four and a half blocks from St.
Cajamas, and this is a funny way to meet so many of my neighbors, but it's pleasant to know that we're all
living in the neighborhood together. I like to voice my support for the map, I'm the mid-change,
and largely because of what Luke presented earlier, I was a part of that.
Pre-planning of the Comprehensive Plan, and there were many subcommittees that were a diverse representation
of this community laying out of vision for what this community is about, and I feel like this does fit
within the parameters of what that comprehensive plan lays out, and I support it, and I look forward
to more of these meetings where we get to have a public exchange. I think this is a rare opportunity,
and a really special one, within a community and within a democracy, that we would get a chance
to bring our opinions here, and to voice them openly, and to know that we're also going to be neighbors
at the end of it. So thank you for your time and efforts, and I appreciate it.
Here you go. Thank you.
Dick, would you prefer a hand-held mic?
Hey, Dick?
Oh, you're fine. Okay, good.
My name is Richard Dahl. I live at 1167 West Fifth Street.
I've lived in Winona, 40 years. I love this city. I love the people. I've worked
along other things as an alcohol and drug counselor for 25 years, and out of the
about 2,000 people I worked with. I can't remember anyone I didn't respect or like.
I know that people, but I'm not here because we're not discussing really a homeless provision.
I support the amendment, because living, I think having a diversity of opportunities in a neighborhood
is helpful, different businesses, they make usually small businesses, make services available,
so I speak and supportive of that. Very good. Thank you.
Good evening, Mayor and council. My name is Mary Ferrell. I live at 665 West Fifth Street,
which is really directly behind St. Kazmer's Church, and I do want to ask you to support
this amendment to the complaint. And I'm sure I'm probably one of the only neighbor in the
media neighborhood that is for this. And I know, again, we are specifically addressing the homeless
shelter, but I just want to say a couple of things. And that is that I have volunteered with the
Winona Catholic Worker for 30 years, which is on the 800 block of West Broadway. And that has been
one of my most rewarding choices in my life. And so the having St. Kazmer's as a possibility for this
Mormon Center and Dase Center, I think is appropriate. I do. In a sense that it's a former
Catholic Church that now has the opportunity to do more than just be a place of worship. It would also
be a place where people can find solace and can find people who do want to care for them and try to
help them through this difficult time in their lives. So thank you for this opportunity. I appreciate it,
and thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Does anybody else from the public wish to speak this evening?
Hello, TJ Low, 65548th Avenue, good view, Winona, formerly 79 West Fistory. Now, me and my wife, we
bought that house 10 years ago. This was just right two months ago that we left the neighborhood.
And it wasn't due to any homelessness or anything like that, but it was just due to crime,
crime in general. Now I live on that cornerhouse for the whole time. And I got to see that neighborhood,
and I fell in love with that neighborhood, and we decided we were going to raise our children
in that neighborhood. And over the 10 years I was there, I watched steady decline in that neighborhood
with drug usage, violence, repeat offenders on multiple different things. One being two houses
down to the right of me, looking out, guns drawn on the home. I went and grabbed my children
and I protected them. I didn't know what was going to happen. Then when we're playing outside,
I have domestic violence on the other side of me. Now, this happens in every neighborhood, I get it.
But what I think is that I do think something should go there. Now, this neighborhood, particularly,
is trying to battle itself back into a great neighborhood. These are people that are homeless,
that are coming into this neighborhood, making this problem. It's people who live there,
that are making this problem. So we have small pockets in our neighborhood that need help
and that need something other than what they're getting. So to put this on top of that,
it's kind of like a compound issue. We have to figure out what's going on in our neighborhood now,
because it can't support the neighborhood to be crumbled. We can't support it. That's all I'm
trying to say. We need the resource, but this neighborhood right now cannot support what's going on.
We need to take care of the neighborhood first. Lay a nice foundation. It's something that
can't support that down the road, maybe. I don't know. But right now, we as a former resident there,
I just know, I saw it every day. It just can't support a warming shelter at this point.
That's all I got. Thanks. There you go. Thank you.
Does anybody else who's just speak during the public hearing? We'll get you next, Sherry.
I haven't sat at you, so I'm not good at speaking, but I had it. Don't worry. I'm nervous too.
Okay. I suppose I'm just on the other from this start, but my name is Carrie Offman. I love it.
703, West 6. I have won this house for many years, and it's Kitty Corner from the Church.
My major concern is with all the kids that live on this neighborhood and all the day cares and the schools
and my house, value is going to go down. I'm very compassionate to help people that really need the help.
But there's a lot of people that are on drugs and have alcohol issues. And if they get turned away,
I don't want them to stand on my porch. I'm just Kitty Corner. It's right there.
Or anyone else is in this family neighborhood. I do not believe this is a right place for a shelter.
I do really care about the people that need help. This is just not the right place.
And I really believe we do need a shelter. I appreciate and thank all of you for this.
They're how I feel on this subject.
Very good. Thank you.
My name is Jerry Papin-Fus. I live at 225 Maine in Urnona, and I'm here to support the amendment request that's before you.
Thank you mayor and city council for doing for being council people in the mayor.
Evenings like this, I know make your job really tough. And I thank you for your service.
I support the request for the following reasons. There's an urgent need to house the homeless.
Finding a suitable building is almost impossible. And I know that staff will testify to the
amount of work that they have put in and trying to find location.
Number four, the city has a responsibility to shelter the homeless. The city is fortunate that
Catholic charities is willing to accept the responsibility to make the program work.
If the or assuming that the policing of the residents is the challenge that has been outlined tonight,
I would suggest that the city council consider taking some of the money from the opioid fund
and using it to help work with Catholic charities and solve the problem.
I know that the city's money has been turned over to the county, but the county has a responsibility to
and so I encourage you to look at that possibility.
The requested change falls within the comprehensive plan and I believe that one of the council's
responsibility is to make positive action happen within the guidelines of the comprehensive plan.
This project falls within those guidelines for the good of the whole community.
I encourage you to grant this change. Thank you.
Very good. Thank you.
Does anybody else from the public wish to speak this evening?
Kelly Shrader, 613 West Broadway. I just made notes today so I didn't really come planned and prepared.
So I kind of took notes from everyone around. First of all, to the gentleman West Broadway is not a
foreign highway. It's Broadway Street for a reason. It turns four lanes right past my house fast,
so it's not a highway. It's a street. Let's just clear that one off.
My question is, and this is like a serious question because I'm still learning all this stuff.
So I'm assuming Catholic charities is funding all of this and paying for this. Do they pay for
is it the volunteers that come in that work here 24, 7? Is it employees that they hired to come in?
These are just kind of questions that I have. When someone someone someone did mention that earlier,
when someone is turned away because of drug alcohol, oblivious, whatever the problem may be, where do
these people go? Are they going to come to my front porch? Are they going to break into my house?
These are all things that I did happen to call my-
The insurance company today, and when that happens, and yes, I know whether it can cause your insurance to go up as well.
But I've had no place. So, with this being happening, my insurance is going to go up at least $300.
So, when there's vandalism to my property and it's beyond my deductible, my homeowners insurance is going to go up $300.
First time, who knows what second time or third time. Now let's talk about cars or garages or anything like that.
Those were some points.
I do think Sancazmiers could be used for something else.
I really do. I don't want it to stand vacant. I don't want to vacant a lot across from my house.
I wanted to be used for something great. I think right now that the elderly are using it for exercise classes, at least two, three times a week, phenomenal.
I'll even come join you because I'm there. I get my art card.
But what that being said, there could be other uses, daycares.
Okay? Single family homes, maybe a part-end buildings, you know, that aren't, I'm sorry, for a homeless shelter.
That's just my, I guess, my fear. If you want to put it that way, might, some sense of security.
I won't ever stay home alone. I can guarantee you that. I don't care what kind of security system I get.
I'll go stay at my dad's for a night. I will never be able to alone or not. We'll leave that out.
So what happens when they are turned away and they do end up, do I call the police? How many times did they just, I think I heard somebody earlier, say,
by no, nothing we can do about it. So then what happens? Do I get to lock and load?
Just saying nothing I do. Just putting that out there.
Maybe I need to.
Some buffers. I've heard that tonight. Oh, there's buffers on each side. Well, I see that buffer right between St. Casvers and the apartment building or whatever business is on the fifth street side.
Just watched a drug deal yesterday. So it's not like I'm not already dealing with things. I just don't need any more added to it. Thank you.
That's last question really quick. Why are we moving it from the current location, which I believe is that Wesley right now?
Those are just questions, because my understanding is that they wanted it to stay there.
But Catholic charities wants to take over. So those are just some questions that I have. Thank you.
Very good. Thank you.
Anybody else from the public? Somebody else from the public was to defeat this evening.
Hello, Adam Mushler, 901 West, fifth street.
I guess I would just like to, seems like we're coming to a close and here, just kind of rephrase this.
This is a vote on a pretty narrow zoning change that was unanimously voted on by the planning committee and recommended.
I think it would be a very unusual and I would argue on ethical place to stop this process and because there needs to be a super majority tonight.
Very good. Thank you.
Does anybody else from the public was to speak this evening?
Now last one last time, does anybody from the public was to speak this evening?
Ted Hazelton, 1073 West, fifth.
I'm about six or seven blocks from St. K. asmers.
And my concern is we hear a lot about compassion and we need to do something. Yes, we do.
However, if you look at the stipulations for the zoning change, number three is going to be the biggest issue to try to
how do you make it safe? What's determined?
You know, I'm thinking, how do you say it?
Is it in the community's best interest? Will it make the community safer? Will it be a detrimental impact?
And I believe the answer is yes. It may meet the first one or two criteria, but definitely not the third.
And as far as compassion it goes, it goes both ways.
There needs to be compassion for the folks that have invested in a home there and live their lives.
I've been in my address for 22 years and I'm adjacent to a mixed use property zoning.
I've seen everything in my 22 years. We've had a car part store. Then it became a plumbing supply place.
Then people ran it out and were working on stock cars.
And they come home from the race track at one and two and a morning in their revenues and squealing the tires.
How is that conducive to neighborhood harmony?
I think there could be some problems down there too. As many point it out.
If they're denied access to the warming shelter because of various problems or situations, where do they go?
I don't need to come home and find somebody's sleep on my doorstep or they broke into my garage or they're sleeping in the backseat of my car.
I have, I have kids that are raised in that area. I have grandkids that come down from Canada.
They don't need to see this stuff.
So please, seriously consider the third stipulation for this zoning exchange because it may look great on the first two.
It might pass, but number three is the biggest issue. I don't think anybody is opposed to a homeless shelter. It's the location.
Thank you.
Very good. Thank you.
Does anybody else from the public wish to speak during the public hearing?
Hello, my name is Ryan Sinning. I'm at 706 West Broadway. I have the Yellow House directly across the street from St. Casmeers that is for sale.
As soon as the news was public about the potential warning house, the value on my house did not go up.
It decreased quite a bit. It is for sale.
It is a tough pill to swallow to try to sell a house directly across the street with that proposed option.
While I do support a mixed use, the adults work out anything else is great.
That's fabulous. Absolutely support that.
But being directly across the street makes it really tough to sell a house. That's all. Thank you.
Thank you.
Anybody else from the public wish to speak this evening?
I'm going to ask one last time, and then I'm going to close it. Anybody else from the public wish to speak?
Required public hearing for item 2.2 comprehensive plan map amendment.
St. Casmeers Church Properties at 614 and 624 West 6.
Hearing no one, I'll entertain a motion to attend or to close the public hearing.
Motion from Steve's second from George.
All those in favour? Say aye.
Aye.
Hearing is now closed.
All right.
Okay. Now council can discuss. We can recall the city planner.
If you have questions and or if you have questions from the applicant.
Same.
First of all, I'd like to thank everyone for engaging in the process.
If my notes are right, we exactly tied the number of people who spoke before planning commission.
Weird coincidence, but you did it. Great job. Thank you for engaging.
This is how community decision making is supposed to work.
Second, I really want to thank staff for such an informative presentation.
It's really easy to assume the worst when we don't have all the facts.
Shared understanding is key for good decision making.
I want it to be really clear what we are voting on tonight.
This vote is the first of three steps.
The third of which is a conditional use permit for an overnight shelter run by Catholic charities.
Out the city of one out of the Catholic charities.
This step only changes the zoning to allow for a variety of different uses.
This is the same zoning that allows for things like.
Lateau's bakery. Penguins us those. E.B.'s corner bar.
I think that very few people in this room haven't issue with the designation itself.
This isn't a bad land use designation.
It's fitting. It gives us more flexibility.
The question we're being asked tonight is only.
If is neighborhood mixed use an appropriate set of rules for this space in our community.
And that for me is an unequivocal yes.
I want our existing spaces to be flexible so they can meet our current needs, especially as we're navigating a housing crisis.
What I've heard from all of you and everyone who's reached out to me before tonight,
I can largely break down into two themes.
First, a value that everyone in our community is able to live with dignity.
Whether that be the stranger, my neighbor, or myself.
Second, a concern for potential negative impacts on our community.
Whether those negative impacts are neighbors not having a warm place to sleep at night,
or fearing potential harm to our families.
Both of those seem to focus on the specific conditional use itself, not the zoning that we're talking about tonight.
And both of those make a lot of sense to me.
We have a tremendous opportunity here, and I mean everyone in the room.
Everyone here is so clearly, deeply invested in finding a good solution to this problem.
I hope that as we navigate this process, we're able to find ways to listen to each other,
especially those with whom we disagree.
I hope we can find collaborative solutions.
I hope we can reduce the concerns, and I hope we can live our shared values.
Hopefully, conversation can be had where more shared understanding is found.
Maybe knowing more about the specific use Catholic charities is proposing and what the programming looks like would calm those concerns.
Maybe volunteering, helping shape the programming and being involved in the program's success will help us live our values.
I'm not sure what the ultimate solution for our community is.
But I do know we need to find that solution together.
Thank you.
Any other questions or discussion by council?
George.
Good.
Father.
Father, Tomson.
I just have a question about the diocese and the church and things.
Good to see you again.
And you're looking good, so.
There's certain things I may understand that the diocese permits and does not permit in a church that's closed.
I looked at the one in St. Charles.
That's a bridal shop now, but other certain things that are not allowed in closed churches.
Yes, that's correct.
I don't have the list in front of me, but it's 10 prohibited uses that we would have if we were to sell a building.
The same would go if we would lease that building.
Be such uses as.
You know, a liquor store.
You know, other sales that would be.
You know, immoral, you know, according to, you know, our teaching and the authentic commandments.
So we would do have a list of prohibited uses when we sell or lease a building.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
Fun.
Vicar. Sorry.
Why you're up there at quick question.
So it's been alluded to that there are some things going on there currently at St.
Casmeers.
We've talked about some senior exercise classes.
Do you have, do you have a list of what's going on there?
Is that the only thing that's going on there?
Yeah.
Yeah, that's the only thing that's occurring there currently.
Currently.
Thank you, sir.
You're welcome.
Okay. I'm just going to sit and wait here, guys.
Because we know it's next.
I would move that the council approve the comprehensive plan.
I'm in.
That's second motion from Jerome second from Sam discussion.
Steve.
Local government in action, right?
We almost all know each other.
And so thank you for for sharing.
Think of your thoughts and perspectives.
Winona absolutely needs services for those experiencing homelessness.
Need a day center and an overnight shelter.
We're fortunate that the one that die sees the set forward with the proposal.
And a potential location to help meet that need.
Other communities have done a bit of research.
As I'm sure many of us have.
Other communities near us in the region have opened similar shelters to provide these services.
In real estate, we often say there's three important factors, location, location and location, right?
And that's the challenge that we face here at the location.
The proposed site is in the center of a residential neighborhood.
And many blocks away from essential services such as grocery stores, medical facilities, the library that provides internet access, county support offices.
I was counting between 10 to 15 blocks away from those services.
No comparable city, the research that I did, I may be wrong, but no comparable city that I found has placed its homeless services in the middle of a residential neighborhood.
Far away from the resources that people use each day.
We don't want to need to shelter, but we need to get it right. The location matters.
It's current form that proposed site is not the right place.
I'm confident that, as we work together, we can find a location that meets the needs while also fitting better into our community.
So, thank you.
Thank you.
Jeff.
Okay. First of all, I want to thank everybody that has voiced their opinion today.
And I want to back up even just a little further.
And I'd like to thank all the people of work diligently to find a temporary solution for this winter for when known as unhoused.
The include organizations such as Wesley's Methodist Church, St. Paul's Episcopal Church, the Catholic Dicies, Catholic Charities, City staff, community and Icages.
And most importantly, all of the individuals that have worked diligently to make this happen and my apologies to all of those that I have missed.
I am 100% supportive and appreciative of the short term solutions that we've developed and 100% in support of a long term one as well, however, location matters.
Despite the differing opinions on St. Cass mrs location voiced tonight, I think I can say virtually every person in this room is supportive of a long term solution for when known as unhoused.
So let's be clear, we're not here to discuss the need for long term shelter.
We do need one and I am supportive of finding one.
We're here to discuss if St. Cass mrs is the right location or not.
St. Cass mrs is served the surrounding neighborhood for 120 years in many ways.
Honestly, spiritually, but also as a school and a place to mark the passages of life.
Marriages, baptisms, deaths and the like.
The Church has supported the neighborhood providing for many and anchor.
And the neighborhood has supported the parish.
In my conversations, correspondence and looking at the petitions from neighbors, they by over 90% do not support this change.
This request does not support this neighborhood.
You can make the argument that it supports the community at large, but at an undetermined cost to this neighborhood.
I represent Ward 2 on this council, which is what I was elected to do.
The message from the neighborhood and Ward 2 at large is very clear.
This is the wrong location.
Despite one bar, a yoga studio and a computer repair shop on fifth street, this is a residential area.
There are no services used by the unhoused population in this immediate area.
Some of the ones that Steve mentioned, grocery stores, county services, meals offered by various downtown churches, library, AA meetings and AA meetings.
Places and so on are not located here.
What there is here are residential houses that people have sunk their life savings into, and that they naturally are concerned about, as well as two day cares within 200 feet, a group home within a block and elementary school within two blocks.
Each person who needs these services has a unique story as to why.
There is an economic component.
And although it in no way applies to all, there is mental illness, often untreated and substance abuse issues are also a part of unhoused populations.
So to claim that the residents are operating from fear, I think is overblown.
I think they are operating from justifiable concerns for their families and neighborhood, as well as those who are unhoused.
I appreciate the DIC's generosity and offering the use of St. Kazmeers for this purpose.
I know it comes from a genuine desire to help.
However, this is a community issue that will require a community solution.
I do not think any one entity within the community should decide what that solution is, even if it is coming from a place of benevolence and grace.
There are so many other ways St. Kazmeers can be put to use to continue to anchor the neighborhood in community.
You started one, which is the exercise class, and many others have been already talked about here besides homeless shelters.
So there is no question, there is a variety of uses for this space in this building that could be again an anchor for this neighborhood, as it has been for 120 years.
There is nothing to stop the DIC's from pursuing this process again for a more suitable use at this location.
Simply put, a no decision tonight does not destined St. Kazmeers to ruin or any such thing.
There are plenty of good uses to be had.
This is the second step of a multi-step process based on the DIC's request to place a homeless shelter at St. Kazmeers.
I do not think this step is just a formality nor do I think we should debate this in full later.
The DIC's request as well as the city's letter to residents clearly states the reason for this hearing.
It is the first step in placing a homeless shelter at St. Kazmeers.
There is no reason to continue this process if you think it is the wrong location.
No future step is going to change that simple fact.
This is the wrong location.
Continuing this process which is waste the time that could be used to find more suitable location for a long term overnight shelter for the unhoused in Wanoida, which we all know is needed.
Lastly, I think there are better solutions closer to the services needed that have far less impact than residential neighborhoods.
One that was mentioned tonight was the Catholic Parachat Parachat 8th and Central.
It is on a block that is 100% student rentals.
It is closer to services that I mentioned previously and adjacent to a known state that has a variety of advantages over this location.
One being a potential partnership with the WSU and their social work program.
For all the reasons that I have stated I will not support this change nor homeless shelter at St. Kazmeers location.
Together we can find a better solution.
Thank you.
I want to talk about degrees you here.
Fear.
There have been two common threads in everything that has been said here today.
One.
We need a place for people to sleep at night when it is cold out.
We need a shelter in this community.
It is our responsibility to have one to provide one.
To provide for other people in our community.
It was cited.
This is the Christian thing to do.
We are all often hearing about how Christian this country is supposed to be.
Until we have to start applying.
The words of Christ.
The other thing that I hear that's been a common to everyone.
Everyone who has spoken against this is fear.
Simple, plain fear.
Afraid of people.
We don't know.
People who are hurting or damaged.
People who are in need.
But also.
And this is what's fearsome.
There are people who look like us.
There are people who maybe related to us.
There are people who.
If something goes wrong.
Would be us.
We are afraid of them.
And we say.
We've got to have a shelter but don't put it here.
In our neighborhood.
Put it in somebody else's.
Push it off.
And that's easy to say.
And we can feel.
Somewhat better about it because we're on the side of the angels.
As long as.
We're not going to really have skin in the game.
Well, I've got skin in the game.
I've been in this neighborhood for 40 years.
Mary.
I've been.
Mary's my wife.
Our fence.
A butts.
St. Cass.
You don't get to be any more.
Skin in the game than that.
Mary's been working with homeless.
And needy people since 1992.
Catholic worker.
I've been drawn into that orbit.
I know these people.
The young man that someone referenced.
Walking through the neighborhood with long hair and a shopping cart.
I know his name.
I know who he is.
And I don't doubt he was not.
Looking in your car.
To steal something.
And don't shake your head at me.
Because he's a people I know.
People that I.
Make breakfast for.
On occasion.
Who I talk with.
So.
Fear is the common denominator here.
What about location?
This is a large facility.
Unused.
It's not going to require additional financing.
The diocese is behind Catholic workers.
Behind it is established.
You don't get a more established sponsor than the Roman Catholic Church.
They've been in business for 2,000 years.
We're not going to get a more solid basis to establish a shelter.
Are there reasons to be uncomfortable?
There are.
I'm not disputing that there are problems.
We all know that.
We've been saying and we've heard about it with the.
The former day center downtown downtown.
That's the ideal location according to some people.
Let's put them downtown.
Because that's close to things.
Well, folks.
All those people are a hell of a lot more resourceful than most of us.
Stands is right on the bus line.
And guess what?
Every one of those folks knows how to write a bus.
They can get there.
They can get there and back.
They can make it all the way to the courthouse.
Often the same way that they get around everywhere.
They walk.
No.
I'm not going to be apologetic to say that we should take a serious look at this location.
I'm not saying that this is where it should be.
We don't know that yet.
Because we haven't gotten that far yet.
We have a potential solution here.
And it's scared the shut out of a bunch of people.
And a bunch of people been going around for the last month,
starring up more fear and more fear and more fear.
Rather than looking for a solution.
And you know, I'm sick of it.
And they've gotten to people.
We'll talk about neighborhood.
Am I?
I'm here at large.
I represent the entire community.
I love in this neighborhood.
But I wouldn't have elected to represent the entire community.
And what am I hearing from the community?
What am I hearing everywhere in town except for a small number of people?
Directly in the radius that have been stirred up over the last few months?
This is a good thing.
Place to look at.
Let's consider it.
Let's see what we can do.
If it doesn't work.
If the problems can't be overcome.
We'll find that out as we go through the process.
But to cut the process off at the knees at this juncture.
At this juncture is premature and quite frankly stupid.
Because we're going to have to put that shelter someplace.
It's going to go in somebody's neighborhood.
And we'd better not be proud of ourselves.
If all we're doing is running it out.
Because we're scared of people who've got to sleep in doorways if we don't do it.
Thank you.
Thank you, Jerome.
Jason.
In my head.
My opinion, shutting down the land use designation change, that's the wrong precedent.
I believe it will cause a chilling effect on development in the communities.
This blunt tool, to be used to stop anything we don't like, we'll just allow nothing we built.
The majority of the folks that I spoke to regarding all this, want the property as utilized for something.
It would be a shame to watch these lots, rot, and turn into a pile of bricks.
And I believe this land use designation change is the first step. It does not lock us in to a shelter.
Thank you.
Thank you, Jason.
Good.
Thank you, Mayor.
First of all, homeless as we all know, it is a problem throughout the country, not just the city of Winona.
Representing Winona's fourth ward, we have drugs here. We have drugs here.
There's drugs here, drugs there. It's throughout the city, it's throughout our country.
So it's just not our problem here that Winona has a homeless problem.
Every community has one regardless of how small they are.
First of all, I want to begin by thanking Mr. Myers and Father Will Thompson, the Victor General for your work on this issue.
You've put a lot of time in and be putting a lot more in as well too, but thank you very much for what you have done.
And yes, it is very well appreciated for what you do.
After listening to the testimony from the audience tonight, I understand that this is not the shelter they are objecting to.
But moving the location to a residential neighborhood, it's the location where the objections are coming from.
I also feel it should not be located in a residential area.
Residents of the Second Ward feel that locating a shelter in their neighborhood, wouldn't factor safety and security.
As we mentioned, yes, I don't blame them one bit.
And I want to just set one thing straight, nobody out here is putting fear into me as to what decision I make tonight.
I'm making a decision not from fear from anybody out in the audience tonight. I want to make that perfectly clear.
I do not know how the vote will go tonight, but tonight I will not be voting to change the comp plan.
If I were to agree to any changes, it would be to benefit all the taxpayers by perhaps having a taxable property.
Thank you.
Councillor Young, Councillor Borgeskowski and Councillor Hyma.
I agree with almost everything that y'all have said.
My one sticking point is if this ultimately won't be a homeless shelter, then there's no reason to continue this process.
And I disagree with that. I think there's a really big reason to continue this process.
And that's housing, baby. We're in a housing crisis.
And by amending this the comp plan and allowing more options in this zoning, we have more flexibility for more housing options moving forward.
Regardless of if the conditional use passes at that point.
I think that we owe it to a known to stick through this process to give ourselves more options regardless of that and use.
I know we need more homes.
And I think that this is space that could be redeveloped into more homes.
If it doesn't become a homeless shelter, thank you.
Very good. Thank you.
I would agree completely. I think it could be used for housing.
But that's not what's being proposed here tonight.
The application from the diocese to notes that went out say specifically that we are considering this location for homeless shelter.
If we get a and they can reapply to shift it to something else, I would be totally in support of housing.
100% amongst a variety of other options to go on to that site.
But what's before us is a homeless shelter.
And the location is not the right location for that use.
So if we're not doing a bait and switch.
That's what's been proposed. That's what we're voting on.
You can always bring something else back.
You can go forward and say, I would agree to housing.
That's not what's on the table.
So that's really in my mind.
You're not we're not being transparent.
In my mind, this is what's here. This is what we're voting on.
I hope to see I dearly hope to see something else.
Whether it be housing, whether it be more integrated services for seniors or any of the other things that we're suggested here tonight.
I would be 100% in support of those things.
But that's not what we're voting on tonight.
It's the homeless shelter that's in front of us.
Respectfully, truly, what we're voting on tonight is a complaint update.
We're not voting on a homeless shelter.
We're voting on what should the rules of this space be?
Other than that, you and I are in alignment.
We're seeing I die. We want the same things.
I'd rather get this barrier to housing out of the way now so that we don't have to do it later.
Because that's the step of the process we're at.
Outside of that, yeah, hear you loud and clear.
I would respectfully disagree.
I do think that that's what was in the application to make this change specifically.
So that is what we're voting on.
So, you know, I agree, I mean, you know, but that's what's on the paper.
That's what's written.
Jeff.
I'll leave it at that.
Jeff, you're seeing then that you're going to support housing except for the people who need it the very most.
Any other discussion?
I call the question.
May I give my piece?
I guess.
Thank you.
Appreciate it. Sorry.
Sorry to delay everyone.
I obviously did not talk with everyone because everyone had a paired statement tonight and I do not.
So here's the deal.
Everyone in this room is my neighbor.
I live 908 feet away from that location.
I got little.
I've been in your bar.
I've locked that neighborhood.
I've seen what we have in our neighborhood with or without that homeless shelter.
That's there.
Now.
Sorry.
It is.
We're doing everything we can to try and help those people as best we can.
I will also be very clear.
The city is not proposing.
The city is merely the gatekeeper.
This is not our project.
You are not paying for this through your city tax dollars.
Here's where I'm at on this deal.
This should be rezoned.
And it should be rezoned to MUN.
Should a homeless shelter go there?
I don't know.
What I do know is I heard from a hell of a lot of my neighbors that said no.
It's difficult to go against a lot of your neighbors.
I also had a lot of people with very good arguments as to why it should be there.
It is also very difficult to go against those people that I align with in terms of what we should be doing for people within our community.
I'm in a tough spot here.
And I know nobody cares because I signed up for it.
But I do want to say that I think about this stuff.
I read every single one of your emails.
I heard extremely excellent arguments tonight on both sides.
I am in favor of the rezoning.
I am not in favor of the housing or the shelter in that location.
And here is why.
There are other locations that I know are being discussed currently.
That may potentially be better than Kazemiers.
I am not here to stop the Kazemiers project.
But I am here to suggest very strongly to the people that have been working on this project.
That we look elsewhere.
I do want to say thank you for everybody in the room for being here tonight.
This is what I have been asking for for years participation by our community.
It is unfortunate that it has to be something that creates negative involvement.
I would ask all of you to come back on a different night.
I really would.
I would also like to thank from the bottom of my heart.
All of the people who have been working on this behind the scenes.
You know who you are.
I know some of you are in this room tonight.
It is extremely difficult work.
Because everywhere you go you are getting knows thrown in your face.
This room, again, we have heard it.
Everybody wants the solution. Everybody wants to help these people.
There are people that are doing this work now.
To try and make it better for those people within our community,
which ultimately makes our community better as well.
I am in favor of this M.U.N.
Reson.
This complaint change amendment.
I am not necessarily in favor of the shelter at Kazemiers.
So if this comes before us again at Kazemiers, I may or may not.
I'm not going to disclose which way I'm going because I don't know where I'm at.
When this comes through.
But here's what I do know right now.
I could not vote for Kazemiers.
But I am more than happy to vote for M.U.N.
because we have seen what happens to dilapidated buildings around this community when they've been vacated.
I would also take the opportunity for each and every one of you to volunteer at a day shelter or a volunteer shelter.
And find out what it's really like.
Because there are people in this room who conveyed what it was like.
And it is not what you all think it is.
It always feels good to help someone else.
I don't care what the situation is.
So take that time.
Look into your hearts and give back to the community however you can.
That's where I stand on M.U.N.
Yes to that.
No to Kazemiers in the future.
That's where I'm at.
We may now call a question.
Should we vote by roll call.
Very good.
We will vote by roll call.
Mayor Sherman.
Hi.
Councilmember Young.
Hi.
Hi, Ma.
Hey.
Kristensen.
Yes.
Is there any short-rich?
Yes.
Borgicowski.
Nay.
Thank you.
Yes.
Motion denied.
For the remainder of this meeting.
Residents are only allowed to speak if they have a request before the council.
And I recognize you to speak.
Under new business.
Item 5.1 is a legacy grant amendment.
We'll wait just a few minutes for everybody to leave.
If you'd like to.
You don't want to stick around.
Not fun, I promise.
I would ask if you carry out conversations that we do.
I would ask if you carry out conversations that we do outside the chambers, please.
Yes, that's right.
That's right.
I think we're good.
I'm going to repeat this.
Under new business.
Item 5.1 is a legacy grant amendment.
With the council approve the amendment draft staff to execute the same motion from Steve
Sam any discussion.
I like hearing about grants.
You should discuss the grant.
All right.
Thank you, Mayor and Council.
Yes.
This is our second legacy grant that we were awarded.
So we're just asking for an extension.
What's a grant extension? I thought we were extending trails. I thought we were building stuff.
And so we are asking for an extension on that grant.
Like extension.
Drill extension.
To give you a quick update.
All right.
Since I'm now at a microphone.
We have completed trail number 204, which is now named troll stroll.
It's 0.41 miles.
We've completed a trail number 16, which is now called Zinger.
It's 1.22 miles.
And then we also built a new trailhead parking lot.
Complete with the single vault toilet.
And so what's left is just the installation of the signage.
Which should be done this fall in winter.
See, quick question.
What are you doing for publicity?
I was meeting with a young man.
Know this young 13 year boy.
He did.
I started to talk to him about what he likes to do.
Bicycle.
He knew nothing about the trails.
What are we doing to promote this to young people to create awareness?
Yeah.
Unfortunately, the city of Winona does not have any kind of marketing coordinator.
So it's up to the recreation coordinators to do kind of our own marketing.
But we rely heavily on visit Winona to get the word out about Winona.
And of course, the Winona area mountain bikers.
They also have their own social media pages, their own website.
So we have really heavily on them as well.
Especially since they have an agreement with the city of Winona.
I found the visit, Winona.
We have a clip on Facebook.
And I sent it to this voice mom to say, these are the trails we were talking about.
Yep.
And we do now have the international mountain bikers basically in association.
They've been doing some advertising for us as well on the side.
They're a nonprofit organization who have.
They've designed and assessed and done a lot of work on our trails and constructed three of our trails now.
So they have also done marketing for us as well.
Thank you.
And then just kind of anecdotally when I've been up there.
If I see someone that's kind of standing there looking confused, I'll ask them if are you from the area.
And they'll say no.
And then I'll try to guide them.
But it's surprising to me how many people are coming to those trails from out of the area.
Just to try them out because they heard from in some location or someplace.
So it's it's it's working.
And this signage package will help.
So they don't get as a lot of trails on any signs.
So that's what you do.
That's what you explain to that.
Yeah, don't really pay attention to those signs.
Yeah.
So we have ordered 57 signs for most of them are going in.
Bluffside Park.
And then there's a few that are going in Sugarlow Park as well.
Great.
Thank you.
Any other questions for Alicia.
And Alicia.
It's okay that I said it here.
Thank you.
I don't know.
I'm reading about some in-but marketing that Alicia was recently highlighted.
And of course I did.
And of course I'm not mad.
I did shed it here when I saw those trails for the first time because I had worked decades to get those wrongs.
It was a sweet moment.
It sure was.
Yup.
And then I crash right after that.
Cool.
Anyways.
Any other questions for Alicia.
Alicia.
Thanks again for all the hard work.
Great job here.
Hearing none.
All those in favor say aye.
Aye.
Opposed.
Motion passes.
Item 5.2 is a grant application for the solar on public buildings program.
With the council author.
I statute for the grant applications.
Second.
Motion from Steve.
Second from Sam.
John.
Would you please?
No.
There's a couple questions.
There you go.
Good evening.
Mary and council.
Yeah.
There's a number of things to go over here.
So I'll try to give an overall summary.
And I'm sure there's going to be questions.
So they have a state has a program called.
Minnesota statewide solar on public buildings.
It's a any public building throughout the state is eligible.
There are some criteria that need to be met.
One is it needs to have solar capacity.
You need to be able to put solar panels on the building or next to them on the property.
But the great part about it is the state fund 70% and the remainder is picked up by the federal government through the investment tax credit.
So it is theoretically a hundred percent funded.
It does require upfront capital to provide that or are alone to actually have install those panels.
But once you've once you've got the grant and once you get the application in.
As long as you meet the criteria, you should be eligible funding.
The only other challenge here is that it is a very time sensitive first come first serve.
So we do have.
We do want to get those in quickly.
So that's partly why we don't have complete applications here.
We do we will have to submit submit those in the coming days.
But yeah, it is it's I don't think we're going to find a better better grant for solar because it is a hundred percent funded.
And we've we've found 10 locations 10 meters 10 that they're all an exalt territory.
That's a period of be suitable would be cost effective to install.
And so I think our big question is how much can we find funding to implement because it does have to be there next year or the following year.
Where we have those dollars.
Yeah, quick question here.
So I was looking at your your photos and and kind of looking at your some of your building.
She has some overhead photos where you kind of colored in and I'm seeing it page 61.
Well, I looked at you have buildings here with with solar.
Lines you drew in and then page 61 I see some in the grass.
One one seven five Gilmore Avenue.
Is that.
It's a little few school.
So that is.
Between the by the something a lift station property.
It's behind a small strip mall.
It's behind the the kind of strip mall aspect of the one on a mall area.
That's that's on the south side of that picture.
So this is a this is along the creek the corner of Vila and and going around.
Here's where I'm going with this my question.
You know, servicing things on a roof always takes more energy.
You got to get up on that roof.
You're oftentimes having to anchor into a roof.
You're puncturing a roof that you would like to stay waterproof.
I know it's possible to do.
Isn't some of this stuff better suited to simply have on the ground for servicing.
In terms of accessing yes, it's a lot easier to access on the ground.
Which.
You know, yep, that that's theoretically a small part solar to pretty much a plug it in.
It's pretty durable.
There shouldn't be much that needs to be done.
The.
To my surprise, the quote we got for a lot of this stuff was cheaper to be on the roof because they don't need to have the the they don't need to have a pounding in the the the metal post and other pieces.
So it is slightly more cost effective to put it on a roof that's in good shape.
So that was one of the considerations of some buildings that didn't make the cut because they've got old roofs.
And in some cases, we tried to go with roofs that were that either could be ballasted.
So you don't have to, you know, drive much down through the roof.
You can be weighted down there and just the size of the panels.
And and materials like put on those racking will keep it in place or in other cases, like the central village salt shed.
You know, if you put that if you can seal around the roof, if you drop this and going to.
May I make the pigeons uncomfortable, but it's not going to be any any problem to the.
The overall operation.
Okay.
You've thought about it.
Thank you appreciate it.
So quick question. So is this being considered for city hall.
Or the East and Rex Center.
We did value with those and those who have good solar access.
The the issue is the roofs are rather old.
And so both are being replaced, at least in the budget to be replaced for the next year.
So I guess that was my main question is, do you do this when you're after the roof's replaced and it's good or do you do it as a part of the replacement of the roof.
Well, yeah, you you want to wait till a roof is replaced or in good shape.
So theoretically these buildings if they did if they do get the roof replaced would be eligible.
The the problem is that the work does need to really happen.
Begin next year 2026.
So yeah, yeah, it's in case things don't happen quickly.
It would be hard to.
Kind of get them and and with I think that with city hall at least we do have a community solar subscription that would.
Make it more complicated to get solar.
So we can't have solar panels that would where we have community solar where there's unless.
We can't double dip with having those.
Yeah, we're already saving to enter energy credits.
Thanks.
Thank you.
Any other comments or questions?
Yeah, I'm at the tail end of a solar project in my house on the east end.
And we're financing 70% well 100% but then we're going to get the 30% tax credits.
The even paying for 70% of the project at pace for itself in five to seven years.
And that's before taking account how electrical costs will be possibly surging with AI.
So to get 100% I think this is to me in no brainer.
But I think I'm just smart to really concentrate on the right projects.
And.
Yeah, focus.
Are you saying?
Thank you for following this project together.
If I'm reading it right, it's almost $2 million in savings in 25 years.
That's tremendous.
Thank you.
Absolutely.
Any other discussion?
Thank you, John.
Appreciate it.
Here you know their discussion.
All those in favor say aye.
Aye.
Opposed.
Motion passes.
Lots of work, John.
Thank you.
Item seven is council concerns.
Council member.
Time being eight fifty five.
Who got them first?
What do me.
I've been involved in several public hearings, contentious public hearings.
But being involved in this hearing tonight, watching the people, regardless of what side you were on.
They were both sides very, very respectful.
And I mean, you don't see that public hearings.
And this is one.
I mean, it's been quite a while since I've witnessed a hearing where everyone regardless of opinion.
You've just simply said your piece didn't pick on anybody else.
And it was very, very good.
Very professionally done.
Thank you to the people that, of course, are left here.
So and in closing, happy Thanksgiving, everyone.
Very good.
Thank you, George.
Thank you.
You're good.
Council member Haema.
Just wanted to addition to Georgia's comments.
Not only was the hearing good.
Then I appreciated all the comments.
But all of the correspondence was equally good.
Things were well thought out.
People expressed heartfelt opinions on both sides.
And it was logical.
And it was, there was virtually no vitriol, which is always super pleasant.
So again, thank you for participating.
We can't do this without community participation.
Thank you.
Absolutely.
Jerome?
Let's eat turkey.
Yeah, there you go.
Councilor, is your district rich?
You've heard enough from me tonight.
Okay.
You're using, uh, just fine today.
Okay.
Councilor, councilman.
I'm good.
Not thank you.
Okay.
Very good.
Under the consent agenda, we have six items.
Item 8.1 is the approval of the November 3rd, 2025 council minutes.
Item 8.2 is the approval of the ordinance to increase liquor license fees.
Item 8.3 is an ordinance to set the fees for the city services for 2026.
Item 8.4 is an ordinance to establish a handicap parking space on Sandboard Street.
Item 8.5 is an ordinance to amend one hour parking located on Mark Street.
And finally, 8.5.
Item 8.6 is a claim against the city by Tony Herman.
Move to approve the consent agenda.
Second to all that.
Motion from Steve, second to all that from Jerome.
Those in favour?
Aye.
Opposed?
Motion passes.
Mayors, a time being eight fifty eight p.m.
I move.
We adjourn.
Second.
Motion from George.
Second from Steve.
All those in favour say aye.
Aye.
Meeting adjourned.
Thank you everyone.
Good job.