I hereby call to order the Roseville city council meeting for Monday April 22nd 2024 Mr City man you call the rooll please council member strong here member here counc member herec member here mayor Ro here uh and with us at the D by way of introductions we've got our City attorney Rachel Tierney who's on my right at the end and city manager Pat trudon is on my left at the other end uh we have a number of other uh staff and guests who will be participating in the meeting and we'll make introductions as those uh folks come forward for their portions of the meeting I would note for people from the public there is a meeting information on the table in the back of the chambers underneath the clock uh extra copies of the agenda if you want to look at that and then there's a full set of meeting minutes or meeting minutes uh meeting materials in the big binder right next to that that's available uh from reference as people need it uh would remind folks if you've got a cell phone to silence it or otherwise assure that it doesn't uh disrupt the meeting this evening and with that uh we'll stand for the Pledge of Allegiance I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice next our agenda is approval of tonight's agenda and as always we'll start with Mr Tron are there any changes from a staff perspective this evening yes uh Mr Mayor as I mentioned in an earlier email we are requesting that item 7A which is the request for an abatement for 3119 migd Drive be removed from consideration tonight uh we have been in contact with the property owner and want to work through with him to resolve the code issues we will bring this back if that is unsuccessful in a future meeting but there's no need to take action tonight right thank you Mr trenen uh and I'll check with the council are there any uh changes that council members would like to make to the agenda this evening or items to remove from the consent for SE separate consideration no does not appear to be the case uh and we'll do a quick check with members of the public also we have a section of our agenda called the consent agenda which is at the end starting at the bottom of the first page and carrying over I believe onto the second no all at the bottom of the first page it is um about six items that we usually take up as a single motion with a limited opportunity for input and discussion and it's usually fairly administrative items that don't have hopefully a lot of controversy associated with them but uh that being said if there is anybody here this evening who wishes to speak to one of those items or ask a question related to one of those items uh we would as a courtesy move it earlier in the meeting for you uh if that is the case is there anyone here this evening for an item in section 10 of tonight's agenda right does not appear to be the case uh then we uh have our agenda with the one change to remove item 7A uh from the agenda Al together uh is there a motion to approve that agenda second move by council member Scher second by council member gra and a discussion on that motion hearing none all those in favor signify by saying I I oppos that passes now so we have our agenda for tonight uh next is our first opportunity for public comment during our meeting this evening we'll have a number of opportunities as agenda items come forward uh but we do start each meeting with an opportunity for general public comment on items that are not on tonight's agenda uh but either may be related to City business or of interest to people in the community uh just ask uh in that case that if you're here to speak under General comment as well as any comment uh you follow the city council rules for public speaking which is a three-minute time limit for speak uh we do ask that you state your name and either your address or your street at least for the record at the beginning of your comments direct comments and questions to the city council uh and if there are questions that need to be followed up on we can certainly follow up uh after the uh comments are concluded uh so with that we'll open it up for general public comment this evening and I should have mentioned that when you want to speak you have a seat at one of the chairs at the table uh and the microphone will pick you up so feel free to come on up and introduce yourself hello council members and staff uh my name is Lindsay stoner I'm with the uh St Paul Farmers Market and we are located at 295th Street East St Paul Minnesota um I am here to share with you that we will be starting our seasonal Market here in Roseville uh in two weeks our opening day is on May 7th and we're really excited to uh be back again this year um you each have a handout in front of you here just kind of giving um some information about the market and I'll leave a stack of them as long as as also with our full schedule uh that you can keep at City Hall in case any community members have any questions or uh comments about the market uh we have about 40 vendors signed up this year with a collection of local food um and we're really we're just really excited we'll have some Community booths as well including the Master Gardeners uh so our kickoff day is May 7th and we'll be here all the way through the end of October uh the market is open from 8:00 a.m. to 12: p.m. and where is the Market located yeah it's at uh Corpus chrisy Catholic church and that's at uh 2131 Fair viiew AV all right thank you for being here this evening and letting everybody know and I know there's a number of people who perked up when they heard about that so and I see a thumbs up there so we look forward to it yeah um Roseville Market has been one of our uh best markets I think last year we had about an average of 1,300 visitors per week so that was really great so we're excited to be back again for another season wonderful thank you thank you is there anyone else from the public here for general public comment this evening all right with that then we'll proceed uh to the rest of our agenda and thank you again uh next on our agenda we've got recognitions and donations and this evening we have a number of proclamations so hopefully the mayor won't get horse reading them all but we'll give it a try here um and uh with that the very first Proclamation this evening is related to Asian Pacific uh excuse me Asian-American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month in Roseville and the proclamation reads as follows uh whereas the City of Roseville is committed to recognizing and honoring the contributions of all members of our community and whereas in 1992 Congress passed Public Law 10245 which annually designated may as Asian-American and Pacific Islander heritage month and whereas the month of May was selected to commemorate the immigration of Japanese citizens to the United States on May 7th of 1843 and to Mark the anniversary of the completion of the Transcontinental Railroad on May 10th 1869 with the majority of the workers being Chinese immigrants who were often mistreated and whereas Japanese American troops fought for freedom from tyranny abroad in World War III while their families here at home were intered simply on the basis of their ethnic origin and whereas in 1965 the immigration and nationality act opened new doors of opportunity for more Asian and Pacific Islander immigrants to the United States and whereas the end of the Vietnam War brought new Vietnamese Cambodian mang and excuse me and Le Ocean Communities to the United States and to Minnesota and whereas there are over 20 million asian-americans and Pacific Islanders in the United States with over 260,000 calling Minnesota home and nearly 3500 in Roseville based on the 2020 census and whereas many Roseville residents identify as Asian-American or Pacific Islander particularly mang and Ken community members they contribute to the Vibrant Community of Roseville through their Rich cultures and also as business owners Educators scientists artists and in many other ways and whereas the Mong people began arriving in Minnesota in 1975 as refugees from the destructive Wars in their Homeland in which the Twin Cities metro uh region has the largest concentration of mang people in the United States and whereas the Ken people have been oppressed in their Homeland for decades and sought refuge in other places with St Paul currently supporting one of the largest Ken communities in the United States and whereas despite all the progress many Asian-American and Pacific Islanders continue to face persistent inequality discrimination including barriers to equal access to education employment and healthare asian-americans especially those who are Muslim Hindu or sik too often face senseless violence and harassment due to the color of their skin the tenants of their faith or merely by being Asian and whereas the 2024 Asian-American Pacific Islander Heritage Month honors the theme of advancing leaders through Innovation and whereas the City of Roseville invites all members of the community to renew their commitment to ensuring cultural humility Racial equality and justice by participating in activities designed to advance the cause of freedom and equality for all now therefore be resolved that the City of Roseville hereby declares the month of May 2024 to be Asian-American in Pacific island heritage month so move all right it's moved by council member St seconded by council member Aton to approve that Proclamation any discussion on the motion uh hearing none all those in favor signify by saying I opposed that motion passes unanimously that Proclamation is approved the next Proclamation deals with mental health Awareness Month in Roseville and it reads as follows whereas mental health is a part of overall health and helps to sustain an individual's thought processes relationships productivity and ability to adapt to change or face adversity mental illness adversely affects those abilities and often is life-threatening in nature according to the Mental Health Alliance One in five adults and children will experience a mental health condition in their lifetime and whereas it is important for all to maintain mental health and learn the symptoms of mental illness long delays sometimes decades occur between the time symptoms first appear and when individuals get help early identification and treatment can make a difference in successful management of mental illness and in recovery and whereas we recognize numerous residents of the City of Roseville are impacted in various Ways by mental illness and whereas every citizen and Community can make a difference in helping end the silence and stigma that for too long has surrounded mental illness and discourage people from getting help and whereas public education and Civic activities can encourage mental health and help improve the lives of individuals and families affected by mental illness now therefore be resolved the City of Roseville hereby declares May 2024 to be Mental Health Awareness Month in the city of rosville so move second it's been moved by council member grath second by council member Aton discussion on that motion no hearing none all those in favor signify by saying I I I opposed that passes unanimously that Proclamation is approved next we have a proclamation related to older adults month in Roseville and that reads us follows whereas Roseville is home to many residents aged 60 years and older and whereas older adults in Roseville are the roots from which our community has grown who bestow Gifts of wisdom and insight upon younger generations and strengthen the bonds between neighbors to create a better place to live and whereas the city of Rosell recognizes and focuses on older adults taking in charge of their health getting engaged in their communities and making positive impacts in the lives of others and whereas older adults are productive active and influential members of society sharing essential talents wisdom and life experiences with families friends and neighbors and whereas our community can provide that recognition and respect by enriching the quality of older adults of life for older adults by increasing opportunities to remain in their Community as active and engaged citizens providing Services Technologies and support systems that allow older adults to Foster and maintain connections within their community and emphasizing the value of older adults by publicly recognizing their contributions to the diversity strength and unity of our community now therefore be resolve the City of Roseville hereby declare May 2024 to be older adults month in the City of Roseville and be it further resolved that we urge every citizen to honor our older adults and professionals excuse me and the professionals family members and volunteers who often care for them them our recognition of older adults and their involvement in our lives can help us achieve stronger and more meaningful connections with each other and enrich our community's quality of life move by council member shter second by council member grath any discussion on that motion if not all those in favor of the Proclamation for older adults month signify by saying I I opposed that passes unanimously that Proclamation is approved uh next we have a proclamation uh regarding ing days of Remembrance in Roseville and it's especially timely I would say at this time uh the proclamation reads as follows whereas the Holocaust was the state sponsored systematic persecution and annihilation of European jewry by Nazi Germany and its collaborators between 1933 and 1945 and whereas an estimated 6 million Jews along with millions of Romani disabled lgbtq plus and political dissidents among other marginalized groups suffered grievously and were Mur Ed Under Nazi tyranny and whereas the history of the Holocaust offers an opportunity to reflect on the moral responsibilities of individuals societies and governments and whereas the days of remembrance have been set aside is a time for all to remember the victims of the Holocaust as well as to reflect on the need for respect of all people to strive to overcome intolerance and indifference through learning and Remembrance and whereas the people of the City of Roseville remember the terrible events of the Holocaust and especially the deaths of more than a million children who were the victims and remain Vigilant against hatred persecution and tyranny and whereas the people of Roseville are dedicated to the principles of individual freedom in a just society and whereas the Roseville Community honors the memory of the victims survivors Rescuers and liberators of the Holocaust now therefore be it resolved the City of Roseville hereby proclaims the week of May 5th to May 12th 2024 as the days of Remembrance in Roseville some move by council member St second by council member shorter any discussion on that motion hearing none all those in favor signify by saying I I I opposed that passes unanimously and that Proclamation is approved and uh finally uh the proclamation regarding poppy days in the City of Roseville which reads as follows whereas after the first world war inspired by the opening lines of John mccrae's wartime poem in Flanders Fields And championed by International humanitarian workers MOA Michael of the United States and Madame guran of France the poppy was adopted in many countries to commemorate the sacrifices of those who had been killed in war and whereas the United States Veterans of Foreign Wars in 1922 officially designated the poppy as a symbol of remembrance and conducted conducted their first poppy day drive that year and in 1924 the VFW registered the Buddy poppy as its official commemorative Poppy and whereas BFW buddy poppies are assembled and assembled by disabled and needy veterans and the proceeds of the use of Buddy poppies as a fundraising campaign are used exclusively for the benefit of disabled and needy veterans and the widows and Orphans of deceased veterans and whereas the basic purpose of the annual distribution of Buddy poppies by the Veterans of Foreign Wars is eloquently reflected in the desire to honor the dead by helping the living and whereas each year members of the Roseville Anderson Nelson VFW Post 7555 distribute poppies at local sites the weekend before Memorial Day to ra raise awareness about the service of veterans and the importance of Memorial Day now therefore be resolved that the City of Roseville hereby declares May 24th 25th and 26th of this year to be poppy days in Roseville for the distribution of these symbols of appreciation for the sacrifices of our honored Deb and further Ur urges citizens of this community to recognize the merits of this cause by contributing generously to its support through donations for Buddy poppies on those days and be a further result that the city urges all patriotic citizens to wear a buddy poppy as mute evidence of our gratitude to the men and women of this country who have risked their lives in defense of the freedoms which we continue to enjoy As Americans so moved second all right moveed by council member Aton seconded by council member Scher any discussion on that motion no thank you hearing none all those in favor signify by say I I opposed that motion passes unanimously and that Proclamation is approved as well uh that then concludes that portion of our agenda related to proclamations there's a lot to be remembering at this time and thoughtful about and we appreciate uh that effort by folks to bring these uh proclamations forward to the community that brings us to our business items then and our first business item this evening is an update on the Highway 36 uh Transportation study which has been ongoing in our community and neighboring communities uh for some months now and with us this evening we have our city engineer and assistant Public Works director Jen Lowry to introduce Our Guest for this presentation welcome thank you mayor council members um we had David Elven come a couple months ago and give an update on the first phase of this multimodal study we're nearing the end of the second phase correct right and so I'll just hand it over to him um and stay up here if it's appropriate for discuss thanks Jennifer welcome mayor council members and staff um I'm David Aline I'm a transportation planner with mot in our Metro District and Jennifer must uh be having fun on the study because it's actually a year since I've been here not just a few months yes wow seems like yesterday time flies when you're having fun um deeply grateful for her participation on our project management team we've been meeting month and when I was last here we were talking about what are the needs of the study I'm going to take just a few minutes and summarize some of the safety information and such that we've been looking at working with in our public engagement to come up with Alternatives and that's my main mission here this evening is to share those Alternatives with you show the ones that we'd like to carry forward but also the ones that we would like to eliminate that's a big part of what we do in the planning study stud process is to get rid of the stuff that uh there isn't support for so uh we'll get to that shortly I always like to start with this graphic because it tells what we do in Corridor study planning we help people move along our Highway and we help people get across it and get over it in this case this is our study area to remind you uh we are about 8 miles from the 35W interchange proceeding Eastward to just a little bit east of English street where the uh purple line was to cross that alignment is being changed but it's that uh JY Street area where the Eastern end of the study area is and you're seeing here um our 36 Highway 36 Main Line in Orange and then the purple areas are the crossing components that are such a integral and important part of this study we're in three cities Roseville um Little Canada and Maplewood and we also have Metro Transit participating met Council participating and of course the county we're just about at the end of our evaluation phase we have some refined alternatives to share with you be taking your input tonight incorporating it into our study report and then we'll be begin what we call the project development plan which will be understanding what projects come next who can lead them what additional information do we need to start advancing Solutions this is just a summary again of what a study this is called a planning and environmental linkages study so it's intended to help support those future planning processes especially if they involve environmental documentation we don't expect uh there would be a lot of need for that but it's possible with some of the solutions that we would need to do an environmental assessment and so we've begun doing some of that pre-work which involves as I said getting rid of the Alternatives that don't meet the needs of this study so we don't get into detail design we don't come up with one preferred alternative you're going to see three different Alternatives tonight another reason we're doing this is because of money and yellow you'll see uh here highlighted the bridge projects that we need to do within the next 10 years in about 10 years at uh bridge at at Fairview and Cleveland is going to need to be replaced as well as the bridge at Snelling Al together that's getting close to 75 maybe a hundred million dollars depending it's good to that we're taking the time now to understand uh the needs so that those future projects don't leave anything out don't leave any any people out this is uh kind of the the heart of the study area just uh to to be uh reoriented here we're looking toward the East and you'll see that Cleveland interchange and then the fair viiew interchange in the in the distance and then Snelling a little further on so just a little bit of orientation our traffic numbers are uh pretty high for a four-lane facility uh we have about 6% of trucks as well which is also relatively High uh compared to our Metro average we also have uh our Easy Pass planning process that has designated this part of Highway 36 as a tier 2 and that's a big part of what's driving this study is to understand is an Easy Pass facility which uh would go from uh probably Highway 61 to the intersection with 35 W is that still the right solution we looked at it a number of years ago and we need to understand if it still makes sense given the changes that have happened postco with uh travel demand and uh with the buildout of our other uh Easy Pass Lanes which you see in purple here this gets to this statistic gets to the the heart of of people going over our um Highway we actually have uh almost twice more than twice as many people going over Highway 36 in this study area than moving along it and majority of those are going by car but a lot are going uh by foot and by bike I should I should say also we're not totally certain about those foot and bike numbers planning for people walking and biking is still a relatively new uh task for us at mindat and so we have new data source sources of data new ways of estimating but planning for cars has been something we've done for decades and we're trying to do a better job now of planning for everybody uh the safety summary I think we looked at this uh last time I was here but we have in red uh the the dark red are those areas that are uh above a critical crash rate it it's not quite average but it's hard to say what the average crash rate is but it's exceeding what we would expect and what we would want to see and so here you're seeing at that um Snelling Avenue interchange we have a problem we also have uh oh I can use I can use the mousy mouse uh here at Lexington we have a light crash problem and then down at County Road B we have some safety issues going on and also here at the Hamlin uh on and off ramps at Commerce Street we have some uh safety crashes exceeding our uh expected uh rates those were on the ramps and at the intersections these are along the main lines and uh these and also on the ramps and we can see here at Hamlin we're having uh issues on the Commerce Street side again at Lexington uh problems on the ramps there on the main line near Dale as where we have our main concerns and then uh to a lesser degree out on the East End of the study area and I put this in uh partly because you can see we don't have any bike or uh pedestrian Crossing of our probably most heavily traveled and in demand uh Crossing of Highway 36 this is the Snelling Avenue Bridge and this is the uh transit station over at rosale ironically here's my office and so I can look out and see a non-compliant highway structure and uh this is kind of Ground Zero for our thinking about improving things for all travel we've been doing a lot of engagements since we were uh we last visited more than 5,000 written comments were submitted and we had a poor intern who read many of them and coded them and what you see here is the result of that coding that allowed us to get the type of comment here in the leftand column and then across the top the location if we were able to determine it where those comments were being generated from and what you're seeing here is pedestrian comets are clustering near Fairview and Snelling and Hamlin similarly the bike comments in that same area we also have off at the far end where we couldn't necessarily put a geographic location to it those issues that The Pedestrian the bike we also have uh a significant number of driving comments again clustering in that same area so it's this area near Rose D Hamlin um east of uh west of Lexington is where we're seeing a lot of the issues and so through that engagement process and through our um analysis of the safety information and uh our forecast our traffic forecast both for people in vehicles and people walking and biking we determined what we call the primary needs the reason we're doing this study and it's to improve conditions for people walking and biking improve those conditions for people uh the safety conditions for people in cars and improve Mobility for people uh riding in vehicles so the Alternatives we developed uh two types of Alternatives one is what we call it preliminary or higher level that looks at the main line basically the the crosssection configuration are we going to add a lane throughout the entire length are we going to drop a Lane are we going to convert a lane to manage Lane so a a big range of big big picture um uh approaches and then treatments of those Crossings would we want to improve those Crossings to be consistent with what local plans call for both the city plan and the county plan or are there opportunities to exceed what's already called for in plans and improve the I conditions U even further so you see in the left hand column here uh six Alternatives what we call preliminary Alternatives that we developed to a degree that we were able to understand if they met those three primary needs and so the first line is the no build that's just required so we have a baseline understanding to compare for what if we left everything the way it is would the these Alternatives be better the first alternative is to add Easy Pass Lanes one in each Direction and make sure that that shoulder uh brt facility is there right now um metr transit buses can ride during congestion they can ride in the shoulder there's some inconsistencies in that right now so we would want to make sure that we make sure that shoulder uh brt capacity is there but if it's an Express those buses can also get into the Easy Pass Lane and we actually are carrying a lot more people not not a lot more but we're carrying more people in an Easy Pass Lane in buses these days in some Cor in the Metro so the Easy Pass Lane is not just for people who can afford to pay the fair during uh rush hour it's for people riding in buses and it's also for everybody uh virtually 93 % of the time so an Easy Pass Lane can function as a general uh general purpose Lane we also looked at uh alternative two Easy Pass Lanes without those um shoulders for buses an effort to save conserve pavement try and reduce a little bit of that uh permeable surface that's not consistent with um metro transit's plan to run Highway brt in this Corridor that's a pretty important um need for people's Mobility it's not just the mobility of people in cars but the ability of people to travel by bus along this Corridor and so that was determined where we would not carry it forward the third alternative is what we call auxiliary Lanes so extensions of the ramp so you have additional space to merge or decelerate and that would be paired again with the highway brt on the shoulder and was determined it would meet the needs we also looked at Easy Pass Lanes only between 35W and 35e uh the idea would be to limit the amount of new construction we needed to do but we found that um it didn't fully address the our traffic forecast showed it would not fully address the congestion that is beginning to occur to the east of 35 e so that was not carried forward adding a general purpose Lane also was not carried forward uh to some degree because of what I was saying earlier about an Easy Pass Lane functioning as a general purpose Lane 93% of the time we also have um general policies for the region that say when it's a choice between um adding a managed lane or adding an Easy Pass Lane you should choose the Easy Pass Lane that's our general Regional uh met Council policy and so given that uh we we also uh did the traffic forecast calculations as well and the general purpose Lanes really the difference between Easy Pass Lane is uh marginal for for vehicles so that is not carried forward and then we looked at adding just one Easy Pass Lane you're probably familiar with how it works out on 394 on the west side and that works because the morning and afternoon split between Peak demand in One Direction is such that it's worthwhile in this case uh you and you need to be at least at 7030 so your difference between your morning and afternoon Peak we're only at 6040 in this Corridor and so given the extra hassle of the um maintaining those things going sending somebody out to move the gates every day uh and and uh the additional work that's needed plus the Savings in terms of pavement reduction was pretty marginal and so that one was uh eliminated and so what you see is we have uh three Alternatives Still Standing we took that alternative one which is ADD easy pass with Highway VRT and we have the 1A option and the 1 C option and that hinges on a lot of a public feedback that we received about the uh ramps at Hamlin and you'll recall we had a little discussion about that when I was last here and we heard pretty clearly businesses in that area and uh just our general public Outreach was split pretty much 5050 on whether or not those ramps to and from Hamlin Avenue should stay or go and so we responded to that by uh creating a refined version of the original option one that would keep the ramps at Hamlet open and then our our third option is to add the auxiliary lanes that unfortunately would require closing the ramps at Hamlet because we need to address that safety problem with the merges um and so I can show a little bit some graphics here that may help uh our discussion and and your feedback on that this is our main line existing conditions and you'll see the purple uh so this is uh 35W the purple outside lines here are the existing auxiliary lanes and uh we have some crash locations showing on red dots there and then down at the bottom you see what the the what we call the crosssection looks like and so there are two the two main lines going through with the auxiliary on the outside here's what that alternative 1A would look like this is adding the managed Lanes so those are shown in Orange all the way from Highway 61 through to 35W there would also be auxiliary Lanes in this congested area around Roseville and so you see down here I think yeah I've got a bigger picture here uh to show I think I you have a packet in front of you now I think I finally caught up to the packet I didn't give you all those preliminary slides in there apologies for for not referencing that earlier and so the the cross-section here this is just east of uh uh Snelling app is the on the inside you see the managed Lane with shoulder the two through lanes and the auxiliary Lane on both sides and what you're seeing is not the same type of interchange that's out there today which is a clover leaf which is the four traditional for Clover Leaf those kind of sweeping ramps promote speed and speed is why we have a lot of our safety problems in this area the design you're seeing here at the upper left is what's called a folded diamond and it is counterintuitive to me because it looks a bit like a folded Loop but I'm told by Traffic Engineers that the diamond part of it comes from the fact that it has right angle intersections with the main line and so even though those Loops are folded there because they have this 90 Dee angle at Snelling that's why we call it a folded diamond and it's similar to what is in existence at Fair View already um the other feature of alternative 1A is a new connection of Commerce Street behind Target underneath Snelling to connect up with the frontage road over at the Southwest quadrant of this um interchange and we've gotten a lot of positive feedback on that connection this would allow a person to get off at Fairview and pick up that Frontage Road and access the uh uh area behind excuse me behind Target um the other feature here that's really interesting is a bus only uh turn into the existing uh transit station at rosale so instead of having to go up to County B2 and loop around add several minutes a a bus only left turn in and out of the mall there could really speed up travel time for aine for one and help with our congestion problem up at County B2 so I think those are the key features of uh this alternative 1A and I'll just pause there been talking a lot uh and I want to be mindful of our time is there anything that's jumping out at you from this alternative that you think works or meets those needs I guess the question we've been asking people do you think these Alternatives meet those needs of walkability bikability safety and Mobility great thoughts feedback Council M TR yes thank you um first of all Jes is that really how you say it I've called it Jarvis my whole life Jarvis it's Jarvis and local local vernacular is the French connections thank you I've just called it Jarvis as long as I can remember and I was like wa um I I note on page 31 of your presentation it says local business com comments R comments menot maintenance comments those weren't included and I don't know if you have or is that part of the um as part of that Matrix of all comments but it didn't and then you said that Community input kind of um made it 50/50 on how things were between 1 a and 1 C I don't know if you can speak to what some of the comments were from the high school or you know how that would impact things I certainly can and I did not include them in written form here but I I did want to address them you asked me when I was last here to please go out and talk to some of those folks and we we did have good conversations with them some of them were somewhat candid um so I want to be careful how I characterize what people said um I could start with Wellington development the uh company that is redeveloping the old Department of Ed uh site and they are still looking for tenant and they need to uh maintain all access options they were very supportive of the Commerce Street connection underneath um uh 51 they they uh thought Commerce Street itself could be a little wider and and help promote whatever kind of development they bring back there on the issue of the Hamman ramps they they were quite clear that uh they need to be kept because a future tenant would see that as a benefit we spoke to Target which is Target number one and I learned it's the fourth busiest Target in the country which was really remarkable bunker um that was quite quite an eye-opening visit um very similar comments the Commerce Street connection would be uh a Boon to them they would enjoy that very much because it gives their uh delivery people direct access to the loading dock uh in back we followed up actually uh they had some concerns about the elevation Jennifer was super helpful in providing information about U uh utilities that are under there and we determined that uh it could work uh the the the option to have a connection there could work with their existing geometry for their loading dock so that was a relief uh they too very interested in keeping that access open at Hamlet keeping those ramps at Hamlet open that's a big part of why we came up with the the additional option we talked to uh uh principal or I'm sorry Dr Wilson the the uh principal at the school and some of her staff about the school's needs and they again are concerned about keeping access at uh Hamlin open I think the statistic was 27% or so of students at the school are choice and so are coming from more distant locations either being driven by parents or by themselves and that is an important access point that helps helps maintain vehicle flow I have yet to follow up on my invitation to go out and actually see how afternoon dismissal goes but uh Dr Wilson assured me it's a little crazy and it would help me understand better uh why they are interested in keeping all the access they can on the other side though they are interested in more opportunities for people walking and so closing those ramps at hland actually allows us to have uh grade separated uh not grade separated but but physically separated bik lanes and pedestrian um walkways from the road whereas if we keep the ramps there the intersection needs to be larger and the the dimensions for the uh for the inter for for having a barrier would not work and so it would just have to be a painted barrier on the road and so you wouldn't get quite the level of comfort and safety that you would expect with um with that um we also got comments from mot maintenance that they do not like the Hamlin ramps the signals don't work well all the time there seems to be a problem there more accidents um it's very difficult to plow and the merge distances for people getting on and off create some safety problems for when they're out trying to do maintenance so I think uh I think that's about the extent of comments we were not able to um speak directly with rosale about what they would feel they did host us for a fabulous uh public uh open house in I think it was the first weekend in March um but we have not been able to reach them yet I'm not quite sure what their position on the hamling ramps would be or or the other facilities that are closer to them just couple follow um I just think um I know that this traffic study was can conducted in 2022 but I'm sure if you're house right close by you've noticed that especially Tuesday through Thursday of late the traffic has really increased Mondays and Fridays tend to be a little lighter I think with hybrid schedules continuing but the amount of people who are back into an office per um location seem to have increased greatly as someone who gets on 36 every day um I just wanted to comment about the I think the Commerce underneath selling is a great idea but I do think it's really important to you had a bike lane um noted on that but I want to make sure that if we consider a bike lane that it can extends all the way from Hamlin to Fairview oh for sure because neither side of that um have even sidewalks so along in front of the apartment buildings um from Snelling to Fair View you're on your own there's no there's no bike Lanes there's no um even you know there's no there's not even parking along the side it's just two straight roads with no sidewalks so I love the idea and then the other piece would be a bike you really nice if a bike trail went to um at least on the target side there is sidewalk um in there if they somehow connected up so that it got to that b intersection of B and snailing just because um I mean on either side and then I guess you know we have had problems with carts before so love to know what the pro what the solution would be if we're going to ask Target to put locks or something on the cart because then if it's easier to get underneath the freeway it could be a um a remote parking access and then just lastly I want to know how all of these things work together with issues we've been addressing with that D and snailing intersection yeah um Jennifer and I were talking about the uh Snelling and be that project is a county project believe well it's a it's a mix bake it's a study funded by the county uh primarily led by the city um it is coordinated our um short-term and long-term our long-term um Concepts that we're talking about assume that this folded Diamond would happen so I don't know if you have any exhibit of selling itself for this I but the fact that it would be two um intersections with signalized traffic control it the the kind of the cross-sections considered for future rebuild of selling would provide for um off-road uh at least ped facilities I don't we have their paths we haven't gotten in detail um to provide access Allway smelling um and then it would also you wouldn't you would no longer have cars coming off the freeway at speed approaching that intersection there so um they are coordinated there's a lot of the same people on both yeah and I should have mentioned uh another reason for this 90 Dee uh uh uh uh intersection is slower speeds and our Target speed for Snelling would be 45 miles an hour which is about at least five maybe 10 below what's going on uh today and so that would be more consistent with the kind of speed you'd want at County B it's snowing uh so you'd have just a slower speed segment all the way from harar up to even uh after uh B2 so slowing things down is a key part of what uh this strategy with alternative a would be with this interchange type and this folded interchange is the only um option moving forward for selling itself yeah we did have you noticed option one B was missing uh that was eliminated because it used what we call a tight Diamond which is basically it's the uh I don't know if I have a I don't have an image of here it is yes some I anticipated myself I'm impressed what you see uh with the tight diamond and this is the reason we needed to eliminate it is to make it work you would have to eliminate the Hamlin ramps and we heard very clearly we need an option at least one that retains those Hamlin ramps and in order to make it possible for somebody to exit from 36 to 35 W North you would need what's called a collector distributor Road a CD Road system as it says on the graphic and that you might be familiar uh there's some on 394 in the western part of the Metro there's some on 35e to the South but it's kind of like you have a separate Highway going alongside the main Highway and in order for somebody to make that move from 36 to 35e they would have to get into Lane way back at Lexington and so just from a common sense standpoint it doesn't work so well and you can see the cross section here the profile the amount of asphalt additional asphalt that would be needed to make this option work just isn't consistent with our our goal I don't even know if we have enough right of way to fit all those Lanes in we want to minimize the amount of pavement uh that we're putting down because of storm water and m issues so that's where 1B went council member ad thank you for all of that I think some of these thoughts that you have I I would agree with and um I think pertain to some of the other ones here uh the questions about RW are well taken I'm wondering if you've had high school sorry high school if you've had communication with the county the county just rebuilt Lexington and B2 did they build that considering the possibility that Hamlin would shut down no thinking about the peak times for the high school what we going to do is you're going to pile more traffic into that especially people turning left and heading westbound on B2 to the high school um you're going to put a lot of extra strain in that situation so I wonder about that coordination so the first answer is no I don't know that we discussed that issue with the school directly I know we did County the Count's yeah the count is on on the PMT for the the project management team um I don't think that when Lexington was redone this conversation considering Hamlin ramp closures had even begun at all so I'm guessing no okay all right was there any conversation with the two churches there at that intersection we did go we did go to King of Kings that's that's onale Street uh there's Grace and then there's an Episcopal Church Christopher thank you I do remember we reached out to them but we're not able to line something up okay all right um I would I would concur with council member st's comments about uh Commerce first of all being a positive extension but also thinking about that pedestrian access that would be a tremendous Boon for what we have as people crossing not at the intersection just north of B and between B and and 36 so I hope that would Prov a much safer connection for folks to important uh resources for people at Target and other the library and things like that so I really appreciate that um my other question is about these intersection additions on selling Avenue um when we think about some of the big changes that have happened in the North Metro and I'm thinking about uh the intersection at Rice Street and um 36 and about the intersection at U of Rice Street and 694 they were eliminating traffic signals and this is adding to traffic signals so I'm curious about that the projections here I don't know what they would be two years after was built but the projections in 40 2045 are for those to be uh rated as a sea level so I feel like we're building in a problem see actually pretty good from a traffic engineering point of view well but there's there it flows beautifully right now with nothing so we're we're actually building in congestion um and quite opposite from these recent things that have been award-winning hey we took out this many intersections and whatever so can can you speak to the purposes and ways we might think about this as not building a bunch of congestion but actually this is necessary or roundabouts wouldn't work or we couldn't put this all into one interchange like they did at Rice 36 can you talk about that please yeah you're you're very you're very right about it will move slower it'll move at level C that is the intent to improve the safety piece of it the design of The Interchange also provides connection for bikes and pedestrians to get over and across which they don't have today and so we need to somehow get those pedestrians across that traffic line and so the introduction of those new 90 degree uh intersections creates a place where we can have cross walks for people and bikes and that's something we heard from Target is that they want more ability for people because they know people are crossing on the bridges and and the same place uh just north of be over Snelling uh today with the carts uh they're very concerned about that so that's the one of the other reasons is to accommodate pedestrians at bikes where they don't have accommodation today okay but you could have pedestrians without intersections right Crossing I think is the we wouldn't need cross anything if there wasn't an intersection Bel there you would ped Thing Crossing Snelling I think is the they'll need to cross sing there aren't as many opportunities without these interchanges we don't have to cross on and off ramps yeah well we're we're creating Crossings for the on andof ramps and without those new additions I just adding congestion makes my head explode so without those new intersections the pathways would just go straight through we wouldn't have to worry about um I don't know maybe I'm wrong maybe because of the loops that are there right now you know it's critical but you know we've talked about how can we just carry people over it's a critical thing I think it's an expansion for Roseville um for people getting to work and the facilities but I guess it's the congestion piece that blows up my brain yes well I think some of that comes to Signal timing and those types of um coordination to make things still flow well well enough we' we've done preliminary analysis which says it will work at level C I'm I can't tell you how much of a degradation that is over existing levels I would have to get back on that just those intersections aren't there right now so right right so it's there's zero I mean maybe an A or whatever you know it's not rated because they aren't intersections right they are they are merge areas for yeah for the ramps yeah but there's no intersection that's where I don't know what the for example the rating the current rating for the B and Snelling intersection is um but these are brand new intersections with zero rating because there's no waiting right now there's just a just a rope and just to clarify it does not appear um that the Snelling traffic stops on the south side of 36 just because there's no crosswalks going across East West I'm presuming that that may just be a stop for the people coming on and off I think it's still signalized I suppose it has left Turners these are just the crosswalk left Turners there still trying to get off selling to go East yeah okay yeah these would both be signalized okay yeah yeah so that that's that's my concern my concern is that we're we're building in congestion um and I I wonder about building in congestion this is an area that is really congested of course the Converse of that I suppose is that I'm I'm not arguing for one versus the other but one of I'm perhaps one of the arguments that is being made is that by adding that congestion it's also a way to control speed and increase safety to a certain degree although obviously intersections always have a safety concern trade number of conflict points and I would think did you have other question that's that's all for now thank you right I did want to try to catch everybody if if you've got other questions or comments or feedback coun m not not anything particular I wasn't curious I'm glad you clarified that those are um signalized intersections so that would be one I County Ro B one at the entrance exit going that direction then one further and then also at well then it wouldn't be till c I guess after that that's true um B2 will still be there yeah but not a not a but signals that's right yeah it will not be signal2 isn't now I mean b i was y and these two and that's where people try to get across so um I guess one of the questions I had is if Hamlin does stay there and it's I understand the reasons for it the problem I have encountered is when you're going east on hway 36 the traffic and this will be helped by this um this reconfiguration is the traffic merging off of the selling um ramp it's too tight so people are trying to get in and out of there quickly and that's many times I've seen near misses on that yeah so I think we're you're talking about this area here I'm illustrating this is option three which has auxiliary lanes and so the the solid purple line is where there are existing auxiliary lanes and the dashed would be the the additions so that would help with that yes okay however ever that half mile distance between Snelling and Hamlin is still about half again right closer than we would want a typical Urban freeway Interchange to be from the next one and then the only other thing is that Commerce Street is a real CL where that area of GL Lane and kind of West of even Cleveland where I live because that'll give people an alternate route when they're bicycling or walking and there are a lot of walkers in that neighborhood that would appreciate that access to without having to go down County Road B other thoughts questions comments I just wanted to note a couple of things one is I I think I agree with comments that the the the Commerce connection under selling is very helpful I think that's going to help with pedestrian issues and conflicts at B especially because that's that's a difficult place to cross and and certainly a a an unrestricted Crossing by having it grade separated is is should be helpful uh we have to think about that from a little bit from a public safety point of view too and just in terms of some of the concerns people have about going under a highway and and lighting and and visibility and things like that too but that all will no doubt be considered as part of project design going forward when you get to details but I just wanted to note that um the other thing is of course um if there's a way to do as many auxiliary Lanes as you can even in a 1A or a 1 C I think that that would be helpful because of those acceleration deceleration issues that are already conflicts right now um the other thing of course I don't say this too seriously but of course the spacing between Fairview and Snelling is the same as the spacing between Hamlin and selling and sets that they're a half mile roughly to um I don't think any thought was given to closing down the access at Fair viiew uh to to try to space out those those interchanges better to for the benefit of 36 because I'm sure their spill over concerns that would be associated with access to it it is very well used yes that's part of the reason Hamlin those Hamlin ramps are among the least used in in the study area so that's part of the consideration and and one of the reasons I wanted to ask about the Hamlin ramps is because right now as you're heading westbound on 36 I believe Hamlin is designated as sort of the suggested place to get off to go to rosale um and so certainly if those close then there's going to be a different traffic pattern I'm not sure how many people actually follow the suggestion and use Hamlin to get to rosale in the westbound 36 uh mode but I do know that that's something that apparently mindat wanted people to do or rosale wanted people to do or whatever so just hopefully that is taken into account in the thought process that that was supposed to be sort of I think some overflow capability and if they go away that that may cause other issues that they were intended to solve at that hlin council member strong I just wanted to reiterate I think the reason um in followup to council member eton's concern I also shared the concern about adding intersections on snailing but as a biker or a walker there's really no other way you could get across that people do go incredibly fast as they're coming off of those um accelerating and you know getting off and on either direction and so I think the only way that you could actually add pedestrian or traffic on that would be to do SUB type where you have to bring everyone to a complete stop otherwise even then I I would worry that it would take a little bit of learning to get people to uh be cognizant of the various uh speeds that people who aren't in a big vehicle are going great um do you want to kind of run through the other two uh Alternatives that you have I know they're kind of outlined in the presentation as well we stopped at the end of the first one but also we have about five minutes in our in our time before we start getting behind on our agenda too so I think we've kind of summarized the the main differences here the the onea and 1 c um have those those main features at um Snelling the main difference being the ramps for Hamlin are retained with option 1 C and that reduces the width available for bike and ped facilities on that bridge and at the a local intersection so you have a slightly less optimal BK and pet facility but you can still exceed what's out there today and then option three which is add the auxiliary Lanes to make that work the ramps at Hamlin do need to uh be closed so that's the main summary I think the main takeway a couple of other quick visuals to share uh on the left you see uh a proposed treatment for what would happen at B2 and so again instead of the sweeping Loop ramps that are there today the intersection gets squared up to a uh T and so that would be another so there would be a signal intersection yes would it I'm going to make your head explode you're right and and there is an offset intersection too Crossing cap it does look offset yeah I'm not sure that's I don't know if it's full access though yeah I can't be certain I can't be certain on that I can't imagine we would do an offset intersection when it's so close there yeah my eyes are real big right now I mean offsetting that and putting another so we'd add three signals then in a half mile and that's I mean that's I I I don't like I don't know that that one signalized it looks like it's restricted to just write in right out basically you know I do see um some islands there in channelization so that one that one may be I think there still needs to be definitely deceleration and acceleration Lanes when you go to a right angle turn there because otherwise you're going to have people in the main traffic lanes that are going to really be coming up the works but I think it seems like what's what there is to is to facilitate the north south Trail yeah and but not so much Crossing at that point there little crosswalk things there even if I steal your glasses I can see those yeah okay and then there's the Hamlin issue um this is uh very quickly what we uh what the differences between the ramp closures at Hamlin would mean for The Pedestrian facilities and so the main difference is here on the left side if the ramps were closed protected by physical barriers would be possible like you see in the lower left here and if the ramps were kept open that would mean those barriers would need to be painted you couldn't get enough space for um physical barriers to be U installed so that's that's pretty much it I think we've addressed a lot of discussion questions already U anything else uh that I'm missing counc uh you're just bringing up more questions it's great I appreciate that can you go back to that one slide please um looking at those pictures very helpful both of us like oh yeah the pictures make it easier um certainly the picture on the left with the um things out of the way would would be nice I'm curious about how the intersection off offer disappearing create that or help with that in the sense that there still needs to be a road to St Christopher's um there so there's still going to be an intersection on the east side of that intersection of what the off ramps are and hin so we still have an intersection there we still have the same intersection south of the um south of 36 so I'm not sure what's changing there but right now we have great separated sidewalks here and this these pictures look to be either a completely barrier separated sidewalk or on grade bike and pedestrian right now students use that all the time it's a very heavily used very important p and bike actess so I appreciate that we're thinking about this but it almost seems like we're downgrading it in the sense right now it's grade separated and then it would not be at least on the right side so not sure how the left side um is improved because I feel like all the same intersections are going to happen so I'm not sure how that works and then that right side is actually I think a a lower safety feature that we have right now I think they're just high level conceptual so I don't think but as as we think about that um with it currently great separate I I always find find myself feeling much safer when there's a curb um than any of these other things and the barriers you know we've often discussed barriers in spots for example on County Road B West of Cleveland and just the maintenance of those things so I wonder about how that works for the county and their plows and things like that so I wonder about a lot of those things versus just having nice big old sidewalk that's great separated yeah so we'll follow up with that as well because I don't have a good answer so my follow up on that is I think the sidewalks that are existing on that Hamlin Avenue Bridge are very narrow and notep not intended for not intended for bicycle use and I would guess that the bicycles stay on the the roadway most of the time um just because of that issue too not kind of being fearful being on a narrow sidewalk entally pedestrians and a big drop off to the road um so one of the things maybe to look at because I don't think that Hamlin Bridge was scheduled in the the yellow highlighted Bridge Replacements so it must be a really good Bridge um but it's got some of these issues about the geometry of the bridge so I think that you know if there's a way to potentially create the bike you know ability on the p on the road surface and then look at if there's ways to expand the sidewalk width to help with The Pedestrian side of it um and see how that all looks you know once again we've got issues with snow storage and what you know when there's plowing on this bridge there you know there's just not a lot of space for all these things to happen so um there may have to be consideration of some sort of bridge more substantial Bridge work on this bridge as part of upcoming project too so I didn't want to I didn't want to just say that that's not an option um uh because it may of necessity to facilitate all the crossings it may need to be so one put that out anything anything else that we've got I I got one more for you because why not talk more I guess um the two uh ramps that I find most dangerous in this stretch are the ramp from southbound 35 to eastbound 36 which I use regularly coming from work there is no room there the lane is maybe a full Lane um and if there's ever snow then it's not a full Lane um and I noticed the bridge is scheduled for replacement but thinking about that that through Lane um for folks would be super helpful because there people have to merge and then a 100 yards later there is a through Lane for people who are coming north from Cleveland onto eastbound 36 so thinking about how that bridge will work so that we can improve that that that U access from 35 South to 35 East that is a big thing that slows down 36 is going eastbound coming out of Minneapolis um is those cars having to emerge they come on a tight Loop and they have to merge in a very short period of time it's very dangerous so that just on that you weren't here I don't think for the presentation on this summer 36 project go ahead and actually an auxiliary Lane is a part of this Summer's project in that area to improve so that you don't have to merge right away when you're coming up that ramp okay let's start it's pretty narrow when we do the bridge they're going to be putting in a a full aular Lane further I'm super excited um the other the other piece is that uh interchange at 35e and 36 um those are some awkward angles that people come in again the tight uh Clover leash that we have for example if you're going northbound 35e and coming to westbound 36 that's an intersection my family actually won't take anymore uh my parents uh my sisters family coming from rochers they won't take that because it it because of the way the lanes come in and out and then the um people coming south bom 35e then merge in with it there's so many lanes coming in together and it it's it's Bonkers there between from there to Rice Street before the things settle out so I'd love to see what we're going to do to make that safer yeah I'm going to rebut that because actually I drive that all the time and when they improved it with the change of that interchange it was a huge improvement over what used to be there it is an improvement yeah and it's it's great because it pulls it pulls everything off so the merging activity takes place outside of the main two lanes whereas you used to have to try to merge right away into the the one of the main two lanes that was rebuttle autt because when you come up if you're going in Avenue we're talking about 356 oh you're talking about 35 but we're blood away anyway okay we'll let that go thank you sure I just wanted to say um that Hamlin um those sidewalks because of how um with the how much the change in grade between the ground and the sidewalk gets I just wonder if those are adaa compliant because of at the bridge itself yeah they are thicker on the approaches well they're just it's a big step down so I would think it would be somewhat there's no I mean if I was in a wheelchair they're not terribly wide if you had oncoming traffic I would be afraid for someone that fell down that uh the width the width is a big issue the width but also it's aight deep step yep it's the same thing on Victoria yes the exact same thing where you got to and with a 4ot sidewalk instead of six or eight and then there's a big grade separation which I feel very safe on but it's h wide Bridge with that narrow sidewalk is just amazing we're talking to the county about that right on it thanks so you can see there's a there's a 5050 on that 35e 36 interchange we did hear that comment from several people avoid that I heard that at several uh of our Outreach events that's I will say one thing it works when people go the right speed for The Interchange the problem that happens is that you get people no I'm saying you get people using it every day you get people coming off of either 36 or 35 and they go the full highway speed and then Slam in their brakes and try to cross three lanes to get to that exit and that really WS havoc on people trying to come on SO luckily it's all offset from the main two lanes that helps but people need to understand that they've been given a deceleration Lane be things like that so there there's other issues I think that need to be dealt with there and I could go on and on and on about that particular interchange I have several items to follow up on so watch for my email might be more than a year he's not gonna come back I I bet he enjoys these you still maintain it was last fall I'm gonna check all right march with that we've got a oh a lot more business before us this evening so I appreciate you being here with the update and tolerating our our feedback here and no this is very helpful I'm very appreciative good thank you thank you again all right that then brings us to our second business item having not uh having taken item a out of our business items this evening rep item 7c uh which is to hear about and discuss uh potential policies and strategies related to smoke free multif family housing and I'll turn it over to city manager trudon to make introduction on this topic and certainly if we've got folks from other organizations feel free to introduce them and invite them to make their presentation thank you uh Mr Mayor yes we do have representatives from the association of M smokers here to uh discuss uh with you about variety of multif family uh strategies uh making um multif family units I should say or buildings smoke free I did meet with them earlier in the year and we talked about the range of options that a city can consider um I think often uh people think about there's an ordinance in place and you have to enforce it and all that thing there's a lot of other um ways to approach it that I found very interesting and invited them to a work session know there's been interest on the city council over the years about looking at this items and the occation to get the residents um calling us about that so um I will invite the folks on up uh to come and talk about that I would mentioned that in the packet I do have information uh provided by them about the number of unit and buildings that are currently smoke free according to their database and that is 77 buildings uh for a total of 2,650 units that are smoke free just as a reference we have about 2011 multi family buildings or 7500 units so if you do the math it's about 38% of the buildings um or 35% of the units in Rosal that are currently covered according to data provided by the asso stationers so that hello and welcome and if you can just introduce yourselves as you begin your presentation this evening good evening good evening mayor R and council members my name is Katie angman I live in the 1400 block of Elder Avenue and I also work at the association for nonsmokers Minnesota I'm just here to introduce my colleague I work primarily on the point of sale which you guys have done a great work on um over the years and rosville has really been a strong leader um so bringing this forward as housing um makes sense and it makes sense to talk about it as a whole city so thank you um manager troan and I'm going to turn it over to Cara she knows all this I don't I've learned a little bit but thank you go ahead I'm gonna just sit back in the audience watch the r go by just kiding uh good evening thank you mayor ow and council members it's really wonderful to be with you this evening um again my name is Caris skan I'm actually a resident in Minneapolis but I work with Katie at the association for non-sers Minnesota I am a program director at answer and I also run their Minnesota prevention Resource Center I am here uh this evening on behalf of my colleague Jackie seart who is on family leave so um I will do my best to fill her shoes for you before I begin I just want to um acknowledge that answer and lift smoke free are located on the traditional hends of the Dakota people and that the land that our organization occupies comes with the legacy of genocide and Trauma caused by US law and policy applied to American Indians with that being said I also want to just recognize that when I mentioned tobacco in this presentation I'm referring to commercial tobacco which is mass-produced and not secret tobacco that is used for ceremonial purposes by indigenous communities so a little bit about a Liv smoke free our goal is to increase smoke-free housing opportunities for everyone um but especially for folks who are disproportionately harmed by secondhand smoke so the folks who are most vulnerable within our communities um we want a world where everyone has access to Safe clean healthy Air at home um and has access to those smokefree uh housing opportunities um as I mentioned earlier smoke free is a program of the association for nonsmokers Minnesota we provide free assistance to Property Owners managers and homeowners associations including condos town homes and cooperatives um with adoption implementation and maintenance of um Equitable smokefree housing policies we support residents who are exposed to secondhand smoke um and thirdhand smoke in their homes um we have received uh a number of calls over the years from Roseville residents on this topic and I know a number of them have reached out to you on this topic as well we also educate and engage decision makers and the community about the importance of smoke free housing policies and we conduct research on this topic um and I will talk about a study that we did within Ramsey County in just a couple slides here so when we talk about social determinance of Health we're really talking about a number of different components that benefit health so it's not just access to healthcare um we're talking and I actually appreciate the conversation today tonight about pedestrians and and bike transportation again we're talking about um the built environment as well so do people have access to um uh Trails for running and walking and biking do they have access to nutritious food um education and in in our um situation we're talking about housing and healthy housing so one component of that is exposure to secondhand smoke where one lives we all know that secondhand smoke is har harmful I'm not going to belabor that point tonight I do want to point out however that 25% of the US live in multi-unit housing um and there have been numerous studies that show that Air Trans pretty easily from unit to unit within multi-unit housing um Center for Energy and environment um which is a local organization here in the Twin Cities has studied this a number of times over the years they have found that all those tiny little cracks and crevices between units um so we're talking electrical outlets we're talking about Plumbing access panels um even tiny uh cracks where the wall and the baseboard meet even underneath carpet air can transfer from unit to unit from all of those tiny little cracks and crevices so um Center for Energy and the environment found that when you add up all of those little cracks it depends on the building and age of the building of course but on the high end that could translate to about the size of a softball of air transferred um kind of a hole between your your unit and your neighbor's unit so it makes sense that you can smell your neighbor's cooking and it also makees sense that you can smell your neighbor secondhand smoke that being said approximately one-third of residents um of multi-unit housing are involuntarily exposed to secondhand smoke where they live and we this is pretty consistent with the local service ve we have done as well when we have asked residents um what they have seen in their own homes there are lots of benefits to smoke free housing I'm can't get into all of them this evening but we're obviously talking about healthier cleaner air where folks live um there are certainly Market advantages for um smokefree properties reduced cleaning costs um protecting Investments reduced fire risk reduced legal liability fewer resident complaints potential Insurance savings and eliminating uh cealing and ventilation costs um thank you um to manager Tran for talking about the number of policies that we have here locally um according to our records and we've been tracking this since the 90s we're we're aware of almost 700 policies um and these are voluntary smokefree policies I'll mention within Ramsey County um here in Roseville we are aware of uh 34 um and as you heard that includes over 70 buildings and 2600 units so two of those 34 properties are common interest communities which again kind of broadly encompasses condos town homes and cooperatives just kind of some landscape of current uh law as it pertains to smoke-free housing back in 2018 the Department of Housing and Urban Development implemented a federal rule uh prohibiting smoking and public housing all public housing Nationwide um as far as here in Minnesota we have the Minnesota Clean Indoor Air Act that only prohibits smoking in the common areas of rental rental properties so that's a common misconception it does not cover common interest communities like condos town homes and cooperatives um at the municipal level here in Minnesota there are currently two uh smoking disclosure policies so this um again does not say whether you can or cannot smoke indoors but it just says that you need to disclose what the policy is pertaining to smoking in the building so duth has a smoking disclosure ordinance for rental properties where the prospective renter needs to be told kind of like with letter rate on what the smoking policy is for the building before signing that lease um and St Paul a few years ago passed a smoking disclosure ordinance for Condominiums and so before at the before the point of sale the prospective buyer needs to be um notified in terms of what that smoking policy is for the property in terms of other states um 84 municipalities in California have laws that prohibit smoking in 100% of private units and Rental multi-unit housing properties I will say that most of those also include condos um and there are a number of ADD municipalities and counties within California that have uh partial coverage as far as smoking policy disclosure um main Oregan Rockland County New York New York City Oakland California and San Francisco California so from our perspective why why should Minnesota cities consider to implement smokefree housing protections for residents um stating the obvious protecting uh multi-unit housing residents and staff and guests from commercial tobacco and cannabis smoke I will say we are getting lots and lots of calls about secondhand cannabis smoke to our office um protecting Health Equity I didn't talk a lot about this but we know that the folks who are being exposed to secondhand smoke the greatest are the most vulnerable in our communities and tend to be um low wage earners or people of color uh reducing fire risk in our community the Minnesota State Fire Marshall has said year after year that the number one cause of known fire um related death is due to smoking materials so again this is a a great way to reduce fire risk as well attracting new residents to Comm to a community that values Health um and a majority of renters want these protections um this isn't just true in our surveying but the Minnesota adult tobacco survey has also shown that this is what people want the majority of minnesotans are non-smokers but even smokers and non-smokers both um as a whole want smoke free housing um I mentioned earlier there's been some local surveying done on this so there was a Ramsey County survey um that was done in collaboration between Anar and St Paul um uh Ramsey County St Paul Public Health uh of that survey there were over 518 respondents uh almost half of respondents uh stated that they were exposed to secondhand smoke at least a few times a year um and not surprisingly of the smoking allowed properties respondents with lower incomes or who identified as people of color were over represented in those smoking permitted properties data shows Community Support so I just wanted to emphasize again although most uh people don't allow smoking in their units Ramsey County renters are still exposed to secondhand smoke in their homes um and secondly renters support city-wide smoke-free housing protections so just wanted to highlight um in our surveying 91% supported a city-wide smoking disclosure ordinance like radon and Lead um and 78% supported a city-wide smoke-free housing related ordinance just a little bit about some of these different options to consider um a smoke uh smoke free and I'm sorry this should say a smoking policy disclos disclosure ordinance uh it requires landlords or homeowners associations to inform prospective tenants and buyers what the smoking policy is for the building so whether it is allowed or Pro um or prohibited and where on the property it is allowed um and similar to laws requiring Property Owners to warm prospective Renters of uh or purchasers of buildings that contain lead based paint or raden so what could a policy like this cover it could cover rental properties it could cover common interest communities like condos and town homes or could cover both of those um multi-unit housing entities a few just benefits and considerations of uh smoking policy disclosure ordinances benefits uh it increases property owner education it improves resident awareness and protection of smoke smoke secondhand smoke and smokefree policies uh it could increase the adoption of smokefree policies we saw this as as a positive side effect when the St Paul or disclosure ordinance went into effect is a lot of condos chose to go smoke free um during that point in time uh these are fairly easy to implement um and they're unlikely to be legally challenged a few considerations U of course adoption of smokefree policies are not guaranteed with disclosure policies um and theoretically residents exposed to secondhand smoke may have difficulty getting relief for example a manager could say well you knew there was smoking when you moved in so um I'm not going to do anything about it but again kind of a theoretical consideration there in terms of a smokefree policy ordinance um so this would require that multi-unit residential buildings would have a smokefree or a not no smoking policy that covers 100% of the indoors that's really our floor to ensure that you're getting all of the benefits of a smokefree policy um so that could cover all multi-unit properties um some multi-unit properties so that could be rentals or common interest communities again or both um it could be new developments only moving forward at a certain point or it could be all properties phased in overtime some benefits and considerations benefits broad resident staff protection um improves awareness of again secondhand smoke and smokefree policies and really levels the playing field between different communities and properties and management companies um considerations uh you know we want to ensure that Equitable enforcement is a priority we also recognize that housing instability is also a public health threat and we want to ensure that everyone gets to stay in their home we just want to make sure that they are um have access to healthy Clean Indoor Air at home so with that said promoting the goal of compliance and not eviction not steep fines or criminal penalties but really focusing on Equitable enforcement um I will say the public health law Center has a really wonderful um Public Health based Equity Equity focused U model policy as well available for cities um another consideration is community engagement is necessary for successful implementation um we're lucky here in Minnesota we have the Statewide health and Improvement partnership that provides resources um and support to communities on this topic that can help with that other options that have been considered by communities here in Minnesota are municipal resolutions or a declaration of support um for smokefree housing Richfield for example has done this um creating a City web page with information for residents there are a number of um cities in Minnesota that have um implemented that hosting a city sponsored lunch and learn for property managers to talk about this or have um for example answer come in and talk about uh the resources available for properties free um another option cities have considered is decreasing the rental licensing fee for cities that have a smoke-free policy or the flip side of that is increasing fees for properties that do not have a smoke free policy um another option is requiring City funded multi-unit Housing Development or Rehabilitation projects to be smokefree as a condition of receiving those City funds just a few takeaways uh secondhand smoke exposure it's harmful and it remains a prent in pervasive health hazard all throughout Minnesota disparities persist among those who are exposed to Second and thirdhand smoke and the vast majority of res residents support smokefree policies for their buildings and their for and their communities um as I mentioned an equity centered Public Health focused model policy is available and there are resources available that exist to support policy implementation thank you for listening and with that I will take any questions right thank you again I appreciate for you being here this evening uh and you did an ad the job filling in for your associate thank in my opinion uh with that are there any questions or uh feedback from actually let's start with questions maybe right now and then we can we can get into discussion if we need to other questions or clarifications any council members like to have Council one of the things I'm sure you're aware certainly your colleague who uh prepared this is aware that we have a resident who's been quite vocal about concerns with buying into a a community that said they were smoke free but aren smoke free um and with some of these steps you run into that same problem essentially a grandfather policy or a yeah they're smoking but we're not going to pay attention um are there any um points from things we've learned from other places about how to handle these kinds of issues yeah great question um and we I will just say that we do have a whole toolkit on compliance and enforcement for properties um that we can provide free of charge and technical support report um that being said we do have a lot of you know we encourage properties to have everything written so we have really excellent um policy language from the public health law Center um we have um really everything should should be documented so for example um well for one we don't recommend permanently um exempting any uh smokers in a in a building that again we don't consider that to be a smoke free property um so if there are for example if there are say fixed term leases where um and many of you are probably aware of this you can't break lease terms mid lease so for example if someone refuses to sign on to a smoke free policy say before their lease is up um we make it very clear to managers that they need to notify all new residents moving into the property what the smoking um policy is for the property that the property is transitioning to be smokefree they may still smell smoke until X date until the you know the mo person to most recently sign a lease has signed that smokefree policy um so I would say part of that issue tends to be um honestly confusion from multiple parties in terms of what policy details are what that timeline is what that transition is um and we have a number of different resources that we could provide for that situation does that answer your question maybe it's a condo Community U so it's a purchase thing not a lease thing oh a okay um it's um the board choosing to not or from this perspective choosing to not enforce their own rules so that I think that's that's a an example of a problem the way how we're now and I wonder how these things help or don't help with that so I think that's that's something we need help probably moving forward with how these things would interact with enforcement um but certainly this is a present situation for this person yeah absolutely um I think that is part of the appeal of having a city-based policy is again it kind of levels the plane field it's the same rules for everybody and in terms of kind of what that process looks like for following up say with a manager or a board that doesn't say enforce their own policy um I was G say I could talk for another hour about that but that's probably you guys are probably like we're done with this um we do have um as I mentioned we have put a lot of time and thought in the public health law Center into kind of a model policy that has a very robust enforcement mechanism available for cities that that offers a lot of support in that process so um um but again I think that's part of the appeal of a city policy is that helps put more pressure on other you know building based entities for enforcing yeah us enforcing that's very difficult to do right showing up when someone's smoking knowing which room it is in so yeah right uh Council that is the one that we I'm sure on the council have all heard because yeah someone purchased and it's not easy for that person to get out of the unit so not they been basically living in their car a lot of the time because they can't stand the smoke and the management says unless you catch the person smoking in the ACT aren't going to do anything so that would be something that would be helpful perhaps the educational component would maybe be a tiny step towards it sometimes if you have that available for the management maybe would help us I don't know yeah that is a big issue here y can um I'd like you to address the Cannabis part I know that there's still a lot of loose ends in what's coming down from the state on where and and you know all of that and so are you saying that you would lump cannabis in with all other smoking then we we are seeing the cities want to take be proactive about it and so just to to clarify and again there to your point there's a lot of discussions happening right now at the legislature so I'm aware currently as the law stands um currently smoking is allowed smoking of cannabis is allowed in multi- housing until March 1st 2025 and so the law was written after March 1st 2025 the smoking of cannabis will no longer be allowed in multi-unit housing per state law so um there are also some kind of points that are unclear um within the law for example multi-unit housing isn't defined um so there are again there's some gray area there that I think is still being worked out at the state legislature um but I will say you know what in our conversations with cities and and public health um I'd say that most are considering lumping that in as a proactive measure um because this there is so much gray area and they're not sure whether or not that will be included the state level moving forward and one more question um what about the rights of the smoker so if you are saying you can't and and when you say that the lowincome um people are affected the most do you know what percentage of low income are smokers because I'm just trying to make sure that if if you know we want to make sure balance people's rights and and so I'm just kind of curious one if you know how many are smoking and then what about their rights to smoke how do we handle that yes great questions so um I guess I'll from and I this is my I'm not a lawyer hat but this is my know not the law know it's not good but there's a lot of things we choose that are not healthy habits absolutely nope I I I hear you loud and clear um so under the eyes of the law there are no um legal protections for the active smoking so um if we look at kind of federal law or state law we're looking at for for example um you know freedom of speech or freedom to assemble like these are things that have legal protection in the eyes of the law um smoking has never been deemed a protected category of person or a protected activity under the eyes of the law um and so from a legal perspective like that's not a really a thing you know I'd say we recognize you know nicotine addiction is a very very significant addiction um the the tobacco industry has prayed on different communities uh for decades so there's a there's a lot of layers to this that we don't take lightly when we're talking about smokefree policies um I will emphasize that smokefree housing is not smoker Free Housing so people who are smokers can absolutely live in smokefree housing and as I mentioned again um surveys have shown that smokers also want smoke free housing because they don't want their clothes to smell this you know the their Furniture to smell um for from a real real estate perspective I've talked to realators who have said that it's really really hard to sell for example a condo in a building that smells like smoke because the prospective rent comes in and says you know I'm going to have to tear out the carpet and redo this and that and that so um it's absolutely not smoker Free Housing um so we talk a lot about this is about the smoke not the smoker so again this isn't all not tobacco right there are other ways to use tobacco that don't involve smoke so that being said we also recognize that you know this is not also a policy that's implemented overnight or over the course of a month this is a transition with a lot of support for the residents in the building support for managers um and so residents feel prepared um as that policy is is being implemented um in terms of the percentage of adults who are smokers 20 2% of the general population thank you I was not gonna remember that off the top of my head so again we're talking about very small but again folks who need support um we have um staff members who have been trained in tobacco Association and that's something a support that we provide um during that smokefree policy implementation too not that smokers have to quit again they don't have to quit to live in smokefree housing but if they want to quit um and we're told that a lot of smokers like smoke free policies because it helps them cut back on how much they're smoking and a positive side effect is it it also is kind of a little bump for a lot of people to quit smoking so thank you other questions coun um I this question was for um a attorney T um what would be the legality of decreasing the licensing fee for uh smoke free policy uh buildings uh council members council member strant you you would need to um as I'm sure you're all familiar fees are based on costs so your license fee needs to reflect the costs of providing that service of whatever service it is you provide to a licensed establishment so you would need to demonstrate that uh a building that was not smoke free is higher cost to the city than a building that is smoke free in order to justify that disparity thank you that was a good question so it's not and just to follow up on that if I may so it's not just the case where if you cover your overall costs of a program even though there there's a dis arity in the fees between smokefree policy buildings and non-sm smokefree policy buildings that does that doesn't meet that that requirement you're saying that it has to be based on the specific difference in cost to the city being a smoke free building versus not instead of just how you distribute who pays for the overall inspection and Licensing program exactly you know there are there are certainly um other examples liquor licenses for example get more expensive when the place gets bigger because um a larger um establishment is serving more people there are ways to distinguish between one licensed type and another even within the same category um but all laws that a city passes have to have a rational basis so you have to be able to explain um why is it more expensive to have a building that allows smoking than a building that doesn't and license fees are not a place to um achieve policy OB OBC that's not what fees are and if I can follow up along this line of thought um if the city um or could the city consider uh a a building if it has a smokefree policy and they don't and there's evidence of non- enforcement of that policy is that something that could be added as a consideration for the cities um uh looking at their license and whether or not to renew or whether to impose some sort of uh penalty associated with that license I just want to kind of talk through is that something that is is something that the city could look at yeah mayor R absolutely in the same way that you have uh tobacco or liquor licenses that come in front of you when they violate the they fail a compliance check um you you penalize them and if you get them in enough penalties you can revoke a license um those actions for councils though become very more difficult when you're talking about housing because the ultimate consequence of revoking a rental license is evicting everyone who lives there then that's that's something we dealt with in terms of we have revoked licenses before and the question is what how does that work and in in the case of the particular case where it was it was like code violations and things like that it was revoked but they could still everybody could still live there they just couldn't rent to new knew people as units became vacant that was sort of the penalty associated with it so I would imagine that that would be similar to this and that there would be a chance to perhaps reinstate and and get rid of that inability to rent to new tenants on vacant units of course mayor R and there would be a whole lot of steps between no violations and they simply won't comply but at the end of the day nothing else works right so probably a bit of an extreme hypothetical but it it is where it ends at at ration of the license you can't ever get a l compliant and you want to enforce your law at some point that's the consequence you end at and really long path there but and and you said enforce our law can we put those requirements in place if if it's a voluntary policy of the of the um the the the the building you know the management of the building has the voluntary smoke free policy that they are not enforcing is can we do anything about that through our licensing enforcement or is it only if we have a smoke free law in place your tool is laws okay that's how I just want to clarify that okay thank you appreciate that coun member strong just clarifying we wouldn't be able to utilize something like our new sense policy for currently we use for the hotels and such there's no mechanism for utilizing something like that in a situation it would have to meet the definition of nuisance which I suppose there's an extreme circumstance for secondhand smoke could be considered a nuisance but I can't say that I've ever seen it so we would be breaking new ground if we did that new ground yes there have been um and I'm not gonna I can look this up and send it to you but there have been um some communities Nationwide that have amended the nuisance Clause to include secondhand smoke I will I can look that up I don't off the top of my head remember but I was going to say I don't know that that's included in our current nuisance code so or at least not not uh specifically and and well articulated that might be potentially generally included in some broad language but that would be interesting to try to deal with in its current form other questions or comments and I did want to check is there anyone from the public who wish to speak to this item this evening I know we've got a few people from the public here is there anyone from the public who wanted to provide some feedback to the city right doesn't appear to be the case um so Council I think the the request from staff is to perhaps provide some some thoughts as to do we want to I guess that's kind of the threshold do we want to look at some some things we can do in this area um and and do we have an idea of what those might be if so and do we want to direct a process to perhaps start uh for the city to look at that thoughts from the council in that regard and it's open to whatever we want to do Council M John well um first I I would be supportive of a smokefree policy disclosure ordinance um obviously would not help the person that we've had heard a lot of but I think um it could help others and if there was some type of interface where that was somehow connected to resources that person could um easily obtain but that seems like a um something that would be quite able and I also would like I think we could consider a declaration of support for um smokefree housing um I I think I still have other reservations on some of the other ideas at the moment given some of the questions and concerns people have raised right other thoughts I would tend to concur with some of those points council member I would concur with a lot of those points uh the disclosure piece is something that I would be prepared to do and then having those education pieces both both things on a website as well as some Outreach to those um properties we certainly have a lot of because of our licensing program a lot of abilities to contact folks and uh channels for communicating so um I would be in favor of those pieces as something to look at in the near future here other thoughts from Council Members council member uh gra yes I I think I agree with both those items and especially the educational part or some contact with the management m that's more than just sending them something and I don't know what that is yet but I think we need to imprint on their brains that this is a a thing we're paying attention to and it might go further than this if we don't get compliance because that's where we really have problem C shorter um I I guess it doesn't hurt to get more information I'm going to withhold my support on things until I know more this is first time looking at this so I don't want to um commit to anything from that aspect and I'm I'm concerned about doing anything that we have to one U dedicate resources to to enforce because it seems to me the only you know if you're going to force a um management team to enforce it then they'd have to evict people and I'm I'm very not comfortable with that thought so if we're going even deeper into that I I we want to make sure that yes we want I think it's we all understand smoking is bad it's but you know as we said you know people are addicted to smoking and there's some of this going on and so education I think is always good but I I just want to be careful about anytime we want to enforce because if if we're going to put something in and we have to enforce it we have to make sure we're enforcing it so I mean so that I'm just saying let's look at it but be careful how far we take it sure well I think the the disclosure requirement is just that that we're requiring properties to disclose prospective tenants or purchasers what their policy is and I how that so hopefully that doesn't lead to evictions uh but I understand your concerns and I would I would say that even if we were to enact a smokefree requirement for all multif family I would not want it to be designed to create the opportunity to evict people that's not that's not what we do with our licensing program and this would be contrary to that so I'm sure that's not what's recommended by this organization or others that's actually eviction is absolutely not in the our model policy and certainly I think a key stakeholder to engage with is the Minnesota multi you know family multi Housing Association as well because they have that perspective as well um just specifically on the disclosure policy I think it's important to note that I I believe it should apply to both rental as well as ownership um because I think that gets at that particular situation you know with the condos once again it's disclosure so it's but it it does seem to have KnockOn effects which are positive so you know that's a starting point I like the notion of the education part of it I think there's things we can do to connect people to resources as a city um and also to connect with especially multif family rental properties who are in our licensing program and and and look at education opportunities we already talk about doing that with respect to other aspects of providing rental housing in the community uh so that that falls in line with that um I also um am interested to talk about thinking about how we look at uh projects that the city helps to fund I think that we have some ability in those cases to look at potentially requiring restrictions as as a as a as a um result of receiving City funds for a project and so I'm open to talking about it I think you know there we need to know more once again as council member Scher said but I would add that to the list of things to to maybe bring back for further discussion um I I I think that the fallback is that depending on how we progress in this issue as council member gra said we may have to look at subsequently looking at a more substantial City policy but I think there's a whole host of as we talked about with enforcement there's a whole host of things that have to happen before we get to that point and and and certainly would be a lot of discussions we'd want to have with the community uh and others before we put that type of uh full-fledged City smoke free multif family policy into effect but I think these are some things we can do to try to affect some change in a positive way um and hopefully relatively minor towards our use of resources as the city counc joh I was just wondering if we needed to formalize a declaration of support of smokefree housing by putting the educational materials on our website and such we are applying but should we take a more formal approach and say we do support smoke free housing I don't think it's at the cost of non-smoke Free Housing but I I just wonder if we're kind of saying we support it if we are doing educational programming do we take a bolder stand and say we do support it and here's the resources because of that I guess it's just a matter of intention and of what our statement is that we're making um but I appreciate the other comments it's something to maybe think about I'm not always sure that that our Declarations of things have much impact that we think they do but at the same time um you know one aspect might be looking at is this something we want to advocate for or uh you know like we looked at with some of the uh Minnesota clean Andor Air Act and things like that it was initially it was sort of some cities and some counties that were restricting smoking in public spaces and then eventually became you know a Statewide requirement and so I think that we may want to look at as we talk about our legislative priorities that this is something we want to add to that to be Advocates of that might be a way of of getting at that that that has more um theoretically a little more Effectiveness you know because it's pointed at people who can make decisions if that makes sense seeing no objection to that I think stff do you feel like P that you got a pretty good handle on come back we'll work looking at a disclosure ordinance um I think with the education there's a lot of opportunities we can do I I would note that just recently we were partnering with Brighton and uh mounts view in gathering Property Owners on a poly basis to meet about whatever issues there is so that could be very easily set up not sure the attendance is great but it's something to to start with we can look at that and then try to do some research on Declaration of support what that looks like and dis what other cities have done um yeah bring some that back to discussion and see in black and white as far as what that or would look like and kind of go from there I know they have a lot of resources they've already provided me a lot so work with them to get U additional information bring back right and this is probably a good topic to kind of have a plan ahead of time as to how we're going to do engagement on some of these decision making so it' be important to to make that a part of what we're talking about as we bring things back y very good thank you again for being here this evening and bringing forward this uh this issue for our consideration thanks and I'm sure you'll be a continued resource for us as we go forward yeah all right with that then we've got a uh another business item 7D which is to consider oh do we need to do our break all right let's do a five minute break then thanks e e e e e e e e e e e we're back from a short break and I do just want to apologize I think we had some audio issues with the ability of people to hear our presenters at the table uh certainly in the room here and if not elsewhere or elsewise so okay good to know uh so hope I apologize to people in the room here especially who weren't able to hear all the presenters very well uh and we apologize for that we've I think we've made the adjustment so hopefully it's all better um with that then we're moving to item 7D once again which is to consider a request from Kids in Need Foundation related to the state bonding uh funding for this legislative session I'll turn over once again to C manager trudon to introduce this item and I think we've got some representatives of uh kids need as well who will be here this evening uh Mr Tre thank you Mr Mayor um I'll try to be brief I know the council has a lot of background on this and try to put it into uh the case as well and let kids and need talk about on their request but just some some basic here so kids in need Foundation uh it's a great organization that provides resources to students and teachers that are located in our community and actually um is the headquarters as I understand it for the Nationwide effort on have throughout the country uh as a result of every meal um being able to purchase their building from receiving State uh funding uh they are looking for a new place to locate and they also have some space needs as well that they need to have addressed any case so uh they are looking at uh possibly um relocating to the former Department of Education building that came up earlier today uh for the new headquarters warehouse and teacher Resource Center the estimate that project cost to be about 10 million uh as I mentioned uh last year a lot of nonprofits did receive funding from the state if you will recall state had a very large cash Surplus and uh this is something I learned along the way here um I thought it was bonding dollars all along they actually uh received dollarss nonprofits from the cash reserves as we come into this session uh kids in need Foundation is looking for some State assistance um to relocate given it U its support uh Statewide of U teachers and students and uh given that there is a less of a cash Reserve uh the state level that would not be possible for them to receive direct funding so the only other way for the uh kids in need to receive uh bonding dollars is the City of Roseville to actually receive the funding because it's tax exempt bonds that are issued to fund that so we would need to be in involved very directly into the process and this is not simply a pass through that we receive the money and pass along we have to have an ownership interest in uh the building itself we would need to ensure that um the public purposes as outlined um in the award and legislation is met um for what I have been told 125% of the lifetime of the project which is uh 40 years we have to make sure that construction is done according to the plan state approve approved plans as well as making sure compliance and a whole heck of a lot of issues sustainable wages and all the other reporting in addition there is a lot of um paperwork I guess to do and reporting to make sure throughout that 40 years that um uh the the public purpose is being met and continually reporting back to the state if any of those things don't happen along the way uh technically the city's on the hook to return those dollars back to the state now I I mentioned that there are ways to work through all that you can get into a long-term lease you can have construction management contracts and long-term operating agreements but all that would need to be created uh by the city most likely at our cost uh as as well as even if you have those agreements there still be U use of staff to make sure those Agreements are in place and and monitoring all those type of things so it is a significant um investment I guess you could say both in um actual dollars maybe and uh certainly staff resources in doing this and I do raise those concerns in there uh I would mention that it's got nothing to do with u the organization we think it's a great organization our employees have volunteered there and and we'll continue to do that is just as I look at um responsibilities the city has to take on I do have some concerns about whether we have the capacity um to do that also concerned about the future liability of that and then third I think we have a lot of projects uh and organizations like this that um certainly appreciate similar type of assistance from the city and I um conflicted on helping one without opening up the door for others or how do we select which ones we help and don't help and um so anyway those are my reservations I just wanted to make sure that that was clear and it's not about the organization it's just about additional responsibilities we as a city um would need to take um kid an is here I can't see them them up I think Cory Gordon uh will be coming up representing and um would mention that there is a bill uh that has been introduced uh down to legislature that is ready to be um taken act as as I understand it to um get potentially included in some type of budget bill down the road so time is short um by third week in May I think is the last days of the session so clock is sticking here so with that Cory actually uh before we have I just wanted to maybe if there's some questions that the STA Council has for staff specifically I wanted to do that step first and then we'll uh turn it over to Kids in Need for their their presentation uh and you know my first question is you talked about ownership interest is is it a partial ownership interest of on the part of the city or is it do we own the building outright as a result of this probably the simplest way is to own it outright but I think there's some ways you can now I'm look but ultimately we have the responsibility that somebody we into a long-term lease ownership interest and lease it back okay and is it is it is it that we own the building you know I think in situations like this what's commonly happening is that the the nonprofit would acquire the property then they would lease the property to the city who would lease it back to the nonprofit um and then there'd be you know so just the the document structure is that the city would enter into a grant agreement with the state to receive the funds then the funds would be used to purchase the property on behalf of the nonprofit who would lease it to the city who would lease it back to the nonprofit and then as part of that transaction the city would enter you guys can jump in if I'm getting little this wrong but um the city would enter into a use agreement with the nonprofit as well to conduct the the program the project which has to be um what the state legislation says it is so in this case it's operating a nonprofit that provides school supplies to teach teers in a teacher training location facilities for training teachers um so that's what the program is but the the legislation requires that if for some reason this organization goes away that the city takes over that program so we take over the program yes because that's what's being funded with because that's what's being funded okay so from what you're saying um it does not sound like the city actually has ownership of the building we have ownership of the program you don't have to have own well the there's I am not the best person to explain the federal tax law as it relates to tax exempt um properties I know just enough to be dangerous and so the Federal Law requires that you own it but they consider you having a lease that will last for 125% of the life of the project to be a suff to to rise to the level of what they would consider an ownership interest okay so to the federal government to the tax laws it's equivalent you don't have to actually own it you can have 125% lease and I I don't know what the life of the project would be but what I'm hearing is ballpark 30 years so you would have may be a 45 year lease all right thank you for clarifying that other other questions uh for staff at this time and we'll certainly uh if you can clarify any of those points feel free to do so uh when we get into the to the presentation from you uh councilor Scher yes um would being in taking on these bonds affect our ability to take on bonds to do the city's projects then would this go against our rating um no C sh I don't believe so because we'd be receiving a grant so we're not actually borrowing if we were to borrow for maintenance center or but it doesn't show up on a liability it's it's money in Money out okay I think there is a liability there as City attorney outlined that we take over the program but I'm not sure you can quantify that in exact dollars at this point would not be held against as for Deb service right we are not issuing bonds it's the state issuing their their state general obligation bonds a portion of the proceeds of which would go to this as well as other projects around the state that's typically how the state bonding program works so yeah I couldn't see how it would F our our ability to borrow funds or anything like that any other questions council member strong so if the program were to no longer be in operation and it were to come back to us we would have to conduct the program or make a decision as an organization to change what the scope of the program was or give the money back I suppose sort of you would have to you because they're tax exempt bonds you you've got Bond holders who have their ability to continue to hold bonds that are exempt from federal taxes relies on the continuation of this program so the city would need to take over the program I don't know whether it could be modified that's just a little bit outside of my B but I'm going to say it can't um it is tied to the original legislation that created the program I suppose it's possibly go back to the legislature and get it amended but I just really don't know the answer to that um but and if if you fail to continue the program which doesn't mean that you actually have to have city employees now operating the program you could contract with another nonprofit who can then operate the program but you are responsible to make sure the program keeps operating if you failed that responsibility it could happen that the state could come to you to pay the money back all right one more question um so um you said that uh the bill was introduced did the city have any input or was the city involved before the bill was um introduced uh no sure so we weren't involved with that part of it before okay I didn't see any of the drafting I saw a a draft after I asked about status and um so I saw a draft but we had no part in writing that um and then last week that it had been introduced okay thank you and that brought up I did have a second question and that was um the mechanism that the city has to um undertake I mean do we have to provide some sort of documentation to the legislature of our support of the bill or our willingness to accept Okay I I I thought there was something in in the materials about that and I just wanted to make sure so there is something we have to proactively do do as a decision by the city in order for this to work if if the legisl legislature were to pass the legislation and we didn't do our part then it doesn't it doesn't complete the circle so to speak correct okay and I'm not sure the exact timing I think you know obviously when we're down there for B and we show the legislature that we support this um so I'm not sure if that has to happen before the legislation going include that in if if if that's where they want to go certainly before receiving funds we need to make sure we have all that paperwork that okay right that I wanted to clarify right appreciate that thank you for uh indulging our questions here you can imagine that this is something that we're not you know if our attorney is not an expert in it we're we're at C ourselves so we appreciate your uh patience for that uh question and answer and I'm sure to the extent you can fill in additional information that will be appreciated as well so now feel free to introduce yourselves and we look forward to hearing from you this evening well good evening mayor Rogue council members back good seeing you again um I'm Corey Gordon CEO of kids and need Foundation hi um mayor Ro council members um my name is Molly Jansen I'm a constituent in the City of Roseville and I work as a lobbyist at the firm representing kids and mean Foundation at the capital and I understand that uh the go bond process and Route is new for the city so the questions are not at all uh concerning um and you know I think there are some uh I think largely a lot of what uh Matt you WR up but we would agree I think in terms of some of the the risk exposures costs Etc we'd be happy if the city wants to take all those on but that you're actually speaking for a lot that we would actually be taking on so I think um both in terms of the risk exposure as well as the significant portion of cost components are actually costs that would be on kids and need foundation not the city uh for someone not being familiar with the all aspects of the geob bond I think you're turning has done an admirable job of explaining and recommending there are some uh risks Associated for the city U there are some opportunities it's a $10 million project we're looking for the state to provide 50% the rest of it would come from corporate and private sources that have funded the organization for 30 years and the burden on the city really is uh as a Fiscal Agent um this route can take either through go through the city or the county and so we are working with the state legislator to see legislative session to see if we can get the approval for this at mentioned last year there was a surplus of cash and so there was a lot of cash provided um our building our leas expires in November and it was owned by private Equity Firm in New York City fortunately because of the cash Surplus last year a nonprofit owns it today but they bought it not to be a landold they bought it for Mission purposes and since our leas will be expiring and uh we have an extension uh we do know that they're anxious to continue continue on with the mission purposes for which they acquire the building uh we would like to stay in the City of Roseville uh this is our national headquarters as Pat mentioned uh we serve roughly a third of the teachers uh that work in the Roseville School District so Jenny and molissa been out to our location as well and talked about some of the ongoing work we'd like to be able to do together you're also Central here right so our headquarters is Central to the Greater Minnesota um metro area that is and then from here we serve the entire state of Minnesota so teachers are able to come to our Center and they shop for free imagine a um kind of like a small FedEx Kinkos Workshop area as well as then a Staples Office Depot office stationary school supply products retail store teachers come shop for free and uh they come once a quarter to replenish their uh the classro full of supplies whether it's for themselves or for whether it's for their students and then uh if teachers in the area visiting the Twin Cities so we have teachers coming from duth coming from Rochester they can come from anywhere in the state as well as then we uh ship supplies directly to school districts uh whe and with through different programs that we have where we then from our Center we act as a Distribution Hub and we drop shipping supplies directly to these schools all throughout the state as I said it's a central location so we'd love to be able to stay in the area and so that's why we're working with the with the city to get the additional funding it's uh as Pat mentioned it's on the uh Center where the Minnesota Department of Education was based it's specifically the building which is has National American University so we think it's it's also a bit poetic justice that um a for-profit entity that created millions of dollars a student loan debt is being replaced by someone who giving away supplies to underserved teachers and students at zero cost to them completely free to them and it's a great location where we love to be a to spand our services to offer more support for uh teachers but then also for the students themselves especially at the senior high level so Juniors and seniors we are working on on programs where uh there can be uh not just the kids stay in school to get us a a diploma but can they get certification for Workforce uh development where within we are able to provide them certifications where they can graduate with a diploma and if a four-year college is not or university is not in the future for them can they get certification for jobs that are to pay Beyond minimum wage but actually put families Beyond uh into a livable working wage scenario and so you know we feel strongly about some of the work that the Roseville School District has already done on that front and some of the ideas that they have for continuing that as well as than being a partner with an NGO that has tremendous corporate support where we can get a continuation of that it's that tandem that this new location would provide us that we're we're excited about so pleased to be here and thank you for the opportunity again I know that the goo bond process is new to the city so we appreciate the consideration for us to make uh the GE bond process work within the state as Pat noted does need to be with the city or the county and so since we uh have been here in Roseville for some time that is an option we would like to be able to continue to explore all right thank you Mr Gordon I appreciate you being here this evening uh I'm man we may have some questions for you um I may kick it off if I may just to clarify again is it's not the entire department of education and National American University building it's the National American University part of it cor it would be basically 50% of that the West half correct got it okay just want to clarify exactly um and then this may be kind of a tough question and you may or may not be able to answer it uh in this public forum but uh just curious if if for some reason this didn't find its way through the bonding process at the capital despite the priority of the legislature and and the excellent lobbying effort of our of the lobbyist uh do you have sort of a plan B in mind or is it a situation where you have to find different sources of funding or attempt to borrow money and or or you know what I'm sure as an organization you don't uh you don't just put all your eggs in one basket without having thought about sort of what the other other path might be so just can you talk to us a little bit if you can about we're not Ana so nothing that's top level security clearance here um and the answer is really is all of the above to what you just articulated so correct we're not putting all our eggs in one basket um there the Geo bond process in of itself has two routes to take right you have to a physical agent as an NGO but there's two routes that have to be taken we did pursue the cash Bond cash Grant route and depending on which legislator you talk to on which day whether or not that's just completely DOA or whether there's still a chance I mean just today MMB got another update where revenues look a little bit better and the economies in Minnesota still going green Gang Busters right and so now does that mean there's a little more money there available again I don't have a crystal ball but depending on who you talk to on which day whether or not it's a snowball chance not in Minnesota but somewhere else hotter or you know we might have an outside shot at it right so if there's an outside shot at that's the where oute we would prefer to take simply because it's the simplest the cleanest for everybody right however if it's not the route to take that's what the geobond process was really enacted to to do is to in a kind of a a public sector not for-profit sector combination to be able to uh largely for infrastructure and large improvements right so cities in Minnesota have been doing it for years um and uh it's it serves a good purpose and and they really being the litmus as your attorney no is serving the public good public Ser serving the public interest right um if the neither of the state funding routes were to go we have some um uh bills that are been dropped in both House and Senate for Appropriations congressionally uh directed funding which would be for programmatic support so there's other things that we would be able to we would look to do it's not going to go towards infrastructure support like what we're talking about here and so in that case then for us there would be a pivot where yes we wouldn't be able to afford to buy anything outright um a lot of what we do is warehouse and in terms of commercial realities today it's upside down office spaces at a bargain warehouse space is at a premium right and so um um you know that that is a challenge and that's a limiting factor in terms of where we can go while we like the facility of you know the northern um you know uh University centered and the education center the buildings themselves are not conducive completely to what we would need to be able to do so we there would be an extensive remodel to uh convert the building into more of a functional space for us and so that's part of what the expend that money that we would be incurring as well and what we are raising to it would be to do some of the renovation remodeling now if this route completely fails well we still have a lease that expires we still have a a cordial relationship with every meal we have an extension we have all those things in place but ultimately we do need to move and uh but uh there's uh there's not exactly a uh wealth building options in the City of Roseville and so really all those options would be in an adjacent community and so yes we would be we would be looking at purchasing probably a you know we have a a backup uh and another backup to the backup um where um where it would be you know it may not have the full scope of what we were trying to accomplish well for another school district as well it be a little it would be a little bit more work to try to make everything that we're trying to do with the Roseville School District work uh because of proximity and things like that there it would be definitely be a it but you know the Practical aspects of lease and needing space additional space as Pat mentioned it just would take us to a different Community right thank you I appreciate your cander and answering that other questions from Council Members council member Aton um thanks for being here uh you mentioned that you felt like there were some City responsibilities costs other things like that that you didn't think would need to be City things as they were listed by our city manager can you speak to some of those more important bigger ones both Financial as well as um responsibility for the program continuing for 125% of its term yeah so um so 125% of I'm not sure how you uh Peg something like that on an organization that this is all we do and we've done for 30 years thus far and as long as we stay in existence we would continue to do so it's a long term it it's an obligation right um whether it's 30 years or 40 years it's a longterm either way looking at right in terms of program uh uh continuation the uh so there is definitely the risk on that component unequivocally that's probably the most obvious and also the most significant risk potential if kids in need Foundation were to fail five years from now 10 years from now whenever have you then the city would either need to do a continuation of the services as your attorney said it wouldn't be necessarily need to be you yourself doing the work it could be uh outsourced to another NGO involved in educ a support keeping continue to serve the public interest in the manner in which the bond was provided right or you could theoretically return you know do a clawback and send the money back to the state so to speak and say okay here you you have the building um so yes those are the risk components that that the large most significant level exposure for the city uh the city on an an annual basis would need to file a report with MMB that indicates whether or not you in your in your belief we is continue to serve the public interests and the public goods as per the condition of the bond if the answer is yes great that's really not much more than on an annualized basis than the city would have to do in terms of all the aspects of construction real estate that is on us we would be paying for those types of expenses those would be the responsibilities of kids in need Foundation as the Fiscal Agent um you're not just a pass through as Pat mentioned it's more than that and it's the continued um responsibility of the city to report back to MMB which would be again the other big key factor is to that it's not us saying yeah we're serving the public interest we're doing well the city would need to concur with that and say we are fulfilling the obligations of the bond thank you council member grath um have you approached Ramsey County it seems to me like this is more of a a larger thing than just Ros have you approach them about this um well it's with all due respect we do think the city is the first step um as it's mentioned um every year the bonding process has been enacted in Minnesota for example I mean St Paul Minneapolis are of course always taking these bonds and doing these left and right um however Brooklyn Park did $18 million Geo bond with Second Harvest just a few years ago even little Rosemont has done these goo Bond so it is very much uh uh kind of the hometown is who you work with first um let's say for the sake of argument that the state legislature passes the bill and we are and they this is approved right and the city says there's absolutely no way we will never do this you know go pound sand kids and need Foundation go away what whatever the answer is right then yeah then it could be the process of going to the county because the counties also do this Ramsey County anipet County Scott Pok they they've all done these as well and so it's again it's not an uncommon thing that is what a geobond process was intended to accomplish but that would be the fallback if the state were to approve that this is a bond that they were willing to you put a seal stamp of approval on then that would be the other recourse that we would have would be to have have it be redirected through the county so to have this pass the legislature you don't have to have it identified hand of time in the documentation well you would you would list your preference which for us in this case would be the city of Rollo would the preference we'd like to stay in the city of roll obviously if it's it's granted through the county level as long as we stayed within Ramsey County that would be the right so if we were to say you know there is no other building for us in Roseville but there are buildings within gramsey County that would still fit both the intent and spirit of the of the process so since the property we are looking at you know it was actually thanks to Pat and his team that introduced us to the Steve Wallington the owner of the property and we've had copious conversations out with uh with this gentleman about the property and walkthroughs it'd be more appropriate to start with the city then going straight to the county great other questions well thank you very much again for being here and uh and helping us through this uh learning curve here um you probably want to stay handy for for other questions it doesn't mean you have to stay in the hot seat at the table necessarily but I'm sure you won't leave the room until you hear more from us uh so appreciate you being available to answer any additional questions we're said we've been doing this for 30 years we're happy to work with Roso we've been happier and so uh you know I know Pat's been out several times is fact uh I believe some of our employees are uh related to some of the Roseville staff and so you know it's it's been a good relationship and we serve approximately a third of the Roseville teachers and we look forward to being able to do more in terms of not only just the programmatic support we have currently but as I said some of the Workforce Development efforts especially uh we we feel for the seniors and juniors where they're feeling more and more disconnected in school in high schools and giving them purpose where you know stay in school get that diploma get a certification get something that will also then give you a purpose for there's hope there's reason to stay engaged here so and I think at least one of Y all are Educators so it's a it's a reality that you face every day thank you again all right um other uh questions from the council for either staff or attorney or uh points of discussion um where is Council want to go here at this point or do we know where we want to go I know you know just I'll speak from my perspective I know I shared a lot of the concerns that were expressed by the city manager um uh it may help mitigate some of those concerns knowing that our responsibility is is you know primarily for the the the program um I think that still there's some questions I have about sort of this notion of well if we do it you know how do we determine for whom we do this sort of thing and what what is our our sort of precedent we're setting and how do we deal with with the next request that comes and where how does that relate to our capacity to to do these things um so I'm not sure I have answers yet on those questions and I don't know exactly how we get to answers on those necessarily but um but I I I'm still working through it I think from my perspective other thoughts from Council Members or questions I mean ultimately we can table this but uh we probably need to to start moving in a direction councelor yeah well the first thing I want to say and I think Pat said this that what we're talking about at this point isn't about the really good work you guys do I mean I think we all understand that it's a good program so that AB absolutely isn't it I think what we're trying to decide here is how much of this of the City of Roseville wants to take on uh when it comes to this particular obligation so I I guess that's one thing I just want to make sure you know that that's what we're talking about and um I'll have to say you know last time we did bonds it didn't end well and we had that last little incident and and so I guess I'm I'm a little gun shy um from that and and um you know this is very long term and I don't feel that I mean it seems so new because that's why I asked if we were involved because I think if we would have had conversations earlier we would have had more time to because I I I feel uncomfortable that I don't know enough about this process and about some of the details and and what what what am I missing that we're on the hook for or what what Nuance I guess I'm just I'm uncomfortable um I don't at this point I can't support it because I don't feel I have enough um comfort from this point because it hasn't been we haven't been part of the process um you know and I know the timing is is is has to be done quick so um I I guess until until we get more with it that's that's where I stand Council St thank you um I think I've been lobbying for a community center as long as I can remember so um I think when I thought that this building would belong to Roseville and if in 40 years it became ours for our use it's one thing but to think that at 40 years we have to execute this program as is that is is a bit intimidating um and I pla you on 30 years of being a nonprofit but nonprofits do change and do come and go based on the market and one that I worked for two years ago no longer exists um so you know it can be somewhat trickled and I look at your 990s and you've had some pretty significant changes in um income and fundraising based on the market 2019 2020 um fairly low years and so I think I share some of that trepidation like there's just um and yet at the same time like so excited to hear about this Workforce because that's the future of what we need to do for young people in order for them to survive in our economy and for them to grow as humans um so I mean I'm very conflicted but I feel like there's a lot more questions that this is raised than answered unfortunately and that actually makes a good point in the questions that or the concerns that Council M shter have is it possible at an upcoming meeting to perhaps try to get an expert in this area to come in and help us understand better I think the key thing on it once again is the risk I think if we understand how it unlinen best aspirations that may help because I think that is that's you know we're as as probably is is appropriate uh as um you know holders of the public purse and the public trust we want to make sure that we understand our risk and we want to understand how how things unwind if if you know if things don't go as plan and so if we perhaps can can look at trying to get somebody in in you know in the near term to help us with some of that it has expertise Miss Terry mayor R you have someone um G Gina f I was thinking so uh I mean she she's who I went to to start learning more about this I know a little about it but she's who I went to to learn more so she can certainly um answer more of your questions than I can um so she'll probably be at your next Eda meeting so that would be an opportunity and I was going to look so our next council meeting is May 6th Okay so we've got a couple weeks and we're approaching the end of the legislative s last I was looking that up we're speaking that's correct right um we do have a meeting on the 20th we have Mee in the 13th and May 6 right so we would have to hustle together oh certainly and I don't know if it's something that it may work to receive information in the form of some kind of memorandum ahead of the sixth that might accelerate the process perhaps uh but we still would I think need to have a council discussion at that point um so that's that's just up put that out there something we may want to think about as as one of our next steps here counc um I would agree with all the comments that have been made here and the concerns and the praise for your work all at the same time um if we were to table this for more information from Miss Fiorini I would also be looking for some uh information feedback knowledge can be gleaned from other suburbs not Minneapolis Minneapolis is great but they're a completely different entity and work really differently from us and have very budget and all there're all kinds of things that are different um but maybe Brooklyn Center The Rose Mountain so kind of what kind of things and maybe that's something that Miss fine would be bringing but that would be information that would be important for me to understand yeah we do actually represent both of those cities well there you are um but you know I I am certainly apprehensive about those those long-term responsibilities um you know if if you were saying oh well you know we own the building we can find a different public purpose sure maybe uh but to a specific type of program uh becomes a very very difficult thing to sign on to yeah I think that was one of my questions was if for some reason kids need wasn't able to continue the program you know how easy is it to find somebody else to to do that because I don't know I I can't think of other entities so that would be something that would be concerning for us too um both council member graph and Sher so council member graph um yes I agree with everything that's been said number one of course we want you to stay in Roseville and of course we want you to continue the work you're doing I mean it's no one no one is doubting that I don't think the the issue for me is what is the risk involved to the taxpayers so I think someone the suggestions you had are exactly on point if we could get more information on that where what would happen if X happen in 10 years what would the city be able to do what would happen in 20 years you know I know we can't always put the future but and even if you did have the building I mean other nonprofits have buildings and it's not the easiest thing to do because you aren't set up with a maintenance system for building you know a building so things like that so obviously we can do a little better because we do have a department but I think my response good as council person to be sure this is the best thing for Roseville and for the taxpayers in Roseville so I need more information sure and and just to take that a thought a little further is also we don't have a process to determine who we should do this for so there's a lot of other nonprofits that if they knew Roseville was willing to do something like this you know how do you choose which is because we have a lot of great nonprofits since so that's the other piece I I'm wondering about we don't have that process to determine and I know this is one that comes forward because there's a need but if other people knew that this was an option should we consider other nonprofits that we're going to so that's just another question I have so okay uh sounds like we want to get that more information as much as we can get ahead of the the sixth meeting probably would be good so we can start to digest it understand it and maybe ask followup questions but it sounds like we're going to have to have a discussion on the six certainly I can't even remember what the agenda looks like but I know we've got that coming up on our agend this evening to talk about and I did want to provide an opportunity for any follow up on your part this evening as well in case there's just some obvious thing that we should know about that that you know you can you can help us with this even I think getting the um input of cities who have done this is is a new start up I we understand this is new to the city so appreciate having the opportunity to have the conversation I'm not at all surprised that there would be questions or concerns it's first time right so and it's not $100,000 it's $5 million right so it it is a sign not a signant Brookland Park's first first dance was 18 million so at least they you know set the bar even but getting the cities the St Paul just did two and for 2024 two more so obviously cities are doing this so I think getting that input is great there are you're not stuck so the these experts can also tell you about what are the options the city has you're not stuck for 40 years so that's that's not that's not your risk okay so there are there are options to get out that that that can be explored the other comment I was going to make you know in terms of you know of other nonprofits well there's a real one practical Avenue you don't have to try to solve for which nonprofits we do this with or not there's one practical aspect if the state doesn't approve a goo Bond it's kind of a m point right and so in in some ways in terms of you don't have to necessarily decide who are we going to do with this with or not it's really it's the state's going to make the have the you know if they're going to pass a law to say yes we are approving this then that becomes a consideration for the city at that time right so practically speaking the state legislator will tee up if you will candidates that may or may not be ones you want to consider right and then if you decide to pass then of course then the county becomes next in line so to speak right so I think from that perspective there is just a practical answer to to that question is who do we consider is well if the state doesn't approve a Geo bond in the through the legislative process anyway then it becomes a mood Point um I'll also add to um as more of a capital creature um that uh while I do really hear and appreciate and respect this council's um concerns about the risk of the of taking this sort of project on um I just want to also encourage you to to think about the fact that statute is not immutable it can be changed and I know um one example this session of a city who is currently um clawing back a project where the nonprofit is no longer able to perform the function of a bond appropriated five years ago so just kind of a a thought as you as you gather more information in in the weeks ahead um to think about that you know talking to to your representatives at the capital like as a city council um sharing your inability to continue the original you know intent of the bond that is an option that is available so uh just wanted to throw that option out there too for for those concerns U Mr treer if I could uh mayor and councel you know uh we're talking about kind of try get the information could you talk a little bit about status of the bill committee deadlines that been passed that are blown by and what is the likelihood that this will be in the final legislation we could do all this work in the upfront and it might not come to anything I I am concerned about this not committee deadlines have passed and I know anything can happen down the legislature but there are processes in place and I'm just wondering how realistic it is to have something like this actually included in the final bill and sign by the government yes I'm happy to provide that kind of perspective um so first thing that I'll say is bonding is not subject to to to committee deadlines um there's all these exceptions the legislature you know those legislative processes um so uh bonding is um an a unique situation in that in order for the bill to pass um you need two-thirds majority vote as some of you probably know and so you need the help and assistance of the minority party to pass a bonding Bill and so I say all that because um and now I am hearing that conversations between majority and minority parties in both the House and Senate are going well um but um often times the bonding bill is one of the last things that is done in a legislative session because it is one of the only bargaining chips of the minority party in a legislative session um so it's not subject to deadlines so no need to worry about that and second of all it could very well come together in the final hours of of May 18th or May 19th um through a a agreement from um both Chambers so um there's still time for um the city to to collect the information as you've suggested this evening other words what she's saying is Kids in Need Foundation is nothing more than a bargaining chip at the St well we we uh feel your pain because we have a bonding request as well and and so I mean the it has dropped in both the house and the Senate we have uh um uh some staunch supporters in P both Chambers which we're pleased for and we have had gosh I don't know how many tours now at our Center in Roseville we've had just a steady drum beat of legislators coming through and doing a tour talking to the teachers Etc um they obviously are all eager to avoid a feeding the future type debacle um and so we've had I don't know gosh I don't said I don't know how many tours we done I've lost count at this stage um so we feel good P but really up until the 11th Hour of the day really who knows right it might be depending on this what type of session no there is you know Rising tide of lifts elbows right where people are feeling good right now and so there's some more collegiality let's just say that maybe has been lost in recent years to that that's looks promising but it's those 11th Hour negotiations where we just become a bargaining chip unfortunately so that's where we are great uh I think we've got this pretty well set where we'll bring this back on the six then and and try to get as much information as we can between now and then and then have some further discussion then uh I do just want to be clear about a couple points and then we can move on is the um so this is the state issuing bonds and they issue a big bond issue for everything that's that's included in the bill basically so they're not issuing individual bonds project by project and so because the state has huge borrowing capability so from a financial and a bonding point of view I don't think we have too much to worry about about the bonding process necessarily as opposed to the city issuing bonds for a specific project and the financial aspects of that um so just to help people understand that part of it um but I think it is exactly the whether whether any particular project ends up in the state's legislation so that's the that's the thing uh or whether there is a bonding bill at all at the end of the session depending on how things go in their negotiations so all right well thank you again for being here and helping us to to gain a better understanding and hopefully we'll move fast enough in increasing our understanding to be helpful for the process thank you right that brings us to our final business item this evening item 7e which is to talk about uh Community aspirations uh adoption as well as authorizing next steps towards receiving towards doing a strategic planning process and receiving proposals and so I'll turn it over again once again to Mr Tron to introduce this item thank you Mr Mayor uh and Council I'll be really brief here there's really two items that you mentioned one is we want to just quickly revisit the community aspirations that were put forth as part of The Envision rosville uh the council did receive that information report I think it was November um and we probably should formally adopt these as aspirations we start using them that's a small thing we have actually done so I have included them in the packet um certainly can uh talk about the wording if you like um but like have the council adop that the second part is to talk about plan that we always envisioned to come off Envision word twice there um to really build off of U those aspirations and really putting in action our priorities and the work that we're going to be focusing on as an organization as a city council as staff and to hit those aspirations and make sure we're focusing right things so uh as you know typically uh we would throw out an RFP we bu you here things and then we go through interview process I think with this and talking to staff and the leadership particular there's a feeling that this is so um unique and context matters and what we're looking for that we take a slightly different approach that we still bring in um Consultants that to have an individual Mee Mee with them talk provide them background have a conversation versus having a document speak RFP uh speak uh to what we want to have a little bit more of a conversation that can hopefully we would hope um have a response proposal that's more in line with what we're thinking and more responsive to what we're looking at uh I know when we've done these arm length rfps we we certainly get a fair share of um responses but as you look at them uh they're often Cy cutter we're not really um localized to what we want and I think often times we've seen the result of that so we want to be a little bit more deliberate can't guarantee that's going to happen it's going to be ultimately uh who we choose and making sure it's the right process but if we think if we do that work in the front end a little bit we could hopefully get better responses we would still expect to receive a bunch of proposals um uh from that and we would still bet them and we still want to have a council interview the finalist as part of that initial I think it's really key to have at least one council member part of that work with staff because this is your document really at the end of the day and we need to make sure that uh you as a council are represented at least at the beginning stage to explain what expectations are provide the context the history whatever we need to do on that so um what I'm asking for for the next steps versus just issuing an RFP and we've been working in the background on draft RFP but it's one of those technical documents that um doesn't give you a lot of spiration to you know come back with something unique so what we're hoping to do is um set this process in motion where we could start um even this week reaching out to Consultants bring them in schedule some meetings and then from that then have uh shoot for you know realistically probably June before we can start interviewing the finalists but try to move as fast as we can on that to get that process started the other thing we should talk about we don't have to um compl the conver ation tonight and start thinking about the actual strategic planning effort that we would do we did one in 2014 2015 I think only two of you were there we did two half days here in the council chambers with the facilitator department heads and councel um so we should talk about um time of day should we do it one day two days should it be on the weekend should it be during the weekday what days should be in the evening instead of the day um and then other miscellaneous things be wanted recorded uh we did record it in 201 15 I think it was um want minutes of the actual conversation you know how deep we want to get into that so and I te that up in the council case so I will be quiet here to get some response uh from uh where we want to go with that but also just remind you that we do want to improve the community aspirations here tonight and to that point maybe we should tackle that request first and see if we can get to maybe potentially approve of of the aspirations if it looks like we're going to have to do a ton of rewriting I'm not sure we're there that we want to do that but uh but are we um at a point where we might be able to uh just uh take the output of the of last year last two years's process and and adopt those as our as our aspirations going forward thoughts from the council Council M strong are we following What's um in the 7e item or is it it diff significantly from this Envision rille packet yeah so we did uh not sure significant so The Envision Roso packet I actually requested that was a that was the presentation last fall as the output of the process and the reason I wanted that included as information for this discussion was that it actually has the aspirations and a lot of the additional information uh just to help our thought process and in conversation I wasn't sure because there also a a section title with the same title that Loosely interprets many of the items but not all sure sure so yeah I should have clarified that that that is strictly just a bench hand of exactly the report we got last fall as a reference material for this evening but but the aspirations as we talked about report um we Tred to capture this as much as possible we did have our communication staff kind of work on that and actually this word really based on what the mayor talked about in The Business Council um we just tried to not change anything but just try to make it read better and better Clarity and maybe the mayor that as well no that's a very good point these so most of these follow pretty clearly with what was in the uh in the Invision rville report I think there were a couple of them that that that were a little bit rewarded by the communications folks and Community engagement folks and then I did some further tweaking with them before my presentation to the Business Council um the primary changes I think uh related to the um the housing related one which is thriving diverse neighborhoods um talking about it was just the order of the wording was was kind of clunky and and it didn't quite read as easily and clearly so we some changes there uh and then the one um related to the U business Community it might be you might have to scroll up a little bit uh let's see the um economically Pros yeah I'm trying to trying to think oh it was no it was primarily the one about the thriving diverse neighborhoods I think was the one that had the biggest amount of changes to it obviously you could you could look at the report and see where more specific differences are but in in my reading of what came out of the process of of sort of the re-editing by the communication folks uh the rest of it was pretty good I just needed needed a little bit of further tweaking to clean up you know and smooth out the the language of thriving diverse neighborhoods I would just recommend that the economically prosperous start with the same convention that the rest of them do so a community or a city that is that is just because it's the one off out of that Bunch that doesn't quite match yeah and I think if you scroll up to to the the lead in sentence it says we aspire to be then it kind of makes sense that we start out by saying economically prosperous but I think you're right or you can say Roseville as a city aspires to be and then take that beginning part out of each one of those and then each bullet point is an action item sure so not I think it doesn't work completely for all of them including the thriving diverse neighborhoods one so it might be easier just to insert a community that is on the economic I did notice the same thing when I was reading through I thought now why is it and then I went up to the dot oh well it does make sense but it is it's coming back to me is that was something I thought about at that time too yeah uh other thoughts or or concerns questions Council actually I just need um a um clarification or definition and the last one a community with a safe incl inclusive and well connected transportation and infrastructure systems is the word inclusive talking about the um transportation modes or is inclusive talking about people both I think it was it was an allpurpose inclusive in my interpretation in that we're looking at all different types of Transportation infrastructure and we're making sure that it serves all different types of people I think it's a multi purpose inclusive well because it talks about um yeah some of that the people down below so that's why I was wondering um so you're really then um including people twice right yep because people are that important to us may I would just assert that in that particular line with a safe inclusive and well-connected transportation and infrastructure system that supports some V s from system sys could you repeat that again um infrastructure system instead of an that supports yep I'm surprised the mayor of grammar didn't find that one I am too disappointed embarrassing I I may have to give up my title other thoughts otherwise maybe a motion to adopt the uh aspirations with those changes I move to adopt the right Mo by council member gra second by council member St to approve the aspirations with the changes as noted this evening any discussion on the motion maker the motion council member go off I just rereading them and revisiting this was really good I I felt really good about what was what in this our aspirations that I look forward to working right is the second or council member SE I mean kind of a little bit of a few it's just nice to know that all of that process um seen from the beginning to the end is is uh kind of concrete and know I think back to when uh city manager Tron said we're kind of out of what to do next and I hopefully now our next process is to give you guys as a city staff and us as a council what those next steps are Bas rooted in this wealth of knowledge great any other discussion on the motion council member um I I didn't word Smith this a lot I think there are a lot of words in here um that could go a lot of directions I think that too uh come aer's Point around what inclusive for um so I guess there'll be a lot of directions we can take this and it's fine I don't don't disagree with any of these pieces but there're just a lot of words that can mean a lot of things Council Sher yeah and was see the same thing as um council member at is I I support the general concept of all of these I think some of the word smithing there might be yeah we might want to look at it but the concepts and how it is I think I I'm supportive with that so and I would say that it's a it's a living document so we can always revisit to the wording if we find it not working as we go through the strategic planning process or other aspects of what we do um so um I'll be supportive as well from that perspective so we have the motion to adopt those aspirations as uh discussed this evening with changes um all those in favor signify by saying I I I post that passes unanimously um and then as to the strategic planning process I did want to say a couple of things just to kind of kick off the conversation um one of the reasons I asked that the report from Invision was included was because not only does the report include the aspiration but it has the where dot dot dot in several bullet points and I think that is the starting point of some measurable um objectives and some things that we can we can work towards um so that's why I'm make sure that that we don't lose track of that because otherwise we could be spinning our Wheels not having that raw material to start from um and even beyond that in some of the aspirations it even talks about more specific measures of some of those things or or concerns expressed by the community and so I thought that was really helpful I was going through that this afternoon and that process helped inform what our strategic planning might look like from a couple perspectives and one is the notion of sort of identifying what those outcomes are under each of the aspirations is important because we want to know what we're looking for what we're trying to achieve I think a big piece of this is also to understand and acknowledge um what we're already doing towards some of those things um so that we don't sort of think of this as oh we've got to Institute a thousand new programs to accomplish these things but rather hey let let's do ourselves a favor by giving ourselves the pat on the back and the credit for the things that we're already doing towards these things and doing well maybe and then we can narrow our Focus as a strategic plan as to okay where are we falling short you know where have we not done as much success and then we can come up with strategies then to to push us towards better accomplishment there so that's sort of how at a 30,000 foot level I would Envision the strategic planning process as to whether we meet twice and we meet in mornings or afternoons or weekdays or weekends I think that may may be a little further down but it's good to know that that's a part of what the decision-making that we have to do is um but I think we you know we we all need to be on the same page as to what this process is going to be and so hopefully that that I've just outlined kind of gives you gives an agreeable overall perspective to it and then we can start to talk about more you know filling out the bones of that I don't know any bone filling out or any disagreement of of that that counil members have this evening at this this unfortunately late hour um council member Sher yeah no I I I I think you make a good point because you need something to start with you know on this and it's really important that who's ever working on this all have the same um priorities of what we're trying I you know in the corporate world I guess you call it you know the objectives what are we trying to get done we you know and so so to have something like that is important but I also um I wanted to talk about the um consultant piece of that too you want to make sure we get the right consultant to walk us through this make sure they keep us on task and that they know what they're doing when it comes to strategic plan because I know Paton that we did it before but technically I think that last one wasn't really a Str iic plan it was more kind of like a work plan anyway I just want to make sure we get the right consulted to help us walk through this absolutely council member ad um I was going to say I I appreciate the framing you've given I one of the key things here what are we already doing because most of these most of these aspirations are vastly different from what we had before there's some little adjustments there's an addition a little bit right but we're not talking about brand new Big Ideas um so to ensure at some point we're saying what are we doing towards these aspirations what do we want to expand in this area or what's a new program that's fine but if we don't talk about what we're doing right now we're probably going to create a whole bunch of soup and the staff will look at us funny cross eyes and walk out the door so well and to be clear I think that that that would be an exercise that we and whoever else is involved in those we Day weekend you know evening afternoon sessions would go through an exercise you know Guided by the consultant to you know go through each aspiration talk about the outcomes make sure we all tend to have an agreement on what the outcomes we're trying to achieve are and then do some of that inventory of what we're already doing and where we should be focusing and then we can zero in on some you know specific strategic objectives because ultimately this has to be manageable for us going forward uh all you have to do is go back to the document that came out of imin Roseville 2020 back in 2005 right um and it was 70 pages of probably good ideas but it was all over the place and it was clearly something we couldn't achieve as organization without a winnowing process and you know so we started from the fire hose and attempted to winnow it down it seems like a better process is to start you know to do to get focused first and then pick those things that we can focus on as an organization to get us you know close gaps those types of things I'm sorry I interrupt you no you're fine I I don't disagree with any of that so thank you um I'm wondering about is the best value procurement method a process that might work or some adaptation on that where we do have some form of an RFP but we're asking people to come in and and say hey here's how we can do this differently let's listen to them let's have them listen to us how do they how do they make a proposal that really fits and niches into Roseville so we've seen lots of Consultants come in where it's such a cut and pce they left the other City's name in the in the thing right so can we can we get them in the door several different organizations and have them talk about how they could make some of these things really happen what what their strengths are that would work for Roseville and what we need um before we are saying yes well we could certainly uh look to try to do a lot of the values and the best value um I'm not trained in I know where Parks folks are I'm familiar with it but um you know um we can certainly talk about that how we bring some of those those ideas into process um I think meeting in person having a conversation asking not just the standard questions you know identifying the risk what's the value ad that you bring you all be important um data I do think along the way um well there might be some betting to say well we have seven and we're going to talk to three of them um that's when we can get really into into the deepest of what they're proposing um so let let let me bring that back to the team and see how we can maybe manage that as I said I'm not trained to do that but I know our organization is not that well right to you in a minute I was just going to say I think the best overall value is our yeah version of that Professional Services um and it was pretty nebulous but I think what what staff is kind of describing as the notion of bringing in potential biders and talking through and saying here's the basics of what we're looking at and and having that conversation is sort of a part of that uh so it's not out of line what you're talking about or what staff was suggesting um we just kind of put a name to it Council M um being new to this process I'm not quite sure I know the order of operations but where do staff fall in all of this decision and you know are you the staff that speaks for the whole organization I mean because there are there possibilities that we may omit something that's really important that's been in place or a really great idea you know Chief brahan has a list a mile long of things he wants to do and he's he knows his area so well that's not maybe something that we would have on our radar so I want to make sure we respect the expertise of the people that we UST to do the work every day yeah absolutely and so the intent would be to have the Heth the department here sitting side by side with the council we're all having the same conversation and working through the uh the real um important work afterwards to help operationalize the conversation and finalize with be staff and then brought back to you folks but for that day or two days it' be department heads the table let's invite Rachel not be there oh and actually that's why you have to really good consultant because you're going to have so many people involved you want to make sure that they can keep us Focus going and and for my two cents I would go for two half B because it's it's good to do some work have some time to think about it and come back versus trying to sludge through eight or 10 hours in one day that that's just my thought on that I mean look at us in this we've only been at this for three hours quarter and we're already getting started and to require the staff to do you know a full day on top of their regular day yes I think you need to break it up a little bit that's just my thought and I would say Obviously once we have the consultant on board whoever that might be that's going to inform the schedule timing when they can do it when they're available so certainly don't lock in days or anything just wanted to start having conversation so we progress we keep talking about that and once we have consult talk thats and we may maybe could say we you know one weekend day but the fact is we have a whole group of people who work Monday through Friday we have we're the few compared to them so I mean I think anything that we can do to be aware of that as soon as possible and that there's some flexibility for what we do during the day is helpful um and I think one of the things that you were sort of looking for was potentially having a council member as part of that sort of that preprocess yes um thoughts as to council members who might be interested in that working with staff on that I have an interest in the subject matter but I don't want to jump be interested in that because yeah and actually um I do strategic planning with my clients now so I I not that I would absolutely wouldn't say what to do but I think I have a pretty good understanding of of how at least the corporate world and how they do it so this is my and I just suggested one we could have two it doesn't hurt to have two I was I was actually G to suggest that maybe two would be better well if it makes sense I mean I do it I just don't have the bandwith right you know I certainly have the understanding of sort of you know what the Envision is and the aspirations and how that all fits together so if that is a good combination I'd be happy to do that the mechanic and you have whatever else isar so I think it makes sense to have the newest person this go spite you back the institutional memory yes all right is that everything staff was looking for okay and and I would be happy to sort of help with I had I had thought of some some suggested language you know on the Dr little you know blur that's in the packet sure I'd be happy to help out with that offline too we don't need to word Smith at our council meeting at 95 all right I believe that concludes our business items this evening uh next on the agenda is uh the consent items and I'll turn it over once again to Mr trudan to introduce the consent items for this evening okay uh item um 10 I still say 12 that was from the left me sorry it was 10 10 a approves payments in the amount of 1,653 45177 item 10 B approves two liquor or two temporary liquor licenses one for the Rotary Club of Roseville for the cas of rosfest event 27 the other for B Distillery for an event on May 25th this action also approves a temporary Gambling License for an event hosted uh By The Park View Center School PTSA on May 17 uh item 10 C approves an ordinance trans coning the procedures for the preparation adoption and Amendment of the ceh of plan uh from chapter 2 which regulates commissions to chapter 10 the zoning code this action also approves publication of an ordinance summary item 10d approves appointments to theing board planning Commissioners Asus chaus and borm uh will serve on the board with commissioner MC serving as an alternate item 10e approves entering into a grant agreement with the state of Minnesota for the pathways to policing grant that will provide the city of Ral with $30,000 to help the city assist our police Cadets and csos to cover their costs for Education become a certified and licensed police officer there is no match requirement for this Grant and finally item 10f approves entering into a grant agreement with the state of Minnesota for the Intensive comprehensive peace officer education training Grant the amount of $100,000 to assist the city in recruiting individuals to become a police officer that have a two or fouryear degree that are looking to pursue a career transition into law enforcement this grant also does not have a matching Grant thank you Mr treer is there a motion on the consent items move second it's been moved by Council M gr second by council member schroer any discussion on the motion I would just note a couple of things one is that that last grant program the acronym is the IC poet program if you want to shorten up your presentation next time I was told to explain acony I understand I understand completely and then just to clarify on the uh the vent distillery license that is a special event one of their 12 permitted special event licenses I believe I had we had a member of the public question it as as a club license but no I don't think it is a club license special thing yes it's a temporary liquor license yeah okay I think they were listed as a club um under their items when they check the box as a club on the form itself okay got it thank you uh with that we got the motion before us there's no further discussion all those in favor signify by saying I I I opposed that passes unanimously those items are approved uh Mr Tre once again you're on to review the upcoming agendas just real quick with some changes yeah so may six uh we talked about that we'll certainly have need Foundation back on there talk about the financial audit have the audit presented to you actually and we'll get that in your packet beforehand so you have the full audit um we'll talk about the bu process calendar just about some of the information packages we'll do just kind of revisit that kind conversation uh we look to have the uh contract approval for rosdale police officers um two police officers that they would pay for we have five uh liquor license violations you can see um I I I off hand I don't recall but there's a couple that are repeat violators so different penalties and as ition K and need on the 13th we do have an Eda meeting uh we just want to uh have a conversation about updating our housing study and looking at some different things that was put into the budget we talked about before but to maybe get that started and then we'll spend the rest of the night uh talking with the HC scope uh purpose and uh their role so we'll have an opportunity to hopefully make some good progress on that so we know what our next steps are and then 20 uh 20th we have the all Department Equity update and the fire department staff interview right thank you Mr charge other questions on the upcoming agenda uh Council memb just to confirm um and for public record um the H was unable to meet last time because of a la uh council member initiated items for future agendas or uh reports announcements from Council Members um Board of Metro cities wednesday8 here at the OV leadership Lun for on May 8 at 11:30 Heights comments all right other announcements I did want to report one small thing hopefully it'll be quick uh from my work on land use advisory committee at the Met Council a lot of talk about the the system plans that are being developed that get sent out to the cities to work on their next comprehensive Plan update believe it or not it seems like we just finished ours it's every 10 years um and one of the discussions at our last meeting was about Transit and Transit oriented development and I I advocated for the notion of not just focusing on a lot of housing density around Transit but also job density because you need that Nexus because I think that's one of the challenges we see with folks is their inability to get to employment using Transit very effectively I think we've heard that from people in the Ken community and the bhes nepes community in South East Roseville and others and so I just wanted to note that that on our behalf I had put in that two cents and uh I'm one of only about five regular attendees out of the the the 12 or 15 that are supposed to be there uh so I I have a lot of power so let me know anything else you want me to add for I would love to make sure that that um the food desert um situation is discussed as well around Transit just because a lot of folks who um lack solid Transportation are really living in a food desert in certain areas especially North Minneapolis is bre um so just as it's looking at a Metro Wide situation yep no that actually has been on the on the radar screen of that process so appreciate that all right if there's no other business before the council the only other item on our agenda this evening is adjournment so second all right it's been moved by council member TR and second by council member Edon to adjourn no discussion on the motion to adjourn all those in favor signify by saying I I posed that passes unanimously before I bang the G before I bang the gab officially Journey the meeting I did want to recognize we had a couple of students from centur college I believe with us this evening and they stuck it out to The Bitter End long in mon I don't yeah I was to say last and get involv so thank you for being here and hopefully we didn't we didn't bore you to tears too much but appreciate your your call them now we are adjourned at 9:23 p.m. thank you for