. I THINK EVERYONE AND WELCOME I WILL CALL THIS BLOOMINGTON CITY MEETING TO ORDER. TONIGHT IS MONDAY AUGUST 5TH, 2024. THANKS TO EVERYBODY JOINING US HERE IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS AND TO EVERYONE ONLINE. WE WILL START OUR MEETING AS WE ALWAYS DO IT VERY PLEASE RISE, UNCOVER AND JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION UNDER GOD INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL . ONCE AGAIN THANKS EVERYBODY JOINING US ON THIS BLUSTERY EVENING. APPRECIATE YOUR COMING OUT TONIGHT. COUNCIL OUR FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS TONIGHT IS TO APPROVE TONIGHT'S AGENDA AND I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF HOUSEKEEPING THINGS THAT I WANT TO GO THROUGH IN OUR AGENDA. WE HAVE A TIME DYNAMITE AND 4.1 IS OFFICIALLY A TIMED ITEM SO WE'RE GOING TO MOVE THAT UP AND WE'LL MOVE THAT WE'LL DO THAT IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE PROCLAMATION FOR NATIONAL NIGHT IF WE COULD RELATED TO THAT ALSO IN FRONT OF YOU YOU'VE GOT NEW COPIES OF THE RESOLUTION. THERE WAS A COUPLE THERE WAS A TYPO OR TWO I THINK THAT WAS IN THERE THAT THERE WAS A RED LINE VERSION AND THEN THE FINAL VERSION OF THE RESOLUTION TO ITEM 4.1 IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT OTHER THAN THAT OUR AGENDA INCLUDES AS I SAID, ITEM 2.1 WHICH IS A PROCLAMATION FOR NATIONAL NIGHT OUT COUNCILMEMBER HAS THE CONSENT BUSINESS FOR TONIGHT AND IT'S A BEEFY ONE. WE'VE GOT 23 ISSUES UNDER CONSENT BUSINESS UNDER OUR HEARING'S RESOLUTIONS ORDINANCES ITEM 4.1 THAT'S THE TIMED ITEM THAT WE'RE MOVING UP AND ITEM 4.2 RESOLUTION REGARDING THE BALLOT LANGUAGE RELATED TO THE PETITION FOR A CHARTER AMENDMENT THAT'S FOR RANKED CHOICE VOTING UNDER FIVE OUR ORGANIZATIONAL BUSINESS WE'VE GOT THREE ITEMS ONE IS A STUDY ITEM REGARDING THE RS ONE ZONING DISTRICT REVIEW. OUR SECOND CRACK AT THAT WE'LL HAVE A CONVERSATION ON THAT AS WELL. ITEM 5.2 IS A DISCUSSION ON THE SOLID WASTE CONTRACT DISCUSSIONS THAT HAVE BEEN GOING ON AND WILL WRAP UP AS WE ALWAYS DO WITH ITEM 5.3 OUR CITY COUNCIL POLICY AND ISSUE UPDATE. SO COUNCIL UNLESS THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS OR ADDITIONAL CHANGES WOULD MOVE TONIGHT'S AGENDA AS STATED WITH THE CHANGES SECOND MOTION IN THE SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER CARTER TO ACCEPT TONIGHT'S AGENDA NO FURTHER COUNCIL DISCUSSION ON THIS ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING I OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES SIX ZERO. I DO WANT TO POINT OUT COUNCILMEMBER LOWMAN IS A BIT UNDER THE WEATHER AND NOT ABLE TO JOIN US THIS EVENING SO THAT'S WHY WE'VE GOT A60 VOTE TONIGHT. OUR FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS TONIGHT IS OUR INTRODUCTORY ITEM IS A PROCLAMATION FOR NATIONAL NIGHT OUT AND I'M GOING TO GO DOWN TO THE PODIUM AND DO THE PROCLAMATION BEFORE I TAKE THE AS I HOPE YOU ALL KNOW TOMORROW NIGHT IS NATIONAL NIGHT OUT HERE BLOOMINGTON AND ACROSS THE COUNTRY AND WE IN BLOOMINGTON WE'RE PROUD WE'VE GOT ONE OF THE BIGGEST PARTICIPATION RATES IN TERMS OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA AND LOOKING FORWARD TO ANOTHER FUN NIGHT TOMORROW NIGHT. BUT WE'RE GOING TO START WITH THE PROCLAMATION AND I'LL HAVE THE CHIEF SAY A FEW THINGS. WE'LL EXPECT TO SEE EVERYBODY TOMORROW NIGHT AT NATIONAL ADULT PARTY NATIONAL NIGHT OUT TUESDAY, AUGUST 6TH, 2024. WHEREAS THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF TOWN WATCH ONCE AGAIN SPONSORING A UNIQUE NATIONWIDE CRIME AND DRUG PREVENTION PROGRAM AUGUST SIX ,2024 CALLED NATIONAL NIGHT OUT. AND. WHEREAS 41ST ANNUAL NATIONAL NIGHT OUT PROVIDES A UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE BLOOMINGTON DEPARTMENT TO JOIN FORCES WITH THOUSANDS OF OTHER COMMUNITIES ACROSS COUNTRY IN A COMMUNITY BUILDING CAMPAIGN THAT PROMOTES POLICE COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS AND NEIGHBORHOOD CAMARADERIE TO MAKE NEIGHBORHOODS A SAFER, BETTER PLACE TO. AND. WHEREAS, THE BLOOMINGTON FIRE DEPARTMENT AND THE BLOOMINGTON CRIME PREVENTION ASSOCIATION PLAY A VITAL ROLE IN ASSISTING THE BLOOMINGTON POLICE DEPARTMENT'S EFFORTS BY SUPPORTING NATIONAL NIGHT OUT 2020 FOR LOCALLY. AND. WHEREAS, IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT ALL RESIDENTS OF BLOOMINGTON BE AWARE OF THE IMPORTANCE OF CRIME PREVENTION PROGRAMS AND THE IMPACT THAT THEIR PARTICIPATION CAN HAVE ON REDUCING CRIME AND DRUG ABUSE IN OUR CITY AND STRENGTHENING NEIGHBORHOOD SPIRIT. AND. WHEREAS THE BLOOMINGTON POLICE DEPARTMENT VALUES COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS BY ALWAYS BEING RESPECTFUL OF KEEPING OUR COMMUNITY SAFE. THIS RESPECT IS DEMONSTRATED THROUGH OUR COMPASSIONATE AND HONEST SERVICE. AND. WHEREAS COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS ,NEIGHBORHOOD SAFETY AND AWARENESS AND COOPERATION ARE IMPORTANT THEMES OF THE NATIONAL NIGHT OUT PROGRAM NOW THEREFORE I TIM BUSSEY, MAYOR ,THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA DO HEREBY PROCLAIM AUGUST SIX, 2024 AS NATIONAL NIGHT OUT IN THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON AND URGE ALL RESIDENTS TO JOIN WITH THEIR NEIGHBORS FELLOW COMMUNITY MEMBERS THE BLOOMINGTON POLICE AND FIRE AND THE BLOOMINGTON CRIME PREVENTION ASSOCIATION IN MAKING THIS COMMUNITY SAFE FOR EVERYONE DATED THE FIFTH DAY OF AUGUST 2020 FOR CHIEF THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR BEING UP HERE WITH THIS THE LAST WHEREAS WHERE I SAY COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS NEIGHBORHOOD SAFETY AWARENESS AND COOPERATION IN IMPORTANT THEMES OF NATIONAL NIGHT OUT I WOULD SAY THOSE ARE INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT THINGS FOR NEIGHBORHOOD SAFETY JUST IN GENERAL. IN FACT I CAN'T THINK OF ANYTHING MORE IMPORTANT THAN NEIGHBORHOOD AWARENESS AND WORKING TOGETHER THE PARTNERSHIPS THAT GO INTO THAT KIND OF THING. YEAH, THANKS YOU'VE BEEN VERY HELPFUL. IS YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD TO I'LL JUST SAY THIS YOU KNOW BLOOMINGTON WE GOT A GREAT COMMUNITY HERE AND OBVIOUSLY PARTNERSHIPS WITH ALL OF OUR NEIGHBORS HELPED MAKE THAT AND I'M GOING TO KNOCK ON WOOD WHEN I SAY THIS BUT RIGHT. OUR CRIME IS DOWN 16% FROM LAST YEAR. SO AGAIN THAT THIS WILL MAY BE ONE OF THE RECORD LOW NUMBERS FOR CRIME IN THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON AND THAT'S A TESTAMENT TO WHAT PEOPLE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS ARE DOING. SO THANK YOU AGAIN WELL AND THANK YOU THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK AND IF YOU COULD SHARE WITH YOUR ENTIRE DEPARTMENT IN YOUR COMMAND STAFF OUR THANKS FOR THE OUTSTANDING THAT THEY DO I SEE CHIEF SEAL HERE AS WELL IF YOU COULD SHARE ALL OF YOUR FIREFIGHTERS THEIR THANKS FOR THEIR PARTICIPATION IN NATIONAL NIGHT OUT TOMORROW NIGHT. RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU'RE GOING TO BE A NATIONAL AND OUT PARENT PARTY TOMORROW NIGHT VERY WE WILL BE OUT AND ABOUT AND HOPE TO SEE YOU AT ONE OF THOSE PARTIES AND IT'S ALWAYS A GOOD TIME AND HOPEFULLY THE WEATHER'S GOING TO BE NICER. SO NOW WE NEED TO DO THE OFFICIAL GRIP AND GRIN HERE IS MELISSA. YOU COULD HOLD IT. OH I'M NOT USED TO GETTING THESE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR. THANKS . NEXT ON THE AGENDA COUNCIL PER HOUR A CHANGE THAT WE MADE IN THE AGENDA IS OUR TIME DATE AND THIS IS ITEM 4.1. THIS IS A RESOLUTION AWARDING THE SALE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION SOCIAL CHARTER BONDS SERIES 20 2040. THESE ARE SOCIAL BONDS LAWRIE SHOULDER OUR CFO IS HERE TO PRESENT THIS GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME. THEY MAYOR AND COUNCIL WITH US TONIGHT REMOTELY ABBOTT JULIE ADDINGTON OUR FINE ATTORNEY FROM KENNEDY GRAVEN AND ELIZABETH BERGMAN FROM BAKER TILLY. SHE'S A PRINCIPAL THERE SO THEY'RE BOTH ONLINE IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS CAN ANSWER. SO MOVING FORWARD WITH THE PRESENTATION. SO THE CITY IS VERY THAT WE CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN OUR THREE WAYS WE HAVE WE ARE ONE OF 37 MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS NATIONAL WIDE THAT HAS THIS TRIPLE-A AND WE MAINTAINED THE TRIPLE-A FROM ALL THREE OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS FOR OVER 20 YEARS NOW. SO AND THEN ON THE NEXT SLIDE IN THIS PARTICULAR BOND ISSUE WE ONLY THOUGHT ONE CREDIT RATING WE CAN GENERALLY PICK WE'RE NORMALLY WHEN WE'VE DONE FULL PAYMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM BONDS WE HAVE ALL THREE CREDIT RATINGS FOR THIS PARTICULAR ONE. ONE IT'S JUST A KIND OF ONE OFF I JUST DO STANDARD POOR'S MOODY'S IS IN THE PROCESS OF UPDATING THEIR METHODOLOGY SO UNTIL WE SEE WHAT HOW THEY WANTED RATING I WANT TO BE ABLE TO ANALYZE THAT. SO STANDARD POOR'S WAS CHOSEN SO NEXT SLIDE WE WANT ME TO USE A CLICK. OKAY ON HOW IT WENT TWICE AS FAST SO MOODY'S DID GIVE US THE TRIPLE-A AND THEY HAVE AFFIRMED OUR STABLE OUTLOOK. ONE OF THE COMMENTS I MEAN IF THE CREDIT RATING REPORT IS PART OF THE INTERNET OF MATERIALS AND IT IS ALSO FINANCE ITS WEBSITE UNDER OUR RELATIONSHIP PAGE IN SEVERAL OF THE CATEGORIES BLOOMINGTON HAS VERY STRONG AND STRONG AND THEN THOSE ARE SOME OF THE INDICATORS THAT KEEP US IN THE TRIPLE-A RANGE. SO JUST LISTENING TO THE RAIN COME STRONGER IN THIS PARTICULAR BOND ISSUE WE DO HAVE A SOCIAL BOND RATING HONEST FAIR DESIGNATION. WE HAVE EMBEDDED ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL AND GOVERNANCE AND ALL OF OUR DOCUMENTS THAT WE MOVE FORWARD IN THIS PARTICULAR ONE. WE REALLY EMPHASIZE THE SOCIAL PIECE IN REGARDS OUR RACIAL EQUITY AND SUSTAINABILITY ACTIVITIES. THAT'S PART OF THE AREAS THAT WE NEEDED TO TO BE PART OF A SOCIAL BOND IS I KNOW THERE IS A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS THAT I SEE A IT INTERNATIONAL CITY MANAGERS ASSOCIATION BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR CATEGORY IT'S INTERNATIONAL CAPITAL MARKETS ASSOCIATION AND FOR SOCIAL BOND WE HAVE TO WRITE UP A DOCUMENT THAT IDENTIFIES HOW WE'RE GOING TO USE OUR PROCEEDS HOW WE THE PROJECT WAS EVALUATED AND SELECTED HOW WE'RE GOING TO MANAGE THE PROCEEDS THAT WERE SOLD TODAY AND WILL RECEIVE IT ABOUT A MONTH FROM NOW AND THEN THE REPORTING PART OF THE REPORTING IS THAT UNTIL ALL OF THE PROCEEDS ARE SPENT WE'LL BE TRACKING THAT ON AN ANNUAL BASIS. OUR INVESTOR WEB PAGE. AND THEN WE HIRED KESTREL AS THE SECOND PART OF VERIFIER TO ENSURE THAT WE COULD HAVE THAT DESIGNATION OF A SOCIAL BOND AND THEN PART OF THEIR WRITE UP THAT IS AGAIN PART OF THE PACKET AND ON THE WEBSITE IS THAT WE ARE TARGETING POPULATIONS PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES OF THE BRYANT PARK IS INCLUSIVE PARK AND THEN IN HISTORICAL UNDERSERVED POPULATIONS FAMILIES WITH YOUNG CHILDREN AND THE GENERAL PUBLIC WILL ALL BE ABLE TO OBTAIN THEIR THE UNITED NATIONS SUSTAINABILITY DEVELOPMENT GOALS HAVE 17 GOALS AND WE WERE ABLE TO GO AND MATCH SIX OF THOSE GOALS AND THEN ON THE BOND SALE TODAY THE COUNCIL HAS UPDATED RESOLUTION AND THEY GET AN UPDATED RESOLUTION ON FONTHILL DAYS BECAUSE WE SELL IN THE MORNING AND YOU GET ALL THE UPDATED NUMBERS THIS AFTERNOON AND EVENING. SO INITIALLY HAD AN AUTHORIZING RESOLUTION OR A REIMBURSEMENT RESOLUTION FOR 11 AND A HALF MILLION BECAUSE AT THE TIME WE DIDN'T KNOW WHERE BIDS MIGHT COME IN . WHEN WE WENT TO THE MARKET IT WAS AT 10 MILLION TO 90 SO THAT INCLUDED ALL THE COST OF ISSUANCE AND THE ACTUAL BIDS FOR THE PROJECT AND WE'VE GOT A REALLY NICE FIGURE OFFERING PREMIUM SO WE WERE ABLE TO REDUCE THAT 10 MILLION TO 90 DOWN TO $9,110,000 SO A REALLY GOOD IN THE MARKET AND WE ALSO HAD 11 BIDDERS WHICH IS UNUSUALLY HIGH AND ONE OF THE BIDDERS IN TALKING WITH ELIZABETH OUR ADVISOR NORMALLY DOESN'T BID ON THE $10 MILLION RANGE THEY'RE MUCH HIGHER ONES. SO WE STARTED ATTRACTING MORE BIDDERS WHICH WAS ONE OF OUR GOALS. IT'S A TEN YEAR TERM AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE INTEREST RATE WE DID VERY WELL IN THE MARKET SO 2.7 TO 9 IS THE FINAL WITH A PREMIUM IMPACT AND SO FOR AUGUST 5TH THAT'S THE SAME NAME WE'RE ASKING COUNCIL TO APPROVE THE LOW BIDDER AND THEN A MONTH FROM NOW WE'LL HAVE THE PROCEEDS AND THE PROJECTS WILL START. ONE OF THE OTHER PIECES BAKER TILLY WILL DO FOR US IS ON SOME OF THE BIDDERS THAT BID ON OUR BONDS. THEY WILL BE CONTACTING THEM THIS WEEK TO SEE HOW THE SOCIAL BOND DESIGNATION MAY HAVE PLAYED WITH THAT AND WILL WHEN WE HEAR MORE ON THAT WE CAN WRITE THAT UP IN ONE WEEKLY OR LEAMINGTON THIS WEEK. SO BEFORE HE WAS THE MOTION TO AWARD THE SALE OF THE BONDS. THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH. COUNSEL QUESTIONS OF MS. ECONOMY SHOULDER COUNCILMEMBER DALLESSANDRO THANK YOU MR. MAYOR. THIS GREAT NEWS . THANK YOU FOR SHARING IT. I YOU MENTIONED THAT ONE OF OUR GOALS WAS TO TO SEE TO TO SEE THAT MUCH ACTIVITY AND MAYBE MAYBE YOU'RE GOING TO TELL US THIS YOU GET THE INFORMATION BECAUSE I THINK I JUST HEARD YOU SAY THAT. BUT IS IT IS YOUR D DO YOU KNOW AT THIS TIME WHETHER THAT ACTIVITY LEVEL AND THE THE BIDDING THAT RESULTED IN THE LOWER PRICE FOR US WAS BECAUSE YOU WENT WITH THAT SOCIAL BONDS IS OR IS IT A COMBINATION OF LIKE SOCIAL BOND PLUS OUR TRIPLE-A RATING PLUS LIKE HOW ARE YOU THINKING IT IT MIGHT HAVE HAD AN IMPACT ? MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBER DALLESSANDRO I WOULD ASK ELIZABETH BERGMAN, OUR MUNICIPAL ADVISOR SHE WOULD POP ON AND POSSIBLY ANSWER THAT QUESTION FOR YOU. SURE. HI. GOOD EVENING. WELCOME. I THANKS TO OUR STAFF I CAN'T BE WITH YOU TONIGHT OUR MAYOR AND COUNCIL BUT HAPPY TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION. I IT WAS A VERY ASTUTE ONE AND YES WE ARE EVALUATING THE DEGREE TO WHICH THE SOCIAL BOND GENERATED IN THE THIS BOND OPERATES. YOU CANNOT DISMISS THE THREE TRIPLE-A RATINGS IN THE MARKET AND BLOOMINGTON'S VERY FAVORABLE REPUTATION IN THE MARKET THAT CLEARLY PART OF WHAT GOT INTERESTED IN THAT BUT IT WAS AN UNUSUALLY HIGH NUMBER OF BIDDERS AND BEHIND EACH OF THOSE BIDDERS OUR INVESTMENT THAT EXPRESSED AN INTEREST IN OWNING BURLINGTON SPOTS. SO WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO DRILL DOWN AND TALK WITH THE BIDDERS AND FIND OUT HOW THEY'RE POTENTIAL BUYERS BECAUSE. WE SELL THEM TO OUR BANK AND THEN THE BANK SELLS THEM ON TO INVESTORS AND UNDERSTAND THOSE INVESTORS WHAT ATTRACTED THEM TO THE BONDS IF THERE WAS SOMETHING IN PARTICULAR AND THEN IF THERE ARE FOLKS WHO APPROACHED THEM AND ASKED THEM IF THEY COULD GET ON THE BONDS BECAUSE THEY WANT THE SOCIAL BONDS. SO IT IS DEFINITELY A COMBINATION BLOOMINGTON'S FUNDAMENTAL STRENGTH SHINES THROUGH BY THE HIGH NUMBER OF BIDDERS WE WILL DO DILIGENCE AND FIND OUT IF THEY'RE THE SOCIAL PLAYGROUND PARTNER OF GREAT. YEAH, I'M VERY CURIOUS ABOUT THAT. I MEAN IF IF WE'RE SEEING YOU KNOW EITHER A BIDDING WAR THAT SAVES US A QUARTER POINT OR A HALF A POINT OR YOU KNOW, SOMETHING LIKE THAT AS A RESULT OF THAT WE SHOULD DO THIS MORE OFTEN OBVIOUSLY IF AS LONG AS THAT HOLDS TRUE AND SO NEVER MIND THAT IT'S GOOD TO DO GENERALLY SPEAKING AND I'M A BIG FAN OF THOSE USG GOALS SO THANKS FOR INCLUDING THEM. THANK YOU PETER. THANK. MEMBER COUNCILMEMBER NELSON. THANK YOU MAYOR. JUST TO CLARIFY THIS WAS DONE TODAY RIGHT? YOU SOLD THESE TO THE MAYOR COUNCILMEMBER NELSON WE SAW THEM AT 1130 THIS MORNING AND TODAY WAS AN INTERESTING DAY IN THE MARKETS. WAS WAS THERE ANY IMPACT BECAUSE I KNOW THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE LOOKING AT THE MARKETS THEY WENT DOWN OBVIOUSLY THE LAST SEVERAL DAYS THEY'RE STILL UP 12% YEAR OVER YEAR, 7% FOR THE YEAR. BUT OBVIOUSLY PEOPLE LOOK AT TODAY DID THAT IMPACT OUR RATES AT ALL? DOES THAT HAVE AN IMPACT ON THOSE THINGS. PEOPLE ARE LOOKING TO SHIFT INTO BONDS OUT OF EQUITIES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBER NELSON ,I'LL HAVE ELIZABETH CHIME IN . BUT NORMALLY OVER THE LAST OR SO BUYERS WERE ALREADY WORKING WITH THEIR UNDERWRITERS TO PUT A BID ON THESE HOW THEY SHARPEN THEIR TODAY COULD BE HOW THEIR FLIGHT TO QUALITY AS OF HOW THE MARKET WAS SHIFTING. SO ELIZABETH, IF YOU WANTED TO ADD MORE ON THAT ABSOLUTELY. WE ACTUALLY ENTERED THE MARKET AT QUITE A FAVORABLE TIME FOR THE CITY. SO LAST WEEK AS WAS DISCUSSED THERE WAS MUTUAL RATES CAME DOWN ABOUT 30 BASIS POINTS OVER THE LAST WEEK AND THAT WAS A COMBINATION THE ECONOMIC NEWS THAT CAME OUT INCLUDING THE FEDERAL RESERVE'S LAST WEEK AND THEN OBVIOUSLY AS THE ECONOMY SHILLER REFERENCE THERE WAS A MOVE BACK FROM EQUITIES AND TURNED TO BONDS WHICH MAKES BETTER INTEREST RATES FOR THE CITY AND ACTUALLY TODAY WE GAINED FAVORABLY MOVED TEN BASIS POINTS FOR THE CITY. SO TODAY ALONE WAS TEN BASIS POINTS OR ABOUT 40 BASIS POINTS OVER THE LAST WEEK AND A HALF INTEREST RATES BETTER THAN WHAT WE HAD PROJECTED A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO. SO ALL GOOD NEWS FOR THE CITY. WHAT MIGHT BE BAD FOR YOUR 41K IS GOOD FOR THE CITY EMPLOYMENT AND SPOT. COUNCILMEMBER NELSON ANYTHING ELSE COUNCILMEMBERS ANY ADDITIONAL HERE? WELL THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH. THANK YOU FOR THE GOOD NEWS . THANK YOU. THANK YOU COUNSEL. IF THERE ARE NO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS NO ADDITIONAL COUNCIL DISCUSSION ON THIS, I WOULD LOOK FOR A MOTION ON IT AND 4.1. COUNCILMEMBER DALLESSANDRO MAYOR AND ACTUALLY ELIZABETH, IF YOU COULD PUT THE MOTION BACK UP I THINK ON OUR MOTION SHEET WE HAVE AN INCORRECT NUMBER HERE WE HAVE 10 MILLION AS OPPOSED TO THE 9 MILLION. SO IF YOU COULD PUT THE MOTION BACK UP OH THAT'D BE GREAT. 9.1 I WAS JUST GOING TO ASK THE THE MOTION THAT WAS ON THE PRESENTATION RIGHT THERE. YEAH. GOTCHA. OKAY. NINE ZERO. OKAY GREAT. SO I AM MOVING AWARD THE SALE SORRY TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AWARDING SALE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION CHARTER BONDS SOCIAL BONDS SERIES 2024 A IN THE ORIGINAL AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF $9,110,000 FIXING THEIR FORM AND SPECIFICATIONS DIRECTING THEIR EXECUTION AND AND PROVIDING FOR THEIR PAYMENT. SECOND MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER DALLESSANDRO SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER TO ACCEPT ITEM 4.1 A RESOLUTION AWARDING THE SALE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION CHARTER BONDS. NO FURTHER COUNCIL DISCUSSION ON THIS ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING I OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES SIX ZERO. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS SURE AND THANKS TO OUR TEAM THAT PULLED THIS ALL TOGETHER AND HAD A VERY GOOD DAY OBVIOUSLY TO GET TO GET THE NUMBERS IN WE WILL DOUBLE BACK ON OUR AGENDA NOW FROM ITEM 4.1 WE'LL HEAD BACK TO ITEM THREE OUR CONSENT BUSINESS COUNCILMEMBER HAS OUR CONSENT AGENDA TONIGHT COUNCILMEMBER. THANK YOU MAYOR. I ONLY HAVE ONE WHOLE SO FAR ANYBODY ELSE LET'S CALL AND I ONLY HAVE ONE HOLD FOR 3.2. WITH THAT THEN I WOULD MOVE ITEM 3.13.3 THROUGH 3.2 OR THREE MOST OF MY COUNCILMEMBER SECOND VOTE COUNCILMEMBER D'ALESSANDRO TO ACCEPT THE CONSENT BUSINESS AS STATED FOR THE COUNCIL DISCUSSION ON THIS ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SIGNIFY BY I OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES SIX ZERO AND 3.2. COUNCILMEMBER NELSON THANK YOU MAYOR. I JUST WANTED TO LET THE KNOW THAT WE DID REACH AN AGREEMENT WITH THE GIRL'S FAMILY. MY APOLOGIES IF I MISPRONOUNCED US US SO AND I'M VERY HAPPY ABOUT THAT. I KNOW THAT THERE WAS SOME HURT WITH THE REMOVAL NEAR THE BASKETBALL COURTS AT DRED SCOTT BUT THAT MEMORIAL WILL BE REINSTALLED. WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT WITH THEM AND I APPRECIATE ROBIN CAMERON'S EFFORTS TO WORK WITH THE CITY I BELIEVE JAMIE IF YOU CAN CORRECT ME SORRY CITY MANAGER IT WAS JEREMY AND PARK AND REC THAT WORKED WITH THEM AND SO JUST VERY HAPPY THAT THAT IS GOING BACK UP AND WE REACHED AN AMICABLE RESOLUTION WHICH I THINK IS WHAT EVERYONE WAS LOOKING TO DO IN THIS SITUATION KNOWING WHAT HAD HAPPENED THERE. SO AGAIN, THANK YOU TO THE FAMILY. THANK TO THE STAFF THAT WORKED ON THAT AND LOOKING FORWARD GETTING THAT BACK DONE AFTER AND FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT AREN'T AWARE WE REBUILT THE BASKETBALL COURTS OVER THE SUMMER AND AND THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME ADDITIONAL BENCHES AND SOME OTHER IMPROVEMENTS. SO JUST I THINK OVERALL A GOOD OUTCOME, A SITUATION THAT MAYBE DIDN'T START AS POSITIVELY AS IT SHOULD HAVE. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER NELSON, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MOVE ITEM 3.2 THE SENIOR I'LL MOVE ITEM 3.2 SECOND MOST OF MY COUSINS REMEMBER NELSON SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER TO MOVE ITEM 3.2 APPROVING THE MEMORIAL AGREEMENT AS OUTLINED IN THE COUNCIL PACKET NO FURTHER COUNCIL DISCUSSION ON THIS. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING I OPPOSE MOTION CARRIES SIX ZERO THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER MOVING ON ITEM 4.2 ON OUR AGENDA THIS IS A RESOLUTION REGARDING THE BALLOT LANGUAGE RELATED TO THE PETITION A CHARTER AMENDMENT. I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO MS.. MANDERS SIDE HERE IN JUST A MOMENT. COUNCILOR, AS YOU RECALL A COUPLE OF WEEKS BACK HAD A GOOD DISCUSSION ON THE LANGUAGE FOR THE PROPOSED CHARTER AMENDMENT IT RELATED TO RANKED CHOICE VOTING. WE DID HAVE A GOOD DISCUSSION AND I THINK WE CAME TO CONSENSUS BUT I THINK EVERYBODY WANTED TO LET IT SIT FOR JUST A WHILE LONGER AND SEE IF THERE WAS ANYTHING ELSE THAT MIGHT COME ALONG. AND I KNOW THAT THE STAFF TOOK A LOOK AT IT AND I THINK THERE WAS A ONE WORD CHANGE IS THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BUT OTHERWISE IT'S PRETTY MUCH WE HAD TALKED ABOUT THE OTHER EVENING AND AND MOVED FORWARD WITH SO DID I SUMMARIZE THAT CORRECTLY? MRS. MANASSEH SCHEIDT IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT WE NEED TO KNOW ON THIS ONE? MAYOR MEMBERS THERE WERE A COUPLE MORE THAT I WOULD LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION TO A MOTION ON THIS MATTER. THERE'S A POWERPOINT I PUT TOGETHER THAT HIGHLIGHTS THE DIRECTION THAT YOU PROVIDED AS WELL AS FEEDBACK THAT WAS RECEIVED THAT YOU SORT OF PUT AN INVITATION OUT TO THE COMMUNITY TO PROVIDE SOME FEEDBACK SO I CAN GO THROUGH THAT OR WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THE MOTION THAT'S IN THE PACKET. ACTUALLY WHAT IF YOU COULD RUN THROUGH THE PRESENTATION? THAT'D BE GREAT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. SO THIS IS JUST A REMINDER FOR THE FOR EVERYONE ESSENTIALLY. BUT WE'RE AT THE BLUE PART, THOSE LAST TWO BULLET POINTS. THE COUNCIL NEEDS TO TAKE ACTION TONIGHT. THEY WANT TO TAKE ACTION IN A REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO TAKE ACTION OUTSIDE OF AFTER TONIGHT IT WOULD NEED TO BE IN A SPECIAL MEETING BASED ON THE CURRENT CALENDAR. THE BALLOT LANGUAGE IS DUE TO THE COUNTY ON AUGUST 13TH. NEXT SLIDE THIS IS JUST A REMINDER OF THE PETITION LANGUAGE. THIS WAS IN THE PREVIOUS POWERPOINT. THERE'S AN EXCERPT FROM THE TOP OF THE PETITION PAPERS AS WELL AS THE SPECIFIC AMENDMENT LANGUAGE WHICH WE WENT THROUGH LINE BY LINE AT THE LAST PRESENTATION ON JULY 22ND. NEXT SLIDE THIS IS A QUICK OVERVIEW OF WHERE WE'RE AT CITY. THIS IS GOING TO BE CITY QUESTION ONE ON THE BALLOT IN THE NOVEMBER ELECTION. WE PROPOSED TO OPTIONS AT OUR LAST DISCUSSION ON JULY 22ND. YOU PROVIDED AS A COUNCIL A LOT OF DIRECTION AND. YOU PUT A SORT OF A CALL OUT TO THE COMMUNITY TO PROVIDE ANY FEEDBACK IF THEY WOULD LIKE ON THAT LANGUAGE. THERE WAS SOME REVISED BALLOT LANGUAGE THAT WAS PUBLISHED IN THE PACKET FOR THIS COUNCIL MEETING AND IS IN THE PACKET FOR TONIGHT. WE RECEIVED SOME ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK ON THAT LANGUAGE AND I'LL AND I'LL GET INTO THAT IN JUST A LITTLE BIT. AS A REMINDER TALKED ABOUT THE GRADE LEVEL AND OUR PERCENTAGE OF ENGLISH SPOKEN IN THE HOME AND WE TALKED ABOUT HOW IT NEEDS TO RELATE TO THE PURPOSE STATEMENT ON THE PETITION ABOUT WHAT YOUR ROLE IS TO SET THE BALLOT LANGUAGE YOU ARE THE GOVERNING BODY THAT IS IN CHARGE OF DOING THAT AND THEN THE REQUIREMENT THAT IT SUFFICIENTLY IDENTIFY THE QUESTION THEN THE REQUIREMENT IN THE MINNESOTA ADMINISTRATIVE RULES ABOUT NO MORE THAN TEN WORDS IN THE TITLE APPROVED BY ME AND THEN IT HAS TO BE A YES. NO QUESTION. NEXT SLIDE. SO THIS WAS THE LANGUAGE THAT STAFF LEFT WITH THE UNDERSTANDING OF WHERE WE WERE AT AT THE END OF THE LAST AND THIS WAS OUR UNDERSTANDING THE MOST SIGNIFICANT EDITS WERE TO THE TITLE SPECIFIC STATEMENTS RELATING CHARTER AMENDMENT AND RELATING REPEAL RANKED CHOICE VOTING. THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT A DESIRE TO HAVE IT BE CLEAR THAT IT RELATED TO CITY OFFICES AND ONLY CITY OFFICES. WE TALKED ABOUT HOW WE COULD HAVE SHORTENED IN THE TITLE AND MORE DESCRIPTIVE LANGUAGE IN OTHER PARTS SO FOR EXAMPLE YOU SEE REFERENCES TO SPECIFICALLY MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL IN THE QUESTION AS WELL AS IN THE YES AND NO EXPLANATION LINES. THERE WAS ALSO QUITE A BIT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THE USE OF THE WORD REPEAL RELATIVE TO STOP AND CONTINUE. THERE WAS ALSO A LOT OF FEEDBACK THAT WAS RECEIVED RELATED TO THE DESIRE TO HAVE LANGUAGE THAT WAS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WAS USED IN MINNETONKA IN THE COUNCIL GAVE DIRECTION TO INCLUDE LANGUAGE ABOUT REINSTATING THE PRIMARY IN DETERMINING THE CANDIDATES FOR THE GENERAL ELECTION SO THAT'S WHERE WE ARE THAT'S WHERE WE WERE AT AT THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING. THERE WAS SOME FEEDBACK THAT WAS RECEIVED. NEXT SLIDE. WE RECEIVED SOME FEEDBACK FEEDBACK LAST WEEK AND THIS IS THE SELF-IDENTIFICATION THAT WAS IN THE EMAILS THAT WE RECEIVED. SO THESE ARE NOT MY SORT NAMES FOR THE RECOMMENDATIONS BUT I DREW THEM FROM THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE OF THE EMAILS. SO ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE THIS THERE WAS A REQUEST SPECIFICALLY TO ADD THE WORD OF IN THE TITLE REPEAL OF RANKED CHOICE VOTING FOR CITY OFFICES. AND THERE WAS A DESIRE TO HAVE ADDITIONAL EXPLICIT EXPLANATORY LANGUAGE IN THE YES AND THE NO LANGUAGE THAT FOLLOWED THE FILL IN THE BLANK PARTS ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE IS A RECOMMENDATION THAT ARE SOME FEEDBACK WE RECEIVED TODAY AND THAT INDICATED THAT THEY WERE SATISFIED WITH SIMPLICITY OF THE LAST PART OF THE DISCUSSION. THAT WAS A PART OF IF YOU REMEMBER ONE OF THE OPTIONS THAT WAS PRESENTED AND DISCUSSED AT OUR JULY 22ND MEETING. AND SO THAT BRINGS US TO TONIGHT WHICH IS THE BALLOT QUESTION THAT'S IN THE PACKET . THE NEXT SLIDE. SO AGAIN YOU SEE WE ADDED THE WORD OF THE TITLE. WE ARE STILL WITHIN THE TEN WORD LIMIT. WE THE QUESTION AS IS AND WE LEFT THE YES NO EXPLANATION ACTIONS AS THEY WERE PREVIOUSLY. WE KEPT THE THE LANGUAGE WE USE THE LANGUAGE ABOUT CITY OFFICES THAT TO BE A REQUEST FROM THE LAST COUNCIL DISCUSSION AND SPECIFICALLY YOU HAVE REFERENCES IN THE QUESTION TO CITY CHARTER YOU HAVE THE INCLUSION OF THE WORD REPEAL. YOU HAVE A CLARIFICATION THAT THIS IS MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL AND YOU HAVE THE REQUEST TO HAVE PRIMARY AND GENERAL ELECTION REFERENCES AS IT MINNETONKA. I RAN A GRADE LEVEL ANALYSIS BECAUSE THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WE HAD DISCUSSED AT OUR LAST DISCUSSION. THE TITLE IN TOGETHER COME IN AT A GRADE LEVEL OF 20.2 AND THE YES NO SENTENCES ARE AT AN 8.4 GRADE LEVEL. SO WITH THAT I STAND FOR QUESTIONS. THANK YOU MS. MANAGER. COUNCIL QUESTIONS QUESTIONS. I THINK THAT IT REFLECTS THE CONVERSATION THAT WE HAD AND I THINK IT REFLECTS SOME OF THE FEEDBACK THAT WE RECEIVED FROM COMMUNITY GROUPS AS WELL OF COMFORTABLE WITH IT. COUNCILMEMBER NELSON THEN COUNCILMEMBER DALLESSANDRO COUNCILMEMBER NELSON IT. THANK YOU MAYOR. WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE GRADE LEVEL AND THE CLARITY IF WE ADD THE ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE INTO THE YES NO PART AT THE BOTTOM JUST CLARIFYING WHAT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RANKED CHOICE AND THE PRIMARY SYSTEM MAYOR MEMBERS I WOULD NEED TO RUN THAT ANALYSIS. I DID NOT DO THAT IN ADVANCE BUT MY ESTIMATION WOULD BE THAT WOULD GO UP IN GRADE LEVEL BUT I CAN DO THE ANALYSIS QUICKLY MAYBE NOT LIKE IN 3 SECONDS. OKAY BUT WE'LL PUT A PIN THAT AND MOVE ON. COUNCILMEMBER DALLESSANDRO, DO YOU EVER QUESTION OR COMMENT? I HAD A COMMENT FOR YOU. I THINK THIS TO ME REFLECTS THE SPIRIT OF WHAT WE WERE HEARING FROM EVERYONE INVOLVED I FEEL LIKE I DO I PERSONALLY LIKE THE SIMPLER LANGUAGE AT THE BOTTOM JUST BECAUSE I THINK YOU KNOW, WE WERE JUST TRYING TO GIVE PEOPLE YOU KNOW YES MEANS THIS MEANS THIS AND AND THE COMMENT AT THE TOP REALLY SHARES WHAT WE'RE REINSTATING WHICH I THINK IS AN IMPORTANT PIECE OF THAT. SO MY PERSONAL THOUGHT IS THAT THIS LOOKS LIKE SOMETHING I CAN. NO PROBLEM. ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS COMMENTS COUNCIL AND I WOULD ECHO THAT COUNCILMEMBER DALLESSANDRO I THINK IT DID. IT'S A GOOD COMBINATION OF ALL THAT WE HEARD AND I THINK THE COMPLEXITY OF THE TITLE THE QUESTION IS OFFSET BY THE YES NO SENTENCES. I THINK IT KIND OF BALANCES OUT AND MAKES IT CLEAR TO FOLKS WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AND OBVIOUSLY UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN NOW AND NOVEMBER THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF INFORMATION OUT. SO FOLKS WILL HOPEFULLY BE AWARE OF WHAT'S GOING ON AND HAVE A OF INFORMATION AND KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT THEY'LL BE VOTING ON IN THE FIRST PLACE. MAYOR MEMBERS, I JUST DID A VERY QUICK ANALYSIS ON THE SPOT HERE OF JUST THE YES NO THAT WAS PROPOSED BY RANKED CHOICE VOTING. BLOOMINGTON I BELIEVE IS THEIR IDENTIFICATION AND IT COMES OUT AS 15.4 WITH JUST THOSE YES AND NO LINES WITH THE ADDED ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE AND OTHER COMMENTS THAT COUNCILMEMBER NELSON OR NO. SOUNDS GOOD. COUNCILOR, IF THERE ARE NO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THAT I'D LOOK FOR A MOTION ON AN AND 4.2. COUNCILMEMBER CARTER I WOULD MOVE APPROVE A RESOLUTION. I DON'T KNOW WHY I VOLUNTEERED TO DO IT. IF I SPOKE AND MOVED TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION REGARDING BALLOT LANGUAGE RELATING TO THE PETITION FOR A CHARTER AMENDMENT MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER CARTER SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER RIVAS TO APPROVE RESOLUTION REGARDING THE BALLOT LANGUAGE RELATED TO THE PETITION FOR A CHARTER AMENDMENT OR FOR THE COUNCIL DISCUSSION ON THIS IF NOT ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING I AM OPPOSED. MOTION CARRIES SIX ZERO. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE LANGUAGE FOR THE BALLOT ON NOVEMBER 5TH SIXTH. I'M NOT EVEN SURE WHICH DATE IS. I SHOULD KNOW IT, SHOULDN'T I? IT'S IN NOVEMBER. WE HAVE A BALLOT WE HAVE WE HAVE LANGUAGE FOR THE BALLOT IN NOVEMBER. SO THANKS TO BOTH GROUPS FOR YOUR FEEDBACK AND YOUR INPUT ON THIS AND WE WILL SEE HOW THE REST OF THE SUMMER IN THE FALL PLAYS OUT NOW. THANK YOU. NOVEMBER 5TH. THANK YOU. NOVEMBER 5TH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO MOVE ON COUNCIL TO ITEM FIVE OUR ORGANIZATIONAL BUSINESS AND OUR FIRST ORGANIZATIONAL ITEM IS A STUDY ITEM. THIS IS ITEM 5.1 THE RS ONE ZONING DISTRICT REVIEW PART TWO AND WE'LL LET FOLKS SETTLE HERE A LITTLE BIT. NICK JOHNSON WILL BE COMING UP I WILL SAY COUNCIL THIS WE HAD A PART ONE DISCUSSION ON THIS A WHILE BACK AND NOW WE'RE INTO PART TWO OF THIS DISCUSSION AND I THINK WHAT STAFF IS LOOKING IS SOME DEFINITIVE DIRECTION AND WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO TO MAKE SOME DECISIONS ON WHERE WE WANT TO GO AND HOW WE WANT TO DO IT. AND SO JUST TO SET YOU UP FOR THAT AND TO LET YOU KNOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE GOING TO MAKE SOME NOT NECESSARILY DECISIONS BUT WE'RE GOING TO GIVE SOME SOLID DIRECTION TONIGHT. THANK YOU, MAYOR, FOR THAT INTRODUCTION AGAIN NICK JOHNSON PLANNING DIVISION DURING THE SECOND PART OF THIS THANKS TO TOM RAMBLER OLSON THE PLANNER WHO PREPARED A LOT OF THESE MATERIALS PRESENTING ON HIS BEHALF TONIGHT SO YEAH IT'S BEEN ABOUT SIX MONTHS SINCE THE PREVIOUS DISCUSSION SO I'M GOING TO DO A LITTLE BIT OF LEVEL SETTING HERE. JUST A FEW A FEW SLIDES EXCUSE ME TO REMIND EVERYONE WHAT THE HOURS ONE ZONING DISTRICT IS WHAT IT DOES FOR BLOOMINGTON AND OUR ZONING CODE AND THEN TALK ABOUT THE POTENTIAL CHANGES I THINK IN OUR PREVIOUS DISCUSSION WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND COUNCIL WE KIND OF PRESENTED A VERY LARGE WIDE AMOUNT OF GRANULAR DETAIL AND GAVE A LOT OF DIFFERENT OPTIONS. TONIGHT WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A LITTLE DIFFERENT APPROACH TO TRY AND PRESENT YOU KIND OF SIX POTENTIAL CHANGES AND AND A BASKET A BULK WAY AND HOPEFULLY THERE'S SOME SUPPORT OR DIRECTION ONE WAY OR THE OTHER ON THE BULK OR THE BASKET BUT WE CERTAINLY SLIDES AND INFORMATION THAT WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE SIX ISSUES AS WELL AND THEN DEPENDING ON THE NATURE OF THAT GAIN SOME DISCUSSION WE CAN TALK ABOUT WHAT THE NEXT STEPS WOULD BE. SO JUST TO PROVIDE A SUMMARY OF THE PROCESS WE PURSUED TODAY. SO AGAIN THIS IS A THAT'S ON THE 2024 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKPLAN IT'S ESSENTIAL TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE LAUNCH OF THIS CAME ON THE HEELS OF THE SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO THE R-1 ZONING DISTRICT. SO THAT PREVIOUS ORDINANCE THAT WAS APPROVED IN MAY OF 2023 LOOKED AT A WIDE VARIETY OF DIFFERENT STANDARDS IN OUR ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND AGAIN THE R-1 DISTRICT REPRESENTS OVER 21,000 LOTS. IT REPRESENTS THE VAST MAJORITY THE LARGE PROPORTION OF LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES IN BLOOMINGTON AND THAT PARTICULAR PROJECT DID NOT FOCUS MAKING CHANGES TO THE HOURS ONE DISTRICT OR OUR DASH ONE A FOR THAT MATTER WHICH IS OUR OUR SMALLEST ZONING DISTRICT PEOPLE FORGET ABOUT FOUR UNSERVED LOTS BUT IT JUST DIDN'T REPRESENT A LARGE PROPORTION OF THE PROPERTIES IN BLOOMINGTON SO THOSE WERE NOT PURSUED AT THAT TIME AND THEN PLANNING COMMISSION AND COUNCIL ADDED IT TO THE WORK PLAN AND SO IN FEBRUARY OF THIS YEAR WE DID PERFORM OUR I SHOULD SAY PRESENT TO STUDY ITEMS PLANNING COMMISSION ON FEBRUARY THE FIRST AND CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 12. SO THERE IS QUITE A BIT OF DISCUSSION AT BOTH OF THOSE MEETINGS ON WHICH DIRECTION TO TAKE SINCE THAT TIME YOU MIGHT WONDER WHY KIND OF THE PAUSE AND ONE OF THE REASONS FOR THE PAUSE IS THERE WAS ACTUALLY A COUPLE OF BILLS AT THIS LEGISLATIVE SESSION THAT APPEARED TO HAVE SOME MOMENTUM BEHIND PROBABLY THE MISSING MIDDLE BILL. MOST IMPORTANTLY OF ALL THAT HAD THE POTENTIAL IF IF PASSED TO ESTABLISH MINIMUM LOT SIZES FOR CITIES OF DIFFERENT CLASSES AND EFFECT WOULD HAVE PREEMPTED BLOOMINGTON FROM ESTABLISHING LARGER LOT ZONING DISTRICTS. AND SO I KNOW THAT ARE LEGISLATORS WHO ARE STILL ADVOCATES FOR THAT LEGISLATION AND LIKELY WILL BRING SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES BACK NEXT SESSION SO I DON'T SAY THAT AS A WAY TO SHARE THAT THAT YOU KNOW, THIS WORK COULD BE DISRUPTED IN THE FUTURE ONLY TO SAY THAT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE WHY THE PAUSE BUTTON PRESSED WHY IT WAS APPROPRIATE TO PAUSE WHILE THAT WORK WAS GOING ON AND HAVING SOME ACKNOWLEDGMENT OR AWARENESS OF ITS POTENTIAL IN THE FUTURE . SO THE LAST BULLET HERE NOT TO TOO VAGUE BUT WHEN WE CONSIDER THESE SIX CHANGES AND THIS WAS A PRETTY COMMON THEME OR THREAD DURING R ONE ZONING DISTRICT CHANGES IS TRYING TO PIN DOWN WITH GREATER CERTAINTY WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IF YOU MAKE THESE CHANGES AND I'LL REITERATE NOW AS AS WE ATTEMPTED TO DO PREVIOUSLY THAT THE FUTURE IMPACTS CAN BE VERY DIFFICULT TO FORECAST AND MAYBE EVEN MORE SO IN THE IRIS ONE ZONING DISTRICT IT HAS SOME PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS THE LOTS TEND TO BE OF HIGHER ASSESSED VALUE WHICH MAKES INFILL DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY OR REDEVELOPMENT MORE CHALLENGING OR MORE HARD TO EXECUTE FROM A FINANCIAL STANDPOINT THEY ALSO TEND TO BE LOTS THAT HAVE OR MORE STEEP SLOPED OR HAVE MORE DIFFICULT CONSTRAINTS FROM THE ACTUAL LAND THEMSELVES AND SOMETIMES THOSE LOTS ALSO TEND TO BE MORE DIFFICULT OR LESS GOOD POTENTIAL CANDIDATES FOR INFILL DEVELOPMENT. I KNOW THAT YOU KNOW, INFILL DEVELOPMENT IS A POTENTIAL CONSIDERATION WHEN THINKING ABOUT THIS BUT AS WE'LL SHOW YOU THERE'S A LOT OF EXISTING LOTS THAT ALL ARE SUBJECT TO THESE RULES AND JUST HOW THEY EXIST NOW OR THE LAST THING I WAS GOING TO SAY ABOUT THAT IN TERMS OF IMPACT FUTURE CHANGES REZONING, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THAT WE TRIED TO DO WITH OUR ONE PROJECT AS WELL AS THIS ONE IS TRY AND LIMIT NOT INCLUDE PROACTIVE REZONING ON THE PART OF THE CITY AND THAT'S THAT'S DESCRIBING NEW ZONING DISTRICTS TWO NEW PROPERTIES ONE OF THE REASONS BEING IS JUST PROCEDURALLY IT CAN BE A DIFFICULT THING TO DO YOU HAVE HAVE PUBLIC HEARINGS YOU HAVE TO NOTICE ALL THE DIFFERENT PROPERTY OWNERS YOU GET A LOT OF RESIDENTS WHO EITHER CAN BE INTERESTED OR CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT WHAT DOING AND SO WITH RESPECT KIND OF SOME OF THE CHANGES BEING CONSIDERED, WE ALSO WANTED TO THROW IN THE ELEMENT OF REZONING AND WHAT POTENTIAL YOU KNOW, OUTCOMES CARRY ALONG WITH THAT. SO AGAIN JUST LEVEL SETTING SO THE HOURS ONE ZONING DISTRICT WAS CREATED IN 1986 THERE WAS YOU KNOW, MULTIPLE ITERATIONS OF DIFFERENT LOW DENSITY ZONING REGIMES IN BLOOMINGTON BUT THIS WAS THE INTENT STATEMENT THAT EXISTS TODAY. IT'S INTENDED TO PROVIDE LOCATIONS FOR LARGE LOTS SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT IN AREAS OF STEEP, SIGNIFICANT VEGETATION, WETLANDS OR IN AREAS SUBSTANTIALLY DEVELOPED AS LARGE LOTS TO PRESERVE THEIR CHARACTER AND TO PROTECT NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENSURE COMPATIBLE REDEVELOPMENT. ONE THING I WANT TO POINT OUT IN THE EXISTING INTENT STATEMENT IS THAT FORWARD AND ONE OF THE CHANGES THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND STAFF TALKED ABOUT WAS POTENTIALLY SETTING UP A SYSTEM WHERE MULTIPLE CRITERIA WOULD BE REQUIRED TO BE ELIGIBLE AND THE REASON THAT THAT INTENT STATEMENTS IMPORTANT IS THAT WHEN WE GET REQUESTS FROM PROPERTY OWNERS TO REZONE SAY JUST A COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT OR AN INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT, NOT ONLY DO WE LOOK TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO SEE WHAT THE AREA IS GUIDED FROM A FUTURE LAND USE PERSPECTIVE BUT WE ALSO LOOK THE LOT FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF IS IT REALLY IN LINE WITH THE INTENT STATEMENT OF THIS DISTRICT DO THEY WANT WHAT THEY WANT TO DEVELOP IS A CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT STATEMENT OF THE ZONING DISTRICT THEY'RE SELECTING SO THIS CAN SEEM LIKE KIND OF A ACADEMIC EXERCISE TO LOOK AT INTENT STATEMENTS WHAT THEY ACTUALLY MEAN BUT THEY DO SERVE AN IMPORTANT ROLE IN WHEN WE AS STAFF AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEN PRESENT THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS TO YOU WHETHER OR NOT A REZONING ACTION IS REALLY CONSISTENT WITH THE CODE . SO AGAIN OUR AS ONE THERE'S 116 OF THESE LOTS IN BLOOMINGTON THEY'RE LOCATED PRIMARILY JUST TO THE WEST OF NORMAN DALE BOULEVARD. MOST OF THESE AREAS HAVE SOME OR THERE TEND TO BE WOODED, HEAVILY VEGETATED FOR US THERE'S THREE PRIMARY NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE THIS DESIGNATION FOREST HAVEN BRIER AND TIMBER GLADE. THERE ARE THE TWO PARCELS AT THE SOUTH OF NORMAN DALE BOULEVARD OVER WHICH WERE THE RESULT OF A PRIVATELY INITIATED REZONING ACTION JUST TO GIVE A FINAL LEVEL SETTING IS JUST WHAT ARE THE STANDARDS OF THIS ZONING DISTRICT? SO WE BECAME VERY FAMILIAR WITH OUR ONE THROUGH THAT PROCESS JUST REMINDING EVERYONE WHAT OUR ONE STANDARDS ARE. SO 33,000 SQUARE FEET FROM A MINIMUM LOT SIZE OR A LOT AREA REQUIREMENT THREE QUARTERS OF AN ACRE I WOULD SAY THAT NOT ALL OF THE LOTS THAT CURRENTLY ARE ZONED OURS ONE MEET THE STANDARD IT'S UNCOMMON TO HAVE A LOT THAT IS IN THE UPPER TOWS OR JUST SHY OF THAT 33,000 MARK ON THE LOT . ACTUALLY WE'RE ALIGNED ALONG WITH OUR ONE ZONING DISTRICT AS PART OF THAT PREVIOUS EFFORT WITH ONE REALLY IMPORTANT DISTINCTION AND THAT IS THAT THIS MEDIAN SITE WITH STANDARD STILL APPLIES TO OUR AS ONE AND WE'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT MEDIAN SITE WITH HIM PREVAILING SETBACK KIND OF WHAT FUNCTION OR WHAT ROLE THOSE PLAY BUT BASICALLY IT IS IS THAT WHEN YOU SUBDIVIDE OR CREATE A NEW LOT IN AS THE MINIMUM SITE WITH IT HAS TO MEET THROUGH THE BULK OF THE MAJORITY OF THE SITE HAS TO BE NO LESS THAN 80% OF THE MEDIAN WITHIN THE LOTS I CLOSE BY 500 FEET IS MEASURED ALONG STREETS SO REALLY IT'S A STANDARD THAT'S ATTEMPTING TO ENSURE THAT IF ANY NEW LOTS ARE CREATED THAT THEY'RE CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD ON SOME MINIMAL LEVEL AND THEN PREVAILING SAME THEORY APPLIES THERE AND I HAVE A SLIDE THAT BETTER DESCRIBES THIS IF YOU WANT TO LOOK AT IT BUT BASICALLY SO SAME SETBACK REQUIREMENTS AS THE OUR ONE ZONING DISTRICT WITH THE EXCEPTION PREVAILING SETBACK AGAIN BOTH MEDIAN SITE WITH AND PREVAILING DID APPLY TO OUR ONE ZONING DISTRICT THEY WERE REMOVED AS PART OF THOSE IN MAY OF LAST YEAR AND SO WHAT PREVAILING SETBACK DOES IS SAY THAT YOU CAN'T BE CLOSER UP TO THE STREET MORE THAN FIVE FEET THAN THE AVERAGE OF YOUR TWO NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES ASSUMING THEY'RE PROPERTIES OF A CERTAIN VINTAGE CERTAIN AGE. AND WHAT THAT EFFECTIVELY DOES IN SOME OF THESE AREAS IS REQUIRES THE STRUCTURES TO BE SET BACK FURTHER KIND OF AN ESTATE LOT FEEL IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THAT KIND OF CONCEPT. AND SO IT DOES PUSH STRUCTURES BACK FURTHER. SO IN TERMS OF YOU KNOW WE PRESENTED A LOT OF DIFFERENT OPTIONS OF WAYS OF THINGS TO LOOK AT AS PART OF OUR PREVIOUS DISCUSSION AROUND THIS BUT JUST LOOKING AT IT WITH FRESH EYES AGAIN AND THEN COMING FORWARD TO YOU AND AS CRISPER SENSICAL AS WE CAN IS JUST TRYING TO PRESENT IT TO YOU IN THESE SIX BULK ITEMS AND ON THE SLIDE YOU'LL SEE THAT SOME OF THEM ARE HIGHLIGHTED RED THE REASON I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT IS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION DID NOT AGREE WITH ALL OF THESE POTENTIAL CHANGES. THEY DID NOT SUPPORT ITEMS. NUMBER TWO, THREE AND FOUR AND I CERTAINLY CAN DISCUSS THE REASONS WHY THEY DIDN'T. ONE POINT I WILL MAKE ABOUT THE PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION AS THERE WAS ONLY FOUR MEMBERS PRESENT AS PART OF THAT DISCUSSION AND IT WAS AT THE TAIL END OF A FAIRLY LONG MEETING WHERE I THINK THERE MAY HAVE BEEN SOME DECISION FATIGUE OR DISCUSSION FATIGUE HAPPENING AT TIMES AND THAT'S NOT TO DISMISS THE RECOMMENDATIONS THEY WERE MAKING BY ANY MEANS. IT'S JUST KIND OF JUST SETTING A LITTLE BIT MORE CONTEXT. THINK THEY WOULD BE KIND OF IN SAY THAT'S FAIR OF HOW THAT DISCUSSION WENT SO IF YOU DON'T MIND I'LL JUST GO THROUGH THESE AT A HIGH LEVEL I TAKE YOUR QUESTIONS. I DO HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL SLIDES IF YOU FIND IT HELPFUL BUT JUST TO GO OVER THESE AGAIN SO IN YOUR PACKET FIRST JUST RELATED TO THE DISTRICT INTENT STATEMENT, ONE OF THE CHANGES WE TALKED ABOUT MAKING WAS AUGMENTING THE DISTRICT INTENT STATEMENT AND AS ALLUDED TO EARLIER, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE RECOMMENDED TO DO WAS TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE COMP PLAN THAT THE HOURS ONE DISTRICT IS INTENDED FOR LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AS OPPOSED TO SINGLE FAMILY ONLY THIS SPECIFIC INTENT STATEMENT SAYS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THE REASON THAT THAT'S IMPORTANT IS OUR COMP PLAN GUIDES THESE AREAS AS LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ACCORDING TO OUR LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO FAMILY DWELLINGS AND SOME ACTUALLY A FEW OTHER RESIDENTIAL TYPES ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE LDR LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND THAT WOULD BRING IT INTO ALIGNMENT WITH OUR ONE DISTRICT. SO THAT WAS ONE PIECE OF IT AND THAT'S KIND OF REFLECTED THE TOP PART OF THE LANGUAGE AND THERE WAS AN EXHIBIT IN YOUR PACKET THAT KIND OF LAID OUT THESE CHANGES AND I TRIED TO UNDERLINE THE ONES THAT REPRESENTED A DIFFERENT FROM THE EXISTING AND THEN THE SECOND COMPONENT OF THAT WAS THAT THAT THEY HAD TO HAVE A MINIMUM OF TWO OF THE FOLLOWING CHARACTERISTICS. SO AND THESE CHARACTERISTICS ARE SUBSTANTIALLY THE AS THE EXISTING INTENT STATEMENT BUT WHAT IT'S TALKING ABOUT IS YOU HAVE TO HAVE MULTIPLE OF THESE NOT JUST ONE. THE REASON WHY THAT'S IMPORTANT IS I REWATCHED THE DISCUSSION FROM FEBRUARY I KNOW THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT IT BEING IMPORTANT THAT THIS BE A DISTRICT THAT IS SERVING KIND OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIVE TYPE PURPOSE OR YOU KNOW UTILIZATION AND SO IF IT'S AN ORDER STATEMENT BASICALLY THE ONLY THING YOU NEED TO HAVE IS LARGE LOTS. YOU DON'T NEED TO HAVE ANY OF THE OTHER CRITERIA. AND SO WE PRESENTED THIS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION WERE GENERALLY IN FAVOR OF HAVING MULTIPLE CRITERIA AND SO WHAT THE MULTIPLE CRITERIA WOULD BE WHAT YOU WOULD NEED TO MEET. TWO OF THE FOLLOWING IS STEEP SLOPES AS DEFINED IN CODE SIGNIFICANT NATURAL OR NATIVE . WE DID ADD THOSE WORDS AND THEN THEN IT GETS TO AGAIN THE SENSITIVE ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVE AREAS WETLANDS OR SUBSTANTIALLY DEVELOPED LARGE A LOT TO PRESERVE THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA AND THEN THE SECOND STATEMENT REMAINED THE SAME. SO I THINK WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING TO YOU IS JUST AMENDING THAT DISTRICT INTENT STATEMENT TO WHAT WE FEEL IS MORE IN ALIGNMENT WITH COMP PLAN AND KIND OF THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF THE THE SECOND ONE LOWERING THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE TO 22,000 SQUARE FEET. I WOULD SAY THAT THIS IS THE STANDARD THAT THAT STAFF IS KIND OF PUTTING FORTH YOU LEAST STRENUOUSLY IF I CAN SAY AND I THINK IT'S REALLY JUST A POLICY DECISION ON THE PART OF THE CITY OF WHAT WANT TO DEFINE AS LARGE LOT AND THE REASON I SAY THAT IS THAT THERE'S NO INDUSTRY BEST PRACTICE FOR WHAT THAT MEANS. IF YOU LOOK AT DIFFERENT CITIES IT'S OVER THE MAP. THIS DISTRICT ACTUALLY USED TO BE 22,000 SQUARE FEET DATING BACK TO ITS HISTORY AND IT WAS IN 86 THAT THEY MOVED IT THREE QUARTERS OF AN ACRE. SO IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A SEESAW EFFECT THERE IN THAT REGARD PERHAPS BUT A HALF AN ACRE CERTAINLY IN THE BLOOMINGTON CONTEXT CERTAINLY IS A LARGE LOT OF 22,000 SQUARE FEET. THE CAVEAT OR PAUSE THAT WE OFFER ALONG WITH THIS RECOMMENDATION IS TO JUST BE COGNIZANT OF THE FACT THAT THIS DOES UP MORE OPPORTUNITY FOR PROPERTIES TO SEEK REZONING TO IT EXPANDS THE OPPORTUNITY. I THINK IN SOME OF THE MAPS THAT PLANNER EMMET OLSON PRESENTED BEFORE I THINK IT WAS 500 SOME LOTS MET THE 33,000 IN THIS CASE I THINK IT'S 1500 SOME AND I HAVE THOSE MAPS AGAIN IF YOU WANT TO LOOK AT THEM BUT JUST BEING AWARE COGNIZANT THAT THE LOWER YOU SET THE BAR YOU KNOW MORE APPLICABILITY MAY INCREASE THE OR THE DEMAND FOR SAID ZONING DISTRICT AND THEN REMOVING THE MEDIAN SITE WITH REQUIREMENT AS I MENTIONED IT'S BASICALLY TRYING TO CREATE A MINIMUM LEVEL THAT'S DICTATED BY YOUR SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD PROPERTIES THAT IS YOU KNOW THE MEDIAN LEVEL IT'S NOT THE LARGEST IT'S NOT THE SMALLEST BUT IT IS 80% OF THE MEDIAN THIS ONE IN SO MUCH AS A RECOMMENDATION BASED ON THE IDEA THAT THIS IS REALLY ADDING REGULATORY COMPLEXITY TO FOR PROPERTY OWNERS, CONSULTANTS WORKING ON THEIR BEHALF AND FOR STAFF. WHEN WE DO ANALYSIS OF THESE PROJECTS IN OUR VIEW IT ADDS COMPLEXITY THAT DOESN'T ADD A LOT OF VALUE IF YOU'RE HAVING A VERY LARGE MINIMUM LOT SIZE THAT WILL KIND OF TAKE CARE OF THE ISSUE UNTO ITSELF FOR THE MOST PART THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT THIS STANDARD DOES CREATE UNIFORMITY AMONG THE LOTS BUT A LARGE MINIMUM LOT SIZE ALSO DO THAT IN EFFECT WHETHER IT BE 33,000 SQUARE FEET OR 22,000 SQUARE FEET ON THE LOTS THAT PROBABLY ARE MAYBE THE MOST CONNECTED TO THAT MEDIAN SITE WITH REQUIREMENT MAYBE ALONG THE AND THE REASON THAT I SAY THAT IS THAT YOU TEND TO HAVE LONGER NARROWER LOTS THE POTENTIAL FOR THAT SO THAT YOU CAN AND BY THAT I MEAN CAN ACHIEVE VERY LARGE LOT AREAS WITH A VERY NARROW LOT BECAUSE THE LOT SO DEEP BUT KEEP IN MIND AS IT RELATES TO ANY POTENTIAL THERE WHAT THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THESE CHANGES ARE IN THOSE LOTS THOSE LOTS ARE ALSO PROTECTED BY THE BLUFF PROTECTION OVERLAY SO THERE ARE SOME PROTECTIONS ARE SPECIFIC TO THE MINNESOTA RIVER VALLEY FOR THOSE PROPERTIES PREVAILING SETBACKS SO I WILL SECOND THE POINT ABOUT REGULATORY COMPLEXITY AND SOME OF THIS MIGHT BE PHILOSOPHICAL ON OUR PART AS WELL IS THAT YOU AS A PROPERTY OWNER HOW YOU CAN BUILD ON YOUR LOT, WHAT YOU CAN DO THERE IS INFORM BY HOW THE STRUCTURES WERE BUILT ON YOUR NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AND SO THAT'S A POLICY DECISION ON THE PART OF THE CITY WHETHER THAT'S THAT'S IMPORTANT OR THAT PROVIDES IMPORTANT LAND USE GUIDANCE FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE THINKING ABOUT ZONING AS A WAY THAT IT'S TO ENSURE PUBLIC HEALTH SAFETY WELFARE IT KIND OF IT'S NOT AS GOOD AT MEETING THAT TEST IN OUR VIEW AS SOME OF OUR OTHER ZONING STANDARDS AND RESTRICTIONS. SO THAT'S ONE REASON THAT WE'RE LESS MARRIED TO OR LESS SUPPORTIVE OF IT IN ADDITION TO THE REGULATORY COMPLEXITY. BUT THE OTHER PIECE OF IT TOO IS THAT IT ACTUALLY IS TIED TO THE ENVIRONMENT AND THAT IS IN ORDER TO REQUIRE FAR AWAY SETBACKS MORE FOR ANESTHETIC CHOICE ON THE PART OF THE CITY OF THESE AREAS. WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS YOU'RE INCREASING THE LENGTH OF THE YOU'RE ADDING UNNECESSARY IMPERVIOUS TO A PROPERTY JUST BECAUSE YOU WANT THE SETBACKS TO REMAIN CONSISTENT WITH NEIGHBORS AND SO THAT MIGHT ACTUALLY ALSO REQUIRE ADDITIONAL TREE REMOVAL IN SOME INSTANCES TOO IN SOME OF THESE AREAS. SO AS IT TURNS OUT THAT USUALLY AREAS THAT ARE MOST CLEAR AND SOME OF THESE ARE AS ONE LOTS ARE ACTUALLY USUALLY PRETTY TO THE STREET. SO THE FARTHER BACK END YOU GO THE MORE IMPACTS THERE ARE. I JUST WANT TO KNOW YOU KNOW IT'S THOSE THREE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION WERE NOT SUPPORTIVE AND I THINK PART THEIR RECOMMENDATION IN THAT REGARD IS THAT THERE IS A THROUGH LINE OF THAT DISCUSSION IS THAT THEY SAID JUST LEAVE IT ALONE THIS IS AN AREA THAT MAYBE WE CAN BE UTILIZING DISCUSSION OR POLICYMAKING IN OTHER AREAS AND THEY JUST FELT IT WAS KIND OF GOOD AS IT WAS AND THAT IT SHOULD REMAIN SO USE CHANGES AGAIN. THE RECOMMENDATION IN THE STAFF REPORT WAS TO ADD TWO FAMILY DWELLINGS TO RS1 THINK THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE COMP PLAN AND WE THINK IT'S GOOD TO HAVE ALIGNMENT WITH OUR ONE AND REMOVE THREE INSTITUTIONAL USES WHICH JUST FRANKLY DON'T MAKE A LOT OF SENSE IN THE RS ONE ZONING DISTRICT SO THEY'RE ALL ACCESSORY USES IT HAS TO DO WITH COLUMN AREA ACCESSORY TO A CEMETERY A GREENHOUSE ACCESSORY TO AN INSTITUTIONAL USE AND I FORGET OTHER ONE I'VE TALKED MY HEAD BUT THEY DON'T THERE AREN'T ANY OF THEM IN OUR S-1 SO IT'S HARD HAVE AN ACCESSORY USE TO SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T EXIST THAT ISN'T ALLOWED IN RS1 SO REALLY THAT'S JUST A CLERICAL CHANGE BUT WE DO THINK THAT THE TWO FAMILY DWELLING PIECES IS GOOD AND IMPORTANT. ONE THING I FORGOT SORRY TO GO BACKWARDS AND GO OUT OF ORDER . ONE THING I FORGOT TO SAY ABOUT ITEMS NUMBER THREE AND FOUR IS THAT THESE TWO STANDARDS ALSO APPLIED TO THE R1A ZONING DISTRICT AND AGAIN THAT'S THE ZONING THAT IS NOT ABLE TO CONNECT TO SANITARY VIA GRAVITY. THESE SITES ARE ON SEPTIC. THERE'S VERY FEW OF THEM I THINK THERE'S SITES AND IF THE COUNCIL SUPPORTED A DIRECTION OF REMOVING A MEDIAN SITE WITH AND PREVAILING SETBACK IN THE RS ONE ZONING DISTRICT I THINK STAFF WOULD BRING AN ORDINANCE YOU THAT ALSO REMOVED IT FROM THE R ONE AND JUST FROM THE PURPOSES OF CONSISTENCY AMONG ALL OF OUR LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS IT WOULD NOT MAKE A LOT OF SENSE AND I THINK THE VALUE IS SOMEWHAT QUESTIONABLE TO RETAIN IT JUST FOR SEVEN LOTS IN EFFECT JUST FROM A CONFUSION STANDPOINT. SO YEAH AGAIN BACK NOW TO NUMBER SIX SORRY I WENT BACKWARDS THERE. NUMBER SIX IS NOT AN ADDITION TO THE CODE PER SE AND WE'VE TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THIS BUT IT'S MORE OF STAFF IN KIND OF GOING THROUGH SOME REZONING REQUESTS PREVIOUSLY AND THINKING IT'S TO HAVE THIS DISCUSSION AS A GROUP AS A BODY WITH PLANNING COMMISSION AS WELL AND THIS IS THESE ARE KIND OF UNSPOKEN METHODOLOGY. THESE ARE TACTICS THAT WE USE WITH RESPECT TO ANY REQUEST FOR REZONING ANY TIME SOMEONE REQUESTS REZONING WE'RE ALWAYS LOOKING IS IT CONSISTENT WITH THE PLAN? IS IT CONSISTENT WITH THE DISTRICT INTENT? DOES MEET THESE DISTRICT STANDARDS YADA YADA YADA. THE POINT IS IS THAT WE WE PRESENT THIS INFORMATION TO YOU ALWAYS IN THE STAFF REPORT ANYWAY BUT THIS IS JUST KIND OF MEMORIALIZING AS A AS A GROUP, AS A BODY THAT IF YOU DO GET SOME OF THESE REZONING REQUESTS IN THE FUTURE THAT WE HAVE THE DISCUSSION AND WE HAD THIS FIVE CONSISTENT CRITERIA AND THAT WAY IT EMPOWERS YOUR STAFF TO YOU KNOW TO COMMUNICATE WITH RESIDENTS THESE ARE THE FIVE THINGS THAT WE'RE GOING TO LOOK LOOK AT AND I DO HAVE A SLIDE THAT WE CAN TALK ABOUT THEM IF YOU WANT BUT JUST TO REITERATE AGAIN WHAT THEY ARE IS WITH THE INTENT THE LEVEL OF CONFORMITY WITH S-1 DISTRICT STANDARDS. THE MOST IMPORTANT ONE THERE IS LOT AREA THE SCALE OF THE REZONING ACTION SO A NUMBER OF LOTS AS COUNCILMEMBER NELSON POINTED OUT IN THE LAST DISCUSSION HAVING TWO LOTS VERY ZONED RESPONDED AT THE BOTTOM OF ARMIDALE BOULEVARD MAYBE DOESN'T MAKE SENSE FROM A SCALE PERSPECTIVE THAT YOU DO WANT TO HAVE A NUMBER OF LOTS KIND OF BE WORTH YOUR WHILE SO TO SPEAK AND THEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONTINUITY FACTOR SO ONE SITUATION WE DO WANT TO AVOID IS A NEIGHBORHOOD COMING FORWARD WHERE ONLY HALF OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD WANTS TO BE OUR ONE, THE OTHER HALF WANTS TO BE ONE AND YOU HAVE POCKETS OF INCONSISTENCY IN BETWEEN THAT'S NOT A GOOD OUTCOME. AND SO THERE HAS TO SOME CONTINUITY AMONG THE AREAS THAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT AND THEN E OR FIVE IS THIS THE PROPORTION OF NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT? SO THERE'S TWO FORMS THAT REZONINGS CAN COME TO YOU FROM THE PUBLIC. ONE IS PRIVATELY INITIATED WHERE EVERY PROPERTY IS SIGNING THE APPLICATION. THEY ARE IN FACT AN APPLICANT. THE OTHER IS A PETITION PROCESS WHICH IS OUTLINED IN THE CHARTER AND THAT SCENARIO AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING THROUGH SOME PETITIONS LATELY BUT IN THAT SCENARIO YOU KNOW NOT EVERYONE HAS TO BE ON BOARD AND SO WHAT IS THE LEVEL OF PROPORTIONALITY OF NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT IN THIS ACTION THAT MAKES IT APPROPRIATE OR TO MOVE FORWARD AND BY DESCRIBING THESE CRITERIA I DON'T THINK WE HAVE LIKE THE EXACT NUMBER MAPPED OUT IN OUR MINDS AND I'M SURE MAYBE YOU DON'T EITHER BUT IT'S JUST IMPORTANT TO TALK ABOUT SO THAT YOU TRY AND GET TO A CONSISTENT APPROACH TO THIS THING SO YOU KIND OF AVOID INCONSISTENT ACTIONS THAT LEAVE PEOPLE FEELING LIKE IT WASN'T A FAIR OR CONSISTENT PROCESS. YEAH. SO THOSE ARE THE SIX ITEMS THAT WE ARE PRESENTING TO YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. I CAN COME BACK TO THESE BUT JUST TALKING ABOUT NEXT STEPS REALLY TWO PATHWAYS HERE IF CHANGES TO OUR S-1 ARE SUPPORTED WE'LL DRAFT AN ORDINANCE THIS MONTH AND WE'LL SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARINGS IN THE END OF SEPTEMBER OR OCTOBER AT PLANNING COMMISSION . GET BACK TO YOU WITH A PUBLIC HEARING IN OCTOBER NOVEMBER OF THIS YEAR AND THEN IF CHANGES ARE NOT SUPPORTED UNLESS YOU PROVIDE A SUBSEQUENT DIRECTION ELSEWHERE ,WE WOULD PROPOSE THAT THE STUDY BE DEEMED AS COMPLETE. SO WITH THAT I'LL TURN IT OVER BACK TO THE MAYOR AND TAKE YOUR QUESTIONS. THANKS SO MUCH MR. JUST WONDERED WHY DON'T YOU DOUBLE BACK TO THE POTENTIAL CHANGES THERE WE GO ANY BEFORE WE GET INTO THE DISCUSSION OF EACH OF THESE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT ANY OF THE SIX PROPOSALS HERE COUNCILMEMBER DALLESSANDRO THAN COUNCILMEMBER NELSON COUNCILMEMBER DALLESSANDRO THANK YOU. SO I THINK YOU ANSWERED THIS I JUST WANT TO DOUBLE CHECK YOU SAID YOU SAID FOR THE MOST PART THE REASONS FOR PLANNING COMMISSION OPPOSITION TO THESE WERE NOT SO MUCH THEY HAD SOME OTHER IDEA AS MUCH AS THEY WERE LIKE WE SHOULDN'T BOTHER IT. IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH. MAYOR COUNCILMAN NELSON I THINK THAT'S FAIR. I THINK THAT PART OF THEIR DISCUSSION AND I HOPE I'M NOT YOU KNOW, ENTERING OTHER INTO HOW I'M FORMULATING WHAT THEIR RESPONSE WAS BUT I THINK THERE DO SHARE SOME OF THE CONCERN ABOUT REZONING ACTIONS AS I'VE TALKED ABOUT PREVIOUSLY AND I THINK MAYBE SO THE CASE WITH OUR AS ONE DISTRICT BUT LARGE LOT DISTRICTS AT LEAST JUST THE INDUSTRY OR AREA OF PLANNING HAVE BEEN USED AS A TOOL OF EXCLUSION IN THE PAST AND SO I THINK THERE'S SOME CONCERN ABOUT THAT BUT. I THINK IT ALSO WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT JUST WHERE DOES THE CITY ITS RESOURCES IN TERMS OF KIND OF THE ZONING AMENDMENTS, THINGS WE WORK ON. I THINK THAT'S KIND OF THE BULK OF WHAT I HEARD IS THAT YOU KNOW, THIS IS ONLY 116 LOTS. MAYBE WE SHOULD JUST BE FOCUSING ATTENTION ELSEWHERE AND I DON'T THINK IT WAS A A FINGER POINTING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. I THINK IT WAS WELL-MEANING AND I ALSO THINK IT WAS VERY LATE AT NIGHT. BUT YEAH THAT'S HOW I INTERPRETED IS THAT THEY JUST THAT THIS WAS KIND OF WINEMAKER ISSUE OR THERE ISN'T ONE KIND OF THING. OKAY. SECOND QUESTION WAS THERE ANY CONVERSATION REGARDING THE RECOMMENDED INTENT STATEMENT WAS THERE ANY CONVERSATION ABOUT PROVIDING EXPLICIT DEFINITIONS FOR THOSE ITEMS? SO WE DO HAVE FOR EXAMPLE A STEEP DEFINITION. WE DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE A DEFINITION OF SIGNIFICANT NATIVE OR NATURAL PLANTINGS. WE DON'T HAVE THAT FOR WETLANDS. WE DON'T HAVE THAT FOR I MEAN MAYBE THE D DOESN'T MATTER BECAUSE THAT THAT THAT MAKES SENSE THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN BUT I MEAN IS THERE A IS THERE AN EXPECTATION LIKE WHAT THE WHAT IS THE OBJECTIVE OR SUBJECTIVE CRITERIA USED TO EVALUATE THAT LIKE WHAT WOULD A PERSON A PETITIONER HAVE TO BRING TO YOU FOR YOU TO CONSIDER IT SIGNIFICANT? YEAH, THANK YOU. GOOD QUESTION. COUNCILMEMBER DALLESSANDRO, SO YOU MENTIONED CORRECTLY WE DO HAVE A DEFINITION OF STEEP SLOPES. WETLANDS ARE WELL DEFINED IN STATE LAW. IT'S REALLY THAT ITEM B IN TERMS OF NATURAL OR NATIVE VEGETATION MEAN THAT JUST FRANKLY AS A PLANNING STAFF AND WHAT WE WOULD DIRECT THE PUBLIC TO DO THIS IS TO JUST WORK WITH OUR NATURAL RESOURCE STAFF BECAUSE YOU KNOW SOME AREAS USED TO BE FARM FIELDS THAT ARE NOW YOU KNOW, HAVE GROWN YOUNG OR WOODS OR NOT NATIVE WOODS I GUESS INVASIVE WOODS AND SOME AREAS HAVE STANDS OF VALUABLE MATURE TREES THAT ARE NATIVE OR SIGNIFICANT TO THE AREA THAT ARE WORTHY OF PROTECTION. AND SO I THINK YOU KNOW WHAT WE WOULD AND YOU KNOW WE'RE NOT TALKING ON A PER LOT BASIS, RIGHT IDEALLY TO THAT SCALE POINT WHAT WE'RE REALLY LOOKING AT IS WHAT ARE THE AREAS THAT HAVE SOME OF THESE MORE VALUABLE TREES AND OTHER FLORA FODDER WHAT HAVE YOU THAT OUR NATURAL RESOURCE STAFF THINKS IS VALUABLE? AND SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S SOMEWHERE WHERE WE WOULD LOOK TO THEIR EXPERTIZE OKAY YEAH. COUNCILMEMBER NELSON YEAH THANK YOU MAYOR. I THINK I KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS BUT JUST CLARIFICATION THERE WAS NO DISCUSSION ABOUT JUST ELIMINATING RS ONE ZONING YEAH. MAYOR COUNCILOR NELSON SO WE DIDN'T THAT AS PART OF THE PROJECT AND SO MUCH AS WE DIDN'T DISCUSS REZONING ANY PROPERTY IS PART OF THE R-1 ZONING DISTRICT STUDY OR OF THIS STUDY THE STAFF IT WOULD MAKE OUR JOBS EASIER TO ELIMINATE AND I'M NOT GOING TO I'M NOT GOING TO DISAGREE WITH THAT BECAUSE YOU WOULD HAVE JUST GREATER CONSISTENCY EVERY SINGLE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY IT WOULD BE THE SAME RULES IN EFFECT. BUT BACK TO THAT POINT THAT THE REZONING PROCESS CAN BE CHALLENGING AT TIMES DEPENDING ON THE NATURE OF WHAT IS PROPOSED, THE SCALE OF WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED. SO I THINK WE DIDN'T GO THERE BECAUSE WHAT EFFECTIVELY THAT MEANS IS THAT YOUR REZONING 116 EXISTING PROPERTIES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS MIGHT BE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THAT IDEA OR THAT ACTION OR THEY MIGHT BE STRONGLY OPPOSED OR EVERYWHERE IN BETWEEN AND WE WOULDN'T KNOW UNLESS WE SURVEYED THEM IN SOME OF WHAT THEIR PREFERENCES WOULD BE. BUT WE SUSPECT THAT SOME PEOPLE ARE VERY SUPPORTIVE AND ATTACHED TO THOSE STANDARDS WITHIN THAT ZONING DISTRICTS JUST FOR AS A GOOD ANALYSIS. AND THEN JUST FOLLOWING UP ON COUNCILMEMBER D'ALESSANDRO, IF I MIGHT SO YOU MENTIONED THAT WE HAVE WETLANDS ARE VERY WELL DEFINED AND WHAT YOU CAN AND CAN'T DO THERE AS WELL AS STEEP SLOPES THOSE MAY CONSTRAIN LOTS EVEN IF THEY'RE LARGE TO CERTAIN BUILDABLE PORTIONS OF IT. BUT WE ALSO HAVE A LOT OF TREE STUFF MEAN WE WE HAVE GOOD DEFINITIONS FOR HEALTHY TREE NON-NATIVE BENEFICIAL TREES SIGNIFICANT TREES THERE MAY BE OTHER PLANTS AND THINGS THAT WE DON'T HAVE AS GOOD BUT WE IN TERMS OF TREES WE HAVE ORDINANCES THAT PROTECT THOSE PARTICULARLY IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY IN THE SITUATION OF REPLANTING TO SUBDIVIDE WHICH WOULD BE PROBABLY WHAT WAS HAPPENING IF SOMEONE WAS GOING TO BUILD AN ADDITIONAL HOUSE. IS THAT ACCURATE? THAT'S CORRECT. SO OUR TREE PRESERVATION CALLS FOR AN ELEMENT OF TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE DOES REQUIRE A REPLACEMENT RATE THAT'S PRETTY SIGNIFICANT ONCE YOU EXCEED A CERTAIN THRESHOLD OF REMOVAL AND WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT HAVE LOTS THERE IS GOING TO BE REMOVAL AND I WOULD ADD AND NOT TO THIS POINT IS LOST OR UPON YOU BUT JUST FROM THE STANDPOINT THE PUBLIC IF SOMEONE JUST BUYS AN HOUR'S ONE LOT, TURNS DOWN THE HOUSE AND BUILDS A NEW HOUSE, SOMETIMES IT'S BIGGER, SOMETIMES IT INVOLVES REMOVING SOME TREES AND SO THAT ACTIVITY CAN OCCUR WHETHER THERE'S A PLANT, A SUBDIVISION, A SPLIT NOT AND THE ORDINANCE DOESN'T SPEAK TO THAT AND THAT CERTAINLY IS A DECISION A POLICY DECISION AND CERTAINLY APPROPRIATE IN MANY CASES. MONITORING THESE THINGS ALSO TAKES RESOURCES FROM A STANDPOINT OF GETTING NATURAL RESOURCE STAFF TO MONITOR THEM ,DO THE PERMITS, DO THE PROTECTION. SO IT IS A SIGNIFICANT UNDERTAKING TO THE STEEP SLOPES POINT I WAS TRYING TO PRESS THIS LAST MAY OR BEFORE THEN LAST YEAR THE WAY THAT OUR STEEP ORDINANCES ARE STRUCTURED IS THAT THE STEEPER YOUR LOT THE LESS IMPERVIOUS YOU'RE ALLOWED TO HAVE. AND SO IN EFFECT WHAT THAT RESULTS IN IF YOU ARE LOOKING AT SUBDIVIDING A LOT IS YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE A LARGER LOT THAN WHAT THE MINIMUM IS IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE LIMITATIONS. SO YES, BOTH OF THESE THINGS LIMIT THE KIND OF DEVELOPMENT YOU CAN DO EVEN IN THE R-1 ZONING DISTRICT IN AREAS THAT HAVE THIS CRITERIA IN . ADDITION TO THE POINT I WAS TRYING TO MAKE ABOUT THE COST JUST DEVELOPING IN STEEPER WOODED AREAS IS MORE COSTLY THAN FLAT BARREN AREAS AND SO YEAH THAT THE MARKET IS ALWAYS A PIECE OF THAT BECAUSE IT'S JUST GOING TO ADD EXTRA COST THAT OFTENTIMES WHAT WE'RE FINDING IN THESE PROJECTS IS THERE'S NOT ROOM TO ABSORB THOSE COSTS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER COUNCIL ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS JUST KIND OF GENERAL QUESTIONS. COUNCILMEMBER RIVAS I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS BUT IF IF I MAY IN THE FUTURE ASK YOU QUESTIONS ON JUST HAVING A CONVERSATION WE DO NOT IN THE MEETING I'M SURE I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS BUT I DON'T THINK I WILL MAKE ANY SENSE RIGHT NOW. SO IF I MAY SET A MEETING IN THE FUTURE SO WOULD BE GREAT AND ASK YOU WHAT I WROTE DOWN TODAY THAT'S I WELCOME THAT COUNCILMAN REALLY SOUNDS SO COUNCIL IF THERE ARE NO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AS WE HAVE THESE SIX ITEMS TO TO TALK ABOUT MY MY THOUGHT WOULD BE TO TAKE THE LOW HANGING FRUIT FIRST AFTER WE GET PAST LET'S GET TO THE TO THE THE BIGGER QUESTION THAT COUNCILMEMBER NELSON BROUGHT UP DO WE WANT TO PURSUE THE SIMPLE ELIMINATION OF OUR AS ONE AND I KNOW THERE ARE AT LEAST A COUPLE OF COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO WOULD LIKE THAT AND WOULD LIKE TO CONSIDER THAT. I DO THINK WE HEARD FROM MR. JOHNSON THE COMPLEX INVOLVED OF TRYING TO REZONE 140 SOME PLUS LOTS WOULD BE WOULD BE A CHALLENGE AND WOULD BE A SIGNIFICANT STAFF DRAIN I THINK TO MAKE THAT ALL HAPPEN BUT. IS IT SOMETHING WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT? IS IT SOMETHING WE WANT TO GO DOWN THAT ROAD? WE WANT TO SOMETHING WE WANT TO CONSIDER? COUNCILMEMBER MOUA, THANK YOU MAYOR HOW I'VE BEEN THINKING ABOUT THIS IS THAT THIS CAME OUT OF THE SPIRIT OF OUR ONE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD AND THIS LAST DISTRICT IN PARTICULAR TO ME IS TENURE FOR FUTURE COUNCILS. I DON'T THINK WE'RE WE NEED TO MAKE THE CHANGE NOW I AM ALWAYS FOR MAKING SURE THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS MORE RIGHTS LIKE THE FEWER THINGS THE CITY HAS TO RESTRICT PROPERTY OWNERS THE THE MORE I SUPPORT THAT AND ALSO THE LESS THAT MY NEIGHBORS HAVE SAY IN WHAT I DO ON MY OWN PROPERTY. I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THAT. SO I'M GENERALLY SUPPORTIVE OF UPDATING THESE CHANGES TO MORE STREAMLINE IN THE WITH OUR ONE BUT I DON'T THINK GETTING RID OF THIS DISTRICT IS SOMETHING THAT IS NECESSARILY UP FOR US TO DO NOW AND SO THIS IS POTENTIALLY JUST TEEING UP FOR FUTURE COUNCILS IN THE EVENT THAT THEY NEED TO HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS. BUT I AM SUPPORTIVE OF CONTINUE TO HAVE OUR AS ONE BECAUSE I THINK WE ONE OF THE BIG THINGS THAT I CAME HERE TO BLOOMINGTON WAS FOR THE DIVERSITY AND PROPERTY TYPES THAT WE HAVE HERE AND SO THAT WHEN MY FAMILY GROWS I CAN MOVE OUT OF MY LITTLE RAMBLER AND, GET INTO A BIGGER HOUSE THAT JUST SUPPORTS WHERE I'M AT AND WHEN I RETIRE I CAN CONTINUE TO LIVE IN ONE COMMUNITY AND SO THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I'M AT. I'M TOTALLY SUPPORTIVE MAKING CHANGES ON THIS ONE BUT NOT ELIMINATING WHOLESALE, THE COUNCILMEMBER SAID ANY OTHER WEIGHING IN ON THAT COUNCILMEMBER? CARTER THANK YOU, MAYOR. I GUESS I WOULD JUST SAY I AGREE THE NUMBER OF LOTS THAT IT IS I DON'T THINK IT WOULD PROBABLY BE WORTH DEDICATING THAT MUCH STAFF TIME TO MAKING THOSE CHANGES CONSIDERING. WE USUALLY ALWAYS HAVE A MUCH LONGER LIST THAN CAN BE DONE WHEN THEY'RE THEIR WORK PLAN AND SO JUST THE IMPACT BECAUSE OF THE SHEER NUMBER OF LAYOFFS, I DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD BE WORTH GOING THROUGH ALL OF THE COMPLEXITIES THAT WERE NOTED. COUNCILMEMBER RIVAS AND COUNCILMEMBER NELSON, HOUSE MEMBER IS THE PURPOSE OF THIS POTENTIAL CHANGE BECAUSE CREATING MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR WHAT'S THE REASONING BEHIND PLANNING ALL THIS? YEAH MAYOR COUNCILMEMBER RIVAS, WHEN WE PURSUED THE OUR ONE CHANGES IN MAY THERE WAS A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT GOALS THAT WE SET OUT AND NOT ALL OF CHANGES THAT WERE PURSUED WERE SIMPLY FOR THE THE LOT SIZE AND THINGS THERE WAS THINGS ABOUT SETBACKS, THERE WAS THINGS ABOUT THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS, THERE WAS THINGS ABOUT THE PROCESS BY WHICH YOU CAN A TWO FAMILY DWELLING SO MANY OF THOSE THINGS DO FLOW THE ISSUE OF HOUSING AFFORD AFFORDABILITY BUT A BIG PART OF IT WAS CREATING MORE OPPORTUNITY FOR DIFFERENT HOUSING VARIETY THAN WHAT CURRENTLY EXISTS. I THINK THE CITY HAS SOMEWHERE ON THE LINES OF OH 2520 252 FAMILY DWELLINGS AND I JUST USE THAT AS AN EXAMPLE. THERE'S OTHER HOUSING TYPES LIKE TOWNHOMES THAT ARE GOOD FOR SENIORS AND ONE OF THE DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGES WE'RE TRYING TO GET AHEAD OF AND RESPOND TO AS PART OF THE COMMUNITY IS THAT BLOOMINGTON IS AN AGING COMMUNITY. IT IS THE FIFTH I THINK IT'S THE FIFTH OLDEST IN THE REGION. SOMETIMES IT CHANGES BACK AND FORTH BUT AND OTHER SUBURBAN COMMUNITIES EXPERIENCING THIS TOO THEY BUILT A LARGE PROPORTION OF THEIR HOUSING STOCK, LARGER SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE BLOOMINGTON IS ACTUALLY A LITTLE BETTER POSITIONED THAN SOME OF THEM BY HAVING SINGLE LEVEL AND SMALLER HOMES TOO. SO SOME VARIETY. BUT I THINK THESE CHANGES IN GENERAL ARE RECOGNIZING THAT IT'S PROBABLY JUST SMART POLICY TO LOWER SOME OF THE BARRIERS FOR INFILL HOUSING CREATION. A BIG ONE TO ME WHICH WE DON'T TALK ABOUT A LOT MAYBE BECAUSE IT'S NOT IT'S MORE I DON'T KNOW IF THE UTILITIES THE UTILITIES GUYS BACK THERE IF YOU HAVE TEN HOUSES ON A LOT IT'S A LOT IT'S A LOT MORE AFFORDABLE TO REPLACE THAT PIPE AND REPLACE THAT STREET THAN IF YOU HAVE FIVE HOUSES ON A BLOCK EXCUSE ME I DIDN'T SAY HOUSE AND A LOT HOUSES ON OUR BLOCK. AND SO ONE OF THE ISSUE THAT COMMUNITIES LIKE BLOOMINGTON ARE FACING TOO IS JUST AGING INFRASTRUCTURE AND ADDING SOME ADDITIONAL DENSITY ON THOSE BLOCKS IS GOING TO HELP FINANCIALLY SUPPORT REPLACEMENT OR MAINTENANCE OF THAT INFRASTRUCTURE. SO I THINK THERE'S PROBABLY A LITTLE INTO THE WEEDS OR MORE THAN WAS ASKED I THINK FROM A PRACTICAL STANDPOINT COUNCILMEMBER RIVAS WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THIS WE WERE LOOKING FOR A VARIETY OF OPTIONS ACKNOWLEDGING THAT IF IT'S A 33,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT, IF IT'S SUBDIVIDED INTO TWO, ONE OF THE ANYTHING THAT IS BUILT ON THAT SUBDIVIDED LOT IS NOT GOING TO FALL INTO THE REALM OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND IT'S GOING TO BE IT'S GOING TO BE AN EXPENSIVE HOME SO BUT IT PROVIDES INFILL OPPORTUNITIES AND IT PROVIDES ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES. WE WERE JUST LOOKING AT DIFFERENT SO YES THE AFFORDABILITY ASPECT DOES INTO PLAY BUT IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY DOMINATE THE CONVERSATION. RIGHT RIGHT. COUNCILMEMBER NELSON AND COUNCILMEMBER DALLESSANDRO. THANK YOU, MAYOR. I MEAN OBVIOUSLY I'VE BEEN IN SUPPORT OF ELIMINATION OF THIS. I CANDIDLY DON'T KNOW THAT IT'D BE THAT DIFFICULT FOR STAFF. WE ALREADY HAVE OUR ONE ZONING STANDARDS. IT WOULD BE A MATTER OF JUST BRING IT FORWARD WHEN REZONING IS AND IT'S NOT DIFFICULT FOR STAFF FROM MY PERSPECTIVE IT'S DIFFICULT FOR US BECAUSE CAN GUARANTEE YOU THAT THE FOLKS LIVING ON THOSE LOTS WON'T LIKE THAT JUST DON'T MOVE. I'M GOING TO GO OUT ON A LIMB ON THAT ONE. SO AND BUT I THINK THAT YOU KNOW, HOUSING, HOUSING AND ALL THE LOTS SHOULD BE TREATED THE SAME. WE HAVEN'T SEEN IMPACTS TO INFILL HOUSING. YOU KNOW THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT FORWARD WITH CONCERNS ORIGINALLY ON THIS YOU KNOW HALF THE HOUSES IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD ARE DUE TO INFILL HOUSING AND SUBDIVISION OF LOTS YOU KNOW THAT THOSE THINGS ARE CALLED YOUR NEIGHBORS AND I THINK WE HAVE PROTECTIONS FOR TREES WE HAVE PROTECTIONS FOR WATER WE HAVE PROTECTIONS FOR STEEP SLOPES. WE HAVE THOSE THINGS ALREADY THERE THAT YOU KNOW, WE CAN APPLY THOSE NOT JUST TO OUR AS ONE BUT TO EVERY LOT WITHIN THE CITY AND PROTECT THOSE THINGS THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO US. BUT I'M GOING TO JUST BE CLEAR ABOUT THIS IS THIS THE HILL I'M GOING TO DIE ON? ABSOLUTELY NOT. IS IT SOMETHING THAT WE DO OR SOME FUTURE COUNCIL DOES? YOU KNOW, I'M I CAN LIVE WITH THAT. I RESPECT WHERE YOU ALL ARE. I JUST DON'T WANT TO SEE IT EXPANDED AND THAT IS MY BIG CONCERN OF WHATEVER WE DO HERE OF HAVING A BUNCH OF APPLICATIONS FROM LET'S BE BLUNT LARGE HOUSES, WEALTHY WEALTHY NEIGHBORHOODS THAT COME IN AND TRY TO AVOID WHAT WE DID WITH RS ARE ONE ZONING AND WHEREAS A BUNCH OF OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS WITH THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY THAT ARE PROBABLY IN REDEVELOPED FARM FIELDS THAT ARE FLATTENED DON'T HAVE A LOT OF TREES OR WATER NEAR THEM ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO ARE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT. AND I JUST FRANKLY BLUNTLY THINK THAT'S WRONG AND. I JUST WANT TO FIND SO YOUR IDEA OF WE HAD AN AND OR SOMETHING I'M ASSUMING WE CAN'T JUST SAY NO OR WE CAN'T JUST HAVE AN ORDINANCE THAT WE WILL NOT ALLOW ANY MORE HOURS ONE IF WE CAN I VOTE FOR THAT SO I DON'T KNOW MAYBE THAT'S A QUESTION CAN WE DO THAT THAT? THAT IS MY BIGGEST CONCERN THAT THERE'S 100 LOTS THAT COULD BE LOOKED AT DIFFERENTLY . THE IMPACT ON ANY OF THE GOALS THAT WE HAVE IS GOING TO BE SO MINOR. IS IT WORTH THE FIGHT? I DON'T KNOW. I MEAN AM I WILLING AM I PERSONALLY WILLING TO HAVE IT? YES. BUT IS IT WORTH IT? I DON'T KNOW. IT'S JUST NOT GOING TO ACHIEVE ANY OF THOSE GOALS IN MY MIND IN ANY NEAR-TERM FASHION. SO I JUST DON'T WANT THIS TO EXPAND. THAT'S WHAT I THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT. I DON'T WANT IT TO EXPAND. FAIR ENOUGH. I WAS FROM AND BACK TO COUNCILMEMBER WE HAVE THE THIS ISN'T AN OPTION. YOU JUST SEE WE'RE NOT DOING IT ANYMORE. WE'RE NOT THAT THAT IDEA THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION. IS IT AN TO SIMPLY SAY THIS ONE WHERE WE ARE AT ONE RIGHT NOW IS WHERE WE ARE AT OUR AS ONE IN TERMS OF LIMITER. SO MAYOR, THANKS FOR THAT QUESTION. BY THAT I MEAN I TAKE TO MEAN THAT ADDITIONAL NEW PROPERTIES AND BY THAT I WOULD SAY THAT REZONING IS A HIGHLY DISCRETIONARY ON THE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL. IT'S IN EFFECT LEGISLATING YOU DO HAVE SOME GUIDANCE FROM YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN TERMS OF WHAT AREAS SHOULD BE ZONED ONE BUT FRANKLY BOTH ARE ONE AND ARTIST ONE ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE LDR FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY THE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE CATEGORY. SO COULD SOMEONE MAKE A CLAIM THAT YOU KNOW, I MET ALL THE CRITERIA AND YOU MADE AN ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS DECISION? I DON'T KNOW. I MEAN I THINK THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE EVALUATED BY, YOU KNOW, LEGAL STAFF AND AND DO SOME OF THOSE THINGS. BUT I THINK THAT'S WHY IT'S SO IMPORTANT TO HAVE THAT CONSISTENT CRITERIA THAT I TALKED ABOUT AND MAYBE IDENTIFY WHAT PROPORTIONS OF THE LOTS SHOULD BE FOR FOR AN AREA OR A SOUTHERN NEIGHBORHOOD OR A NEIGHBORHOOD TO BE REZONE BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WHAT WE'VE SEEN SO FAR IS THAT FOREST HAVEN, YOU KNOW, IS AROUND 60 SOME PERCENT OF THOSE LOTS MEET THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE BRIER IT WENT DOWN SOMEWHERE AROUND 50% AND SOME OF THE AREAS PEOPLE OTHER PEOPLE HAVE TALKED ABOUT WERE IN THE TWENTIES AND THIRTIES OF PERCENTILE OF MEETING THAT A LOT AREA CRITERIA SO THAT'S THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU LEARN IN PLANNING SCHOOL TO GO CREATE ZONING TO APPLY THAT THAT'S NOT TO SAY THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN I MEAN IT'S NOT THE END OF THE WORLD TO HAVE A NON-CONFORMING LOT IT HAPPENS QUITE FREQUENTLY WE HAVE OUR ONE LOTS THAT ARE NON-CONFORMING EVEN STILL BUT YES SO IT'S A HIGHLY DISCRETIONARY ACTION YOU AS COUNCIL CAN DECIDE NO THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO HONOR THIS PETITION THIS APPLICATION BY REZONING IT SUBJECT TO WHAT I SAID ABOUT THE ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS PIECE COUNCILMEMBER NELSON THANKS MAYOR. ALONG THOSE LINES I KNOW THAT YOU HAD TALKED ABOUT THOSE GUIDELINES FOR STAFF REVIEW THAT. THEY'RE NOT ORDINANCES BUT WOULD WE BE ABLE TO ADD IN THERE THAT THRESHOLD THAT SAY, YOU KNOW, IT HAS TO BE LESS THAN 20% NONCONFORMING IF YOU WANT TO DO THAT WHICH YOU KNOW IS GOING TO ELIMINATE A LOT OF NEIGHBORHOODS SAYING THAT WE'RE JUST NOT BECAUSE I MEAN THE IDEA THAT YOU'RE GOING TO GO IN AND PUT IN THERE AND 60 70% OF THEM ARE NONCONFORMING IT MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE. I MEAN THE REALITY IS THAT JUST TRYING TO AVOID 7000 SQUARE FOOT LOT THEY'RE NOT TRYING TO HAVE A 33 OR 22 OR WHATEVER IT IS THEY'RE TRYING TO AVOID THE 7000 SQUARE FOOT THING IF IF THEY'RE DOING THAT SO CAN WE GIVE THAT GUIDANCE TO YOU TOO JUST THAT IN MY IS PUMPING THE BRAKES WITHOUT YOU KNOW JUST TOTALLY STOP IN THE CAR ON IT WHERE IT'S YOU KNOW COME UP WITH A REASONABLE STANDARD ON THAT IT'S THAT CAN WE DO THAT SO MAYOR AND I'LL I WELCOME ATTORNEY MAGISTRATES GUIDANCE IN THIS AND THE THE PLANNING MANAGERS IN THE BACKGROUND TO IT THIS IS A LITTLE BIT LEGISLATING FROM DAIS I'M NOT ONLY BEING CREATIVE HERE ZONING AS A TOOL IS UTILIZED ON A PER LOT BASIS AND THAT'S WHERE I THINK I AND A LITTLE BIT STRUGGLING TO BE CREATIVE WITH RESPECT TO IDENTIFYING WHAT A REZONING ACTION NEIGHBORHOOD THRESHOLD WOULD BE FOR MEETING THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE BECAUSE THAT'S NOT A POLITE STANDARD THAT'S EVALUATING A GROUPINGS OF LOTS AND SAYING THAT THAT GROUPING HAS TO MEET WHATEVER . I'M NOT AWARE OF ZONING DISTRICTS THAT TAKE SIMILAR APPROACH. I THINK WHERE IT STARTS AND ENDS IS CITY COUNCILS MAKING THE DECISION TO SAY THIS EITHER MEETS OUR STANDARD AS WE AGREE AS WE AGREE AS A GROUP OR IT DOESN'T BUT. I WELCOME EITHER MELISSA OR GLENN'S GUIDANCE. I'M JUST NOT CREATIVE ENOUGH ON THE STANDING UP HERE RIGHT NOW TO FIGURE OUT APPARENTLY HIS MANAGER SAID THIS IS SOMETHING WE NEED TO COME TO PERHAPS AT A LATER DATE TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION. YEAH, MORE MEMBERS I THINK IT WOULD BE MOST HELPFUL TO GET A SENSE OF WHERE THE VARIATIONS IN IDEAS ARE THOUGH WE CAN DO SOME MORE DIGGING YOU KNOW THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF LITIGATION RELATED TO DENSITY AND ZONING AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE MAKING VERY THOUGHTFUL. SO IT WOULD BE I'M TAKING NOTES AND WE'LL GET BACK TO YOU ON THESE THINGS ENCOURAGE MORE DISCUSSION. SO I DON'T THINK YOU'RE GOING TO GET AN ANSWER TONIGHT, COUNCILMEMBER NELSON BUT IT'S A TOPIC OF DISCUSSION THINK AS WE CONTINUE THIS COUNCILMEMBER DALLESSANDRO SO I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH PEOPLE COMING IN PETITIONING FOR IT TO HAVE AN EXPANSION. WHAT I CARE ABOUT IS THAT IT HAS CRITERIA THAT PEOPLE CAN UNDERSTAND AND AND EITHER MEET OR NOT MEET AND WE'RE BEING CONSISTENT WITH OUR LANGUAGE ON THAT FRONT. SO BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WILL DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THEY DO IT RIGHT AND WE SHOULDN'T I DON'T LOVE THE IDEA OF BEING AND CAPRICIOUS IF YOU WILL. I LIKE THE IDEA OF SAYING THIS IS OUR CRITERIA AND THIS IS THE WAY THAT YOU CAN MEET THAT OR NOT MEET THAT. SO I KNOW PEOPLE DON'T I HEARD I HEARD COUNCILMEMBER NELSON EXPLICITLY OR I I BELIEVE STRONGLY THAT IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY IF YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE NORMAN RIDGE NEIGHBORHOOD, MANY OF THOSE LOTS ARE ARE NOT COMPLIANT WITH 33,000 SQUARE FEET ALREADY TODAY THEY'RE MUCH SMALLER THAN THAT. I'M NOT SURE SOME I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY GET 100% COMPLIANCE AT 220,000 SQUARE FEET. SO A LOT OF THEM ARE SMALLER THAN THAT SO TO SAY THAT THAT IT'S A GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT JUST WANT TO KEEP LARGE LOTS IS A LITTLE LIKE I THINK BROAD BRUSH PAINTING THERE THEY HAVE YOU KNOW MANY OF THOSE FOLKS ARE TO YOUR POINT ABOUT PREVAILING SET BACK MANY OF THOSE LOTS ARE UP AGAINST THE ROAD A LITTLE BIT CLOSER THAN 3030 FEET BECAUSE THE BACKYARD IS A OR THE BACKYARD IS A WETLAND AREA OR THE BACKYARD A COPSE OF TREES THAT WOULD NOT PASS TO TAKE DOWN AND SO THEY'VE MOVED THOSE CLOSER TO THE TO LINE AND THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE. YOU DO THAT ALONG RIDGELINES ALL THE TIME RIGHT? IT'S CALLED IT'S CALLED NORMAN RIDGE I'M ASSUMING IT'S A RIDGE LINE NUMBER AND YOU DO THAT ALONG RIDGE LINES A LOT BECAUSE THE THE BACK END THE BACK SIDE OF THAT LOT IS A OR SOMETHING THAT THAT HAS A VIEW OR WHATNOT. I MEAN THERE IS A ACTUAL PLAYGROUND THAT'S AN UNLIKE ANY UNMANAGED I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RIGHT WORD IS IT'S NOT VERY WELL DEVELOPED. WE DON'T IT IS A PARK IT'S A IT'S ONE OF OUR PARKS AND IT SITS BEHIND A BUNCH OF THE HOUSES THE EAST SIDE OF NORMAN RIDGE. SO IT'S PUBLIC LAND BEING USED IN THIS AREA AND SO A LOT OF THE FOLKS THAT ARE ALLOWED AROUND THERE AREN'T ASKING FOR IT THEY'RE NOT THEY'RE NOT ASKING FOR SPECIAL TREATMENT OR LIKE TO TO BE YOU KNOW THE REALLY RICH PEOPLE ON THE HILL LIKE I THINK I THINK RS ONE WAS CREATED FOR THAT I DO I MEAN IF YOU GO TO 86 AND YOU LOOK AT THE THREE SPECIFIC AREAS I ABSOLUTELY THINK IT DOES I ALSO REALLY HATE THE FACT THAT WE HAVE THESE THREE DIFFERENT AREAS AND THEY'VE BASICALLY BEEN INSTEAD OF CREATING A A CONSISTENT LIKE LAND VIEW THAT MAKES IT REALLY CLEAR OH EVERYTHING THE NINE MILE CREEK AND AND THREE RIVERS AREA SHOULD GET SPECIAL TREATMENT BECAUSE IT'S A SPECIAL ENVIRONMENTAL AREA. THEY DIDN'T DO IT THAT WAY THEY WHETHER THEY CALLED IN THEIR FAVORS OR WHAT THEY DID TO GET THERE, YOU KNOW, BIG, BIG LOTS I HAVE NO IDEA BUT BUT THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS SHOULDN'T JUST BE THROWN OUT. YOU DON'T LIKE THE FACT THAT CERTAIN PEOPLE GOT AWAY WITH THAT LIKE I THINK THERE ARE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT BEING A IN BETWEEN A NINE MILE CREEK AND THE THREE RIVERS PARK DISTRICT WHERE WE'VE ALREADY SAID THEY'RE SET ASIDE AND THEY HAVE SPECIAL VALUE TO US AND EVERYTHING BECAUSE OF THEIR ENVIRONMENTAL VALUE LIKE THEY'VE ALREADY THAT SO I WOULD LIKE US TO BE CONSISTENT IN OUR TREATMENT OF THESE RESIDENTIAL AREAS THAT SIT AMONG THOSE VERY SPECIAL ENVIRONMENTAL AREAS. AND SO I'M A FAN OF THIS BUT I SO I WOULD SAY THIS I HERE'S WHERE I AM, MR. MAYOR. I THINK WE NEED TO ADD A LITTLE BIT MORE INTO THE DISTRICT INTENT STATEMENT IN ORDER TO GET CRITERIA RIGHT. IN MY OPINION I AM FINE WITH TO THREE, FOUR AND FIVE AND REGARDING 66I THINK THEN NEEDS TO BE RELATED TO NUMBER ONE WHICH IS IF THAT DISTRICT INTENDS STATEMENT IS MUCH MORE CLEAR THEN WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE REZONING REQUEST PROCESS INCLUDES HOW WE ARE TO EVALUATE THEIR PETITION AGAINST THAT INTENT STATEMENT . THAT'S MY THAT'S WHERE I'M AT AT THE MOMENT IF THAT'S HELPING. I APPRECIATE THE FILIBUSTER THAT EVENTUALLY GOT US BACK ON TRACK. THAT'S MY JOB WELL DONE. SO I'M JUST GOING TO TAKE THAT STEP BACK AND SAY OKAY, WE HAD THE CONVERSATION REGARDING THE ELIMINATION OF IRS ONE, I THINK WE'VE ALL AGREED OR AT LEAST A MAJORITY HAVE AGREED WE WANT TO CONTINUE IT BUT IT'S A MATTER OF THEN MAKING SURE THAT IT WORKS IT FITS CORRECTLY WHICH THEN BRINGS US TO THE NEXT QUESTION LOOKING AT THESE SIX QUESTIONS HERE AND COUNCILMEMBER DALLESSANDRO PUT HER FLAG IN THE SAND ABOUT HER THOUGHTS THAT PERHAPS WE NEED TO WORK ON ITEM ONE AND SIX BUT EVERYTHING IN BETWEEN AGREEING THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS DO WITH RECOMMENDATIONS BECAUSE OH I THOUGHT YOU WERE AGREEING WITH WHAT WE'RE SEEING HERE THAT I'M SORRY JUST TO BE CLEAR WE WERE AGREEING WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION IN RED HERE THEY DISAGREE WITH THE LOWERING THE MINIMUM SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE TWO, THREE AND FOUR AND FIVE GO YOU LIKE TO SEE THAT? OKAY. YES. SO I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH STAFF NOT. IN AGREEMENT WITH PLANNING. YES, VERY GOOD. THANK. THOUGHTS ON THAT COUNCILMEMBER NELSON, IF WE'RE KEEPING OUR AS ONE ZONING, I WOULD AGREE WITH THREE AND FOUR NOT TWO. VERY GOOD. AND I GUESS I HAVE TO AGREE WITH YOU I DON'T NECESSARILY LIKE LOWERING THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE TO 22,000 SQUARE FEET BECAUSE THEN I THINK THAT ENCOURAGES OTHER TO TO TRY AND WORK TOWARD RS ONE FOR WHATEVER REASON AND I'M NOT GOING TO PUT THE VARIOUS REASONS BEHIND WHATEVER THEY MIGHT DO BUT I'M AFRAID IF THAT HAPPENS IF WE LOWER IT TO 22,000 SQUARE FEET I THINK WE WILL SEE A AN INCREASE IN THE CHANGES TO RS AND IT MIGHT BE DETRIMENTAL . COUNCILMEMBER FREEMAN I'D SAY I'M JUST MORE IN ALIGNMENT WITH COUNCILMEMBER DALLESSANDRO TO THE POINT THAT I MADE EARLIER THE MORE THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS THE POWER TO CHOOSE WHAT THEY WANT TO DO SO IF THEY HAVE A 44,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT AND THEY WANT TO SPLIT, THAT'S AN OPTION THAT THEY HAVE NOW VERSUS WHAT THEY CURRENTLY HAVE AND SO MORE OPTIONS FOR PROPERTY OWNERS IS WHERE I LIVE. COUNCILMEMBER CARTER I THINK WE'RE SO I AGREE THAT I THINK THERE COULD BE MORE ADDED TO NUMBER ONE. I AGREE WITH THREE AND FOUR. I ALSO AGREE WITH FIVE. AND THEN AS IT RELATES TO NUMBER SIX, IF WE DO END UP TONIGHT'S JUST DISCUSSION, WE'RE NOT MAKING HARD DECISIONS TODAY. IF WE DO END UP GOING TOWARD NUMBER TWO ULTIMATELY THEN I THINK WELL REGARDLESS I DO THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE PRETTY STRONG CRITERIA REEVALUATING OR EVALUATING THE ZONING REQUESTS, REZONING REQUESTS. AND I WOULD BE CURIOUS TO KNOW IF WE CAN ADD A CRITERIA LIKE COUNCILMEMBER NELSON SAID THAT A CERTAIN AMOUNT SHOULD BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ZONING DISTRICT IF CHANGED. SO THAT'S MEMORY LOSS. ANY THOUGHTS? OKAY. SO LET ME SEE IF I CAN. I THINK WE DO WE AGREE THAT WE NEED TO DO SOME MORE WORK ON AMENDING THE DISTRICT INTENT STATEMENT AND WE'VE GOT TO CLARIFY THINGS A BIT MORE. OKAY. SO WE AGREE ON THAT. I THINK WE'VE GOT SOME DISAGREEMENT ON TWO, THREE AND FOUR TO DO WE AGREE WITH REMOVING THE MEDIUM SITE WITH REQUIREMENT AND WE REMOVING THE PREVAILING SETBACK REQUIREMENT EVERYBODY FINE WITH THAT. COUNCILMEMBER REGAS, I JUST HAVE A QUESTION WHAT IS THE MEDIAN SITE WIDTH REQUIREMENT WAS SIZE WERE TO LAND TEN FEET, FOUR YARDS OR WHATEVER. MAYOR COUNCILMAN RIVERS I BET WE'VE GOT A SLIDE SO IF I CAN GET THIS ROLLING YOU COULD COVER NEXT SLIDE PLEASE . ONE MORE. ONE MORE. ONE MORE. ONE MORE. HERE. GO. OKAY. THANK YOU, ELIZABETH. SO WHAT MEDIAN SITE AS COUNCILMEMBER REVISES. SO IN THIS PARTICULAR EXAMPLE THIS IS 4301 OVERLOOK DRIVE. THIS IS A PUBLIC CASE NOT TRYING TO PUT THEM ON BLAST. THIS WAS A PUBLIC APPLICATION IN EFFECT AND THEY DID NOT END UP SUBDIVIDING THIS. SO THAT'S WHY I PICKED THIS EXAMPLE BECAUSE IT ENDED UP NOT BEING SPLIT. BUT THE POINT IS IS THAT YOU CAN SEE THAT THIS THAT A PREVIOUS LAND OWNER WHO RESIDED AT THIS LOT WAS INTERESTED SPLITTING THEIR LOT. AND SO WHAT STAFF DOES IN THIS CIRCUMSTANCE AND THEN WHAT WE REQUIRE THE APPLICANT OR THE PROPERTY OWNER DO IN FACT THEIR SURVEYOR TO DO IS TO COLLECT ALL OF THE SITE WIDTHS OF PROPERTIES WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE SUBJECT. WE ADD ALL THOSE WE PUT THOSE ALL ON A TABLE OR WE PUT ALL THOSE SITES WITH ARE WE FIND THE MEDIAN VALUE OF OF THOSE PROPERTIES WITHIN 500 FEET AND THERE'S A FEW LOTS THAT ARE LIKE CORNER LOTS OR FLAG LOTS THERE'S A FEW THAT DON'T GET ADDED THAT EQUATION BUT ONCE YOU DETERMINE WHAT THE IS THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE FOR THE NEW LOTS BEING SPLIT HAS TO BE 80% OF THAT MEDIAN AND IN EFFECT WHAT IT DOES IS THAT EVEN THOUGH YOU MIGHT HAVE LOWER MINIMUMS LIKE IN OUR ONE WE HAVE 60 FEET YOU HAVE TO HAVE A 60 FOOT WIDE LOT IN RS ONE EVEN THOUGH THE MINIMUM 60 YOU'RE ALSO SUBJECT TO THIS MEDIAN REQUIREMENT WHICH MIGHT DRIVE UP THE MEDIAN TO SAY 90 FEET IT MIGHT BE 85 FEET. AND SO IN ADDITION TO SITE AREA, THE TWO MAIN THINGS WE'RE LOOKING AT WITH RESPECT TO A SUBDIVISION ARE A LOT SPLIT ARE THE THE LOT SIZE THE AREAS THE AREAS MEET THE MINIMUM AND THAT THE SITE WIDTHS ALSO MEET THE MEDIUM AND THE WIDTHS ARE MEASURED ALONG THE PUBLIC STREET BACK A CERTAIN DISTANCE WITHIN THE LOT THAT YOU HAVE TO MAINTAIN AND THEN WE LOOK AT OTHER STUFF WE LOOK AT STRUCTURE SETBACKS, WE LOOK AT OTHER THINGS THAT DRIVE CONFORMANCE . SO YOU LOOK FOR THE AVERAGE OF PEOPLE THAT LIVE AROUND IT THE NEIGHBORS BASICALLY. YES. YES. AND IT'S AGAIN DRIVING AT THIS IDEA OF NEIGHBORHOOD CONTINUITY, TRYING TO MAINTAIN SOME LEVEL OF CONSISTENCY AMONG AREA THAT'S WHAT IT'S INTENDED TO DO. I THINK YOU SO WE WERE SORRY. I THINK WE'RE IN GENERAL AGREEMENT ON THREE AND FOUR THE REMOVING THE MEDIAN SITE WITH REQUIREMENT AND REMOVING THE PREVAILING SETBACK REQUIREMENT ARE WE IN AGREEMENT ON ITEM FIVE THE USE CHANGES ALLOWING TWO FAMILY DWELLINGS AND PROHIBITING SOME INSTITUTIONAL USERS? WE'LL GO WITH THAT ITEM SIX THE AFFIRMING THE FIVE CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING REZONING REQUESTS THERE SEEM TO BE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS BUT ARE WE DO WE WANT TO CONTINUE WORK ON THAT OR DO WE WANT TO LET'S REMEMBER DALLESSANDRO IF I MAY, MR. MAYOR, I THINK THAT'LL ACTUALLY HAVE I MEAN HERE'S WHERE HERE'S WHERE I THINK AND I HERE'S WHERE I THINK THEY'RE RELATED. SO LIKE NUMBER IS RELATED TO NUMBER FIVE IN THE SENSE THAT LIKE THE THESE ARE THESE ARE THE YOU HAVE TO HAVE A GOOD OF THE INTENT IN NUMBER ONE IN ORDER FOR YOU TO EVALUATE THE THING SO THEY'RE RELATED. RIGHT. AND THEN THE SECOND PART OF THIS IS IS IS ESSENTIALLY WHAT YOU AND COUNCILMEMBER NELSON ARE DOING IF I MAY BE SO BLUNT IS TO SAY BY NOT REDUCING THE LOT SIZE YOU ARE EFFECTIVELY FORCING PEOPLE TO NOT BE ABLE TO USE THIS ANYWAY BECAUSE THERE'S NO PLACE IN BLOOMINGTON THAT CAN HAPPEN. SO SO YOU KNOW BECAUSE THE THE LEVEL OF THE SCALE OF LOTS THE NUMBER OF LOTS COULD BE RE ZONED YOU WOULD YOU WOULD TAKE 99.9% OF BLOOMINGTON OUT OF CONTENTION FOR AN RC DISTRICT PETITION BY NOT CHANGING THE LOT SIZE SO SO THEY'RE RELATED TO THE PROBLEM SPACES WE ALREADY STILL HAVE I THINK AND THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING LIKE YOU HAVE TO KIND OF HOLD OFF ON NUMBER SIX UNTIL THEN I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH THE NUMBERS THEMSELVES. THE CRITERIA ARE I THINK THEY'RE COMPLETELY FINE AND I THINK YOU KNOW PROPORTION OF NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT IF IT'S IF IT'S A PETITION CONTINUITY THIS IS A BIG THING THAT I IS A REAL REASON WHY LIKE PLACES LIKE NORMAN RIDGE SHOULD BE LOOKED AT BECAUSE IT'S A IT'S THIS WEIRD THING WHERE A COUPLE OF THINGS AROUND WENT AND DID IT. NOW YOU HAVE THESE HOLES AND IT JUST IT'S WEIRD TO ME AND AND BUT YOU CAN'T REALLY YOU CAN'T REALLY GET PAST THESE FIVE CRITERIA WITHOUT SOLVING THE PROBLEMS WE HAVE IN ONE AND TWO IN MY OPINION. SO I UNDERSTAND WHAT SAYING AND I MEAN PROBLEMS GENERALLY LIKE AS IN DISAGREEMENT NOT THIS CONVERSATION THANK YOU YOU'RE GOOD SO FAR. YEAH. YEP. ALL RIGHT. WELL LET'S HAVE CONVERSATION ABOUT THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE AND AS I SAID WHEN WE STARTED THIS ,I THINK WE NEED TO GET SOME DIRECTION TO STAFF AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT AND CAN SPIN IT ROUND AND ROUND. BUT WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS GET DIRECTION TO STAFF AS TO WHERE WE WANT TO GO WITH THESE THINGS AND I AGREE WITH YOU COUNCILMEMBER D'ALESSANDRO ITEM TWO IS PROBABLY A LINCHPIN TO A LOT OF THINGS AND SO I MEAN YOU'VE HEARD MY MY BELIEF YOU'VE HEARD I THINK WHAT COUNCILMEMBER NELSON IS SAYING THAT I THINK IF WE LOWER THAT MINIMUM LOT SIZE TO 22,000 SQUARE FEET, I THINK IT OPENS THE DOOR FOR FOR MANY OTHERS AND SOME OF THEM WOULD BE NEGATIVE THEY WOULD HAVE NEGATIVE IMPACTS THAT'S IN MY SUMMARIZING IT CORRECTLY AND SO AND I KNOW COUNCILMEMBER DALLESSANDRO YOU'RE THINKING THAT IT MAKES MORE SENSE BECAUSE THEN IT WOULD OPEN IT UP TO MORE POSSIBILITY. WELL, THERE'S TWO THINGS FOR ME, MR. MAYOR, IF I MAY. NUMBER ONE IS I TAKE THIS DOWN TO THE SEVEN OR 800 SQUARE FEET. DOESN'T ME AT ALL LIKE FRANKLY BECAUSE BECAUSE LIKE THAT WOULD MAKE IT CONSISTENT BECAUSE THE LOT SIZE ISN'T WHAT'S IMPORTANT TO ME HERE IT'S THE CARE AND FEEDING OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL SPACE THAT'S UNIQUE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS IMPORTANT TO ME HERE. SO I DON'T CARE IF YOU'RE ON 400 SQUARE FEET IF YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE THE MOST LIKE IMPORTANT 400 SQUARE FEET I WANT YOU TO LIKE SAVE THAT THING RIGHT. AND SO AND I'M BEING HYPERBOLIC THERE BUT YOU KNOW SO ME THE LOT SIZE IS NOT THE IMPORTANT PART OF THIS I THINK IF YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A DIFFERENCE IN OUR END ZONING YOU HAVE TO HAVE A REASON BEYOND LOT SIZE LIKE BECAUSE I'M WITH YOU ALL ON THAT LAKE THAT'S JUST ARBITRARY AND B.S. LIKE TO ME RIGHT THAT'S JUST DOING THE WRONG THING FOR THE WRONG REASON. BUT I DO THINK THERE'S REALLY GOOD INTENT HERE ABOUT OUR ENVIRONMENTAL SPACES I MEAN AND YOU SAY THERE'S NEGATIVE IMPACT LET ME LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION. FOR EXAMPLE, IF IF FOLKS IF FOLKS ALONG THE NINE MILE CREEK CORRIDOR CAME BACK AND SAID WE WHO ARE IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD ALONG THE NINE MILE CREEK CORRIDOR WOULD LIKE TO HAVE RS ONE BECAUSE WE THINK WE MEET A HIGHER STANDARD FOR ENVIRONMENTAL LIKE ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFIT THAN YOUR AVERAGE R ONE AND WE SHOULD HAVE TOUGHER CRITERIA IF THOSE LOT SIZES WERE 10,000 OR 5000 OR WHATEVER WOULD IT MATTER OR WOULD WE THINK ABOUT IT SERIOUSLY AS OH THAT MIGHT BE WORTH DOING BECAUSE IT MEANS THAT WE CAN PRESERVE, YOU KNOW, NINE MILE CREEK, RIGHT? IT'S JUST THROWN OUT OUT THERE AS AN IDEA. BUT BUT LIKE TO ME THE LOTS SIZE PORTION IS IS NOT THE IMPORTANT PART HERE AND SO TAKE IT DOWN TO SEVEN 800 IN MY OPINION WOULDN'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE LIKE IT I WANT THE OTHER THINGS TO BE THE REASON WHY PEOPLE GET DON'T GET THIS PARTICULAR DESIGNATION THAT'S KIND OF WHERE MY HEAD'S AT THANKS COUNCILMEMBER NELSON. THANK YOU. FIRST I AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN DALLESSANDRO TO TAKE IT DOWN TO SOME 802ND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THESE OTHER THINGS ARE THAT ARE AS ONE ZONING HAS TO PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT. THE OTHER THINGS THAT IT HAS ARE ORDINANCES THAT APPLY TO ALL PROPERTIES. THEY'RE THE TREE PRESERVATION THERE THE STEEP THERE, WATER MANAGEMENT. THERE IS NOTHING ELSE IN THE ZONING DISTRICT THAT PROTECTS ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE LOT SIZE AND THAT'S WHY I'M AGAINST IT. THE ONLY THING IN THERE IS THE LOT SIZE. AM I WRONG ABOUT THAT? WHAT ELSE IS IN THIS THAT ISN'T TO PROTECT ANY ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURE THAT ISN'T IN OUR ONE ZONING AND. I WOULD AGREE WITH COUNCILMEMBER I THINK EVERYTHING ELSE AS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE THE YOU KNOW ANY WATER FEATURE ANY VEGETATION I THINK THERE'S ALREADY THERE ARE DIFFERENT PIECES IN PLACE ALREADY TOO TO ENSURE THAT HMM. IF THAT'S THE ONLY CONCERN THEN LET'S JUST GET RID OF OUR S ONES ONLY THEN WE CAN FOCUS IN ON IS OUR TREE PRESERVATION ADEQUATE ENOUGH FOR THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY BUT WE JUST CHANGED IT. IF YOU REMEMBER COUNCILMEMBER NELSON, WE JUST WE JUST CHANGED LIKE WE GAVE MORE MORE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE OPPORTUNITY AND OTHER THINGS LIKE THAT WHICH ARE ANTI-ENVIRONMENTAL MY MIND IN SOME OF THOSE THINGS AND SO THAT'S WHY I THINK THEY MIGHT HAVE BEEN THERE MIGHT BE A BENEFIT AND DISTINCTION IF I MAY AGREE. COUNCILMEMBER BUT I WOULD UNDERSTAND ACTUALLY LET'S HAVE COUNCILMEMBER HAVE HIS SAY. COUNCILMEMBER HAVE TO SAY AND YOU CAN BE NEXT DOOR. COUNCILMEMBER NELSON OH I'M ALL DONE. I JUST I THINK IT WOULD BE MAYBE IF STAFF COULD HELP IDENTIFY THOSE DIFFERENCES THAT MAY HAVE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS THAT ARE EMBEDDED IN THE ZONING AND NOT IN OTHER ORDINANCES FOR US TO BETTER UNDERSTAND AND HAVE THAT CONVERSATION BECAUSE I'M NOT SEEING IT WITHIN THE ZONING AREA, I'M SEEING THAT WE HAVE OTHER PROTECTIONS ELSEWHERE, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF THOSE THINGS SO THAT THAT IF YOU'RE WILLING TO LOWER THE LOT SIZE THAT'S FANTASTIC AND I'M TOTALLY WILLING TO PROTECT SLOPES TREES, WATER YOU KNOW I JUST THINK WE SHOULD DO THAT CITYWIDE WITH AN RELATED TO THOSE THINGS NOT THROUGH ZONING SO I MEAN I'M NOT AGAINST THAT EITHER COUNCILMEMBER NELSON BUT WE ALREADY DID RELAXED ENVIRONMENTAL RULES THAT WE HAD IN PLACE WHEN WE DID THE R-1 ZONING RIGHT. SO WE LET THEM HAVE MORE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE IF THEY WANT IT. THEY WE DID ALL THESE THINGS WHICH ARE AGAINST THE WAS THE EXISTING THRESHOLDS THOSE FOR THOSE ITEMS AND SO YOU KNOW THAT'S STORM RUNOFF THAT'S WATER QUALITY THAT'S THESE THINGS AND SO I THINK WE WANT TO FIND A WAY AND I'M OPEN TO ANY IDEAS HERE TO CREATE WHETHER IT'S A ZONE OR WHETHER TO YOUR POINT IT'S SOME STANDARD AND I'D BE FINE WITH THE STANDARD CITYWIDE YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET ME TO SAY NO TO LIKE HIGHER ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS, YOU KNOW, CITYWIDE FOR SURE. BUT IF IF I HAVE A 40,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT IN THIS SAYS MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF 7800 SQUARE FEET AND I COME BACK TO THIS BODY I SAY I WANT TO TAKE MY 14,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT AND I TO TURN IT INTO THREE LOTS IF I'M IN RS ONE IT'S GOING TO BE A VERY FAST REJECTION COMPARED TO BECAUSE OF THE IF WE DID WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT HERE BECAUSE IT JUST WOULDN'T MEET THE CRITERIA FOR IT AS OPPOSED TO YOU HAVING GO THROUGH THE PLANNING PROCESS AND HAVE VARIANCES OR OTHER YOU KNOW OTHER LIKE WHAT DO WE CALL THEM? I APOLOGIZE. NONE THE WORD I'M I'M THINKING OF IS NOT THE THING I'M PD FLEXIBILITY. YES THANK YOU. RIGHT THE FLEXIBILITY THAT WE OFFER SOMETIMES IN THOSE AREAS AND SO YOU WOULD YOU WOULD HAVE A WIDE NATURE YOU'D HAVE A HIGHER STANDARD, RIGHT. IF THEY COULDN'T GET AROUND THOSE THINGS A 40,000 LOT WOULD SAY A 40,000 LOT WHETHER IT WAS AN RS WHEREAS IT MAY NOT IF IT'S IN R ONE THAT'S THAT'S WHAT I'M HOPING HAPPENS AND IF WE DON'T THINK THAT IT HAS ENOUGH TEETH TO DO THAT I THINK WE SHOULD FIGURE THAT OUT BUT BUT THAT'S WHAT I'M HOPING IT HAPPENS AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S A FUNCTION OF THE LOT SIZE AND OR MAYBE IT IS YOU KNOW I DON'T KNOW I REMEMBER NELSON THANKS MAN IT'S REMINDS ME OF OUR GOOD OLD FASHIONED WORK SESSIONS UPSTAIRS STUDY SESSION I LOVE IT SO OH YOU KNOW BUT YOU CAN DO ALL THOSE NEGATIVE THINGS WITHOUT BUILDING A HOUSE YOU CAN BUILD A POOL, YOU CAN BUILD A SPORT JUST CUT DOWN THE TREES FOR BECAUSE YOU DON'T LIKE TREES YOU CAN DO OF THOSE NEGATIVE THINGS WITHOUT BUILDING THE HOUSE THE ONLY THIS PREVENTS IS BUILDING THE HOUSE YOU CAN CUT THOSE SAME TREES YOU CAN YOU CAN ADD ADDITIONAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE . IT'S A PERCENTAGE AND IT'S A LARGE LOTS SO YOU CAN ADD A BUNCH OF IT. YOU CAN DO ALL THOSE THINGS YOU KNOW AS ONE ZONING WITH NO BENEFIT TO HOUSING OR ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE BUT YOU WANT TO HAVE A BIG OUTDOOR PLAY AREA GO FOR IT, YOU KNOW AND THAT'S THAT'S THE TRADEOFF THAT THAT I DON'T GET AND I WILL SAY I MEAN THE WHOLE 7800 SQUARE FOOT IDEA. THE OTHER THING THAT WE NEED TO REMEMBER WE'RE PROTECTING HERE ARE HOMEOWNERS WHO HAVE LARGE LOTS AND WE HAVE TO LOOK AT WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH TO MAKE MORE INFILL ,MORE OPPORTUNITIES. BUT WE ALSO I THINK HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE THOSE LARGER LOTS ARE ARE OUR STANDARD OR ARE COMMON. I MEAN SUBDIVIDING A 40,000 SQUARE FOOT INTO FIVE DIFFERENT LOTS I THINK WOULD BE IF YOU THINK WE'D HEAR ABOUT IT WITH WITH REZONING WE'D CERTAINLY HEARD ABOUT IT WITH WITH THAT THAT PROPOSAL AS WELL. SO WE'VE GOT TO THINK WE'VE GOT TO REMEMBER WHAT ELSE WE'RE WE'RE KIND OF REQUIRED TO PROTECT YOUR I THINK IT'S FOR OUR FOR OUR RESIDENTS CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION, MR. MAYOR? JUST TRY TO GET SOME CLARIFICATION ON COUNCILMEMBER NELSON'S POINT ABOUT LIKE PUTTING IN A POOL OR PUTTING ON A GAZEBO OR JUST CUT THEM DOWN BECAUSE YOU DON'T LIKE TREES. IF IF WE IF WE IF WE ARE DESIGNATING IF WE'RE DESIGNATING I GUESS THE ENFORCEMENT ACTION IS THAT WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR HERE IF WE'RE DESIGNATING A PROPERTY AREA RS ONE VERSUS R ONE AND IT'S BECAUSE THEY MEET THOSE CRITERIA TWO OR MORE OF THOSE CRITERIA RELATED TO WETLANDS NATIVE VEGETATION OR OR THEN THEN THEY SHOULD HAVE DIFFERENT APPLICATION OF WHAT THEY CAN AND CAN'T DO BASED ON THOSE CRITERIA. AND I GUESS THAT'S MAYBE THAT'S WHAT'S MISSING HERE IN MY MIND. SO I'D ASK THE QUESTION LIKE IS THAT WHAT'S MISSING HERE THAT WHY WOULD YOU DESIGNATE SOMETHING INTO A ZONE BASED ON SPECIAL UNIQUE ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS IF YOU'RE NOT HOLDING THEM TO A HIGHER STANDARD FOR THOSE ENVIRONMENTAL THEN AND THAT'S REALLY WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR I'M HOPING FOR HERE THAT WE HAVE A ZONING DISTRICT THAT THAT RAISES THE BAR ON THOSE ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS OVER AND ABOVE WHAT WE HAVE FOR OUR ONE SO IF I'M HEARING YOU COUNCILMEMBER WE HAVE TO DOUBLE BACK TO ITEM ONE AMEND IN THE DISTRICT INTENT STATEMENT WHICH THEN OTHER THINGS CASCADE FROM THAT RIGHT SOME DEGREE THE CRITERIA EVALUATION BECOMES A FUNCTION OF THE INTENT PLUS THE SPECIFIC CRITERIA YOU'RE APPLYING. NO BUT WHAT I WHAT I HEARD YOU SAY COUNCILMEMBER WITH IF WE WANT TO IF WE WANT TO CRAFT SOMETHING SPECIFICALLY TO PROTECT PROTECT THE UNIQUE ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS OF THESE AREAS, THEN I THINK WE GO BACK INTO THE INTENT STATEMENT. IT'S NOT THE SPECIFICS, IT'S THE INTENT STATEMENT TO TO TRY AND GIVE US SOME A FRAMEWORK TO UNDER I THINK THAT'S RIGHT. I MEAN BECAUSE SO AND YOU ALSO D IS ALSO FOR YOUR PURPOSE BY THE WAY LIKE TO SUBSTANTIALLY YOU KNOW KEEP SUBSTANTIALLY DEVELOPED LARGER LOTS IN THEIR CHARACTERISTICS YEAH AND YOU HAD MENTIONED COUNCILMEMBER THAT YOU THOUGHT THE THE INTENSITY THAT NEEDED WORK AND NEEDED SOME SORT OF CLARIFICATION WHAT WOULD YOU RECOMMEND AS WE LOOK AT IT HERE IN FRONT OF US NOW? WHAT WOULD YOU RECOMMEND? WELL, GOES BACK TO I THINK WHAT I WAS SAYING BEFORE, WHICH IS AND THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME THE CHANCE TO SAY THIS SO WE IF WE HAVE A STEEP DEFINED IN THE CITY CODE AND THEN WE DON'T HAVE SIGNIFICANT NATURAL OR NATIVE VEGETARIAN DEFINED AND WE DON'T HAVE WETLANDS DEFINED WE SHOULD IN MY OPINION AND THAT COULD BE SOMETHING AS EASY YOU KNOW TO TO TO STAFF POINT HERE THOUGH WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, AS EVALUATED BY A REVIEW OF OUR NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT OFFICE BUT LIKE AGAIN I WOULDN'T WANT THAT TO BE ARBITRARY. I MEAN NO YOU KNOW I'M CONCERNED ABOUT YOU KNOW, 20 YEARS FROM NOW ARE THIS CRITERIA BECOMING ARE BE BECAUSE IT'S ARBITRARY BEING LIKE UP TO WHO WOULD EVER YOU KNOW YOU WHOEVER YOU PULL YOU'VE HEARD THIS BEFORE RIGHT DEPENDING ON THE INSPECTOR YOU PULL YOU GET PASSED YOU DON'T GET PASSED LIKE THAT. THAT'S WHAT I DON'T WANT. RIGHT? I DON'T WANT TO HAVE A REALLY GOOD IDEA ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THEIR CRITERIA IS BE MET OR THEY WON'T BE MET. AND SO I YOU KNOW WE HAVE STEEP PROBABLY IN LARGELY BECAUSE WE HAVE THE THE BLUFF AREA. RIGHT. AND WE'VE DONE AN OVERLAY DISTRICT AND IT'S GOTTEN REALLY WELL DEFINED SO THE NEXT QUESTION WOULD BE DO WE HAVE FOR MARSH CREEK OR MARSH LAKE THOSE AREAS WHERE WE HAVE SIGNIFICANT WETLANDS, DO WE HAVE A DEFINITION WE CAN APPLY YOU KNOW FOR NATURAL VEGETATION WE'RE WORKING ON THE NINE MILE CREEK LAKE RESTORATION PROJECT DOES DO WE HAVE A WILL WE HAVE CRITERIA THAT WE CAN APPLY. SO I THINK AS I SEE THE NODDING I'M PRETTY SURE THERE ARE STATE REGULATIONS OR STATE DEFINITIONS OF WETLANDS THERE ? THAT'S CORRECT. IT'S WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT WAGGA THEY THERE'S MANY DIFFERENT TYPES BUT THEY'RE ALL DELINEATED AND DEFINED IN THE STATUTE SO WOULD IT BE USEFUL THEN TO UNDER SEE WETLANDS AS DEFINED BY WACKER WE CAN DO THAT SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES JUST SO WE'RE CLEAR ABOUT THE CRITERIA YOUR POINT RIGHT AND THEN THE AND THEN THE EVALUATION PORTION BE LIKE SOMEBODY FROM NATURAL RESOURCES LOOKING AT THAT CRITERIA LOOKING AT THE PETITION AND SAYING YOU DO OR DO NOT QUALIFY AS A WETLAND. RIGHT. THAT I BELIEVE IS HOW IT WORKS. I WOULD WORK YEAH. YEAH. OKAY. AND FOR THE NATURAL AND NATIVE VEGETATION SOMEWHERE BACK IN MY MEMORY I KNOW THAT THERE WAS WORK DONE ON ON THE ON THE BLUFF AND I THINK IN NINE MILE CREEK THE DEFINING THE NATIVE VEGETATION OR SPECIFYING THE VEGETATION HELP ME REMEMBER I CAN'T RECALL EXACTLY WHAT WAS STUDYING AND WHAT CAME OUT OF THAT YEAH DAVE HANSEN CERTAINLY SPEAK TO THIS WITH A LOT MORE AUTHORITY OR WISDOM THAN I CAN BUT WHAT I WHAT I TO MY KNOWLEDGE THE AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN INVENTORIED THIS WAY ARE MUCH, MUCH MORE FOCUSED ON PUBLIC LANDS. SO IT'S NOT PRIVATE LANDS AND THAT'S KIND OF THE GAP THAT EXISTS IS THAT IN ORDER TO HAVE DO A MORE ROBUST INVENTORY WOULD BE ENORMOUSLY EXPENSIVE AS THE CITY DID HAVE TO HIRE. I CONSULTANTS TO DO SUCH WORK ON A CITY ESPECIALLY THE SIZE OF BLOOMINGTON. AND SO THAT'S WHERE I THINK IT MAY IT CERTAINLY IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ARBITRARY IN ANY WAY. IT'S MORE RECOGNIZING THE COST OR THE WORK THAT IS REQUIRED ORDER TO EVALUATE AN AREA THAT'S BEING REQUESTED TO BE DELINEATED AS SUCH AND SO I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S HELPFUL OR NOT. I MEAN YOU CERTAINLY COULD DESIGNATE A AS BY A CITY POSITION OR CITY AUTHORITY LIKE THE FORESTER TO MAKE IT LESS ARBITRARY AT LEAST THAT THAT IS A DEFINED POSITION OR ROLE THE ACCORDING TO THE CITY CODE WHO HAS THAT EXPERTIZE AND SAY ONE MORE THING ABOUT THAT IT'S ALSO PART OF THE REASON IN LOOKING AT THAT WAY IS THAT IT WOULD NOT BE OUR EXPECTATION THAT A PROPERTY SEEKING REZONING YOUR FULL TREE INVENTORY OR TREE SURVEY THOSE ARE AND THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO DO THAT TYPICALLY IF THEY'RE SUBDIVIDING THEY NEED TO DO IT BECAUSE THEY ARE SUBJECT TO TREE PRESERVATION BUT TO DO REZONING YOU DON'T NECESSARILY NEED TO THAT DETAILED OF WORK. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OTHER THOUGHTS ON THE RECOMMENDED INTENT STATEMENT COUNCIL COUNCILMEMBER YOU I THINK FOR ME TO THROW ANOTHER BONE INTO THIS DOGFIGHT I DO WANT TO PROTECT THE LARGE LOTS PIECE OF IT. I DON'T THINK THEY NEED BE THREE OR FOUR ACRE LOTS BUT EVEN A HALF ACRE THAT'S STILL VERY LARGE IS STILL A AN ATTRACTIVE PIECE FOR ME AS A FUTURE PROPERTY OWNER RIGHT IN THAT POTENTIALLY IN THAT AREA AND I THINK THAT GOES TO THE THE VARIETY OF HOUSING STOCK THAT WE HAVE HERE. I DON'T THINK IT MAKES SENSE TO DROP IT DOWN ANY MORE THAN 22,000 BUT THAT STILL PROTECTS THE LARGE SIZE AND SO THAT'S WHERE I'M AT WITH THAT JUST TO THROW ANOTHER INTO IT . SO I THINK I THINK WHAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IN THE RECOMMENDED TEN STATEMENT IS I'LL GIVE YOU A BIT MORE COMFORTABLE A BIT MORE COMFORT COUNCILMEMBER. I MEAN IN TERMS OF THE SPECIFICITY WHEN WE REFERENCE WACKER WHEN WE'RE TALKING WETLANDS IF WE WERE TALKING SIGNIFICANT NATURAL OR NATIVE VEGETATION TO IDENTIFY SPECIFICALLY THE CITY FORESTER AS THE PERSON INVOLVED TO JUST TRY AND PUT SO YOU'RE RIGHT SO IT'S NOT ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS IT'S IT'S NOT WHAT INSPECTOR YOU GET THAT'S DECIDING BUT IT'S SOMEBODY VERY SPECIFIC WHO DOES THAT HELP CLARIFY? I THINK I THINK IT DOES AND THEN LIKE I SAID NUMBER SIX THEN IS WE'D WE'D WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT LEVEL OF CONFORMITY AND THINGS LIKE THAT IN THE EVALUATION CRITERIA WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO BE ABLE TO SHARE WITH THE RESIDENTS WHO ARE PETITIONING WHAT THAT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE AND WHAT CRITERIA THAT IS. YEAH. SO THAT'S FINE BY ME AND THEN YOU KNOW WHOLE NUMBER TWO THING IN THAT AREA WHICH WE HAVEN'T REALLY TALKED ABOUT IS PROTECT NATURAL AND ENSURE COMPATIBLE REDEVELOPMENT. SO LIKE I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS. I'M KIND OF CONFUSED. I THOUGHT THAT'S WHAT OUR INTENT WAS BUT I'M NOT SURE BECAUSE IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE MAYBE WE DO WANT TO PROTECT NATURAL RESOURCES IN THESE PIECES BUT AGAIN IT'S IT'S IS IT IS IT BECAUSE WE'VE IDENTIFIED THEM AS HAVING ONE LIKE TWO OR MORE OF THESE OTHER CHARACTERISTICS THAT WE BELIEVE THE INTENT IS TO PROTECT NATURAL RESOURCES YOU KNOW LIKE SO WHAT I'M GETTING TO HERE IS THE INTENT IT SAYS RIGHT THE HOURS WHEN DISTRICT IS INTENDED TO A OR ONE PROVIDE LOCATIONS FOR LARGE LOT LOW DENSITY THAT HAVE A MINIMUM THESE CHARACTERISTICS AND TWO TO PROTECT NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENSURE COMPATIBLE REDEVELOPMENT SO I GUESS THE SECOND PART OF THAT STATEMENT IS THE SECOND IS THE PART I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW ARE WE SEEING ARE WE HOW ARE WE PROTECTING NATURAL RESOURCES IN ZONING IS WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR US TO UNDERSTAND RIGHT? IS IT BECAUSE WE'VE DEFINED THE IS THAT WHAT WE AGREE IS THAT'S THE WAY WE'RE PROTECTING RESOURCES. ARE WE GOING TO DO SOMETHING MORE THAN THAT? THIS GOES BACK TO MY QUESTION OF LIKE WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO ZONE TYPES APPRECIATE THAT AND THEN IF SPECIFYING THE DIFFERENT ABCD IN YOUR MIND DOESN'T OUTLINE WHAT IT MEANS TO PROTECT THE NATURAL RESOURCES IN THAT AREA WHAT WOULD SO MY QUESTION BE MORE LIKE TO SAY IT SOMETHING LIKE WE ARE WE ARE THE INTENT OF THIS IS TO PROTECT NATURAL RESOURCES BY PROVIDING LOCATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT THAT MEET OR MORE OR TWO OR MORE OF THESE CRITERIA LIKE THAT'S THAT MAKES MORE SENSE TO ME BECAUSE OTHERWISE THIS IS JUST A HANGING DOWN HERE AND WE'RE LIKE YEAH WE'RE ALSO GOING TO PROTECT NATURAL RESOURCES BUT WE'RE NOT DEFINING IT WE'RE NOT MAKING IT A THING. NO, I WILL SAY THAT THAT STATEMENT MAKES MORE SENSE MEAN AND I AGREE THAT YEAH. TO FILL IT IN IN THAT WAY AND THAT WAY IT'S CLEAR THAT THE INTENT OF THE ZONING DISTRICT IS A NATURAL RESOURCES PROTECTION ZONING DISTRICT. IT HAS IT SHOULD HAVE A HIGHER STANDARD OF NATURAL RESOURCES PROTECTION THAN THE R-1 DISTRICT THAT'S MY OPINION AND THAT'S ONLY MY OPINION YORK AND VOTE ME DOWN I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND BUT THAT THAT IS WHAT I THOUGHT I'D LIKE TO TAKE WHAT WAS DONE ORIGINALLY AS A BAD THING DONE POTENTIALLY TO JUST LET PEOPLE HAVE LARGE PLOT LINE SIZES AND TURN IN AND USE AND USE THE ENVIRONMENTAL CRITERIA AS A VE. AND I'D LIKE TO TURN IT INTO SOMETHING THAT ACTUALLY DOES A GOOD FOR THE NATURAL RESOURCES. THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO IF I'M BEING HONEST AND APPRECIATE THAT. COUNCILMEMBER RIVAS JUST TO ADD ON THAT BUT PERHAPS NOT IN SUCH A ONE SIDED WAY THIS DISTRICT WAS NOT CREATED TO PROTECT NATURAL RESOURCES TO THAT EXTENT THAT THAT THAT COUNCILMEMBER DALLESSANDRO IS STATING RIGHT YVONNE CORRECT ME IF I'M MISTAKEN BUT THIS IS CREATED TO PROVIDE YOU POSSIBLE ABILITY TO CREATE MORE WHILE INTENDING TO PROTECT NATURAL RESOURCES WHATEVER TREES OR WHATEVER THE AREA MIGHT PROVIDE AT THAT POINT IF A PARTICULAR OWNER COMES TO THE CITY AND IS ASKING A TO BUILD TO DIVIDE HIS OR HER LOT INTO TWO AND BUILD TWO HOUSES IN THE SAME LOT OR DIVIDE THE LOT THE PROTECTION IS TO THE THIS ZONING IS PROVIDING IT'S JUST WHATEVER TREES NEED PROTECTION IN THAT AREA WILL BE PROTECTED AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF THOSE TWO HOUSES WILL BE ALLOWED BASED ON THAT. RIGHT. BUT IS THE ZONING AS FAR AS I UNDERSTAND WAS NOT CREATED TO TAKE NATURAL RESOURCES IS PROVIDING PROTECTION TO A CERTAIN DEGREE BUT THAT THE INTENTION WAS NOT TO TO PROVIDE PROTECTION TO SUSTAINABLE RESOURCES MAYOR COUNCILMAN RIVERS I THINK IT'S DIFFICULT TO ASSESS WHY THE DISTRICT WAS CREATED IN 1986 AND WHAT WAS KIND OF INFORMING THEIR MOTIVATIONS AND THE REASON SAY THAT IS THAT JUST THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO US THEN IN TERMS OF WHAT WAS THE THE DETAIL THE STAFF REPORTS, THE DETAIL, THE DISCUSSION WE DON'T HAVE VIDEO THAT I'M KNOWLEDGE THAT I'M AWARE OF SO MAYBE I'M WRONG ABOUT THAT BUT IT'S I DON'T THINK WE KNOW WHAT WHAT THE INTENT WHAT THEIR MOTIVATIONS WERE THAT THE UNSPOKEN MOTIVATIONS IF YOU WILL. IT'S HARD TO ASSESS THAT. IF I MAY, MAYOR, JUST FOR A SECOND I DON'T I DON'T WANT TO DRIVE THE CAR INTO THE WEEDS. BUT YOU KNOW, I'M DISCUSSING A LITTLE BIT WITH GLEN AND JUST THINKING THROUGH THIS A LITTLE BIT ON MY OWN THE STANDARDS OUR ONE AND ARTIST ONE ARE NOT VERY DIFFERENT CURRENTLY AND THE REASON GOING BACK TO THAT MY POINT ABOUT REGULATORY COMPLEXITY THE MORE COMPLEX YOU MAKE THESE ENVIRONMENTS THE HARDER IT IS TO CREATE HOUSING THE HARDER IT IS TO DO STUFF PERIOD. THE SECOND POINT IS IS THAT WHILE I AND I DON'T WANT TO ASSUME WHAT THE INTENT IS OR WHAT THE MOTIVES ARE FOR PEOPLE WHO MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN OUR AS ONE AS THE MAYOR SAID, I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH THAT IT WHAT I CAN TELL YOU ANECDOTALLY IS THAT NOT EVERYONE WHO RESIDES IN THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS WANTS TO LIVE IN A VERY COMPACT FOOTPRINT OR DOES NOT WANT TO HAVE SOME OF THESE EXTRA AMENITIES THAT COUNCILMEMBER NELSON SPOKE ABOUT. SO I THINK THAT THERE IS A LEVEL OF CONSUMER EXPECTATION AROUND WHAT CAN DO AT SOME OF THESE PROPERTIES WHICH MIGHT NOT BE IN ALIGNMENT WITH A VERY LOW IMPERVIOUS SURFACE LIMITATION. I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT NOW ALL THAT BEING SAID YOU CREATE DISTRICT SPECIFIC STANDARDS. WE SEE IT NOT OFTEN WITH TREE PRESERVATION OR STEEP SLOPES. THOSE THINGS THAT ARE THOSE ARE STANDARDS ARE APPLIED MORE GLOBALLY TYPICALLY IN ZONING CODES WHERE WE DO SOME VARIATION AS IMPERVIOUS SURFACE. SO IF THERE IF YOU ARE HAVING A DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT OF THESE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS MADE SENSE TO HAVE POTENTIALLY SOME VARIATION BETWEEN THAT I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE THE ONE THAT I WOULD SAY THINK I'M I'M NOT FAVORABLE TOWARDS A LOT OF VARIATION AGAIN TO THE COMPLEXITY BUT I THINK THAT'S ONE THAT MIGHT MAKE MORE SENSE THAN SOME OF THE OTHERS IN MY VIEW I DID COME ACROSS A A SMALLER AN APPLICATION I SUPPOSE THE FIRST ONE TOO SMALL TO DISTRICT IN CHASKA BUT IT WAS SPECIFICALLY FOCUSED ON PROTECTING A HISTORIC STAND OF TREES A PARTICULAR AREA. IT WASN'T YOU KNOW, ALL TREES. IT WAS THESE SPECIFIC TREES CAN'T BE REMOVED IF THAT MAKES SENSE. AND SO I DON'T THINK THAT WORKS WELL FOR OUR AS ONE STEEP SLOPES. I THINK YOU KNOW AS WE'VE GONE THROUGH WITH THIS ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS REVIEW WE'RE PRETTY WE THINK THOSE STANDARDS ARE VERY STRONG AND EFFECTIVE. ONE THING TO THE POINT ABOUT SLIDING SCALES OF LOT AREA OR LOT SIZE IS POTENTIALLY YOU COULD CREATE TIERS OF DIFFERENT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE LEVELS ON WHAT YOUR LOT SIZE IS RIGHT NOW IF YOU HAVE A 20,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT ACTUALLY THERE ARE SOME LIMITATIONS BUT IF YOU HAVE A LARGER LOT OR IF YOU HAVE A 15,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT NURSE ONE YOUR FULL SUBJECT TO 35% AND IS THAT APPROPRIATE? I DON'T KNOW PROBABLY NOT BUT SO I DON'T I'M I DON'T THINK I'M BEING EFFECTIVE AT POINTING YOU IN A PARTICULAR DIRECTION. I'M JUST TRYING TO LAY SOME OF THE DIFFERENT NUANCES OF THIS DISCUSSION AND THINK IF YOU WERE TO DIRECT STAFF IN ANY WAY, I THINK IMPERVIOUS SURFACE WOULD BE WAY TO DO IT. MY LAST POINT ABOUT THAT THOUGH IS THAT HAVING A SEVEN 800 SQUARE FOOT LOT AGAIN TO THAT POINT ABOUT CONSUMER EXPECTATIONS YOU CAN'T BUILD A REGULAR STANDARD HOUSE THAT ISN'T THAT'S DRIVEWAY ORIENTED, NOT ALLEY ORIENTED WITH 35% IMPERVIOUS SURFACE. IT'S ACTUALLY PRETTY DIFFICULT AND THAT WAS WHY THAT WAS ADDED TO THE ORDINANCE BACK IN MAY IS THAT THAT'S NOT A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE. IT JUST SO HAPPENS PERCENTAGE WISE TO BE SIGNIFICANT IN A BLOOMINGTON CONTEXT BECAUSE IT'S A SMALLER LOT AND THAT YOU NEED HAVE THAT LEVEL IN ORDER TO BUILD A DRIVEWAY, A GARAGE AND A STANDARD HOME EVEN JUST WITH SOME PATIOS AND WHATNOT. SO I GUESS JUST A FEW THINGS TO THINK ABOUT. JUST A FEW THINGS TO THINK SORRY JUST A FEW THINGS COUNSEL LET ME SUGGEST THIS I THINK TELL ME IF I'M WRONG, MR. JOHNSON YOU'VE GOT PLENTY TO WORK HERE. I DO AND I THINK WE'VE GOT PLENTY TO WORK WITH AND PLENTY TO GO ON THE ONLY DISAGREEMENT I THINK WE'RE STILL STUCK ON IS ITEM TWO WHAT IF WE AS WE BRING THIS BACK GIVE US OPTION A AND OPTION B AND WITH THE THOUGHT WHATEVER WE COME WITH TONIGHT WE'RE DOWN ONE. AND I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR COUNCILMEMBER LOEHMANN'S VOICE IN THIS AS WELL SO MAYBE WE'LL WORK WITH WHAT YOU HAVE HEARD ,COME BACK WITH AN OPTION AND B WITH A DIFFERENT FOR ITEM TWO THERE AND WE WILL BRING THIS THING ON HOME EVENTUALLY. HOW ABOUT THAT? THAT SOUNDS COUNSEL WE IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT BUT SOMETHING MORE THAN A SHRUG COUNCILMEMBER NELSON WITH YOU REAFFIRMING BUT COUNCILMAN MCCARTER THANK YOU HERE TO ME I KIND OF FEEL LIKE THE RUB I CONTINUE LIKE I KEEP HEARING IS JUST LIKE I DON'T AS A COUNCIL WE HAVE CONSENSUS ON WHETHER WANT TO HAVE A ZONING DISTRICT THAT THAT WHERE THE INTENT IS ENVIRONMENTAL LIKE THE LIKE THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION RIGHT SO IF WE GOT RID OF IT AND WE JUST APPLY THE SAME STANDARD ACROSS THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY WHAT I AM HEARING YOU TALK ABOUT COUNCILMEMBER DALLESSANDRO BUT I'M ALSO HEARING THAT THERE ARE OTHER THINGS THAT WE COULD ADD TO THE RS ONE THAT WOULD ADDRESS SOME OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PIECES IN MORE MEANINGFUL WAY. SO LIKE IN PERVIOUS SURFACE RIGHT? AND SO I THINK A FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION IS LIKE DO WE REALLY WANT TO HAVE A ZONING DISTRICT LIKE WHERE WE HAVE GREATER PROTECTIONS FOR YOU AND THAT'S WHAT YOU WERE SAYING OR DO WE NOT AND WE JUST WANT TO GET RID OF IT AND JUST APPLY SAME STANDARD ACROSS ALL THE ENTIRE CITY. I FOR ONE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THIS ARE AS ONE WITH GREATER AND LIKE IF THERE ARE OPTIONS TO IMPROVE THE ENVIRONMENTAL PIECES LIKE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE OR I WOULD LOVE I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THAT AND THEN I WOULD BE I THINK THIS THAT WOULD BE A MORE CLEAR I THINK THAT WOULD BE JUST MORE CLEAR FOR THE COUNCIL TERMS OF THE DECISION THAT WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE HERE JUST BEING VERY, VERY I THINK WE HAVE TO HAVE AGREEMENT ON THE INTENT. I WOULD AGREE. COUNCIL MEMBER THANK YOU FOR SETTING IT UP THAT I THINK THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT. I THINK THAT MEETS WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. IT TALKS WHAT IT ADDRESSES WHAT MR. JOHNSON WAS BRINGING FORWARD AND THAT ULTIMATELY I THINK MIGHT BE THE CONVERSATION TO HAVE SO CAN I GET MORE THAN A SHRUG AND THAT IT'S A OKAY GOOD ENOUGH GOOD ENOUGH. MR. MAYOR, IF I MAY, ALEXANDRA ,THE YOU KNOW, I'M NOT 100% SURE I I MAYBE THE OTHER THING THAT WE COULD GET AS PART OF THIS IS JUST, YOU KNOW, KIND OF TO THE CONCERN THAT YOU AND COUNCILMEMBER NELSON MADE WHICH IS THAT YOU FEEL LIKE THE LIKE REDUCING IT TO 2020 OR WHATEVER IS GOING TO OPEN UP A BUNCH OF NEIGHBORHOODS TO COME IN AND ASK THIS THING I'D LOVE TO KNOW LIKE WHAT WHAT WHAT WHAT WHAT WE MIGHT SEE IS THE POTENTIAL IMPACT THERE BECAUSE I DON'T I'M NOT CONVINCED THAT THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN BUT YOU ALL ARE AND I THINK THAT THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO HAVE SOME CLARITY ON IF THAT'S POSSIBLE. I WOULD ARGUE THAT IF TO ME IT'S IF THAT HAPPENS IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A BAD THING IF THESE ENVIRONMENTAL RESTRICTIONS ARE HIGHER BECAUSE THAT IT'S GOOD FOR OUR FOR WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO FROM A CLIMATE CHANGE AND ALL THESE OTHER THINGS AS WELL. RIGHT. SO YOU KNOW, I'D LOVE TO SEE HECK I YOU KNOW IF I IF I COULD GET MY WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD TO TURN THEIR ENTIRE BACKYARDS INTO NATIVE PRAIRIES, I'D COME HERE AND AS FAR AS ONE ON THOSE GROUNDS. RIGHT I MEAN, YOU KNOW JUST BECAUSE I'M WE DID THE WORK WE DID THE WORK. WE ACTUALLY MADE IT BETTER RIGHT. AND SO I'M JUST KIND OF LIKE I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE A DISCUSSION HOW MANY HOW MANY AREAS WE'RE REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT. AND MR. JOHNSON JUST PULLED UP A SLIDE FOR US HERE. WELL, MARIN YEAH AND THIS DOESN'T SPEAK WELL TO THAT BECAUSE IT OR IT DOESN'T PAINT WHOLE PICTURE I SHOULD SAY. AND THE REASON I SAY THAT IS BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT POCKETS RIGHT? YOU DON'T YOU CAN'T REALLY ANTICIPATE YOU KNOW WHAT AREAS MIGHT MEET THAT CRITERIA OF NEIGHBORHOOD CONTINUITY OR THE SCALE PIECE OR THOSE THINGS IN ADDITION TO THAT I MEAN I THINK IT'S CLEAR THAT MANY OF THESE LOTS ARE ON ALONG THE RIVER AND THE RIVER ALREADY HAS A SPECIAL OVERLAY DISTRICT WHICH PROTECTS THE SENSITIVE AREA AND THAT'S THE BLUFF AND BELOW AND SO YOU KNOW EACH REQUEST EACH POTENTIAL REQUEST OR EACH INQUIRY EACH PHONE CALL WE GET IS DIFFERENT THAN THE ONE THAT PRECEDED IT OFTENTIMES. AND SO YOU HAVE TO KIND OF IT ON A CALL BY CALL BASIS OR AN APPLICATION BY APPLICATION BASIS. SO THIS JUST GIVES YOU IT AND THIS IS A CRUDE WAY OF DOING IT. I MEAN IT'S JUST BASED ON LOT AREA AND LOT FRONTAGE NOT ALL OF THESE SITES MAY ACTUALLY MEET OUR MINIMUM SITE WITH NO MATTER YOU SET IT OUT WHETHER IT BE THE EXISTING OR ELIMINATING MEDIAN. SO THIS IS JUST IT'S AN ELEMENT IT'S A CRUDE TOOL TO LOOK AT WHERE THE POTENTIAL IS REALLY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANKS. THANK YOU, MAYOR CONVERSATION COUNSEL. THANK YOU MUCH FOR THAT. WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM 5.2 ON OUR AGENDA. THIS IS A DISCUSSION REGARDING OUR SOLID WASTE CONTRACT AND I KNOW LAURA HORNER, A SOLID WASTE PROGRAM COORDINATOR IS THIS EVENING IT'S TURNER. ARE YOU WITH US ? THERE SHE IS. HI. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY? YES, WE CAN YOU MUCH GREAT. AND I BELIEVE ELIZABETH WILL BE PULLING UP OUR PRESENTATION FOR THIS EVENING BUT MY NAME IS LAURA HORNER. I AM THE SOLID WASTE PROGRAM COORDINATOR FOR THE CITY I HAD INTENDED TO BE WITH YOU THERE IN PERSON TONIGHT BUT DUE TO SOME UNFORESEEN OUTSIDE MY CONTROL I'M HERE WITH YOU VIRTUALLY SO I AM HERE TO DISCUSS OUR SOLID WASTE CONTRACT WITH YOU TONIGHT. THERE WE GO. LET'S GO TO SLIDE TWO PLEASE. SO OUR CURRENT CONTRACT WITH HAULERS CONSORTIUM EXPIRES ON JUNE 30TH OF 2026. SO IN SEEKING DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL ON THE NEXT CONTRACT INCLUDING WHETHER TO RENEGOTIATE WITH THE SAME CONSORTIUM OF HAULERS THAT CURRENTLY PROVIDE A SERVICE OR TO OPEN THE CONTRACT UP FOR AN RFP. WE'RE ALSO SEEKING DIRECTION ON POSSIBLE TERM CHANGES IN A FUTURE CONTRACT. SO YOU WERE PROVIDED WITH A MORE DETAILED MEMORANDUM FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE LAST WEEK AND OUTLINED SOME OF THE CONTRACT ACTIVITIES TO CONSIDER AS WE MOVE FORWARD. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO TO GUIDE CONVERSATION THIS EVENING WE WILL BEGIN WITH IN-DEPTH REVIEW OF OUR CURRENT CUSTOMER SERVICE AND PRICE AFTER THAT WE'LL PROVIDE A GENERAL OVERVIEW ON POTENTIAL TERM CHANGES AS WELL AS DISCUSS GENERAL BENEFITS AND DISADVANTAGES OF NEGOTIATING A RENEWAL OR RELEASING AN RFP AND WE'LL THEN PROVIDE AN ANTICIPATED TIMELINE. BOTH OF THOSE OPTIONS WE'LL PROVIDE A STAFF RECOMMENDATION ,MOVE INTO DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO AS A BIT OF BACKGROUND THE CITY BEGAN ORGANIZED COLLECTION IN DECEMBER OF 2015 THROUGH A NEGOTIATION AN AGREEMENT WITH THE LICENSE HOLDERS THAT WERE OPERATING IN BLOOMINGTON AT THAT TIME THEN FORMED THE BLOOMINGTON HAULERS CONSORTIUM. THAT AGREEMENT WAS RENEWED IN 2019 WITH SEVERAL CHANGES TO OUR CONTRACT TERMS AT THAT TIME OVER THE OF THE CONTRACT SMALLER HAULERS IN OUR CONSORTIUM HAVE CHOSEN TO SELL THEIR ROUTES OR WHOLE COMPANIES TO OTHER MEMBERS AND OUR CONSORTIUM IS CURRENTLY MADE UP OF THREE HAULERS A REPUBLIC SERVICES WHO SERVICES 54% OF THE CITY'S WASTE MANAGEMENT'S WITH 36% AND ASPEN WITH 10%. AND AS COUNCIL IS AWARE, SERVICES PROVIDED UNDER OUR CONTRACT INCLUDE A GARBAGE SERVICE. WE HAVE THREE GARBAGE CART SIZES A SMALL 30 GALLON PART A MEDIUM 60 GALLON AND THE LARGER 90 GALLON CARTS WE ALSO HAVE OUR CONTRACT INCLUDES OUR RATES FOR EVERY OTHER WEEK SMALL GARBAGE CART SERVICE THEY CURRENTLY DO NOT HAVE THAT SERVICE TURNED ON WITH THE HAULERS BASED ON DIRECTION WE RECEIVED FROM COUNCIL EARLIER THIS YEAR AS PART OF OUR SOLID WASTE READ STUDY WE DO INTEND ON TURNING ON THAT EVERY OTHER WEEK GARBAGE SERVICE IN 26 OUR CONTRACT PROVIDES SINGLE STORAGE RECYCLING WHICH IS SERVICED EVERY OTHER WEEK. OUR CONTRACT DOES INCLUDE AN OPTION FOR WEEKLY RECYCLING BUT AGAIN WE CURRENTLY DO NOT HAVE TURNED ON WE HAVE ORGANICS RECYCLING SERVICE. THIS BEGAN IN JUNE OF 2022. ORGANICS IS SERVICED WEEKLY AND RESIDENTS SIGN UP TO RECEIVE THEIR ORGANICS CARDS. WE HAVE A YARD WASTE SERVICE. THIS IS A SUBSCRIPTION SERVICE PROVIDED SEASONALLY FOR WEEKLY PICK UP FROM MID-APRIL THROUGH NOVEMBER IT INCLUDES THE YARD WASTE CARDS AND THE OPPORTUNITY SET OUT UP TO 20 BAGS OF YARD WASTE EACH WEEK DURING WASTE SEASON WE HAVE ON CALL BULKY ITEM PICKUPS FOR RESIDENTS TO SCHEDULE FOR A FEE AND LASTLY THE HAULERS PROVIDE EVERY OTHER WEEK CURBSIDE CLEANUP. THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY HOUSEHOLDS TO SET OUT ALL THE ITEMS FOR GARBAGE COLLECTION AS WELL AS APPLIANCES AND BRUSH FOR RECYCLING SATURDAY IN THE SPRING EVERY OTHER YEAR AND COUNCIL RECALL THAT WE MADE SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO OUR BULKY ITEM PROGRAM IN 2022 MILLION TWO THAT EVERY OTHER WE EVERY OTHER YEAR SERVICE WE ALSO ADDED IN THE NEW MONTHLY BULKY ITEM PICKUP FOR REUSE AND RECYCLING PROVIDED BY THE LOCAL NONPROFIT BUT OUR FUTURE IS AS WELL AS THE FALL RECYCLING CLEANUP UP PROVIDED TO ALL RESIDENTS SO JUST A KIND OF GROUND SERVICE THESE ARE THE CURRENT TO GROUND COUNCIL, THESE ARE THE CURRENT SERVICES WITHIN OUR SOLID WASTE CONTRACT AND NEXT WE'LL MOVE ON TO A REVIEW OF OUR SERVICE AND WE HAVE SEVERAL DIFFERENT DATA THAT WE CAN SHARE WITH COUNCIL TO DO SO INCLUDING STAFF FEEDBACK MUST COLLECT REPORTS THE REVIEW OF LIQUIDATED DAMAGES ASSESSED AND REVIEW OF RESIDENTS FEEDBACK FROM THE SURVEYS AS WELL AS ARRANGED REVIEW AND COMPARED TO OTHER TWIN CITIES METRO COMMUNITIES AND WE'LL BEGIN WITH THE UTILITY BILLING FEEDBACK IT WILL START MET WITH UTILITY BILLING EARLIER THIS SUMMER TO RECEIVE FEEDBACK ON HOW SERVICE HAS BEEN WITH THE HAULERS THE UTILITY BILLING CUSTOMER SERVICE TEAM IS REALLY OUR FRONT LINE STAFF WHO HANDLE THE DEBRIS OF CUSTOMER CALLS ABOUT GARBAGE SERVICE SO THEY REGULARLY HEAR FROM RESIDENTS AND COMMUNICATE WITH EACH HAULERS CUSTOMER SERVICE TEAM . IN THAT MEETING UTILITY BILLING SHARED THAT THE SERVICE HAS IMPROVED SINCE OUR PROGRAM BEGAN IN 2015 AND THEY NOTED THAT IN PARTICULAR WITH OUR LAST CONTRACT EXTENSION IN 2019 THEY'VE SEEN IMPROVEMENTS IN THE REDUCTION OF OVERALL PCS AS AS A SIGNIFICANT REDUCTION IN INSTANCES WHEN I'M JUST KICKED OUT IT WASN'T COLLECTED ON TIME FROM THE HAULERS SO WHEN THEY RECEIVE THAT MR. PICKUP REPORT THEY NEED TO SERVICE AT PICK UP THE SAME DAY IF IT'S RECEIVED NOON OR WITHIN 24 HOURS AND IS RECEIVED AFTER. SO WE SAW A DRAMATIC DECREASE IN THOSE INSTANCES IN THIS LAST CONTRACT RENEWAL. THEY ALSO NOTED THAT HAULER HAULER TECHNOLOGY HAS IMPROVED AND THIS HAS POSITIVELY IMPACTED THE SERVICE AND COMMUNICATIONS WITH HAULERS ON TOP OF HAULERS NOW HAVE ON TRUCKS, CAMERAS AND JEEPS THAT THEY CAN USE TO HELP VERIFY WHEN WHEN HOMES WERE COLLECTED. SO WHEN WE RECEIVED THOSE REPORTS WE CAN LOOK TO ACTUAL TRUCK CAMERAS TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY WERE SERVICED. THIS PROVIDES BETTER COMMUNICATION WITH THE HAULERS AND BETTER INFORMATION FOR RESIDENTS AS WELL. AND LASTLY RELATED TO STAFF FEEDBACK, THE PROGRAM ADMINISTRATORS WE DO MEET REGULARLY WITH HAULER REPRESENTATIVES, DO MONTHLY MEETINGS AND REGULAR COMMUNICATIONS. THESE CONSISTENTLY DO HELP CLEAR UP ISSUES AS THEY OCCUR THROUGHOUT THE MONTHS AND THEY HELP US TO PLAN FOR OUR SERVICES THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. NEXT WE CAN LOOK AT MISSED COLLECTIONS IN BLOOMINGTON SO THIS SLIDE SHOWS A REVIEW OF THE RECORDED MISSED COLLECTIONS FROM RESIDENTS SINCE 21 ALL REPORTED MISSED COLLECTIONS TO GENERATE A WORK ORDER IN OUR CUSTOMER SERVICE BILLING SOFTWARE TIME SCALE SO WE CAN RUN REPORTS OF THE NUMBER OF THOSE INCIDENTS AS THEY OCCUR. SO AS YOU CAN SEE IN 2021 WE HAD A TOTAL OF 2029 STOPS THAT WERE MISSED OUT OF A TOTAL ABOUT 2.1 MILLION STOPS THAT RESULTED A MISS RATE POINT ZERO THAT IN 2022 THAT TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSES DID INCREASE . IT STILL REMAINS RELATIVELY LOW. THE INCREASE IS VERY LIKELY CORRELATED TO A NUMBER OF FACTORS INCLUDING THE INTRODUCTION OF OUR ORGANICS RECYCLING SERVICE OCCURRED THAT YEAR IN JUNE THAT YEAR THE HAULERS ALSO REALLY IMPACTED BY CDL DRIVER SHORTAGES. WE SAW SOME SOME WIDESPREAD MISSES DURING THAT TIME AND LASTLY DURING THAT YEAR TWO OF OUR SMALLER HAULERS SOLD THEIR ROUTES TO ONE OF THE LARGER HAULERS AND THIS SORT OF IMPACTED ROUTING SOME ROUTES AND ROUTING TRANSITIONS OCCURRED THAT YEAR OVERALL OUR MISS RATES DID STAY RELATIVELY LOW AT .12 PERCENT AND 23.07 AND WE ARE ON TRACK IN 2020 FOR A VERY LOW MISS RATE THIS FIRST HALF OF THE YEAR WHICH IS CONSISTENT TO THE FIRST HALF OF THE YEAR AND 2021. SO OVERALL HAULERS SERVICE RELATED TO MISSED PICKUPS THEY DO SERVICE THE VAST MAJORITY OF RESIDENTS ON TIME THAT'S THAT WE KNOW THAT EACH MISS IS AN INCONVENIENCE TO RESIDENTS IT'S A IT'S A REAL PAIN POINT FOR RESIDENTS IN OUR COMMUNITY AND ALSO RESULTS IN THE SEVERAL CALLS AND EMAILS TO CITY AND COUNCIL MEMBERS BUSINESS AFFAIRS SO WE DO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH SOLVE THE ISSUES HOWEVER THAT BEING SAID THESE ARE NOT OUT OF THE ORDINARY FOR SOLID WASTE SERVICES OR SOME RELATIVELY LOW NUMBER OF MISSES. THE NEXT ITEM WE CAN LOOK AT IS THE LIQUIDATED DAMAGES THAT WE'VE ASSESSED SO YOU CAN SEE HERE IN 2022 THIS IS THE YEAR THE HAULERS EXPERIENCED LARGER ISSUES TO STAFFING ARE LIQUIDATED DAMAGES WERE THE HIGHEST THAT WE'VE SEEN AND THESE REALLY DO WORK FOR US PARTICULARLY SOME OF THE DAMAGES WE STRENGTHENED IN 2019 TO HELP HOLD HAULERS ACCOUNTABLE WHEN THESE WIDESPREAD MISSES OCCUR IN LARGER SECTIONS OF THE CITY . AS I MENTIONED WE DID STRENGTH THEM USE LIQUIDATED DAMAGES IN 2019 AND THEY HAVE HELPED PULL THE HAULERS ACCOUNTABLE. WE ARE WE'RE PLEASED BUT THOSE THAT PART OF OUR CONTRACT AND THEN THE LAST PIECE WE CAN REVIEW FOR OUR CUSTOMER SERVICE IS THE THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED FROM RESIDENTS RECENTLY WE HAVE HAD TWO RECENT SURVEYS THAT WE CAN LOOK TO SEE THAT ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT SATISFACTION THE NATIONAL CITIZENS IN 2023 WHERE GARBAGE SERVICE WAS RATED AT 83% SIMILAR TO THE BENCHMARK AND SIMILAR COMMUNITIES AND THAT'S THE HIGHEST IT'S BEEN SINCE 21 AND WE ALSO CONDUCTED A SURVEY OF RESIDENTS DURING OUR SOLID WASTE RATE STUDY AND BASED ON THOSE RESULTS THAT INDICATED 90% OF RESIDENTS ARE VERY OR SOMEWHAT SATISFIED THE GARBAGE PROGRAM. SO NOW MOVING ON TO A REVIEW OF OUR PRICES WHAT DO YOU WHAT YOU SEE IN FRONT OF YOU IS A REVIEW OF CITIES IN THE TWIN CITIES METRO THAT HAVE ORGANIZED GARBAGE AND RECYCLING SERVICE SO THEY DO A CONTRACT FOR SERVICE THROUGH EITHER A CONSORTIUM OR A SINGLE HAULER. WE ARE LOOKING AT THE PRICE FOR GARBAGE AND RECYCLING SERVICE. THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE ORGANICS OR YARD WASTE SINCE THIS REALLY VARIES ACROSS THE METRO AND BLOOMINGTON IS THE GREEN BAR ON THIS SLIDE $21.73 FOR AVERAGE MONTHLY GARBAGE AND RECYCLING COLLECTION. I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT IT IS HARD TO COMPARE APPLES TO APPLES THE PRICE OF SOLID BASED SERVICES ACROSS THE METRO FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS INCLUDING THE WHERE YOUR GARBAGE IS AND DISPOSAL AND WHO PAYS FOR OUR DISPOSAL BE IT THE CITY, THE HAULER WHETHER OR NOT A CITY OWNS THEIR OWN CARTS WHEN THE CONTRACT STARTED AND THE OVERALL LENGTH OF THAT CONTRACT SO IT IS DIFFICULT TO COMPARE THESE PRICES APPLES TO APPLES. I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT THESE PRICES OVERALL AND WE SIT GIVEN THE VARIOUS FACTORS OUR ARE FAIRLY COMPETITIVE WITH COMMUNITIES IN THE METRO AREA SO THAT WRAPS UP THE REVIEW OF O CURRENT CUSTOMER SERVICE AND PRICING AND AT THIS WE CAN MOVE ON TO SOME OF THE GENERAL CONTRACT TERM CHANGES THAT WE ANTICIPATE HAPPENING IN OUR NEXT CONTRACT. THE FIRST AREA OF TERMS WE WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT TO ENSURE THAT OUR PRICES REMAIN COMPETITIVE IS OUR GARBAGE AND ORGANICS RECYCLING RATE STRUCTURES. SO CURRENTLY WE DO NOT PAY FOR THE GARBAGE OR ORGANICS RECYCLING DISPOSAL DIRECTLY AND INSTEAD KIND OF AN ESTIMATED DISPOSAL AMOUNT IS BUILT INTO THE RATES THAT WE PAY FOR SERVICE WE WOULD LIKE TO EXPLORE PAYING HAULERS FOR OUR ACTUAL GARBAGE AND RECYCLING SHIPPING FEES EACH MONTH AND THEN WE'LL START PAYING PAYING FOR THAT DIRECTLY AND PAYING THE HAULERS FOR THE COLLECTION OF THOSE MATERIALS AND. WE WANT TO LOOK INTO THIS BECAUSE WE THINK THAT THERE MAY BE A COST SAVINGS THAT WE PAID FOR THE DISPOSAL OF THOSE MATERIALS DIRECTLY AND RELATED TO THAT WE LIKE TO LOOK AT DIRECT HAULING CURRENTLY IN OUR CONTRACT THE HAULERS CAN CO-MINGLE LOAD SO THEY CAN PICK UP MATERIAL FROM OTHER COMMUNITIES IN THE SAME TRUCKLOAD AS BLOOMINGTON. HOWEVER WE WOULD LIKE TO REQUIRE THEY ONLY COLLECT BLOOMINGTON'S LOADS BEFORE NATURE AND AND THE NECESSARY IF WE WERE TO MOVE TO THAT THAT THOSE CHANGES FOR PAYING FOR GARBAGE AND ORGANICS I ALSO THINK THIS WILL ENSURE THAT WE GET ACCURATE REPORTING FROM THE HAULERS RELATED TO KIND OF COLLECTED IN OUR CONTRACT SO THE NEXT AREA ON THAT I WANT TO POINT OUT IS ANY CHANGES TO THE SERVICES THAT I MENTIONED WE HAVE IN OUR CONTRACT WITH THE HAULERS AS I MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY WE WOULD LIKE TO TURN ON THAT EVERY OTHER GARBAGE SERVICE IF YOU HAVE A RATE IN OUR CONTRACT SO THAT WOULDN'T BE AN ACTUAL CONTRACT CHANGE BUT THAT'S SOMETHING WE WOULD LIKE TO TURN ON IN THE FUTURE. WE ALSO WOULD RECOMMEND KEEPING THE REMAINING SERVICES AS I MENTIONED AS IS WHERE WE ARE NOT ANTICIPATING ANY CHANGES NEEDED IN OUR IN THE SERVICES OFFERED AND THIS LAST SECTION THAT I'LL ADDRESS TONIGHT IS RELATED TO EXTENDED PRODUCER RESPONSIBILITY FOR PACKAGING SO THIS LEGISLATIVE SESSION MINNESOTA BECAME THE FIFTH STATE TO ESTABLISH AN EXTENDED PRODUCER RESPONSIBLE PROGRAM FOR PACKAGING CALLED THE PACKAGING COST AND WASTE REDUCTION ACT. I'M NOT GOING TO GO INTO TOO MUCH DETAIL ON THIS LEGISLATION TONIGHT. WE WANT TO MAKE COUNCIL AWARE OF THE NEW LEGISLATION AND THAT WE WILL LIKELY NEED TO ADD IN SOME LANGUAGE TO CONTRACT WHICH FOR THE HAULERS ARE ABIDING BY THIS NEW LEGISLATION BASICALLY THIS LAW IT EXTENDS THE PRODUCERS OF PACKAGING FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THAT PACKAGING SO THEY WOULD BE PAYING FEES INTO AN ORGANIZATION FOR BASED ON THE AMOUNT OF PACKAGING AND UPDATES MINNESOTA AND THEN THOSE FEES COLLECTED WILL FUND A NUMBER OF THINGS ONE OF THEM BEING REIMBURSED FOR RECYCLING SERVICE PROVIDERS SO BLOOMINGTON IS A SERVICE PROVIDER. SO BEGINNING IN 2025 WE WILL BE REIMBURSED FOR 50% OF OUR RECYCLING COSTS AND THAT WILL INCREASE TO 90% BY 2035. SO WE'LL SEE A SIGNIFICANT COST SAVINGS FOR RESIDENTS WITH THIS LEGISLATION. THEY'LL ALSO THE MPCA WILL DEVELOP A UNIVERSAL ACCEPTABILITY RECYCLABLES LIST . THIS WILL HELP WITH SOME CONFUSION RELATED TO WHAT'S RECYCLABLE AND LASTLY ALL OF THE PACKAGING SOLD IN MINNESOTA FOR THIS LEGISLATION EITHER REUSABLE, RECYCLABLE OR COMPOSTABLE BY JANUARY 1ST OF SO THIS WILL BRING SOME GREAT CHANGES TO RECYCLING IN MINNESOTA I WANTED TO MENTION THIS COUNCIL THIS EVENING BECAUSE IT'S A NEW EXCITING LEGISLATION AND ALSO WILL LIKELY LOOK AT MAKING SOME CHANGES TO OUR CONTRACT LANGUAGE TO MAKE SURE HAULERS ARE COMPLYING WITH THIS LEGISLATION. SO LAST IN SUMMARY WE ANTICIPATE LOOKING AT CONTRACT CHANGES IN THE AREAS THAT I DISCUSSED WITH YOU THIS EVENING AND THAT ARE LISTED HERE THE COUNCIL DID RECEIVE A THAT EXPLAINED THESE TRENDS AND FURTHER DETAILED SO TONIGHT WE WILL BE SEEKING COUNSEL'S DIRECTION HOW TO PROCEED FORWARD WITH ADDRESSING THESE CHANGES IN OUR NEXT I WANT TO SHARE BRIEFLY AS IN TERMS OF SEEKING TO NEGOTIATE CONTRACT RENEWAL OR MOVE TO AN RFP IT WOULD BE IT'LL BE HELPFUL TO TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE GENERAL AND DISADVANTAGES THAT CAN BE CONSIDERED AN EITHER OPTION. SO IN A CONTRACT RENEWAL SOME OF THE ADVANTAGES GENERALLY ARE ALLOWING FOR MORE ACCOUNTABILITY FOR RESIDENTS THERE WON'T BE ANY CHANGES OR CHANGES IN TIME . UPDATE OUR PARTICIPANTS WILL HAVE LITTLE WE WILL HAVE MORE CERTAINTY RELATED TO THE CONTRACT PROVISIONS THAT WE KNOW ARE IN PLACE AT OUR CURRENT PRICE AND WE HAVE WE WON'T HAVE ANY EXTRA IMPLEMENTATION COSTS WITH THE NEW HAULER I'M CURRENTLY WE DO HAVE A COMPETITIVE WITHIN OUR CONTRACT AS I MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY SOME OF THE DISADVANTAGES INCLUDE THAT WE MAY A LOWER PRICE IF WE GO TO AN RFP ALTHOUGH THIS IS NOT GUARANTEED AND WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO GET SERVICE AGREEMENTS IN AN RFP THAT WE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO ACHIEVE THROUGH NEGOTIATION AND THERE IS THE NEED TO CONTINUE WORKING WITH MULTIPLE INDEPENDENT HAULERS AS WE NOW RATHER THAN A SINGLE HAULER. AND THEN WHEN LOOKING AT THE RFP PROCESS SOME OF THE BENEFITS MIGHT BE POTENTIALLY ACHIEVING MORE COMPETITIVE PRICE THAN A CONTRACT RENEWAL AND THIS ISN'T THE SERVICE RELATED ISSUES WE CONDUCT BY BID REQUIREMENTS CLEARLY IN AN RFP AND WE MAY HAVE THE EASE OF POTENTIALLY WORKING WITH A SINGLE RESPONDENT INSTEAD OF A CONSORTIUM. SOME OF THE DISADVANTAGES WOULD BE AS MENTIONED LESS CONTINUITY FOR RESIDENTS WITH HAULERS, HAULERS SWITCHES, CARDS, SWITCHES AND MAYBE THEY APPROACH BECAUSE WE HAVE ANY CERTAINTY ON SERVICE COSTS. WE ALSO DON'T HAVE ANY GUARANTEE OF RESPONSES TO OUR RFP. WE WOULD HAVE THOSE IMPLEMENTATION COSTS WITH ROUTING WITH A NEW HAULER THAT WE WOULD NEED TO PAY AND IT IS IT'S A TIME CONSUMING PROCESS TO DEVELOP RFP AND RECEIVE RESPONSES SO MAY BE HELPFUL AS WE MOVE INTO DISCUSSION RELATED TO THE NEXT STEPS HERE I WOULD SAY STAFF WORD YOU KNOW AFTER THIS REVIEW WHERE WE HIGHLIGHTED THE CURRENT THAT WE RECEIVED RELATIVELY GOOD SERVICE FROM A CONSORTIUM RELATIVELY COMPETITIVE PRICES WHEN COMPARED THE METRO AND GENERALLY HAVING OUR SERVICE BE WELL RECEIVED BY RESIDENTS STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND BEGINNING WITH NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE CONSORTIUM AND IF WE ARE UNSUCCESSFUL IN THOSE NEGOTIATIONS WE COULD THEN MOVE INTO AN RFP PROCESS. SO THIS WOULD ALSO ALLOW THE CITY THE OPPORTUNITY TO NOT NECESSARILY RULE OUT AN RFP OPTION AT THIS TIME IF THOSE NEGOTIATIONS ARE UNSUCCESSFUL SO WE DID LAY OUT HERE AND ANTICIPATED FOR NEGOTIATING A CONTRACT RENEWAL AS WELL AS RELEASING AN RFP FOR SERVICE. I SHOULD NOTE THAT THIS IS A TENTATIVE TIMELINE AND OF THE ACTUAL DATES MAY SHIFT A BIT BUT I MENTIONED THIS TIMELINE WOULD ALLOW THE CITY TO BEGIN WITH NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE CONSORTIUM FOR A RENEWAL AND IF THOSE AREN'T SUCCESSFUL AS LAID OUT IN THIS TIMELINE BY WE WOULD HAVE TIME TO RELEASE AN RFP AND STILL ALLOW ENOUGH IMPLEMENTATION TIME FOR A NEW HAULER TO ROUTE BLOOMINGTON AND PURCHASE THEIR TRUCKS AND TAKE OVER SERVICE THIS DOES ALLOW FOR 12 MONTHS FOR THAT HAULER IMPLEMENTATION TIME WHICH IS FAIRLY STANDARD SO AT THIS TIME AS I'VE MENTIONED SOME STAFF HAVE DRAFTED A RECOMMENDED ACTION TO GUIDE OUR DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION THIS EVENING AND AS MENTIONED EARLIER BASED ON OUR CURRENT SERVICE WITH THE CONSORTIUM THE RECOMMENDED ACTION WOULD BE TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO BEGIN TO BEGIN NEGOTIATION WITH HAULERS ON THE GENERAL CONTRACT TERMS PRESENTED THIS EVENING AND RETURN TO COUNCIL TO APPROVE AN AMENDED CONTRACT AND IF THOSE NEGOTIATIONS AREN'T COMPLETE DECEMBER TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO PREPARE AND FOR RELEASE BY FEBRUARY AND RETURN TO COUNCIL TO EXECUTE A NEW CONTRACT FOR SERVICES. THIS IS THE RECOMMENDED ACTION LAID OUT THAT CAN HELP GUIDE DISCUSSION THIS EVENING AND DIRECTION COUNSEL RELATED TO THE CONTRACT AND KIND OF GENERALLY HOW COMFORTABLE COUNSEL IS WITH THE GENERAL CONTRACT TERMS THAT WERE PRESENTED THIS EVENING. SO THANKS FOR YOUR TIME THIS EVENING AND TO SHARE MORE INFORMATION ABOUT OUR SOLID WASTE CONTRACT AND I'M OPEN FOR ANY QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION. THANK YOU MISS HORNER. COUNSEL QUESTIONS AND I'D LIKE TO KICK IT OFF AND I KNOW THIS MORNING YOU SAID YOU DIDN'T WANT TO GET TOO DEEP INTO THE WHOLE FOR PACKAGING THING BUT THE TWO BULLET POINTS HAVE ME SCRATCHING MY HEAD WHY WOULD THE CITY HAVE TO REQUIRE HAULERS TO COLLECT AND COMPOSTABLE ITEMS AS REQUIRED THROUGH LEGISLATION OR HAULERS TO ABIDE BY LEGISLATION ALLOW FOR CONTRACT MODIFICATIONS AS NEEDED. WHY WOULD THAT FALL TO THE CITY? WOULDN'T THAT BE I MEAN THOSE ARE STATE REQUIREMENTS. WOULDN'T IT BE AS A STATE ISSUE? YEAH MAYOR YOU'RE CORRECT TOO THESE ARE THOSE ARE BOTH ACTUALLY IN THE IN THE LEGISLATION ITSELF THAT FIRST ONE WILL REQUIRE THE HAULERS THE PACKAGING WILL BE REQUIRED TO BE RECYCLABLE. WE WOULD NEED TO MAKE SURE WITHIN OUR CONTRACT WE DO HAVE A DEFINITION OF IS RECYCLABLE AND LINDA WHEN THE STATE DEVELOPS THAT ACCEPTABILITY LIST WE NEED TO MAKE SURE OUR CONTRACT IN THAT DEFINITION OF WHAT'S RECYCLABLE WILL MATCH WHAT IS REQUIRED BY LAW. SO THERE MIGHT BE SOME MINOR CHANGES THERE BUT THE ONUS REALLY BE ON THE HAULERS AND THE PRODUCERS WITH THIS LEGISLATION WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE KIND OF COVERING OUR BASES IN CASE WE NEED TO MAKE CHANGES IN OUR CONTRACT RELATED TO THE LEGISLATION. GOT IT. THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. I APPRECIATE THAT. I ALSO TO SAY IT'S GOOD TO SEE SOME OF THOSE POSITIVE PERFORMANCE MEASURES OVER THE PAST YEAR OR TWO I'VE SEEN THE HAULERS PICKING UP THEIR GAME I THINK WITH WHATEVER IT IS IF IT'S IMPROVED TECHNOLOGY OR A BETTER WORKFORCE NOW OR THE EXPECTATION THAT WE'VE LAID THAT WE EXPECTED THEM TO DO A BETTER JOB TERMS OF NOT MISSING ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOODS AND I WOULD HOPE THAT WHATEVER FOR WHATEVER THE REASON I WOULD HOPE IT WOULD CONTINUE BECAUSE THEY'RE DOING A MUCH BETTER JOB THAN THEY HAVE IN THE PAST. COUNCIL QUESTIONS HERE. COUNCILMEMBER THANK YOU MAYOR MY ONLY QUESTION IS WITH THE RFP PROCESS WOULD THAT BE FOR A SINGLE HAULER OR ANOTHER CONSORTIUM MAYOR COUNCILMEMBER MOUA. TYPICALLY IN THE RFP PROCESS FOR SOLID WASTE SERVICES IT IS OFTEN RELEASED AS ALLOWING JOINT BIDS FROM MULTIPLE HAULERS SINGLE HAULER BIDS SO THIS WOULD NOT THIS WOULD NOT STOP THE CONSORTIUM'S YOU KNOW, STOP ABILITY TO BID ON AN RFP. HOWEVER, WE WOULD ANTICIPATE IF WE WENT THAT UP THAT ROUTE WE CAN'T KNOW FOR SURE. HOWEVER IN SAINT AND THIS HAPPENED RECENTLY THE CONSORTIUM THAT WAS IN PLACE DID NOT BID AS A CONSORTIUM ON THE CONTRACT AND SAID HAULERS WITHIN THE CONSORTIUM BID INDIVIDUALLY JUST TO UP TO THAT WHEN IT COMES TO SINGLE HAULERS IF THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED IF WE WENT TO OUR PROCESS AND THE CONSORTIUM DECIDED THEY WERE JUST GOING TO BID INDIVIDUALLY IF WE WERE AN INDIVIDUAL HAULER COMMUNITY DOES THAT REDUCE ANY WORK ON CITY STAFF FOR EXAMPLE THE CUSTOMER SERVICE PIECE OF IT IF WE HAVE ONE HAULER OR CAN THEIR CUSTOMER SERVICE HANDLE THE ISSUES THAT COME UP WHERE THEY'RE MISSED VERSUS HAVING TO ROUTE THROUGH THE CITY. SO IN TERMS OF IF IT REDUCES STAFF TIME TO WORK WITH ONE HAULER VERSUS THREE I WOULD SAY YES CURRENTLY WE PAY THREE IF WE PAY INVOICES TO EACH INDIVIDUAL HAULER AND WE WORK WITH THE CUSTOMER SERVICE TEAMS AND REPRESENTATIVES FOR THREE INDIVIDUAL HAULERS SO THAT WOULD REALLY HELP YOU KNOW HOW TO LOAD ON STAFF IN TERMS OF HOW DO WE COMMUNICATE TO I THINK UTILITY BUILDINGS RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE THAT THE CITIES STILL REMAIN INVOLVED IN KIND OF BEING THAT FRONT LINE FOR SERVICE REGARDLESS IF IT'S WITH YOU KNOW THREE THREE HAULERS WE'RE WORKING WITH OR ONE BECAUSE IT ALLOWS US TO HAVE A MUCH BETTER HANDLE ON HOW SERVICE IS GOING WE DON'T NEED TO JUST RELY ON THE REPORTS FROM THE HAULERS MONTHLY ON THOSE MISSED COLLECTIONS. WE KNOW FROM THE GET GO WHAT RESIDENTS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT AND WHAT THOSE ISSUES ARE SO I THINK THAT THE CITY HAS SEEN SOME ADVANTAGES IN BEING INVOLVED IN THE COST SIDE OF THINGS BUT IT WOULD GREATLY IT WOULD REDUCE THE STAFF THE REGARDING COMMUNICATING WITH THREE HAULERS VERSUS ONE AND THOSE ISSUES. THANK YOU COUNSEL ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS COUNCILMEMBER DALLESSANDRO I'D LIKE TO HAVE A A LITTLE BIT MORE OF DISCUSSION ON THE CONTRACT CONSIDERATION TERMS PIECE AROUND RATE STRUCTURE AND DIRECT HAUL REQUIREMENT BECAUSE I KNOW YOU'RE ASKING ME FOR SOME FEEDBACK ON THAT TO I DIDN'T I DON'T THINK THAT I, I DON'T THINK THAT I KNOW WHAT THE OTHER OPTIONS ARE. SO IF IF IF WE DIDN'T DO IT THIS WAY OR CURRENT THE CURRENT WAY WE'RE DOING IT WHAT WHAT HOW WOULD WE BE DOING IT CERTAINLY. MAYOR COUNCILMEMBER D'ALESSANDRO SO FIRSTLY OUR GARBAGE RATE FOR AN EXAMPLE IS MADE UP OF KIND OF TWO PIECES AND ONE IS THE COLLECTION AND THAT COLLECTION COST IS THE SAME FOR A SMALL CART A MEDIUM PART OR A LARGE PART. THE HAULERS CHARGING US A SET AMOUNT THEN IT'S ALSO INCLUDES A DISPOSAL COST AND THAT DISPOSAL COST INCREASES A LITTLE BIT FROM SMALL, MEDIUM AND LARGE BASED ON HOW MUCH THEIR ESTIMATE AN AVERAGE PERSON IS SETTING OUT MONTHLY IN CARD SIZES SO THAT MAKES UP OUR FULL RATE IT'S FOR GARBAGE YOU KNOW WE THINK BASED ON WHAT THEY CHARGE US FOR THAT DISPOSAL THEY BUILT IN PROFIT THERE THAT WE MIGHT SEE SOME COST SAVINGS THAT WE PAID FOR THAT DISPOSAL DIRECTLY RATHER THAN THAT ESTIMATION THAT'S INTO THE GARBAGE HAULERS, RIGHT? SURE. OKAY. UNDERSTOOD. DOES THAT DOES THAT MAKE IT HARDER FOR US ON THE BACK END THOUGH TO PROVIDE A CONSISTENT BILL TO CUSTOMERS BECAUSE I MEAN ONE OF THE THINGS YOU'RE GETTING BY DOING THAT IS THAT YOU CAN BUILD THAT INTO THE RATES WE CHARGE OUR CUSTOMERS RIGHT AND SO IT'S THE SAME RATE EVERY MONTH WOULD THAT VARIABILITY CREATE PROBLEMS IN US BEING ABLE TO TO DO THAT CONSISTENTLY? SO WHAT THE CITY CAN DO AND WHAT WE DO RIGHT NOW IS RATES THAT WE PAY THE HAULERS FOR SERVICE ARE NOT THE SAME AS THE THE PASS THROUGH RATES TO CUSTOMERS SO CURRENTLY YOU KNOW WE WE ADD IN AN ADMINISTRATION COST FOR CITY STAFF TIME BILLING ON THOSE ARBITRARY SO THE RATE THAT WE PAY THE HAULERS EVEN THOUGH THAT THAT DISPOSAL COSTS WILL CHANGE EACH MONTH WE CAN STILL SET YOU KNOW IN OUR ORDINANCE A SET FEE FOR THE SMALL MEDIUM LARGE SERVICE PARTS. OKAY. OUT IN THE SOLID WASTE RATES STUDY. RIGHT, RIGHT. OKAY. I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. THANK YOU. DOES THAT THE BUT THAT SO THAT DOES NOT CONCERN YOU THAT THE VARIABILITY ON THAT DISPOSAL SHOULD WE GO DIRECT WOULD BE VARIABILITY WOULD BE A CAUSE FOR CONCERN IN TERMS OF US OUR ABILITY TO TO SET A RATE THAT'S KNOW CORRECT FOR THE FULL YEAR AND NOT NOT HAVE COME BACK AND REDO IT SIX MONTHS LATER BECAUSE THAT VARIABILITY WAS TOO HIGH I DON'T THINK SO WE HAVE WE HAVE MANAGERS SO WE CAN WORK WITH FINANCE TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR RATES ARE GENERATING ENOUGH REVENUE BASED ON THE ANTICIPATED DISPOSAL TONS EACH YEAR. RIGHT THERE IS SOME VARIABILITY YEAR PARTICULARLY AS WE WORK TOWARDS MORE WASTE REDUCTION BUT IT GENERALLY ISN'T YOU KNOW, JUMPING ENOUGH THAT IT WOULD HAVE A CAUSE FOR CONCERN IN PAYING FOR THAT. THERE ARE SEVERAL COMMUNITIES IN METRO THAT DO THIS ALREADY THAT WE CAN ALSO LOOK TO FOR BEST PRACTICES. OKAY. AND THEN REGARDING THE DIRECT CALL REQUIREMENT IS THAT JUST IS THAT STAYING CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE DO TODAY SO THAT WE CAN GET THE METRICS THAT WE HAVE TODAY ALREADY? YEAH. SO CONCURRENTLY IN OUR CONTRACTS THE HAULERS DO NOT NEED TO DIRECT ALL THEY CAN THEY CAN CO-MINGLE MEANING THEY CAN PICK UP BLOOMINGTON'S RESIDENTIAL GARBAGE AND THEN GO TO RICHFIELD AND PUT RICHFIELD RESIDENTIAL GARBAGE IN THE TRUCK AS WELL AND THEN GO TO WORK AND DUMP THE LOAD. SO WHAT WE WOULD REQUIRE IS THAT THEY ONLY PICK UP OUR RESIDENTIAL MATERIAL AND THEN GO DUMP THAT LOAD SO WE CAN NO SPECIFICALLY AND HAVE THE WEIGHT SLIPS TO VERIFY THE AMOUNT DISPOSED BECAUSE WE WILL BE PAYING FOR THAT DIRECTLY. OKAY. ALSO RIGHT NOW WE DO THERE IS SOME ESTIMATION THE TONNAGES REPORT THAT HAULERS REPORT TO US. SO THIS ALSO ALLOW US A LITTLE BIT MORE ACCURATE INFORMATION RELATED TO THE AMOUNT OF WASTE GENERATED AND HELP US REALLY GET A BETTER HANDLE ON OUR DIVERSION IN BLOOMINGTON. OKAY. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE AND THANK YOU FOR THAT LINE OF QUESTIONING, COUNCILMEMBER BECAUSE I WAS GOING TO HEAD DOWN THAT DIRECTION ALSO BECAUSE I LIKE EACH OF THESE SPECIFIC SUGGESTIONS BECAUSE I WOULD MUCH RATHER KNOW SPECIFICALLY WHAT WE'RE WHAT BLOOMINGTON RESIDENTS ARE PRODUCING AS TRASH AND THEN PAYING BASED ON THAT I AND ESPECIALLY WITH THE WITH WITH THE GARBAGE RATE STRUCTURE IT GIVES US THE OPPORTUNITY TO TO THEN USE THAT AS A METRIC DRIVE DOWN THE RATE OF GARBAGE AND FOR THAT MATTER TO DRIVE UP THE RATE OF ORGANICS COLLECTION HOWEVER WE WANT TO DO IT AND ULTIMATELY IF THEY HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY IN THE TRUCKS WHICH APPARENTLY THEY DO NOW TO DO THAT DIRECT HAUL REQUIREMENT AND I DON'T WANT AN ESTIMATION I WANT TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT BLOOMINGTON IS PRODUCING WE'LL PAY BASED ON THAT AS OPPOSED TO I DON'T CARE HOW GOOD THE ESTIMATION IS I'D RATHER KNOW SPECIFICALLY WHAT IT WOULD BE ARE THE THOUGHTS COUNCIL. THE ONLY OTHER QUESTION I THINK THE QUESTION ABOUT EVERY OTHER WEEK SERVICE IS WHETHER OR NOT TO TURN ON I, I THINK WE HAD TALKED ABOUT THAT AND I THINK THAT'S A GOOD THING BASED ON WHAT WE'VE BEEN HEARING FROM RESIDENTS FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS NOW THAT THEY JUST DON'T ENOUGH AND THEN THE CONSIDERATION THAT WE ALSO IF FOLKS USE THE ORGANICS RECYCLING THEN THE THE POSSIBILITY OF SOMETHING OVERLY STINKY THE TRASH FOR TWO STRAIGHT WEEKS IS IS GONE DOWN OR AT LEAST THEY HAVE AN OPTION TO MAKE SURE THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN. SO I THINK THAT'S A THAT'S A GOOD ROUTE TO TAKE AS WELL. COUNCILMEMBER NELSON. THANK YOU, MAYOR. I AGREE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN TERMS OF THE DIRECT DISPOSAL FEES AND, EVERYTHING I THINK IT GIVES US A TOOL ACTUALLY TO WORK WITH RESIDENTS TO HOPEFULLY LOWER QUANTITY AND LOWER PRICE, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THOSE ARE YOU KNOW, THE AMOUNT THAT WE THROW AWAY IMPACTS OUR COST AND IF WE CAN THROW LESS AWAY OR THE BETTER FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS THE PART I HAVE IN PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS THIS MATTER HAVE BEEN IN FAVOR OF THE RFP. I AM OPEN TO THIS NOTION OF NEGOTIATING FIRST AND THEN GOING TO RFP BUT I DO WANT KNOW ON THAT YOU KNOW I MEAN IF WE AREN'T GETTING FAVORABLE TERMS THAT WE ARE MORE THAN WILLING TO GO TO RFP AND I DO KIND OF FIND IT SURPRISING THAT THE CONSORTIUM WOULDN'T JUST YOU KNOW, GO INTO AN RFP BECAUSE OF THEIR COST ADVANTAGE OF NOT HAVING TO REALLOCATE BINS AND ALL OF THAT. THEY THEY SEEM LIKE HAVE A HEADS UP ON EVERYBODY IF THEY STUCK WITH THEIR OWN CONSORTIUM BUT APPARENTLY THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY CHOSE TO DO IN SAINT PAUL. BUT REGARDLESS I THINK I THINK IT MAKES SENSE TO FIRST SEE WHERE WE GET WITH THAT CAVEAT AND I KNOW THE LAST TIME WE LOOKED AT THIS THE SITUATION WAS DISADVANTAGEOUS TO THE CITY AND SO HOPEFULLY ADVANTAGEOUS SITUATION RIGHT NOW WE CAN CONTINUE TO DO GOOD WORK FOR OUR RESIDENTS AND GET A VERY FAIR DEAL FOR PEOPLE. I THINK COUNCILMEMBER AND AGREE COMPLETELY YES I THINK GO INTO NEGOTIATIONS IN GOOD FAITH BUT IF WE'RE NOT MAKING PROGRESS THEN I HAVE THAT OPTION OF AN RFP IN OUR BACK. COUNCILMEMBER RIVAS AND COUNCILMEMBER COUNCILMEMBER RIVAS JUST TO ADD A LITTLE MORE TO THAT, I WOULD AS I WAS READING THIS THERE WAS A MENTION OF THE POSSIBLE RELINQUISHING OF THE CUSTOMER SERVICE PART OF IT SINCE IT REQUIRE A LOT OF STAFF HOURS TO TAKE CARE OF IT. BUT IT WAS ALSO MENTIONED IN THE DISCUSSION TONIGHT THAT THAT THE CITY WILL REMAIN INVOLVED IN IT TO A LESSER EXTENT I BELIEVE. RIGHT. SO THOSE SOMETHING THAT I THINK THE CITY WOULD SHOULD NEGOTIATE INTO THIS NEW CONTRACT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY DO TAKE OF IT YOU KNOW THE PLANNING. I DO. I MEAN THE ROUTES ARE ALREADY PLANNED. I GUESS THERE'S NO MORE WORK TO BE DONE THERE. BUT I MEAN THE DECISION TO RELINQUISH A LOT OF THAT CUSTOMER SERVICE TO DO THAT TO THE WHOLE SO THAT YOU KNOW, IT'S MINIMAL INVOLVEMENT. BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT AS MENTIONED THE CITY'S INVOLVEMENT IS IS IT'S IS A GREAT TOOL FOR THE RESIDENTS TO HAVE ACCESS TO THAT STILL SO THAT ANY ISSUES CAN BE ADDRESSED IMMEDIATELY BUT IT AND JUST HAVING THE HOLDERS DEAL WITH IT THAT'S IT. AGREED COUNCIL MEMBER THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER AND THEN COUNCILMEMBER DALLESSANDRO COUNCILMEMBER DEMIR AND I'M NOT SURE IF I MISSED THIS HOW LONG IS THIS NEXT RENEWAL FOR? WHAT IS WHAT'S THE LENGTH OF IT AND THEN WOULD WE BUILD IN ANOTHER RENEWAL OPTION LIKE WE DID WITH THE ONE CHARLES MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER BE I THINK THE SUGGESTED LENGTH TERM LENGTH WOULD BE AN ADDITIONAL FIVE YEARS AND I THINK LEAVING IN KIND OF THE STANDARD LANGUAGE THAT ALLOWS FOR AN OPTION FOR RENEWAL I THINK LEGAL MIGHT HAVE YOU KNOW COULD POTENTIALLY PROVIDE ADDITIONAL GUIDANCE RELATED TO THE TERM LENGTH AND TIMES CONTRACTS CAN BE RENEWED BUT GENERALLY SINCE THOSE CONTRACTS BEGAN THEY HAVE FIVE YEARS THIS IN 2019 WE HAD A FIVE AND A HALF YEAR RENEWAL AND WE DID THE FIVE AND A HALF YEARS SO IN THE EVENT THAT WE DID CHANGE DOLLARS ANY CARD SWAPPING WOULD OCCUR IN THE SUMMER RATHER THAN AS WOULD MAKE THE TRANSITION A LOT SMOOTHER. OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER DALLESSANDRO, THANK THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. SO I I THINK THESE ARE ALL GOOD SUGGESTIONS. I THINK YOU KNOW, I ALWAYS WORRY A LITTLE BIT WHEN CONSORTIUMS GO FROM 5 TO 3 BECAUSE OF ACQUISITION AND WE END UP IN DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN THREE YOU KNOW OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS IT DOESN'T FEEL I KNOW CONSORTIUMS ARE TECHNICALLY TWO OR MORE BUT IT DOESN'T FEEL LIKE MUCH OF CONSORTIUM AT THE MOMENT IN THAT REGARD. ALL THAT HAVING BEEN SAID NEGOTIATING WITH THEM SEEMS LIKE WE CAN GET SOME DECENT TERMS. I DO LIKE THE RATE STRUCTURE AS WE'VE ALREADY DISCUSSED AND EVERYTHING AND I THINK IT'S FOR OUR CUSTOMERS. I'M A LITTLE BIT OF A DIFFERENT THAN MAYBE SOME OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS REGARDING OUR INVOLVEMENT AS A AS A CITY IN THE CUSTOMER SERVICE ASPECT WE ARE CHARGING OUR RESIDENTS ON A BLOOMINGTON PAPER. WE ARE CHARGING THEM AS THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON'S UTILITY DEPARTMENT AND I THINK WE HAVE TO BE THE FIRST CALL PERSON TO QUESTIONS ON OUR BILL. THAT'S JUST LIKE HOW IT'S DONE GENERALLY WE DON'T I DON'T CARE. I KNOW THAT KNITTING PICKS UP MY GARBAGE BUT OUR REPUBLIC PICKS UP MY GARBAGE BUT I DON'T HAVE A RELATIONSHIP REPUBLIC AS A RESIDENT. RIGHT? SO I'M GOING TO CALL THE PERSON THAT'S BILLING ME WHO HAS THE RELATIONSHIP WITH ME FOR SO I WOULD BE I WOULD ADVISE AGAINST TRYING TO OUTSOURCE I MEAN NOT OUTSOURCE IN THE SENSE OF LIKE HAVE CONTRACTORS DO IT. IF WE WANTED TO SAY HEY WE CAN SAVE MONEY BY HAVING AN OUTSOURCED CUSTOMER SERVICE DEPARTMENT THAT'S FINE. THEY STILL SHOULD ANSWER THE PHONE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON. MY OPINION IS WHERE I'M GOING WITH THAT. THANK YOU. YES. AND MAYOR DALLESSANDRO, I'M NOT SURE WHERE THAT CONFUSION CAME FROM BUT WE ARE NOT SUGGESTING RELINQUISHING THE CUSTOMER SERVICE ALL OR WE SEE GREAT BENEFIT AS YOU'VE MENTIONED IN THE CITY BEING KIND OF ON THE FRONT LINES. MAKE SURE WE HAVE A GOOD GAUGE ON SERVICE SO WE CAN BETTER CONTROL THAT. SO IT WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE KEEP THE CUSTOMER SERVICE IN OUR CONTRACT. THE RESIDENTS CAN CALL THE HAULER OR THE CITY DIRECTLY BUT ALL OF OUR KIND ADVERTISEMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS TO RESIDENTS ARE TO CALL THE CITY FOR CUSTOMER SERVICE ISSUES. COUNCILMEMBER NELSON THANKS MARIA. JUST TRYING TO KEEP US HERE TONIGHT FOR YOU DON'T NEED YOU. THAT'S FINE. THE ONLY THING I WOULD SAY IN BALANCE I THINK IT MAKES SENSE FOR US TO MAINTAIN THE SERVICE INSIDE THE CITY STAFF. BUT I WOULD NOTE THAT YOU I PAY XCEL ENERGY AND THEY PAY SOMEBODY GAS. I FORGET WHO SAID HER POINT. YEAH IT'S JUST PAYMENT THERE SO BUT YOU KNOW IT YOU KNOW THERE IS A WAY THAT THAT CAN BE DONE BUT I DON'T THINK YOU CAN SEPARATE COUNCILMEMBER DALLESSANDRO IF THE BILL COMES FROM US WHERE WE'RE RESPONSIBLE AND I DON'T THINK WE CAN ABSOLUTELY SEPARATE AND I THINK KNOWING WHAT THE COSTS ARE AND THINGS LIKE THAT I IT'S A REASONABLE AMOUNT AND LIKE I SAID ON THE BALANCE I THINK RIGHT NOW I WOULD STILL LEAN TOWARDS KEEPING IT IN-HOUSE BUT THERE ANOTHER MODEL IF WE EVER WANTED TO LOOK AT THAT THAT ISN'T COMPLETELY REVOLUTIONARY OH SO COUNCILMEMBER RIVAS, AS SOON AS WE A DISCOUNT FROM THEM YOU KNOW, FOR DOING ALL THE CUSTOMER SERVICE WORK I GUESS WE COULD GET A BREAK FROM THEM AS A CITY DOLLAR IT'S ALL THE GAME NEGOTIATION ISN'T IT? IT. COUNCILMEMBER D'ALESSANDRO UNRELATED TO THE TO THIS QUESTION I HAD ONE OTHER ONE OTHER THING THAT HAS COME UP RESIDENT COMMUNICATIONS I'VE HAD OVER THE NUMBERS THAT I WANTED TO THROW OUT THERE WOULD WOULD THERE BE ANY INTEREST OR BENEFIT IN OTHER PEOPLE'S TO HAVING THE THE HAVING THE RESIDENTS OF THE COMMUNITY WEIGH IN ON WHAT THEY'D LIKE TO SEE AS IT RELATES TO CONTRACT LANGUAGE AND I DON'T MEAN SPECIFIC LIKE THE LEGALESE OF THE LANGUAGE BUT IN THE SENSE OF LIKE HAVING A CUSTOMER ADVISORY GROUP ON THIS PROCESS I'M I'M THROWING THAT OUT THERE BECAUSE I'VE HAD PEOPLE THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE IN THIS COMMUNITY WHO HAVE A VERY AN INTEREST IN HOW THE CONVERSATION GOES AROUND CONTRACTING GARBAGE AND ALL THIS KIND OF STUFF AND NOT NOT FOR OR AGAINST ORGANIZED OR WHATEVER IT'S JUST LIKE HEY LIKE ARE WE GETTING THE BEST DEAL AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT BENEFIT WOULD BENEFIT US TO HAVE A CONSUMER ADVISORY TYPE GROUP THAT THAT PROVIDES INPUT HERE BUT I WANTED TO THROW IT OUT THERE AS A THING. I DON'T THINK IT'S A TERRIBLE IDEA ALTHOUGH I WONDER WHAT WOULD WE HEAR THAT WE HAVEN'T HEARD ALREADY BECAUSE I MEAN WE'VE GOTTEN SOME GOOD FEEDBACK TRASH WHETHER IT'S THE DISSATISFACTION WHEN THERE'S MIS OR THE EVERY OTHER WEEK OF TRASH OR THE EVERY WEEK AND YOU KNOW THE WE'VE WE'VE BEEN DOING THAT FOR A WHILE TO TRY AND GET THE FEEDBACK AS TO THE TO THE WORK THAT'S BEING DONE AND I'M JUST ASKING YEAH I AGREE WITH I MEAN I DON'T KNOW THAT ANY OF THOSE FOLKS HAVE ACTUALLY SAT DOWN AND LOOKED AT THE CONTRACT AND THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY ADDITIONAL THING THAT THAT WOULD DO. BUT YOU KNOW, KIND OF LIKE WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO WHO HELP IN CERTAIN PLACES YOU HAVE CERTAIN SPECIFIC SKILL SETS WHATEVER IF WE WANTED TO BRING IN BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT OUR I DON'T KNOW WHAT OUR NEGOTIATION TEAM LOOKED LIKE IN 2019 OR BEFORE THAT. SO I'M JUST AN IDEA IF THERE'S PEOPLE WITH SOME SPECIFIC SKILL SET OR KNOWLEDGE IN IN THE WORLD OF OUR RESIDENT POPULATION THAT WE WOULD WANT TO HAVE AS AN ADVISOR TO THAT WOULD WE BE INTERESTED IN THAT? AND AGAIN THINK IT'S I DON'T THINK IT'S A TERRIBLE IDEA BUT THEN AGAIN I DON'T WANT TO I DON'T WANT TO MAKE IT I WANT A GUMMED UP, YOU KNOW, CROWDSOURCE NEGOTIATION. NO, NO, EXACTLY. EXACTLY. AGREED. YEAH. I'M ONLY BRINGING IT UP BECAUSE I'VE HEARD IT A COUPLE OF TIMES AND I'VE BEEN CURIOUS ABOUT PEOPLE'S THOUGHTS ON IT. YEAH I IF I COULD ADD A STAFF PERSPECTIVE THINK AS YOU MENTIONED YOU KNOW I THINK TYPICALLY A CITY WOULDN'T ENGAGE THE PUBLIC IN THE NUANCES OF CONTRACT TERMS MORE SO RELATED TO THE SERVICE THAT ARE OFFERED WHICH WE HAVE DONE IN SOME SURVEYS WE DID DO THE RECENT SURVEY IN 2024 OF OUR SOLID BASED SERVICES. SO I DO THINK THAT WE HAVE A A FAIRLY GOOD PULSE ON WHAT RESIDENTS WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN TERMS OF SERVICES OR SERVICES THAT THEY DON'T WANT THAT WE'RE KIND OF REQUIRED OBLIGATED TO PROVIDE BY LAW IF WE WERE TO HAVE AN ADVISORY GROUP OR GO DOWN THAT THAT ROAD YOU KNOW I WOULD ADVISE THAT THAT WOULD TAKE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TIME. I THINK IT WOULD IT WOULD REALLY REQUIRE SOME SIGNIFICANT EDUCATION TO THIS RESIDENT GROUP RELATED TO OUR CONTACT BACKGROUND ON OUR SERVICE SO THEY COULD BE GIVING GOOD PERSPECTIVE ON POSSIBLE CHANGES TO THE CONTRACT AND WE DO HAVE A TIMELINE THAT THAT WAS LAID OUT I THINK WE WENT THAT ROUTE I DON'T THINK WE WOULD HAVE BOTH THOSE OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO US TO NEGOTIATE AND DO THE RFP SO THAT'S SOMETHING TO CONSIDER . ANY OTHERS COUNCILMEMBER NELSON YEAH, JUST A QUICK ONE. WE TALKED ABOUT A NUMBER OF PROVISIONS OF THE CONTRACT I HAVE TO COUNCILMEMBER DALLESSANDRO POINT I HEARD FROM OTHER PEOPLE THAT HAD OTHER THINGS THAT THEY SHOULD BE CONSIDERED THAT I THINK ARE MAYBE NOT AS OF THE THINGS WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE. I MEAN IS IT ALL RIGHT IF WE JUST GET THOSE TO YOU, LAURA, AND DO IT THAT WAY AND SEE IF THERE'S STUFF WE CAN GET IN THERE? YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE ONES THAT I HAD WAS JUST IS IT POSSIBLE TO PAY A FEE F THEM TO COME ON A DIFFERENT DAY BECAUSE? I WAS OUT OF TOWN OR HEY IT WAS TOTALLY MY FAULT I MISSED IT BUT MY TRASH IS FULL YOU KNOW WHAT CAN I DO? WE HAD THE ISSUE RECENTLY WITH A MULTIDAY ELECTRICAL OUTAGE WHERE PEOPLE MAYBE HAD SIGNIFICANT AMOUNTS OF WASTE THAT THEY NEEDED TO GET RID OF . YOU KNOW WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE FOR THEM TO CALL AND SAY I'M JUST IN A BAD WAY? COULD YOU SWING BY TOTALLY WILLING TO PAY A FEE THAT SORT OF THING, YOU KNOW SO, I MEAN THAT'S APPROPRIATE TO GET TO YOU AGAIN. I DON'T THINK THERE'S A HUGE BIG PICTURE THINGS YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT NOW BUT MAYBE THAT COULD BE LOOKED AT. AND THEN TO COUNCILMEMBER DALLESSANDRO POINT, I THINK IN TERMS OF THE COMMUNITY THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE THAT'S WHY STAFF'S HERE. LET US KNOW YOUR THOUGHTS AND QUESTIONS ON THAT BECAUSE THAT HAS HELPED IN THE PAST. JUST A REMINDER I MEAN WE NOW HAVE SATURDAY COLLECTION IF THERE'S MRS. IN THE FAR WEST PART OF THE CITY BECAUSE THAT'S THE FRIDAY PICKUP IT USED TO BE LIKE WE'LL SEE A MONDAY AND THAT WAS NOT A SATISFACTORY ANSWER AND BECAUSE OF THAT FEEDBACK, YOU KNOW STAFF DID A REALLY NICE JOB OF GETTING THAT INTO THE LAST CONTRACT SO I GUESS I WOULD JUST ENCOURAGE AT THIS POINT PEOPLE CONTACT US OR STAFF VERY GOOD. ONE MORE LAST ONE. COUNCILMEMBER HIGHLIGHT AND I JUST WANT YOU TO COMMUNICATE TO THE HAULERS MUCH LITTLE KIDS APPRECIATE SEEING TRASH HAULERS MY STILL SIT AT THE KITCHEN TABLE EVERY WEDNESDAY MORNING TO WAIT FOR A TRASH HAULER AND SO THEY DO PLAY A BIG PART IN OUR COMMUNITY AND MANY APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT THEY DO ESPECIALLY MY YOUNG BOYS. WELL, THANK YOU. I'LL BE SURE TO PASS THAT ON TO AND THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER FOR ENDING IT ON A HIGH NOTE AND THANK YOU LAUREN WELL DONE AND LOOKING FORWARD AS THIS MOVES THROUGH THE PROCESS. THANK YOU MUCH . SO I GUESS ONE POINT IS ARE THERE ANY RECOMMENDED ACTION? OH, THAT'S RIGHT. WE DO NEED TO RECOMMEND THAT. THANK YOU FOR THANK YOU FOR THE REMINDER YOU ON ITEM 5.2 IT'S ON YOUR YOUR MOTION SHEET COUNCILMEMBER THE MOVE TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO BEGIN NEGOTIATIONS WITH HAULERS ON GENERAL CONTRACT TERMS PRESENTED THIS EVENING AND RETURN TO COUNCIL TO EXECUTE AN AMENDED CONTRACT. ADDITIONALLY IF NEGOTIATIONS ARE NOT BY DECEMBER OF 2024 AUTHORIZE STAFF TO RELEASE A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS AND RETURN TO COUNCIL TO EXECUTE A NEW CONTRACT FOR SERVICES MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER D'ALESSANDRO TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO BEGIN NEGOTIATIONS WITH HAULERS AS OUTLINED IN ITEM 5.2. NO FURTHER COUNCIL DISCUSSION ON THIS ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES SIX ZERO NOW THIS WERNER THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH AND THANK YOU FOR THANK YOU FOR REMINDING ME OF THAT I DO APPRECIATE IT. THANKS. HAVE A GOOD EVENING. LAST ITEM OF THE EVENING COUNCIL'S ITEM 5.3 OUR COUNCIL POLICY AND ISSUES UPDATE. I'LL START WITH A QUICK RECAP OF OUR CITY COUNCIL LISTENING SESSION FROM EARLIER EVENING. WE HEARD FROM 123456 FOLKS THIS EVENING WE HAD A WITH A FULL HOUSE LOT OF FOLKS WHO WANTED TO COME FORWARD. KIM FLOYD TALKED TO US ABOUT OUR ANIMAL SHELTER AND FIRST OF ALL WAS VERY COMPLIMENTARY OF OUR STAFF BUT THEN ALSO STRESSED THE NEED FOR IMPROVEMENTS AND ADDITIONAL RESOURCES TO MAKE THAT THE ANIMAL SHELTER A BETTER EXPERIENCE FOR BOTH THE ANIMALS AND FOR THE PEOPLE TAKING CARE OF THE ANIMALS. PAT VERN BARKER HAD CONTINUED CONCERNS ABOUT THE COMMUNITY CENTER AND THE SENIOR POSSIBILITIES THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE AT THE NEW COMMUNITY HEALTH AND WELLNESS AND WE HAD A GOOD DISCUSSION ABOUT PROGRAM AND RATE STRUCTURES AND A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT THINGS. SALLY ENNIS HAS CONTINUING CONCERNS ABOUT LIGHTING AT DORAL FAROOQ SHEILA BARRY SPOKE AGAIN ABOUT ALLEGATIONS OF HARASSMENT BY THE BLOOMINGTON POLICE DEPARTMENT. SHE THERE'S ONGOING INVESTIGATION AN ONGOING CASE THERE SO WE COULDN'T GET INTO A WHOLE LOT OF DETAIL AND QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS WITH HER. SHARON BILLINGS STOPPED BY TO SHOW APPRECIATION TO THE BLOOMINGTON CITY COUNCIL, THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICERS AND A VOLUNTEER GROUP CALLED FRIENDS AND ADVOCATES FOR ANIMALS AT THE BLOOMINGTON CONTROL. AND SHE SAID SHE IS A COMPANION ANIMAL AND WAS COMPLIMENTARY OF THE WORK THAT WAS BEING DONE THERE. BUT AGAIN ALSO SUGGESTED AND RECOMMENDED THAT WE LOOK AT ADDITIONAL RESOURCES TO GO TO OUR ANIMAL CONTROL CENTER AND . ROBERT COLEMAN HAD THE COMMENTS ABOUT TRAVIS TRANSIT SERVICE IN AND THE NETWORK NOW PROCESS UNDERWAY FROM FROM OUR METRO TRANSIT PARTNERS AND I KNOW THAT MR. FAROOQI IS MEETING WITH SOME OF OUR REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE MET COUNCIL AND WAS GOING TO FIND SOME ANSWERS REGARDING THE RESTORATION OF SOME TRANSIT SERVICE IN BLOOMINGTON THAT ACTUALLY WENT AWAY DURING THE PANDEMIC AND NOW WE'RE TRYING TO GET IT BACK BECAUSE I THINK WE ALL AGREED THAT OUR TRANSIT SERVICE IN BLOOMINGTON CERTAINLY COULD BE BETTER AND WE COULD DO A MUCH BETTER JOB OF GETTING PEOPLE POINT A TO POINT B. SO THAT IS A RECAP OF COUNCIL LISTENING SESSION FROM THIS EVENING. THE ONLY OTHER THING THAT I ADD AND YOU HEARD IT EARLIER TODAY OUR NATIONAL NIGHT OUT TOMORROW NIGHT AND I HOPE TO SEE IN THE COMMUNITY OUT AT PARTIES TOMORROW NIGHT AS I SAID WE'VE GOT ONE OF THE HIGHER PARTICIPATION RATES IN MINNESOTA AND AS ALWAYS JUST A GREAT TIME. IT REALLY IS A GOOD TIME TO GET TO KNOW YOUR NEIGHBORS REACQUAINT YOURSELF WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS, POLICE OFFICERS, FIREFIGHTERS, EMTS, OUR JUST THE FOLKS THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY. IT'S A GOOD EVENT AND LOOKING FORWARD TO IT TOMORROW NIGHT AND HOPEFULLY THE WEATHER'S GOING TO BE A LOT NICER THAN IT WAS THIS EVENING. SO MR. BRUIN, ANYTHING ADD THIS EVENING? THANK YOU MR. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS I MAY HAVE BEEN PEEKING AT THE WEATHER APP AND IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE IT'S GOING TO BE 77 AND SUNNY ALL DAY TOMORROW. NOT THAT I'M A METEOROLOGIST AND I'M NOT PROMISING THAT I WANTED TO JUST HIGHLIGHT ONE THING, MR. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THERE WAS A NOTE IN YOUR YOUR WEEKLY REPORT ABOUT THIS THIS IS GOOD KUDOS FOR OUR STAFF IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE WHO WORK OUR PASSPORTS. WE ARE PERIODICALLY REVIEWED BY THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE FOR THE WORK THAT WE DO RELATED TO PASSPORTS IN THE LAST 6 TO 8 MONTHS OUR STAFF HAS PROCESSED OVER 600 PASSPORTS AND OUT OF THOSE ONLY 25 APPLICATIONS HAD VERY MINOR ISSUES. THE INSPECTOR SAID THE TOP CITIES HAVE AN ERROR RATE OF 6%. OUR ERROR RATE IN BLOOMINGTON WAS QUARTER OF THAT IT WAS ONLY ONE AND A HALF PERCENT WHICH HE HAD INDICATED TO US THE INSPECTOR DID TO OUR TEAM THAT HE WAS VERY IMPRESSED WITH OUR FOLKS AND SO I THIS FOR TWO REASONS ONE IS TO GIVE KUDOS TO OUR STAFF THAT THEY'RE EXCEPTIONAL GOOD AT WHAT THEY DO. AND TWO, IT'S TO REMIND PEOPLE THAT WE HAVE PASSPORT SERVICES HERE AT THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON. AND SO IT IS VERY EASY TO GET AN APPOINTMENT AND TO COME IN AND OUR STAFF PROCESSES THEM QUICKLY AND VERY ACCURATELY AND THE FEES THAT GO ALONG WITH IT COME BACK TO THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON. SO RATHER THAN GO SOMEWHERE ELSE WITH THEIR BUSINESS. KEEPING IT LOCAL IS ALWAYS GREAT SO THAT'S IT. THANK YOU MR. COUNCIL. ANY QUESTIONS OF ROONEY ON THAT? COUNCILMEMBER NELSON WHAT'S THE TURNAROUND TIME BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ON A PASSPORT NOW MR. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS I HAVEN'T SEEN MOST RECENTLY EARLIER THIS YEAR IT WAS PUSHING OUT TO 11 OR 12 WEEKS. SO IF I MAY, I GOT MEMORY BUT I GOT MINE IN FOUR WEEKS I PROCESS IT HERE IN THE CITY OF GOLD AND WAS THAT A RENEWAL OR IS THAT A NEW OC? SO I THINK FOR THE NEW PASSPORTS IS THE IS THE LONGER TIME PERIOD. BUT YOU KNOW COUNCILMEMBER CARTER I HAVE A OH ANY OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING PASSPORTS IF NOT MOVING ON COUNCILMEMBER CARTER PAGE YEAH. UM SO I WANTED TO BRING UP THE ISSUE OF THE FIBER OPTICS CONTRACTORS AND SUBCONTRACTORS IN BLOOMINGTON. I KNOW THAT WE'VE BEEN HEARING ABOUT CONCERNS AND ISSUES AND PROBLEMS FOR MANY MONTHS NOW AND I MYSELF AM A FRUSTRATED WHO HAVE HAVE WHO HAS HAD DAMAGE DONE TO MY PROPERTY AS WELL AS MY NEIGHBORS AND MANY OTHER RESIDENTS IN THE COMMUNITY. AND I DO WANT TO START BY THANKING STAFF BECAUSE I KNOW THAT THEY'RE WORKING REALLY TO RESPOND TO RESIDENTS AND NOT JUST RESIDENTS BUT TO ISSUES THAT ARE ALSO OCCURRING DAMAGE THAT'S OCCURRING TO PUBLIC PRIVATE PUBLIC PROPERTY EXCUSE ME AND BASED ON I HAVE HEARD IT SEEMS LIKE THEY'RE DOING A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF DAMAGE . SO I KNOW THE STAFF IS RESPONDING. THEY'RE DOING A GOOD JOB OF RESPONDING AND I THINK THERE'S BEEN EFFORTS TO REALLY HOLD THE SUBCONTRACTORS ACCOUNTABLE ON THESE COMPANIES ACCOUNTABLE. BUT I JUST CAN'T HELP BUT FEEL LIKE THERE'S MORE THAT WE CAN BE DOING OR YOU KNOW, ANTICIPATING WHAT MIGHT BE COMING AND WHAT KIND OF POLICIES WE MIGHT WANT TO PUT IN PLACE AHEAD OF THOSE THINGS. SO I THINK THE CITY OF WOODBURY HAS PUT IN A POLICY REGULATES THE BOXES THAT CAN BE PLACED IN THE FRONT YARD. I THINK THERE ARE THE BOXES AND WITHOUT THAT I DON'T I MEAN I THINK IT'S KIND OF THE WILD WEST AND THEY CAN KIND OF DO WHATEVER THEY WANT AND I DON'T KNOW I THERE IS PART OF ME THAT THINKS THAT LIKE THERE HAS TO BE SOMETHING MORE LIKE WITH THE LEAGUE OF CITIES LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES WE'RE NOT THE ONLY COMMUNITY THAT IS EXPERIENCING THESE PROBLEMS AND MY IT'S SUPER FRUSTRATING WHEN THEY DAMAGE YOUR PROPERTY BUT FROM A COUNCILMEMBER PERSPECTIVE I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE LONG TERM COST TO THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON AND TO TAXPAYERS BECAUSE YOU KNOW ACTUALLY THE CITY MANAGER AND I WERE TALKING THE OTHER DAY I MEAN THERE'S BEEN SOME SHODDY REPAIRS TO INFRASTRUCTURE HERE THAT THEY HAVE DAMAGED. AND SO, YOU KNOW, IN FIVE, TEN YEARS WHEN IT'S US THAT HAVE TO PAY FOR FIXING THOSE THINGS, IT'S GOING TO BE A REALLY BIG PROBLEM AND. AGAIN, I KNOW WE'RE NOT THE ONLY CITY THAT'S DEALING WITH IT WHICH MAKES ME THINK THAT THERE COULD BE A LOT OF THERE'S A LOT OF POWER WHEN CITIES COME TOGETHER THAT ARE UPSET ABOUT SOMETHING SO IT'S GOING TO PUT IT OUT THERE AGAIN AND MAYBE IT'S JUST MAYBE WE REALLY CAN'T THAT MUCH BUT IT JUST FEELS LIKE WE CAN DO MORE FROM A POLICY PERSPECTIVE. MR. FERRARI MR. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS OUR STAFF IS WORKING TO TRY TO IMPROVE RIGHT AND YOU'RE RIGHT THIS IS A PROBLEM THAT A LOT OF CITIES ARE EXPERIENCING. WE ARE ADDING RESOURCES TO OUR TEAM SO THAT WE WE HAVE ADEQUATE I MEAN PART OF THE PROBLEM IS THAT THIS CAME ON SO QUICKLY THE ABILITY OF OUR STAFF TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY WERE MANAGING THOSE WITH THE EXISTING STAFF THAT WE HAD WAS PROBLEMATIC AND SO THERE'S BEEN A HUGE INFLUX OF RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT REVENUE WHICH WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TEMPORARY STAFFING OVER THOSE COUPLE OF YEARS THAT WE'RE EXPECTING SO THAT WE ARE ADEQUATELY STAFFED AND I KNOW WE'RE CONTINUING TO WORK TO TRY AND IMPROVE COMPLIANCE THE WITH THE PROVIDERS SO I'LL TALK TO OUR STAFF AND SEE IF WE CAN GET MORE A MORE RECENT UPDATE OF ACTIONS THAT ARE BEING TAKEN AND WE'LL CHECK IN WITH THE LEAGUE AND METRO CITIES AND SEE WHAT THEY'RE HEARING AS WELL. COUNCILMEMBER RIVAS SO A QUESTION WITH A TOTALLY DIFFERENT SUBJECT WHEN THE BOARD COMPANY COMES OVER AND CUTS YOUR TREES, WHO'S RESPONSIBLE FOR CLEAN UP? I MEAN THEY DON'T EVEN DO A GOOD JOB. SO CHARITY DO THEY JUST WRECK THE TREES AND THEN THEY JUST LEAVE EVERYTHING IN THEIR BUSH A DAVE RESPONSIBLE TO TAKE ALL THEIR STUFF OUT OR THE WHOLE HOMEOWNER AND I'M PRETTY SURE IT'S THE THE COMPANY THAT DO THE CUTTING IS RESPONSIBLE AND ULTIMATELY THE COMPANY THAT CONTRACTED WITH THE COMPANY THAT DID THE CUTTING IS ULTIMATELY I MADE IT HAPPEN AT HOME. XCEL ENERGY CAME OVER. THEY JUST WRECKED THE TREE AND THEN THEY LEFT EVERYTHING THERE. I ONLY PAID $160 A WEEK. JUST MY NEIGHBORS ACROSS THE STREET DO THAT KIND OF WORK BUT IT CAN BE A LOT MORE EXPENSIVE THAN THAT TO TAKE A HALF TREE AND YOU KNOW, AND REMOVE IT. BUT SO IT IS TO THE COMPANY. MR. VERBRUGGE WAS THERE TALKING AT THE SCHOOL THERE OR MR. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS WITH THE RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT THE CONTRACTORS ARE REQUIRED TO RESTORE TO THE CONDITION YOU KNOW THEY HAVE TO REPAIR EVERYTHING THEY'VE DONE RIGHT AND THAT INCLUDES LIKE REPLACING SOD AND IF THERE'S DAMAGE TO CONCRETE OR YOU KNOW OTHER THINGS THAT ARE IN THERE AND YES, THEY HAVEN'T NECESSARILY FOLLOWED THROUGH IN TERMS OF THE QUALITY OF THOSE REPAIRS BUT THE EXPECTATION WOULD BE THEY THE CONDITION OR THEY LEAVE THE PROPERTY IN THE CONDITION THAT THEY FOUND IT RIGHT COUNCIL ADDITIONAL ITEMS TO BRING TONIGHT SEEING NO HANDS UP WE ARE COMPLETED WITH OUR AGENDA AND THE COUNCIL I WOULD LOOK FOR A MOTION TO ADJOURN SO A MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER CARTER SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER RIVAS TO ADJOURN THIS EVENING NO FURTHER COUNCIL DISCUSSION ALL IN FAVOR PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING I OPPOSE THE MOTION CARRIES ZERO THANKS FOR THE DISCUSSION TONIGHT COUNCIL THANK YOU TO STAFF FOR YOUR WORK AND THANKS TO EVERYBODY WHO HAS STUCK IT OUT WITH US WATCHING OR ATTENDING THIS EVENING EVERYBODY HAVE A VERY GOOD TUESDAY ENJOY NATIONAL NIGHT