►
From YouTube: August 8, 2022 Bloomington City Council Meeting
Description
August 8, 2022 Bloomington Minnesota City Council Meeting
0:00:00 Start
0:00:35 1 Approval of Agenda
0:02:02 2.1 Update on the Sale of GO PIR Fund Bonds of 2022, Series 56
0:09:31 Consent Business
0:13:44 3.1 Resolution to Accept Donations
3.2 Review and Ratify the 2023 Fire Pension Contribution
3.3 2022-2023 Insurance Renewals
3.4 Resolution for Budget Adjustment to Transfer Strategic Priorities Funds to Various Projects
3.5 Riverview Corridor Staffing Updates
3.6 Resolution Accepting UASI Grant Funds and Making Related Budget Adjustment
0:10:34 3.7 Penn Lake CityHomes - Change in Condition Resolution
3.8 Approve New Settlement Agreement for Parcel 4 of Xerxes/OSR Project
3.9 Type III Subdivision - MVCC Loskota Addition
3.10 Maintenance Agreement with Nine Mile Creek Watershed District for Skriebakken Pond/Harrison Road
3.11 Resolution: HRA Board Legislation
3.12 Resolution Supporting the Application and Participation in the University of Minnesota Resilient Communities Project Program
3.13 Resolution to Accept Maternal and Child Health Grant Funds from the Minnesota Department of Health
3.14 Aire Apartments - Major Revision to Final Development Plans
3.15 Park N Fly Remote Airport Parking IUP
3.16 Resolution to Award Old Shakopee Road (CSAH 1) & Xerxes Avenue Intersection Improvement Project (2022-201)
3.17 Adopt a Resolution accepting a Permanent Public Sidewalk and Bikeway Easement at 8200 Humboldt Avenue South
3.18 Authorization to Enter into 2022-2023 Collective Bargaining Agreement with Law Enforcement Labor Services (LELS) Bloomington Police Supervisors
3.19 Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes
0:15:02 4.1 Resolution Regarding Ballot Language Relating to the Petition for a Charter Amendment
0:47:56 4.2 Public Hearing: Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Ordinance Amendment
1:24:42 4.3 Resolution: Request for alternate sale process for City-owned RALF properties
2:08:32 5.1 HRA Assessment
2:54:06 5.2 City Council Policy & Issue Update
A
A
A
Thank
you
all
once
again
welcome
to
everyone.
First
order
of
business
tonight
is
approving
our
agenda
and
just
looking
at
our
agenda,
we've
got.
We
have
introductory
items
where
we're
going
to
talk
about
the
sale
of
general
obligation,
fund
bonds
and
just
to
preview
things.
It's
very
good
news
on
the
sale
of
the
bonds
today.
So
that's
very
good.
Our
consent
business,
which
council
member
d'alessandro
has
this
evening
is
19
items,
so
you're
ready,
very
good,
very
good
hearings,
resolutions
and
ordinances
item.
4.1
is
the
resolution.
A
I
think
everybody
is
here
for
regarding
ballot
language
related
to
the
petition
for
a
charter
amendment
regarding
rank
choice.
Voting
I
do
want
to
point
out
and
clarify
to
everyone:
that's
not
a
public
hearing.
This
is
it's
a
it's
a
discussion
among
us
and
we'll
we'll
be
making
we'll
be
making
our
decision
based
off
of
the
staff
presentation
and
the
discussion
among
us.
A
A
A
B
B
Pir
stands
for
permanent
improvement
revolving
fund,
and
these
are
special
bonds
that
are
specifically
for
our
road
improvements
that
have
special
assessments
attached
with
them.
So
the
type
of
bond
is
a
special
assessment,
and
for
this
one
we
approached
the
city
council
back
in
july
early
july
to
sell
bonds
for
both
the
22
projects
and
the
23
to
try
and
save
interest
over
the
as
we,
both
everyone
in
the
room
probably
sees
interest
rate
climbing.
B
At
that
time
we
did
a
set
sale
amount
of
14
million
100
000,
depending
on
where
the
market
stood.
The
amount
of
principal
that
we
went
into
the
market
with
this
morning
was
13
million
950
000,
and
with
the
premium
that
we
received
on
the
bonds,
we
were
able
to
bring
that
principal
down
to
11
million
875
000.
So
a
really
good
day
in
the
market.
With
that.
B
B
B
We
also
have
a
strong
tax
base
and
there's
been
revenue
growth
over
the
last
several
years.
They
also
commented
that
we
have
sophisticated
financial
planning.
They
look
at
our
budgets.
They
look
at
how
we
do
the
financial
planning,
they
look
at
our
strategic
priorities
and
then
they
look
at
our
track
record
of
healthy
reserves.
So
we
try
to
keep
our
conservative
budgets
and
make
sure
that
our
reserves
are
there
to
cover
resiliency
and
should
something
bad
happen.
We
have
reserves
to
take
care
of
us
under
moody's.
Again.
B
B
Again
we
have
a
wonderful
power
amount
of
118.75
and
we
broke
it
into
the
amounts
for
22
and
23
so
that
we
can
track
both
of
those
in
the
23
one.
We
want
to
make
sure
for
all
of
the
arbitrage
and
post
issuance
compliance
rules
that
we're
adhering
to
those
and
then
the
parameters
resolution.
The
council,
approved
back
in
july,
gave
authority
to
the
mayor,
the
city
manager
myself,
to
approve
the
little
better.
B
B
Tilly
has
not
seen
11
bidders
on
an
item
in
over
a
year
and
so
because
of
the
size
and
we're
at
aaa
city,
and
we
have
strong
credit
profile,
we
got
11
bidders
today
and
they
really
sharpen
their
pencils,
so
a
strong
premium
reduction
and
an
interest
rate
of
2.27
so
really
good
day
in
the
market,
and
that
was
just
informational,
update
for
council,
the
mayor
and
the
city
manager-
and
I
approved
it
earlier
today.
So
thank
you.
A
B
Mayor
and
city
council
know
even
last
year
with
the
bonds
that
were
about
half
the
size
for
the
payment
management
program.
That
premium
was
right
around
600
000
and
that
was
very
high,
then
so
again
being
in
the
market
and
where
the
bonds
need
to
be
sized
and
where
the
interest
rate,
where
the
people
that
buy
our
bonds
needed
it
to
be
sold.
We
had
a
great
premium.
A
A
D
Thank
you,
mr
mayor.
I
would
have
clapped
for
that.
I'm
just
saying
I
love
saving
three
million
dollars.
Absolutely
okay,
so
we
have
our
consent
agenda,
as
you
mentioned
is
19
items
I
have
only
two
holds
so
far:
3.1
our
donation
acceptance
and
then
I
know
I
wanted
to
hold,
and
I
think
at
least
one
other
council
member
wanted
to
also
hold
3.7.
So
is
there
anybody
else
I'll?
Take
those?
D
A
D
Okay,
great
yeah,
so
I'm
I'm
holding
this
just
because
I
wanted
to
make
sure
people
were
aware
of
it.
We
it's
on
the
consent
agenda,
as
I
understand,
because
there's
no
action
for
us
to
do
other
than
approve
what
we've
already
discussed
a
a
long
time
is
that
correct,
okay,
yeah!
I
want
to.
I
think
that
everybody
who
is
within
500
feet
of
the
the
property
did
get
their
notices
about
this
right,
full
letters.
I
know
I've
received
a
couple
of
comments
on
it
as
well.
D
E
A
D
I'll
move
the
item
3.7
then,
which
I
guess
I
should
read
this
one,
as
required
by
court
order
in
case
pl,
two
zero.
Two
one
dash
five
zero
to
adopt
a
resolution
approving
a
change
in
condition
of
approval
number,
seven
in
case
number,
pl
2020-133,
to
allow
an
emergency
exit
only
secondary
access
to
penn
avenue
south
for
a
15
unit,
town
home
development,
subject
of
the
conditions
listed
in
the
resolution.
Second,.
A
Motion
by
council
member
alessandro
seconded
by
councilmember
lowman
to
excite
accept
item
3.7
on
our
consent,
business.
No
further
council
discussion
on
this.
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
opposed
motion,
carries
7-0.
Let's
double
back
time,
3.1
our
resolution
to
accept
donations,
councilmember
dallas.
D
Thank
you,
mr
mayor,
just
wanted
to
acknowledge
once
again
the
kind
people
of
bloomington
they
never
fail
to
do
all
good
things
to
support
us.
We've
got
a
couple
of
donations
here
for
our
upcoming
bloomington
pride
celebration
from
transfiguration,
lutheran
church
and
also
nine
mile
brewing.
So
thank
you
to
them
and
in
addition
to
that,
we
have
wonderful
donations
on
behalf
of
the
very
youngest
amongst
us,
bundles
of
love
and
amanda
lemke,
providing
some
much
needed
items
to
the
public
health
department.
D
G
A
A
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye,
aye,
aye
aye
opposed
motion,
carries
7-0
moving
on
to
item
4.1,
the
resolution
regarding
ballot
language
related
to
the
petition
for
a
charter
amendment-
and
we
first
took
this
up
a
couple
of
weeks
ago
when
we
accepted
the
certificate
of
what
is
it
called
certificate
of
sufficiency
from
our
city
clerk,
and
we
said
we
would
hold
off
because
we
needed
a
bit
more
information
regarding
the
language
on
this
and
mrs
manderscheid.
You've
got
a
recommendation
for
us.
F
F
So
this
is
a
highlight
of
the
timeline
that
we
have
been
engaged
in
since
the
beginning
or
since
mid-june.
We
are
now
at
the
last
bullet
point,
which
is
the
council's
consideration
of
the
ballot
language.
As
the
mayor
mentioned
previously,
the
council
acted
last
month
a
few
weeks
ago
to
accept
the
clerk's
certificate
of
sufficiency
and
adopted
a
resolution.
Pursuant
to
that,
we
are
now
at
august
8th
and
there
is
a
resolution
for
your
consideration
in
the
packet
and
so
next
slide.
Please
again,
just
as
a
brief
reminder.
F
F
That
particular
legislative
manner
is
set
forth.
In
section
410.12
of
the
state
statutes,
it
specifically
states
that
amendments
can
be
submitted
to
the
voters
at
either
a
general
or
a
special
election
and
then
goes
on
to
state
in
that
same
subdivision
that
the
threshold
for
acting
on
such
a
charter
amendment
is
51
of
the
votes
cast
on
the
amendment.
This
is
particularly
noteworthy
in
that
there
are
other
provisions
in
the
charter
chapter
that
discuss
other
voting
thresholds.
For
example,
you
may
remember
back
when
we
voted
on
tap
rooms
that
required
a
55
threshold.
F
There
was
other
language
in
other
parts
of
the
state
statutes
that
talk
about
other
thresholds,
so
in
other
relevant
sections.
The
cities
are
only
authorized
to
put
questions
on
the
ballot
when
we
have
a
legal
authority
to
do
so.
We
can't
just
put
a
question
on
the
ballot.
There
has
to
be
authorization
in
state
statute.
For
us
to
do
so,
and
in
this
case,
state
law
says
that
you
can
only
amend
your
charter
by
one
of
the
ways
set
forth
in
410.12
and
when
doing
so
by
election,
it's
a
51
threshold.
F
Because
we
were
concerned
that
the
case
law
indicates
that
we
cannot
put
a
question
on
the
ballot
if
it's
unconstitutional,
inconsistent
or
preempted
by
state
law
or
otherwise
inconsistent
with
public
policy?
There
are
a
lot
of
cases
on
this
and
we
were
concerned
that
we
were.
We
wanted
to
act
and
we
wanted
to
make
a
recommendation
to
you
in
a
manner
that
was
consistent
with
state
law.
F
This
was
consistent
with
a
previous
opinion
that
was
also
included
in
your
materials
for
the
agenda
item
tonight,
which
I
believe
is
a
city
of
chisholm
opinion,
which
talked
about
a
somewhat
similar
scenario
in
the
attorney
general's
opinion
is
consistent
with
its
previous
opinion
in
chisholm
next
slide.
Please.
F
So
here
tonight
it
is
our
recommendation
from
the
city
attorney's
office
that
you
decline
to
put
ballot
language
on
the
upcoming
ballot.
We
believe
that
the
proposed
language
and
the
petition
is
unconstitutional
and
inconsistent
and
in
conflict
with
the
constitutional
requirement,
as
well
as
the
state
statutes
that
I
briefly
mentioned.
F
F
A
F
Mayor
members,
the
petition
language
was
not
reviewed,
was
not
submitted
to
me
for
my
review.
It
is
not
required
that
I
approve
it,
but
it
was
not
submitted
to
me
for
review.
I
will.
I
will
note
that
when
I
did
receive
it,
our
office
immediately
flagged
that
language
as
something
we
wanted
to
look
into.
Given
our
past
research
on
on
previous
and
related
items,.
A
I
yeah
that's
better
now
I
think
so
I
I
did
want
to
point
out.
The
city
has
has
meticulously
followed
the
steps
necessary
on
this
from
june
21st
when
the
city
clerk
first
received
this
petition
to
the
july
7th
special
meeting
of
the
charter
commission
to
july
13th,
when
the
clerk
issued
the
certificate
of
sufficiency
and
then
on,
I
think
it
was
july
18th
when
we
said
yes,
it
was
sufficient.
A
We
have
very
carefully
and
thoroughly
gone
through
all
the
specific
steps,
as
prescribed
by
minnesota
state
law,
about
how
to
do
this
kind
of
thing,
and
I
think
we
we
did
it
because
we
knew
full
well
that
if
we
didn't
do
it
that
way,
if
we
didn't
do
it
correctly,
we're
going
to
get
called
out
on
it
and
rightfully
so
because
we
needed
to
follow.
All
of
that.
A
When
we
accepted
this
certificate
of
sufficiency
back
in
july
18th,
we
said
flat
out
and
heard
flat
out
from
the
the
attorney
that
there
were
concerns
and
questions
about
the
legality
of
the
language.
For
this
petition
and
the
language
requiring
two-thirds
voter
approval
for
a
ballot
amendment,
I
would
be
in
direct
conflict
with
state
law.
Direct
conflict
which
says
51
is
what's
required
for
a
ballot
question
and
council.
I
think
it
would
be
terribly
irresponsible
of
us
to
approve
this
petition
tonight
and
move
forward
with
this.
A
A
The
the
group
that
submitted
the
petition
in
the
first
place
could
rewrite
the
petition
correctly.
This
time
get
the
number
of
of
some
signatures
as
needed
and
submit
it
again,
and
then
a
special
election
could
be
considered
in
the
spring
or
we
could
be
looking
at
it
done
on
the
ballot
next
november.
So
frankly,
the
council.
I
think
this
is
pretty
cut
and
dried.
I
think
ms
manderscheid
laid
it
out
very
clearly.
H
Yeah
thank
you
mayor,
and
I
appreciate
the
way
you
talked
to
that
and
just
want
to
clarify.
So
the
concerns
about
the
legality
of
that
provision
were
brought
up
at
the
charter
commission
and
at
the
council
publicly
for
people
to
understand
that
there
were
concerns
about
that.
That's
right,
so
there's
been
notice
to
people.
This
isn't
the
first
time
they're
hearing
that
there's
a
concern
is
that
accurate.
F
H
7Th,
I
think,
and
so
then
my
other
question
is
given
that
there
was
advanced
notice
of
that
have
we
received
any
contrary
opinion
has
an
attorney
representing
the
people
brought
forth
a
contrary
opinion
with
a
set
of
legal
facts
president
or
anything
like
that
for
us
to
consider
and
or
is
there
anything
you
know
I
don't
know
we're
not
a
public
hearing,
but
you
know
is.
There
is
our
contrary,
opinion
to
what
we've
received
both
independently
through
the
attorney
general's
office
and
with
our
staff.
H
Okay,
that's
the
only
thing
I'd
further
ask
mayor
is
if,
if
and
I
don't
want
to
open
a
public
hearing-
and
I
know
we're
not
doing
that-
but
if
anyone
has
that
information
of
a
contrary
legal
opinion,
like
of
you,
know
that
that
should
be
considered
by
this
council.
You
know
I'd
like
to
see
it.
It
seems
like
we
don't
have
that,
and
even
though
there
was
notice
that
this
was
a
concern
you
know,
so
I
guess
I
tend
to
agree
with
absent
somebody
with
a
different
legal
opinion.
A
No
council
member,
I
would
agree
with
you,
and
I
would
agree
that,
since
this
has
been
this
was
flagged
as
of
the
january,
the
july
7th
meeting
that
this
could
be
an
issue
there.
I
believe
there
would
have
been
ample
time.
There's
been
ample
notice
that
there
are
these
legal
concerns
coming
forward.
A
We
announced
when
we
approved
the
certificate
of
sufficiency,
that
we
were
going
to
be
seeking
an
opinion
from
the
attorney
general's
office
regarding
this,
and
so
I
appreciate
your
thoughts
on
this
and
appreciate
the
the
the
outreach
or
the
possible
outreach,
but
I
don't.
I
don't
see
a
perry
mason
moment
here
where
somebody's
going
to
come
forward
and
say
here
it
is
so
council,
member
loman.
I
Thank
you
mayor.
I
think
you've
laid
it
out
quite
well,
and
I
I
you
know
when
we
brought
this
forward.
I
had
my
concerns
about
4.08.
Initially
I
do
have
some
questions
impossible
motion
here.
I
do
not
support
the
way
that
this
is
written
mayor.
I
think
you've
made
that
clear
and
I
will
not
support
the
way
this
is
written
for
legal
reasons.
F
J
I
I
There
was
a
question
here
by
both
myself
and
councilmember
nelson.
Can
the
city
by
unanimous
vote
put
a
question
on
the
ballot?
Can
we
offer
basic
language
but
fix
the
two-thirds
majority
for
a
51
percent
state
law?
That's
what
I
got
from
staff.
So
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
I
understand
that
and
then
I've
got
a
sub
five
amendment
proposed
by
council
on
the
process
by
which
to
do
that.
Is
that
inaccurate,
or
so.
F
F
I
Long
story
short
it'd
be
impossible
for
this
body
to
adjust
it
today
and
put
it
on
the
general
election,
avoiding
a
special
election
or
a
possible
primary
election,
the
cost
of
the
city.
That's
my
my
biggest
concern.
So
what
I'm
hearing
is
it'd
be
impossible
for
that,
even
if
we
did
that
today
to
to
to
get
it
on
the
general
election.
F
Mayor
members,
the
I
believe
it
would
be
given
the
timing
requirements
in
state
law,
as
well
as
the
requirements
for
pulling
together
the
charter
commission
in
the
notice
to
the
charter.
Commission,
that's
required
by
its
rules,
which
is
10
days
as
well
as
the
some
of
these
notice
requirements.
I
think
it
would
be
very
difficult
to
pull
that
together.
F
The
other
concern
that
I
have
is
that
we
typically
spend
a
a
great
deal
of
time,
pulling
together
those
amendments
and
talking
through
and
researching
all
of
the
elements
and
the
ramifications
of
them,
and
we
wouldn't
have
the
opportunity
to
do
that,
given
if
you
were
asking
us
to
do
it
in
this
very
short
time
frame
and
simply
just
removing
that
one
part
of
it.
So
I
would
have
hesitation
from
a
from
so.
I
F
A
G
Mr
mayor
and
council
members,
I
was
just
gonna:
try
to
elucidate
the
the
timeline.
As
I
understand,
what
the
city
attorney
is
laid
out
is
that
the
council
has
to
propose
by
ordinance
this
recommendation,
that's
going
to
the
charter
commission
and
for
us
to
do
that.
There's
a
public
notification,
public
notice
process
and
then,
once
the
charter
commission
gets
it,
they
have
up
to
60
days
and
they
can
extend
by
another
30
days.
G
So
they
can
take
up
to
90
days
to
consider
what
has
been
forwarded
by
the
city
council
and
then,
when
it
comes
back
from
them,
then
we
have
additional
process
as
well.
So
the
timeline
for
the
november
ballot
is
that
we
have
to
have
all
all
ballot
language
to
the
county
by
the
end
of
this
month,
a
little
bit
a
couple
days
earlier,
actually
august
26th.
So
there
there
is
no
way
to
accommodate
that
timeline.
G
And
if
I
may
just
one
more
just
to
reiterate-
and
I
think
you-
you
clarified
this
council
member
and
I
think
it
was
covered
before-
but
I
just
want
to
reiterate-
the
council
does
not
have
the
authority
to
change
the
petition
that
is
presented
in
front
of
them.
So
even
if
a
council
was
amenable
to
correcting
the
two
thirds
and
just
setting
it
as
51
to
move
forward,
you
cannot
do
that
because
it
cannot
be
presumed
that
every
person
who
signed
that
petition
would
be
agreeable
to
that
change.
I
E
F
Mayor
members,
I'll
defer
to
chris
to
the
city
clerk
on
the
specifics,
but
state
law
indicates
that
proposed
charter.
Amendments
must
be
submitted
at
least
17
weeks
before
the
general
election
and
then
there's
additional
language
related
to
the
election
on
the
form
and
that
sort
of
thing
in
a
subsequent
subsection.
J
Mere
members
of
the
council
I'd
need
to
do
a
little
bit
more
research
to
answer
with
a
hundred
percent
certainty,
but
I
believe
if
they
could
make
the
deadlines
that
are
set
forth
in
statute
based
on.
There
are
five
election
dates
set
in
law
and
when
a
city
can
hold
an
election,
and
so
if
they
meet
the
deadline
for
one
of
those
states,
that
would
be
a
special
election
date
where
we're
not
typically
meeting
or
holding
an
election.
I
believe
we
would
need
to
hold
the
election
on
that
date.
Okay,.
E
Okay,
thank
you.
That's
that's
helpful
to
know
I
just
really
just
kind
of
want
to
make
sure
I'm
I'm
understanding
sort
of
the
the
train
of
thought
when
it
comes
to
the
law
on
this,
because
I
I
look
it
up
and
the
state
constitution
says
amendments
to
city
charters
may
be
proposed
and
adopted
in
any
other
manner
provided
by
law
and
then
in
the
attorney
general's
opinion.
E
They
reference
a
state
supreme
court
ruling
that
holds
at
this
the
constitution
by
that
language,
essentially,
author,
it
says
authorizes
a
legislature
to
fix
the
percentage
of
votes
required
to
carry
amendments
to
a
city
charter,
so
just
to
make
sure
I'm
sort
of
tracking
this
all
correctly
between
that
article,
12
of
the
state
constitution-
and
I
just
bumped
the
page
that
case
ruling.
Essentially
the
the
law
states
that
the
legislature
and
the
legislature
alone
is
responsible
for
setting
the
percentage
by
which
charter
amendments
can
be
deemed
to
have
passed.
Am
I
correct
in
understanding
that.
E
You,
and,
and
just
to
clarify
you
you
referenced
this
previously,
but
when
we
passed
the
brewery
and
taproom
amendment
that
required
55
and
you
referenced
other
sort
of
various
requirements
that
that
raised
that
threshold,
but
those
are
all
very
specific
circumstances
in
state
law.
It
says
you
know,
essentially
an
amendment
question
related
to
this.
Certain
thing
must
pass
with
this
certain
threshold,
so
there's
not
there's
not
any
allowance
in
state
law
for
sort
of
arbitrarily
raising,
raising
or
lowering
that
threshold,
depending
on
what
petitioners
may
want.
F
Correct
mayor
members
and-
and
it's
noteworthy
that
this
particular
51
percent
was
actually
previously
amended
by
the
legislature
when,
as
initially
drafted,
it
was
55
and
in
subsequent
years
I
believe
it
was
in
the
60s-
they
amended
it
to
51.
So
it
was
a
very
intentional
choice
by
the
legislature
to
set
this
threshold.
E
I'm
not
a
lawyer,
but
I
I
it
certainly
sounds
to
me
like
it
would
be
illegal
to
put
this
question
on
the
ballot,
and
you
know
I
I
think
there
may
be
something
to
be
said
for
having
a
higher
threshold
to
approve
city
charter
amendments.
It
is
our
city's
sort
of
constitution.
I
personally
think
there
should
be
a
higher
threshold
to
pass
state
constitutional
amendments
as
well,
but
that's
a
a
battle
for
a
different
day.
E
F
I
F
May
remember:
the
attorney
general
issues
has
the
authorization
jurisdiction
to
issue
advisory
opinions
to
cities,
and
we
have
on
occasion
sought
counsel
from
the
attorney
general
on
issues
of
statutory
interpretation.
We
have
also,
in
the
past,
sought
guidance
when
the
there
are
questions
about
how
to
interpret
a
statute.
H
F
H
A
It
does
say
that
now,
therefore
be
resolved
by
the
city
council
of
the
city
of
bloomington,
minnesota
that,
based
on
the
foregoing,
recitals
that
are
incorporated
and
restated
by
reference
number
one.
The
petition
is
rejected
as
manifestly
unconstitutional
and
inconsistent
and
in
conflict
with
the
minnesota
constitution
and
minnesota
statutes
and
number
two.
A
question
for
the
petition
cannot
be
placed
on
the
november
20
2022
general
election
ballot
and
number
three.
A
The
city
clerk
is
directed
to
retain
this
resolution,
along
with
the
petition
as
an
official
record
of
the
city
of
bloomington
and
finally,
number
four
city
staff
are
authorized
and
directed
to
take
all
necessary
and
appropriate
steps
to
carry
out
the
intent
of
this
resolution.
Second,
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
on
the
languages
stated
any
further
council
discussion
on
this.
A
A
Thank
you
to
our
legal
staff
for
their
work
on
this.
Thank
you
to
our
city
clerk
thanks
to
the
folks
for
bringing
it
forward
and
for
being
here
with
us
tonight,
and-
and
I
hope
there
is
the
understanding
how
this
is
moving
and
and
why
it's
not
moving
forward.
Very
simply
so,
thanks
for
being
here
with
us,
we
will
move
on
to
item
4.2
in
our
agenda.
This
is
a
public
hearing
tonight.
A
A
A
I
don't
take
this
personally,
I
that
they
all
left-
I
mean
that's,
I
wouldn't
take
this
personally
and
she
was
going
to
stick
around
the
other
two
are
leaving
as
well.
I'm
sorry,
but
welcome
good
to
good
to
have
you
in
front
of
us
for
the
first
time
and
looking
for
the
forward
to
the
presentation.
Thank.
K
Some
contrast
on
this
slide
simply
put
it's
adding
an
additional
dwelling
unit
or
living
space
on
a
property,
so
it
needs
to
be
on
the
same
lot
as
a
principal
dwelling
unit
or
a
main
home,
and
it
needs
to
provide
all
the
facilities
that
a
home
provides
cooking
sleeping
sanitary
and,
as
I
said,
it
needs
to
be
supported
into
that
main
home.
What
they
are
not,
and
I
set
this
distinction
on
purpose.
K
So,
if
you'd
like
to
inquire
further,
I'm
happy
to
to
discuss
it
is
that
they
are
not
tiny
homes
and
they're,
not
mobile
homes
and
visualize.
This
is
what
they
look
like.
There's
two
there's
essentially
two
adu
types:
there
are
those
that
are
attached
or
within
a
principal
home
or
they
are
separate
and,
as
you
can
see,
those
that
are
interior
or
attached
are
already
allowed
by
code.
K
K
There
are
several
key
changes.
I've
highlighted
them
on
this
slide.
The
one
I
think
we
ought
to
focus
on
is
the
detached
adus,
that's
the
most
significant,
but
there
are
several
changes
and
I'm
happy
to
go
into
those
details
if
you'd
like
so
with
detached
adus,
there
are
some
things
to
highlight
about
how
we
crafted
the
amendment
with
regard
to
those
detached
adus
height.
They
can't
exceed
the
height
of
the
primary
dwelling
unit
area
of
the
detached
adu
plus
it
doesn't
count
toward
the
maximum
accessory
structure
area
allowed
on
a
residential
property.
K
It
does
count
toward
the
number
of
accessory
structures.
So
right
now
that's
capped
at
two
detached
accessory
structures.
So
if
you
already
had
one
or
actually,
if
you
already
had
two
and
you
wanted
to
add
a
detached
accessory
structure,
you
wouldn't
be
allowed
by
code,
so
that
would
exceed
the
number
and
then
setbacks.
It
has
to
meet
all
the
setbacks
of
the
primary
dwelling
unit
nuisance,
subject
to
all
the
standards
applicable
to
single-family
dwellings.
So
that's
controlled
already
through
standards.
K
In
the
city
code
on
on
the
14th,
there
was
a
public
hearing
held
at
the
planning
commission
meeting.
There
was
no
public
testimony
received.
We
did
receive
one
email
from
an
adu
builder
and
I
believe
that
was
part
of
the
packet
where
the
this
particular
adu
builder
offered
some
suggested
revisions
to
the
draft
ordinance.
K
We
are
considering
some
of
them,
but
the
two
that
we
adopted
related
to
and
and
revise
the
ordinance
accordingly
or
just
had
to
deal
with
simplifying
the
application
process
again,
making
this
an
easier
process
for
those
that
are
interested
in
detached
or
just
adus.
In
general,
we
chose
to
hold
off
on
some
of
those
other
suggested
revisions
until
we
could
do
more
research
or
if
there
was
other
guidance
provided
by
a
council,
and
then
the
planning
commission
recommended
approval
7-0
at
that
public
hearing.
K
D
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
mr
mayor.
Why
doesn't
a
tiny
home
in
the
sense
of
a
its
structural
elements
qualify
as
a
legal
adu?
What
are
the
material
differences
between
them?
That
would
would
preclude
you
from
buying
a
tiny,
tiny
home
from
amazon,
because
apparently
you
can
do
that.
I
had
no
idea
and
just
putting
it
down
like
what
what's
the
what's,
the
requirement
there
or
the
difference.
K
Mayor
councilmember,
that's
a
good
question.
Yeah!
It's
it's
appropriate
to
highlight
those
distinctions.
I
have
some
images
up
here
on
the
left
is
a
tiny
home.
It's
it's
a
representative
example,
but
nonetheless,
their
staff's
understanding
is
that
they're,
usually
stereotypically
they're
on
wheels.
So
that
means
they're
mobile
they're,
not
hooked
up
to
utilities.
K
D
K
Mayor
council
member,
we
have
some
suggest
we
have
some
language
modifying
the
definition.
This
gets
into
the
definition
of
what
we're
considering
to
be
an
adu
now,
so
it's
being
changed
from
what
it
currently
is,
and
it's
also
being
made
consistent
throughout
code.
There
were
several
parts
where
the
definition
was
listed
and,
as
part
of
that
definition
update,
we
added
language
to
to
exclude
those
structures
that
are
on
a
chassis
or
that
are
mobile.
Essentially,
so
that
means,
if
you
know
they
can
be
picked
up
and
they
can
be
moved
granted.
H
Yeah.
Thank
you
mayor,
quick
question
with
regards
to.
There
was
a
note
about
rental
units,
and
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
that
this
does
not
in
any
way
change
short-term
rental,
housing
or
anything
like
that
in
the
city.
This
would
only
be
what's
currently
allowed
long-term
rental
type
units
is
that
accurate.
K
H
Okay
and
then
to
council
member
del
sandro's
thing
and
and
to
your
point
pretty
much
all
houses
are
movable.
There
are
house
movers,
it's
just
a
matter
of
how
much
effort
it
takes.
So
I
think
it
comes
down
to
the
affix
to
the
ground
portion
of
it.
From
my
from
my
experience
so
having
moved
one
house
before
so
it's
an
interesting.
I
K
I
It's
under
this
accessory
dwelling
units,
a
secondary
dwelling
unit,
is,
and
then
you
know
it
kind
of
goes
into
this
definition:
physical,
attach
or
within
a
single
family
dwelling
unit
and
then
b,
which
is
where
my
question
is
the
subordinates
and
size
to
the
single
family
dwelling
unit
and
then
goes
on
see
the
full
separated
from
the
single
family
dwelling.
It
goes
on
and
on
there,
but
I'm
just
curious
about
that
b.
I
K
K
Yeah,
certainly
mayor
councilmember,
I'm.
I
am
not
too
intimately
familiar
with
the
history
of
how
it
was
drafted
back
in
2009
that
might
have
that
might
have
complained
that
or
contained
that
provision
in
its
definition,
definitionally
it's
going
to
be
subordinate
in
size.
We
set
the
the
floor
area
of
the
accessory
dwelling
unit
to
be
33
percent
of
the.
So
when
you
total
it
all
together,
maybe
by
math
or
example-
I
can
I
I
can
clearly
illustrate
it.
K
I
Wanted
to
just
I,
I
just
wanted
to
understand
how
that
how
that
got
there?
How
did
we
do
and
so
we're
dealing
with
it
in
a
different
way,
and
so
I
just
wanted
to
understand
that,
of
course,
that
raises
raises
other
issues
and,
of
course,
with
your
primary
house.
So
I
always
the
next
question
that
comes
to
my
mind
is
so
what
you
know
you
know
if
you
increase
the
primary
size
of
your
house,
then
of
course
you
can
increase
that
accessory
dwelling
unit.
I
mean.
K
Mayor
council,
member
conceivable
you
could,
there
are
other.
There
are
other
standards
by
which
we
can
control
impervious
surfaces
on
lots,
bulk.
We
have
height
limits,
we
have
setbacks,
so
there
are
some
constraints
about
where
that
can
go,
but
conceivably,
you
could
increase
the
size
of
your
home
and
then
therefore
have
a
bigger
adu.
I
L
J
Thank
you
mayor.
I'm
just
wondering
if
you
could
talk
a
little
bit
more
about
the
parking
change.
I
can
just
imagine
that
there
will
be
some
residents
who
you
know
if
there
are
more
vehicles
consistently
parking
on
the
street
in
front
of
their
house.
They
may
have
concerns,
and
so
I
would
just
appreciate
a
little
bit
more
on
the
parking
piece
of
this.
Yes,.
K
So
we're
we're
still
maintaining
that
space
needed
for
two
vehicles,
two
vehicles
in
a
garage
and
then
being
able
to
park
two
more
vehicles
on
site
that
or
if
it's
a
what
so,
it
could
be
a
one
stall
garage
with
the
option
to
with
the
ability
to
expand
the
garage
to
include
another
stall.
So
we
haven't
abandoned
those
standards.
K
Yet,
however,
we
felt
it
appropriate
because,
right
now,
staff
is
looking
into
studying
those
parking
standards
for
single-family
homes
and
if
those
change,
then
it's
just
one
section
that
doesn't
need
to
be
amended
and
perhaps
create
other
conflicts.
So
it
was
just
about
ease
of
use.
More
than
anything,
and
knowing
that
there
was
this
potential
amendment
with
the
the
study
of
single-family
parking.
A
So
when
we've
discussed
this
in
the
past,
one
of
the
questions
that
I
had
was
the
concentration
where,
where
would
folks
be
able
to
have
adus
in
the
city
based
on
lot
size
based
on
zoning
based
on
how
it
would
all
work?
And
I
think
I
I
know
in
the
staff
report
there
was-
there
were
at
least
a
couple
of
maps
wondering
if
you
could
just
share
some
of
what
you
learned.
In
terms
of
that,
I
think
I
saw,
as
you
were
working
your
way
through
your
slides
here.
K
K
K
And
that
same
data
we've
overlaid
on
top
of
census,
tracts
that
show
the
proportion
of
the
population
that
is
that
identifies
as
bipoc.
So
this
gets
into
equity
concerns
about
you
know
what
properties
are
able
to
have
adus,
where,
where
are
those
properties
concentrated?
How
does
it
affect
the
local
population?
Do
they
get
to
share
in
the
benefits
of
having
this
new
ordinance,
and
you
know
possibly
construct
an
adu
on
their
property?
You
can
see
on
the
west
side,
there's
considerably
more
opportunity,
and
that
also
coincides
with
a
lower
share
of
the
population.
K
K
It
may
offer
more
opportunities
to
rent
on
the
west
side,
and
so
deconcentrating
renter
populations
on
the
east
side
and
allowing
them
to
live
on
the
west
side
may
also
prove
beneficial.
So
that's
something
to
consider
something.
To
note
is
that,
with
the
parking
standards
that
are
being
evaluated,
there
is
also
impervious
surface
cover
standards
that
are
also
being
studied.
K
For
instance,
two
family
lots
with
two
family
dwellings
can
possibly
exceed
35
percent
impervious
cover,
but
that
has
to
come
with
the
approval
from
the
city
engineer
to
make
sure
that
they're
treating
storm
water
on
their
property,
with
a
variety
of
interventions,
making
sure
that
they
can
just
prove
that
they're
treating
storm
water
on
the
property.
So
there
is
a
chance
to
even
increase
the
amount
of
lots
that
could
accommodate
an
accessory
dwelling
unit.
But
that's
all
being
studied
at
the
moment.
A
A
A
E
A
Second
got
a
motion
by
council
member
coulter,
second
by
council
member
martin
to
close
the
public
hearing
in
item
4.2.
No
further
council
discussion.
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
opposed
motion,
carries
7-0
council
questions.
Thoughts
on
this
we
have.
We
have
talked
about
this
a
while.
I
think,
the
the
initial
ordinance
that
we
passed
in
2009
and
realizing
that
we
made
we
need
to
make
some
adjustments
if
we
want
to
actually
embrace
and
move
forward
with
the
accessory
dwelling
units.
A
H
You
mayor,
I'm
just
curious
if
we
know
from
other
cities
that
have
implemented
more
these
types
of
proposals,
what
they're,
seeing
are
they
they're
getting
more
traction
than
bloomington
did
with
it,
because
I
think
our
first
iteration
was
to
try
to
create
these
within
the
existing
structure
and
that
obviously
didn't
take
off.
I
mean
both
of
them
are
probably
great,
but
you
know
I
I'm
just
wondering
what
we've
seen
in
other
communities,
and
you
know
how
widespread
is
this
adopted.
H
C
Sure
I'm
mayor
bo,
say:
council
member
nelson,
we
have
talked
with
quite
a
few
other
cities
and
there
are
many
that
have
made
a
lot
more
traction
as
you
put
it
in
terms
of
adding
accessory
dwelling
units,
and
many
of
them
do
allow
detached
dwelling
units.
So
we
don't
think
we'll
see
a
run
on
adus
in
the
city,
but
we
do
think
the
numbers
will
increase
with
this
amendment
tonight.
E
Excuse
me,
thank
you
mayor.
I
just
really
wanted
to
thank
staff
for
this.
I
know
this
is
something
that
we've
talked
about
for
a
number
of
years
and
I
think
it's
a
really
creative
approach
to
addressing
the
issue
of
affordable
housing
that
we
spent
a
lot
of
time
talking
about
as
well,
and
I
think
it's
also
worth
noting,
while
I'm
not.
Obviously
one
of
those
folks
who
believes
deleting
sections
of
city
code
is
particularly
good.
E
Always
I
think
it's
it's
helpful
that
a
lot
of
the
work
done
in
this
ordinance
is
done
by
just
doing
that
by
simplifying
what
is
already
in
city
code
and
and
making
it
just
more
user
friendly
for
everyone
all
the
way
around.
So
I
think
this
is
something
that's
going
to
serve
the
community.
Well,
I
think
it's
going
to
address
in
particular,
older
folks
residents
who
want
to,
as
was
mentioned
age
in
place,
which
we
are
certainly
going
to
have
more
of
in
the
coming
years
here
in
bloomington.
I
Councilmember
lowman,
I
apologize
that
just
a
thought
that
occurred
to
me
when
you
were
making
a
great
move.
That
was
we're
moving
that
way
to
get
this
thing
done
with
just
a
question
with
respect
to
parking
and
rvs.
How
does
that
work
with
this?
I'm
just
kind
of
curious,
so
I
got
the
I
know
I
mean
I
shouldn't
even
ask
this,
but
I
I
gotta
ask
it
now,
because
it's
too
late
after
we
pass
it.
I
If
I've
got
the
four,
you
know
cars
there
and
I
got
an
rv.
How
does
that
count?
Does
that
count
as
two
cars
one
car
doesn't
count?
How
does
that?
How
does
that
relate
to
this
help
me
understand
if
I've
got
an
rv
in
my
in
my
driveway,
how
does
how
does
it
relate
to
this
adu
or
no
impact
at
all?
Can
I
have
two
rvs
and
are
just
just
curious
how
this
would.
C
C
I
Know
I
get
that
I
I'm
not
going
down
that
route.
I
think
we've
covered
all
that.
I
guess
my
question
is:
let's
say
I
I
build
an
adu
in
in
the
you
know:
detached
adu.
Okay,
now
I've
got
the
standard
theoretically
of
four
cars
and
I
have
an
rv.
How
does
that
work
with
that?
I
mean
so.
If
I
have
that
rv
you
know
parked
there.
How
does
that
operate
with
within
our
rules?
I
C
I
E
I
C
Mayor
bussy,
council,
member
lowman,
so
the
ordinance
before
you
before
you
tonight
would
not
change
anything
about
the
number
of
vehicles
allowed
outside
of
a
garage.
The
one
impact
it
could
have
is.
If
you
had
an
adu,
you
may
have
additional
vehicles
present
on
the
site.
They
would
count
against
that
overall
number,
whether
or
not
they
were
an
rv.
I
A
So
I
I
think
it
would
it's
something
that
obviously
we
need
to
keep
an
eye
on
and
it's
it
will
increase
parking
requirements
in
an
area
if
there's
additional
residents
on
that
on
that
lot.
But
I
don't
think
it's
it's
as
complicated
as
we
as
we.
We
need
to
make
it
all
right.
Councilmember,
alessandro.
D
Thank
you,
mr
mayor,
I
was,
I
wanted
to
understand
how
we
plan
to
reconcile
what
I
think
those
maps
kind
of
showed
as
a
as
a
as
a
bit
of
a.
I
don't
know.
If
it,
I
don't
want
to
call
it
a
inherent
conflict,
but
the
idea
that
by
nature
the
the
areas
where,
from
a
from
a
rental
income
perspective
residents
might
benefit
the
most
is,
is
the
place
where
these
adus
are
the
toughest
potentially
to
fit.
D
D
Are
we
planning
on?
Is
there
a
a
marketing
approach
or
a,
or
is
there
any
kind
of
expectation
from
an
education
perspective
to
the
city
that
we
will
as
we
launch
this
thing,
should
it
get
approved
tonight
where
we
would
have
conversations
in
those
areas
under
those
different
perspectives?
Right,
which
is,
you
know,
goal
number
one
on
the
east
side,
if
you
will
maybe
a
and
goal
number
two
on
the
west
side,
maybe
be
right.
D
A
Think
it
might
be
the
case
of
not
knowing
that
yet
I
don't
know
that
we're
that
far
in
the
planning,
or
that
far
in
the
consideration
of
all
of
this,
the
fact
that
it
hasn't
passed
yet,
I
think,
is
part
of
it
also
and
the
practicalities
of
reconciling
it.
I
agree
I
mean
we're
just
looking
at
the
maps.
We
can
see
that,
yes,
it
it's
going
to
affect
one
area
differently
than
it
affects
others,
and
one
thing
that
it
just
keeps
coming
to
mind
what
mr
marker
guard
said.
A
A
It's
not
a
requirement
to
do
so,
and
so
I
think
it's
a
it
will
be
a
combination
of
where
it's
possible
to
do
if
you
want
to
do
it
in
the
first
place
and
and
ultimately,
if
well
for
that
matter,
if
you
can
afford
to,
I
mean
it
cost
a
million
dollars
to
buy
two
by
four.
Now
I
mean
it's
a
I
mean
it's
it's,
so
it's
a
good
question
and
it's
why
I
asked
about
specifically
about
the
maps
to
so
we
could
bring
this
up
and
consider
this
as
well.
A
I
honestly
personally,
don't
know,
don't
believe
that,
as
glenn
said,
there's
not
going
to
be
a
huge
run.
I
think
we'll
see
a
modest
increase
in
this,
but
it
will
be
interesting
to
see
the
increase
in
how
it
plays
out
and
and
how
it
works,
and
I
think,
as
we've
shown
over
the
past
three
years,
when
we
additionally,
when
we
initially
adopted
this
in
2009,
we
realized
it
didn't
work.
We
made
tweaks
and
I
think
we
could
we'd
want
to
consider
that
as
we
move
forward
as
well.
I
don't
think
this.
A
D
Well,
let
me
ask
a
follow-up
related
to
that,
then,
is:
are
these
kinds
of
improvements
if
you
will
eligible
for
some
of
the
programs
that
we
have,
you
know
for
our
lower
income
residents,
for
example,
would
would
you
consider
this
a
redevelopment
activity,
for
example,
not
that
I
noticed
miss
coleman
here,
and
maybe
she
has
opinions
on
this
topic?
I
don't
know
I
don't
want
to
bring.
A
Again,
we'd
have
to
ask
them,
don't
know
if
it's
been
thought
that
far
through
in
terms
of
you
know
with
that
deep
of
tentacles
in
terms
of
what
we're
doing
and
how
it
all
fits.
But
I
think
you're,
bringing
it
up,
certainly
puts
the
the
grain
of
thought
into
somebody's
mind
about
the
possibility
here.
D
D
D
A
H
Thank
you
mayor.
Just
a
couple
quick
comments,
one
I
think
most
of
these
would
be
related
parties
doing
it.
It
doesn't
seem
like
if
you're
going
to
get
into
the
rental
business.
This
is
the
most
cost
effective
way
to
do
it,
you're,
probably
better
off
buying
one
of
the
houses,
that's
for
sale
and
renting
that
out
then
trying
to
build
this
in
your
yard.
H
So
I
think,
most
of
the
time
I've
seen
these
they're
they're
people
that
know
each
other,
that
that
need
some
extra
space
multi-generational
living,
which
I
do
think
brings
up
a
concern
in
terms
of
multi-generational
living
within
those
smaller
lots
on
the
east
side
and
finding
opportunities,
and
things
like
that.
So
the
the
thing
I'd
asked
to
kind
of
to
council
member
d'alessandro's
point
is
that
you
know,
as
staff
consider
a
a
time
at
which
it
reviews
this.
H
You
know
whether
it
be
two
years
or
three
years
or
see
how
it's
working
see
what
we're
seeing
in
terms
of
rental
related
parties,
number
of
units
things
like
that,
because
I
do
think
there's
some
opportunities
for
us
to
learn.
You
know
this
is
new.
I
think
it's
good.
I
think
it's
a
good
step
to
to
provide
this
for
people,
and
I
I
think
that
you
know
I.
H
I
can't
really
know
that
a
lot
of
people
in
west
bloomington
and
in
two-story
houses
that
you
know
are
struggling
with
steps
and
things
and
if
they
could
have
a
multi-generational
living
opportunity
within
that
that
was
safe
and
secure
for
them.
It
would
be
very
beneficial,
I
think,
there's
a
lot
of
people
within
the
community
that
struggle
with
housing
costs
and
this
provides
more
opportunity.
So
I
appreciate
staff's
work
on
this
and
I
guess
my
only
point
is
follow-up.
A
E
D
A
Motion
by
council
member
culture,
second
by
council
member
d'alessandro
to
adopt
the
ordinance
of
endings
chapters,
9
14,
19
and
21
and
appendix
day
of
the
city
code
related
to
accessory
dwelling
unit
standards.
No
further
council
discussion
on
this.
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
always
motion
carries
7-0
council
member
coulter.
Thank.
A
Motion
by
councilmember
coulter,
second
by
councilmember
d'alessandro
for
summary,
publication.
No
further
council
discussion
on
this.
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
opposed
motion,
carries
7-0
thanks
to
staff
on
this.
This
has
been
a
long
journey
that
we've
been
on
here
and
we'll
be
interested
to
see
how
this
plays
out
over
the
next
two
or
three
years
and
curious
to
see
how
it
all
works.
So
well
done.
So.
Thank
you.
A
M
M
Thank
you
next
slide,
so
I'm
here
this
evening
with
the
request
for
an
alternative
sale
process
for
the
city-owned
land.
That
is
a
part
of
the
ralph
program,
which
is
the
right-of-way
loan
acquisition
fund,
so
that
fund
is
actually
managed
by
the
met
council
acts
as
a
lender
in
coordination
with
minnesota
department
of
transportation,
mndot
and
the
funds
are
used
to
purchase
land
slated
for
future
highway
projects.
So
all
the
parcels
are
adjacent
to
highways
and
or
freeways.
M
M
So
I've
previously
mentioned
that
there
are
ralph
program
requirements.
This
is
what
met
council
requires
as
the
lender
in
order
to
start
along
the
process
of
disposing
of
and
or
marketing
the
land
that
they
are
releasing.
We
must
first
have
independently
conducted
appraisals
by
an
independent
appraiser
that
is
approved
by
the
met
council.
M
M
M
M
So
I
had
mentioned
in
the
staff
report
that
a
part
of
this
request
is
in
line
with
our
forward
2040
comprehensive
plan,
as
well
as
our
bloomington
together
tomorrow,
bloomington
tomorrow,
together,
wait.
I
always
get
it
wrong.
Sorry,
wilmington
tomorrow,
together
strategic
plan,
so
as
it
refers
to
our
2040
comprehensive
plan,
this
is
specific
to
section
3
of
that
plan.
M
Additionally,
what
we
do
call
out
in
the
2040
comprehensive
plan
is
our
partnerships
with
west
hennepin,
affordable
housing,
land
trust,
better
known
as
walt
and
habitat
for
humanity
walt
actually
does
receive
funding
through
cdbg.
So
it
is
allocated
every
year
by
this
body
of
75
000
per
property
up
to
two
properties.
A
year
prior
to
last
year,
walt
only
looked
at
acquiring
and
rehabilitating
and
reselling
those
properties
to
affordable
for
affordable
home
ownership,
which
is
capped
at
80
area
median
income.
M
M
So
in
the
2021
year
they
did
three
properties
in
bloomington,
and
that
was
at
225
000
that
they
were
able
to
leverage
570
000
from
our
225
000
for
three
properties
and
the
properties
that
they
did
were
all
estate
homes,
where
the
sellers
welcomed
the
opportunity
to
sell
the
land
and
they
also
rehab
the
homes
with
excuse
me.
They
rehab
the
homes
up
to
sustainability
and
energy
standards.
M
They
had
a
little
bit
more
information
about
who
benefited.
One
of
them
was
a
single
father
with
children
and
the
other
two
were
traditional
families
with
multiple
children
that
they
are
now
able
to
purchase
and
own
a
home
in
bloomington,
where
two
of
them
were
already
in
bloomington
and
now
they're
able
to
stay
so
again.
Continuing
that
work
not
only
with
cdbg,
but
with
also
the
opportunity
of
having
control
of
city-owned
land
to
offer
more
opportunities
for
affordable
home
ownership.
M
Habitat
for
humanity
is
also
called
out
in
our
2040
comprehensive
plan,
because
the
hra
in
particular
partners
with
habitat
for
humanity
we
have
not
been
able
to
partner
in
the
last
couple
of
years,
the
last
one
that
habitat
completed
was
in
2020,
but
they
have
a
strong
interest.
We've
actually
met
with
habitat
talk
with
when
I
say
we
glen
marker
guard
and
myself.
Sorry.
M
M
And
then
our
bloomington,
together
tomorrow,
the
mission
to
cultivate
an
enduring
and
remarkable
community
where
people
want
to
be
this
recommendation.
The
staff
request
actually
specifically
aligns
with
the
strategic
objective
number
two,
where
the
city
will
achieve
significant
improvement
in
the
indices
measuring
the
community's
environmental
and
individual
health,
as
we
know
that
environmental
is
both
the
natural
and
the
built
environment
and
then
individual
health,
as
we
do
know
that
this
is
housing.
M
Our
part
of
social
determinants
of
health
strategy
number
three
identifying
align
efforts
across
organizations
in
the
community
to
leverage
develop
and
maximize
assets
to
achieve
mutually
beneficial
outcomes
that
comes
in
by
wanting
to
work
more
with
our
affordable
housing.
Mission-Based
organizations,
but
it
also
comes
in
where
met
council
has
a
pilot
that
they
will
be
launching
in
september,
where
we
can
apply
for
funding
for
the
low
income.
M
We
would
be
working
to
use
these
lots
in
this
proposal
to
be
able
to
apply
for
that
funding
where
we
would
also
need
to
identify
a
one-to-one
dollar
to
dollar
match,
which
cdbg
is
one
of
those
that
would
count
as
a
dollar
to
dollar
match.
So,
basically,
in
strategy
number
three
not
only
leveraging
the
land
that
we
own,
but
also
leveraging
to
maximize
assets
for
mutually
beneficial
outcomes
when
it
comes
to
funding
and
bloomington
would
not
be
doing
this
necessarily
by
itself
next
slide.
M
Lastly,
that
the
city
council
would
consider
an
ordinance
to
dispose
of
the
ralph
properties
individually
or
collectively,
because
there
are
five
lots
which
must
be
approved
by
not
less
than
five
council
members.
This
process
would
happen
with
the
city
council,
considering
an
ordinance
to
dispose
of
the
ralph
properties.
This
would
happen
after,
if
approved
this
evening
after
the
met
council
approves
all
of
the
process
after
it
is
marketed
after
a
purchase.
D
Thank
you,
mr
mayor.
Thank
you
appreciate
it.
So
a
couple
of
quick
just
clarifying
questions.
Would
you
mind
going
back
to
the
the
prior
slide
for
me?
Okay,
so
waiting
the
process
of
soliciting
sealed
bids.
That
makes
sense
to
me,
I'm
assuming
that's,
because
you
have
folks
that
you'd
like
to
work
with,
and
so
why
would
we
go
with
that
right?
Okay,
fair
enough,
the
the
question
around
funding,
so
it
sounded
like
they're,
we
own
the
properties
outright
so
nobody's
buying
the
land.
Is
that
correct?
No
okay,.
M
Sorry,
that's
okay,
sorry
about
that
mayor,
council
member,
so
we
don't
own
the
property
outright.
We
received
a
loan
to
purchase
the
property
and
to
remove
the
structure
all
of
these
property.
All
of
these
lots
had
houses
on
them
when
we
purchased
them,
however,
because
they
had
houses
on
them,
we
paid
market
value
for
a
lot
and
the
improvement.
D
M
The
one-to-one
match.
Thank
you
for
the
question.
Sorry,
the
one-to-one
match
that
I
am
describing
is
how
we
get
to
affordable
home
ownership.
Okay,
it
would
actually
be
some
type
of
public
investment,
so
cdbg,
the
75
000
per
property
is
an
investment
into
the
property.
It
helps
to
buy
the
price
down
so
that
when
the
buyer
purchases
it,
they
are
not
paying
that
full
price
market
value
in
bloomington
is
about
340
000.
M
They
are
getting
the
houses
for
a
little
bit
less
than
market
value
through
a
land
trust
program,
because
the
land
is
under
a
99-year.
Lease
habitat
for
humanity
has
a
little
bit
different
model
of
equity
sharing
and
that
they
are
able
to
use
volunteers
and
they're
able
to
cut
the
cost
of
development
because
of
how
they
achieve
it.
Then
again
they
are
providing
for
an
opportunity
for
someone
who
may
not
be
above
80
percent
ami
to
purchase
a
home,
but
it
doesn't
look
any
different
than
the
market
value
home
that
exists
in.
D
Bloomington.
Okay,
so
I
appreciate
the
explanation
there
that
helps
a
lot
the
the
last
portion
of
this
ordinance.
It
sounds
like
you're
asking
us
when
it
comes
back.
It
may
be
that
each
of
these
parcels
is
is
sold
individually
to
different
different
parties,
or
someone
might
come
in
and
ask
for
all
five
or
four
out
of
the
five
or
whatever.
Is
that
the?
Is
that
the
the
the
sense
for
what
you're
trying
to
accomplish
here
is
like
we
could?
D
I
Lowman,
thank
you.
Let's
start
off
with
the
question
I
kind
of
pre
pre-sent
to
you,
council,
member
carter
is
often
says
that
you
know
your
zip
code
determines
your
life
expectancy
and
you
know
certainly
having
studied
you
know,
planning
and
that
type
of
thing
I
always
get
concerned
when
we
see
properties
that
are
are
close
by
freeways.
I
You
know
whether
it
be
noise,
chemical
and
that
kind
of
thing,
and
so
I
just
you
know
I
want,
and
I
know
you
guys
responded
to
that
I'll.
Let
you
kind
of
respond
public,
but
I'm
just
curious
about
that,
as
we
look
to
kind
of
go
down
this
route.
If
we
approve
this
tonight,
how
are
we
going
to
control
for
that
that
we're
not
looking
to
to
to
place
these
folks?
M
M
I
Thanks,
I
appreciate
that
lens
piece,
so
just
moving
down
having
the
opportunity
to
to
work
for
habitat
for
humanity.
A
long
time
ago,
I
I
happened
to
see
a
habitat
from
any
truck
drive
by
my
house.
Today
was
kind
of
kind
of
funny
kind
of
coincidental
and
then
also
working
at
the
fed
and
one
of
the
criticisms
that
the
fed
had
of
habitat
for
humanity
was
that
once
they
build
their
house
one,
the
property
is
so
well
built
and
then
it
doesn't
stay
affordable.
It's
kind
of
like
the
best
building.
You
can
have
it.
I
It
kind
of
ceases
to
be
a
affordable
housing
piece
kind
of
moving
forward,
and
I
know
that
you've
built
into
this
a
different
process.
But
I
get
a
little
bit
concerned
when
I
hear
15
years
for
affordability
and
then
you
know
with
apartments
we
kind
of
buy
40
years,
and
so
I'm
just
I'm
concerned
about
that
revolving
affordability
for
for
folks,
so
that
we
can
keep
some
of
these
homes
affordable
for
the
long
term.
I
So
we're
not
kind
of
like
we're
doing
with
the
apartments
we
purchase
it
and
then
it's
kind
of
kind
of
over.
So
he
did
talk
a
little
bit
about
that.
I
know
we're
just
getting
started
so
you
know
you
got
to
start
somewhere
right,
so
I
totally
get
that,
but
I
I
want
to
be
concerned
that
we're
able
to
be
sustainable
if
you
were
yes.
M
Absolutely
thank
you
for
that
question.
So,
15
years
I
came
up
with
that
as
the
minimum,
because
that
is
the
minimum
for
bet
council's
funding
that
I
would
be
applying
for
so
15
years.
The
minimum.
The
other
thing
is
that
I
am
mentioning
west
hennepin,
affordable
housing,
land
trust
and
habitat
for
humanity.
Those
are
two
different
models
not
to
nerd
out
but
west
end
up
in
affordable
housing.
M
Land
trust
is
perpetually
affordable
and
it's
perpetually
affordable,
because
the
land
is
removed
from
the
overall
property
and
it's
on
a
lease,
and
so
you
don't
actually
own
the
land.
You
just
own
the
house,
and
then
you
have
an
equity
share
split
when
you
do
sale
and
then
there's
requirements
because
everybody's
not
going
to
fund
a
land
trust
property
in
terms
of
a
mortgage.
So
that's
where
that's
built
in
habitat
humanity
has
an
equity
sharing
model
that
once
they
get
to
about
30
years,
they
actually
are
losing
money,
and
so
it's
technically
long-term
affordability.
M
M
I
would
have
to
look
at
it
more
and
propose
what
that
language
would
look
like,
because
minnesota
has
some
of
the
strongest
property
rights
around
the
country.
So
just
looking
at
that,
what
is
that
return
on
investment?
If
we
are
doing?
Maybe
fifty
thousand
dollars
but
we're
restricting
something
for
eighty
percent
ami
which
it's
always
going
to
go
up.
The
income
bracket's
always
going
to
go
up
what's
80
today
is
not
going
to
be
80
percent
two
years.
M
M
I
was
gonna,
say
players,
but
other
other
cities
and
other
policymakers,
so
just
know
that
it
is
being
looked
at
and
considered
on
if
we
really
want
to
get
to
affordability
past
15
years.
What
does
that
look
like?
What
are
the
tools
in
our
toolbox,
but
right
now?
How
do
we
start
with
something
that
we
haven't
been
able
to
do
in
quite
a
while?
Thank
you.
J
Thank
you
mayor,
so
I'm
going
to
go
back
to
council
member
d'alessandro's
question
just
because
I
now
want
to
make
sure
I
fully
understand.
So
we
would
so
we
would
sell
the
lots.
We
would
pay
back
the
met
council
what
we
owe,
but
then
we
would
basically
develop
a
public-private
partnership
with
the
developer
and
we
would
apply
or
co-apply
for
the
met
council.
J
J
Okay,
awesome.
Thank
you.
I
was
like
I
don't
I'm
taking
notes
here.
So
the
only
other
question
that
I
had
you
know
you
mentioned
habitat
for
humanity
and
wall,
but
I'm
wondering
are
you
considering
other
organizations?
I
assume
there
will
be
like
a
whole
outreach
plan,
like
I
think
about
the
beautiful
house
on
pen
that
macv,
you
know
partnered
with
the
hra
to
build
and
all
of
the
all
of
the
I'm
assuming
you're
gonna
be
reaching
out
to
all
of
those
organizations.
M
M
We
have
eight
properties
that
the
hra
participated
in
getting
those
properties
and
they're
still
affordable
to
this
day
and
the
original
owners.
I
think
seven
original
owners
are
still
in
them
and
that
does
have
a
restriction
on
it
that
they
either
have
to
pay
back
the
subsidy,
which
was
actually
80
000,
or
they
have
to
sell
to
someone
that
is
income
qualified.
So,
yes,
we
would
reach
out
to
all
the
players
to
let
them
know
that
bloomington
has
some
opportunities.
M
H
M
That
is
correct,
because
that
is
correct,
because
we
we
purchased
the
lots
because
mndot
could
not
so
mndot
was
not,
is
not
able
to
purchase
the
lots
that
they
need
for
the
highway
projects
that
they
have
identified.
So
we
purchased
a
lot,
but
we
had.
We
did
so
by
obtaining
oh,
okay,
obtaining
a
loan
through
the
ralph
program.
Now
the
lots
are
being
released
which
says
mndot
mndot
said:
oh
that
plan
we
had
about
15
20
years
ago.
We
don't
need
it,
and
so
we
could
either
let
the
lot
sit
vacant.
M
A
J
More
than
20
years
ago,
mndot
had
a
plan,
much
like
the
plan
that
they
have
now
for
35w
and
494,
which
required
the
acquisition
of
these
properties,
and
so
over
the
past
25
years
or
so.
The
city
working
through
the
ralph
program
acquired
these
properties
to
help
mndot
when
they
finally
got
to
the
point
of
building
the
plan
that
they
had.
J
H
Why
tear
the
house
down,
if
you
don't
until
you
need
the
property,
that's
not
on
you!
I
understand
what
you're
doing
today
and
it
just.
It
makes
absolutely
no
sense
to
me
to
tear
the
house
down
because
you
think
you're
going
to
need
it
based
on
a
plan.
That's
15,
20
years
out,
leave
the
house
there
for
15
or
20
years.
G
G
I
think
I
think
the
the
philosophy
for
most
cities
is
that
we
don't
want
to
be
in
the
business
of
property
management
with
you
know
now
at
this
point
in
time
I
would
say,
maybe
there's
a
different
conversation
to
be
had,
especially
since
we
have
an
hra
that
is
is
working
towards
some
goals
that
maybe
weren't
as
fulsome
before.
So
I
think
if
the
question
came
up
today
as
opposed
to
20
years
ago,
the
answer
might
be
different.
Yeah.
J
I
would
add
that,
20
years
ago,
when
we
were
acquiring
these
properties,
we
did
not
anticipate
that
it
would
be
20
years
before
we
actually
built
the
improvement.
So
I
mean
it
was,
I
think,
the
time
frame
at
that
time
was
five
years
or
so,
and
I
think
it
was
felt
at
that
time.
It
wasn't
worth
going
into
a
putting
a
new
family
into
these
homes
if
we
have
to
kick
them
out
in
a
short
period
of
time.
Okay,
fair.
J
H
And
for
clarity,
I
think
councilmember
carter
had
asked
some
about
this,
but
what
happens
if
the
sale
is
less
than
the
original
market
value
is
less
than
the
current
market
value.
What
is
the
city
on
the
hook
to
pay
some
of
that
loan
back
and
how
much
of
it
are
we
on
the
hook
to
pay
back
if
it's
less
than
market
value.
M
Thank
you.
That
is
the
question
that
was
posed
to
met
council,
and
so
what
we
are
looking
at
is
that
we
would
have
the
appraisals
and
we
cannot
sell
the
property
for
less
than
the
appraised
value.
So
that
is
why
an
independent
appraiser
must
do
an
appraisal
on
each
one
of
these.
Each
one
of
these
parcels
because
met
council
will
not
accept
less
than
that
appraised
value,
and
they
will
accept
more
up
to
the
original
price
that
we
paid
that
we
loaned
borrowed.
M
Excuse
me
from
them
to
purchase,
and
I
think
there
was
a
little
bit
of
lack
of
clarity
on
if
we
had
excess
proceeds.
If
we
were
allowed
to
keep
them
because
we
knew
that
the
properties
weren't
going
to
appraise.
We
know
that
the
excuse
me.
We
strongly
believe
the
properties
are
not
going
to
appraise
for
what
they.
What
we
borrowed
against.
M
H
Just
a
couple
more
quick
questions,
so
I
appreciate
councilmember
carter
bringing
up
mac
v
and
we
talked
about
housing
first
and
all
that
one
of
the
things
that
I
saw
in
this
proposal
seems
to
prohibit
mcv
from
this
because
it
would
have
to
be
owner.
Occupied
and
macv,
has
a
model
to
serve
homeless
veterans
and
and
provide
support
services.
So
they
would
not
be
able
to,
at
their
initial
point,
be
owners
of
that
property.
H
M
H
I
I'm
not
sure
that
they
would
be
able
to
with
their
model,
provide
the
ownership
even
through
the
land,
trust,
and
so
that
would
be
that's
the
one
hang
up
that
I'm
having
is
trying
to
find
a
way
for
an
organization
like
that.
That's
trying
to
help
our
veterans
overcome
homelessness,
get
the
services
they
need.
You
know
I.
I
certainly
support
the
homeownership
opportunities.
You
know
I've
been
a
strong
supporter
of
that
for
a
long
time,
but
I
look
at
this
location.
H
I
look
at
this
property
and
I'm
like
this
looks
really
nice
for
what
they're
trying
to
do
and
what
I've
heard
that
they're
trying
to
do
in
terms
of
a
place,
a
location
that
they
can
put
multiple
units
on
it,
and
I
want
to
just
make
sure
that
they
would
have
an
opportunity
to
to
come
in
and
see
if
it
works
out
for
them,
and
so
I
don't
know
how
to.
I
don't
know
how
to
fix
that
at
this
point,
because
I
don't
think
they
can
sell
it.
A
H
A
M
A
I
have
driven
past
those
lots
for
a
number
of
years
and
thought
this
is
a
prime
example
of
of
what
we
could
do
to
redevelop
and
to
to
look
at
those
lots
and
then
to
look
at
the
the
pile
of
rubble
right
now
at
8400
humboldt
where
the
the
old
white
office
building
used
to
be
it's
an
exciting
opportunity.
I
think
in
that
area
to
to
kind
of
reinvigorate
or
to
put
in
some
some
new
housing
and
new
opportunities
for
people.
That
being
said,
those
lots
are
very
unique.
A
No
doubt
in
my
mind
that
if
it
moved
forward
to
development,
I'm
sure
the
the
houses,
whether
it's
whatever
partner
we
partner
with,
I
have
no
doubt
about
the
quality
and
the
aesthetics
and
so
on,
but
just
to
make
sure
that
the
neighborhood
and
the
neighbors
are
involved
and
and
informed
as
as
we
move
forward.
Yes,
so
thank
you
all
right,
council,
member,
alessandro
and
then
councilmember
nelson
anything
would.
D
Just
add
to
this:
no,
I
and
I
appreciate
it.
I
love
I
live
right
around
the
corner
from
there
and
so
and
I
know
people
worry
about
health
and
all
policy,
but
I
I
live
in
a
beautiful
home,
that's
literally
three
blocks
from
35
w
and
I
don't
feel
sicker
having
gone
there
for
the
last
five
years.
So
I
appreciate
everybody's
concern
there,
but
I
care
more
about
the
mature
trees
and
things
like
that.
Maintaining
those
things
from
an
environmental
perspective,
and
I
think
they
do
a
great
job
so
hopefully
we'll
be
we'll
have
considerate.
D
You
know,
developers
there
I'd
also.
I
also
just
think
that
you
know
dovetailing
kind
of
the
the
notion
of
density
in
this.
You
know.
Is
there
the
opportunity
for
us
to
be
looking
at
duplexes
or
quadplexes
or
other
things
like
that
on
these
lots
to
to
support
number
one
affordability,
but
also
to
support
some
densification
in
my
neighborhood?
D
M
H
E
I
J
H
Thanks
mayor
just
one
last
one
last
thing
I
just
want
to
ensure
that
passage
of
this
would
allow
us
to
work
with
a
macv
type
organization
if
it
made
sense,
even
though
it
would
not
be
owner
occupied,
because
it's
not
specifically
in
this
motion,
but
it
was
in
other
parts
of
it.
So
I
just
want
to
clarify
that
ms
coleman.
M
F
F
Mayor
mayor,
I
will
say
that
we
do
say
in
the
document
at
the
time
the
buyer
is
identified
and
the
purchase
agreement
is
reached
for
any
or
all
of
the
ralph
properties.
So
we
do
make
that
statement
in
our
now.
Therefore,
clauses
but
theoretically
could
macbee
be
the
buyer
of
the
affordable
housing.
Theoretically,
so
I
think
it's
all
right,
based
on
the
circumstances.
H
F
M
A
Have
a
meeting
next
monday,
how
about
if
we
do
that,
how
about
if
we
hold
this
over
there
and
and
see
if
we
can
craft
some
language
that
I
think
might
meet
the
goals?
I
think
you
understand
the
goals
of
what
we're
trying
to
accomplish
here
and
then
we'd.
We
have
a
motion
and
a
second
on
the
table,
and
so
we
could.
We
could
amend
that
motion
once
we
get
the
the
updated
language
next
week.
If
that
would
be
okay,
don't
don't
defer
to
the.
I
A
I
D
If
I
could
hope,
I
think
I
probably
don't
know
enough
to
understand,
what's
happening
right
now,
but
are
we?
Are
we
trying
specifically
to
set
aside
these
three
concurrent
properties
for
mcv
at
this
point,
because
that's
what
it
and
I
don't
even
know
who
they
are
so
I
apologize?
I
have
to
get
up
to
speed
on
who
they
are
and
what
they
do
and
why
they're
important
I'm.
A
Not
my
understanding
that
we're
specifically
saying
mcphee
what
we're
doing,
I
think,
is
just
opening
up
a
few
more
options.
I
think
we're
hoping
to
craft
some
language
to
open
up
a
few
more
options
right
now,
it's
very
specific
to
owner-occupied
housing.
To
give
us
a
couple.
Other
possibilities
in
the
future.
Macv
is
a
it's
it's
it's
a
group
home
for
previously
homeless
veterans,
basically,
is
what
it
is,
and
so
there
wouldn't
be
owner
occupied
an
owner-occupied
situation.
A
Veterans,
so
they
would
be
the
owner,
but
the
the
occupants
wouldn't
necessarily
be
the
the
owner
and
so
we're
just
giving
ourselves
some
more
flexibility.
I
think
in
this
I
it
doesn't
mean
we
have
to
go
one
way
or
the
other.
It
might
make
the
most
sense
to
partner
with
ultimately
owner
occupied
housing.
It
might
make
the
most
sense
ultimately
to
partner
with
a
macd
or
a
similar
type
organization.
So
I
think
it
just
gives
us
a
little
bit
more.
Flexibility
appreciate.
H
If
I
might
just
to
help
council
member
d'alessandro
as
an
advocate
of
home
ownership,
one
of
the
things
I
see
as
part
of
the
mcv
mission
is
to
help
veterans
get
on
their
feet
to
get
into
home
ownership
and
they
provide
all
the
support
services
so
that
they
can
get
there.
And
so
I
see
it
as
a
pathway
there
as
a.
But
you
know
like
I
don't
know
if
it's
the
right
opportunity
or
not-
and
it's
certainly
not
my
intention
in
this-
to
just
reserve
these
properties
for
them.
A
M
A
A
N
Good
evening,
mr
mayor
and
council,
yes,
so
six
weeks
ago
we
stood
before
you,
we
are
missing
one
of
our
members
but
making
his
debut
appearance
as
the
assistant
port
authority
administrator
is
jason
smith.
So
we
have
a
brief
presentation,
really
all
new
slides.
We
have
a
venn
diagram
for
those
people
that
requested
it,
and
so
we
will
get
the
show
on
the
road
so
matt.
If
you
could
bring
up
the
presentation.
N
N
Then
we
started
talking
about
the
port
authority,
the
planning
division
and
the,
and
should
we
create
an
eda,
so
you
can
go
to
the
next
slide.
So
here
are
the
introductions
myself,
carla
henderson
community
development,
director,
jason
smith,
assistant
port
authority,
administrator
glenn
market
guard,
the
planning
manager
and
erica
coleman,
who
you've
seen
quite
a
bit
tonight,
our
hra
administrator.
N
I
just
wanted
to
reiterate
kind
of
what
our
staff
recommendations
were.
These
have
not
changed
from
when
we
were
before
you.
These
are
the
same
recommendations
we
took
to
the
hra
board
and
to
the
port
authority
board
as
well
again
focus
the
hre
mission
towards
the
continuum
of
housing.
Erica
is
going
to
talk
about
the
missing
middle
housing,
because
that
seems
to
be
a
question
of
how
we
came
up
with
the
20
units
or
less
consolidate
the
majority
of
multi-family
and
commercial
redevelopment
into
the
port
authority.
N
Port
would
add
five
ftes
with
three
of
those
being
vacant.
Coming
from
the
hra,
we
would
again
decrease
the
hra
levy
to
equal,
whatever
we're
going
to
increase
the
port
authority
levy
and
then
fund
citywide
create
a
place
making
with
the
newport
levy
in
the
amount
of
two
hundred
thousand
dollars
and
now
I'll
turn
it
over
to
erica.
M
M
We
would
also
be
keeping
everything
under
affordable
rental,
but
we
would
be
putting
in
port
and
hra
concurrent
meetings
as
needed
and
then
in
affordable
home
ownership.
This
kind
of
gets
to
my
last
item:
expanding
non-profit
single-family
development
really
prioritizing
and
working
on
that
intentionally.
The
same
way
that
we
have
worked
intentionally
on
multi-family
development,
but
it
goes
to
affordable
home
ownership,
in
particular
not
precluding
affordable
rental,
but
a
focus
on
affordable
homeownership
market
value
and
home
preservation.
M
M
The
hra
is
going
to
be
right
there
front
and
center,
and
so
really
expanding
these
different
opportunities
for
the
overall
health
and
benefit
of
our
residents
and
of
those
that
we
serve
but
working
better
together
in
allowing
for
that
that
time,
by
stepping
back
and
consolidating
the
majority
of
the
multi-family
development
with
the
port
authority
and
where
the
hra
is
going
to
work
stronger
with
its
strengths,
and
that
is
the
one
to
over
20
units.
It's
the
missing
middle
missing.
M
Middle
housing
is
really
that,
in
between
of
a
regular
single-family
home
detached
single-family
home
and
an
80-100
unit,
multi-family
complex
who's,
doing
the
in
the
between
duplexes
four
plexes,
eight
plexes.
Where
are
those
opportunities?
And
how
can
we
focus
to
seek
those
opportunities
out
to
bring
those
opportunities
for
more
housing,
stability
and
affordable,
whether
it's
home
ownership
or
rental
in
bloomington
next
slide.
M
And
so
I
had
this
question
of
what
is
the
hra
board's
role
and
I
have
to
say
I'm
sorry,
I
didn't
mention
it
because
I'm
not
proposing
changing
it.
So
the
hra
board
role
is
currently
and
proposed
with
these
recommendations
to
approve
distributions
from
the
affordable
housing
trust
fund,
the
hra
development
fund
and
the
hra
noaa
fund,
approval
and
oversight
of
hra
programs,
approval
and
oversight
of
the
hra
budget
authorizing
acquisition,
disposition
of
hra
owned
property,
so
not
city
owned,
hra
owned
and
then
collaboration
with
boards
and
commissions
and
fulfilling
its
mission.
L
Thank
you,
ms
coleman,
so
I'm
gonna
quickly
go
over
what
this
recommendation
will
do
to
changing
the
port
authority.
Currently
everything
that
the
port
authority
does
is
basically
going
to
stay.
The
same,
we're
still
going
to
work
on
economic
and
development
projects
within
the
south
loop
we're
going
to
continue
to
work
on
the
business
development
resources
which
we
already
have
programs
situated
with
the
city
from
the
open
open
to
business.
L
We
got
our
feet
wet
with
the
cares,
grants
and
loans
program
of
getting
out
that
that
assistance
to
our
existing
businesses
within
our
micro
business
within
the
community
development
we're
currently
trying
to
create
a
facade
program
which,
hopefully
we'll
be
bringing
before
this
board
or
the
city
council
here
later
on
this
year,
we're
continuing
to
do
small
business
outreach
and
we
have
a
team
right
now,
working
on
the
business
incubator
center
of
the
fire
station
3.
and
lastly,
our
creative
placemaking
director.
L
L
L
We
would
continue
to
focus
on
that
and
try
to
move
those
projects
forward
by
meeting
with
the
property
owners
and
seeing
is
there
interest
with
develop
the
development
community
to
move
any
of
those
those
projects
forward
to
get
a
development
proposed
business
development
we're
looking
to
expand
that,
like
I
said
you
know,
currently,
we
do
the
open
to
business.
We've
done
the
grants
and
the
and
the
pandemic
loans,
potentially
opening
up
a
port
authority
levy.
L
We
could
potentially
create
additional
grant
funding
where
we
could
try
to
assist
some
of
these
additional
small
businesses
or
other
programs
that
may
be
able
to
come
out
of
this
and
then.
Lastly,
as
I
stated,
you
know,
we're
working
on
the
small
business
outreach,
we're
hoping
to
expand
that
and
do
that
more
and,
as
ms
henderson
had
stated,
the
port
authority
levy
would
also
be
setting
aside
about
two
hundred
thousand
dollars
initially
for
creative
place,
making
outside
of
the
self
loop,
and
so
hopefully
those
programs
will
be
seen
within
the
next
year.
L
L
Both
are
able
to
create
a
levy
both
are
able
to
create
financial
incentive
packages
for
development
projects
through
either
the
creation
of
of
tif
districts,
they're
able
to
bond
or
able
to
borrow.
We
can
also
guarantee
financing
both
the
hra
and
the
port
authority.
We've
worked
on
housing
development,
which
mr
marker
guard
will
explain
here
in
a
little
bit
mixed
use
developments
and
we
both
can
own
parking
ramps
which,
where
the
hra
differs
a
little
bit
and
has
key
powers,
is
they
are
able
to
own
housing.
L
Additionally,
the
port
powers
allow
us
to
work
on
projects
outside
of
housing,
so
specifically
just
business
development
or
industrial,
similar
to
what
the
port
authority
just
did
with
the
sick
development,
we
were
able
to
work
on
commercial
development
and
we're
also
able
to
issue
general
obligation
bonds
next
slide.
Please
and
I'll
turn
it
over
to
mr
marker
yard.
C
C
C
C
And
if
we
look
more
recently
since
the
adoption
of
the
opportunity,
housing
ordinance
in
2019
we've
entitled
over
1800
units.
And
here
again
the
port
authority
has
been
very
involved
over
half
of
those
units
received
port
assistance
and
then
over
500
units
received
hra
assistance
as
well
next
slide.
C
N
Thank
you.
So
where
have
we
been
since
june
27th,
we
did
present
to
the
hre
board
july.
12Th
unanimously
supported
the
recommendations.
It
was
not
without
dialogue
and
a
lot
of
it,
and
then
we
did
go
to
the
port
authority
board
july
19th
and
they
approved
it
as
well.
Again
it
wasn't
a
slam
dunk.
We
had
a
lot
of
questions
to
answer
and
wanted
to
present
some
of
the
slides
that
came
out
of
the
questions
that
were
arisen
during
those
conversations,
and
so
the
next
slide.
N
I
wanted
to
tell
you,
show
you
the
budget
process,
because
we're
going
to
ask
for
your
approval
this
evening
to
move
forward,
but
there
are
lots
of
steps
to
get
us
there.
I
won't
go
through
all
of
them,
but
you'll
see
with
the
hra
and
the
port,
as
well
as
the
role
that
this
body
plays,
bringing
our
preliminary
levies
for
both
the
hra
and
the
port
on
september
19th
and
then
coming
back
on
december
5th
for
the
approval.
N
So
there's
lots
of
opportunity
to
have
dialogue
as
we
move
forward
through
this,
and
I
think
the
next
slide
is
the
motion,
so
we're
here
tonight
to
ask
you
to
support
our
recommendations
and
move
forward
with
the
implementation
steps
that
we
have
put
forward
through
the
budget
process
and
we'll
stand
for
any
questions
or
comments.
You
may
have
well
thank.
A
You
all
for
this,
and
thanks
for
the
thoughtfulness
that
went
into
trying
to
do
what
we're
what
we
have
laid
out
as
a
council
as
a
community,
what
the
goals
would
be
and
try
to
use
the
the
resources
that
we
have
to
re
to
rearrange
the
resources
that
are
there
to
do
this
most
effectively.
So
I
appreciate
that
I
appreciate
the
the
thought
that
went
into
it
and
I
do
appreciate
the
the
discussions.
A
I
don't
know
the
hra
discussion,
but
we
sure
had
the
discussion
at
the
port
authority
and
the
venn
diagram
did
come
up
and
but
it
was
a
it
was
a
helpful
discussion.
It
was
good
discussion.
I
think,
to
try
and
work
our
way
through
all
of
this.
So
I'm
I'm
supportive
of
this.
I
think
it's
a
good
path
forward.
J
Thank
you
mayor,
so
I
also
am
supportive
and
excited
about
these
changes
and
I
see
there's
a
lot
of
opportunity
in
front
of
us.
I
am
curious
as
it
relates
to
the
port
authority.
You
know.
Obviously
the
south
loop
has
been
a
very
specific
focus.
If
you
go
to
our
website
and
you
look
at
the
port
authority
web
page,
we
say
that
and-
and
I
know
we've
had
conversations
around
revisiting
our
strategic
plan
for
the
port
authority
and
I
guess
I'm
curious.
J
N
So
we
do
want
to
wait
until
the
new
person
is
on
board,
but
we
definitely
believe
that
we
do
need
to
go
through
that
process
and
so
timeline
is
to
get
somebody
on
board.
This
fall
hopefully,
and
then
work
with
the
chair
or
the
president
of
the
port
authority
to
kind
of
put
out
a
timeline
for
that
and
jason
did
you
want
to
add
anything.
L
Yeah,
mayor
councilmember,
I
think
I
mean
definitely
what
ms
henderson
had
stated.
I
think,
additionally
we're
going
to
continue
to
move
forward
on
development
projects
right
now
like
we
have
been
and
we're
starting
to
to
start
the
pro
the
transition
process
with
which
we
understand
that
developments
are
coming
in
and
out
in
other
parts
of
the
city.
Besides
south
loop,
and
so
the
port
authority
team
is
starting
to
sit
in
on
those
conversations.
L
We're
also
starting
to
sit
in
on
a
number
of
the
the
discussions
with
regarding
other
opportunities
to
assist
businesses
throughout
the
entire
city,
and
so
so
our
team
is
is
looking
at
that
and
we
are
preparing
for
that
transition
and
waiting
for
that.
The
new
administrator
to
get
hired
to
then
work
on
that
full
plan.
L
L
M
Thank
you,
mayor,
council
member.
It's
both
and
I
do
want
to
say
that
the
hra
is
in
a
very
unique
position,
because
a
lot
of
the
opportunities
that
come
forward
through
public
health,
in
particular
our
clients,
are
participants
of
multiple
programs,
whether
rental,
assistance
or
home
home
owner
home
improvement.
Loans
could
benefit
or
use
and
just
have
that
connection.
L
So
I
say
somebody's
coming
through
hra
we're
making
those
referrals
but
somebody's
also
coming
through
public
health,
but
it
might
not
touch
hra
programming.
I
guess,
is
there
going
to
be
one
central
clearinghouse,
we're
envisioning
at
some
point,
or
is
this
going
to
be
each
department's
making
handoffs.
M
M
D
Thank
you.
I
don't
know
if
that.
My
first
question
is
a
dovetail
or
a
repeat
of
councilmember
carter's,
but
so
I
apologize
if
that's
the
case,
but
I
think
when
we
talked
about
this
the
before
I
was
curious
as
to
why
we
were
doing
an
hra
assessment,
but
we
weren't
doing
a
port
authority
assessment
prior
to
making
these
decisions,
because
it
kind
of
indicated
that
the
port
authority
was
working
just
fine
and
we
should
just
expand
it.
We
didn't
really
have
that
same
assessment
process.
G
So
I
I
don't
want
to
say
that
it
ended
up
being
a
de
facto
port
assessment.
I
don't
think
that's
the
case,
but
it
was,
I
think,
a
full
assessment
of
how
we
approach
development
and
how
we
can
continue
to
do
it
better.
So
I
think
if
there
is
a
strategic
planning
effort
that
occurs
with
the
port,
with
the
arrival
of
a
new
administrator,
as
I
think
asking
the
questions
about
what
the
port
is
intending
to
do
going
forward,
some
of
those
questions
that
you
may
be
asking
are
appropriate
at
that
time.
G
D
Dov,
I
guess
the
counter
to
that-
is
that
for
the
hra
it
it
seemed
as
though
there
is
actually
an
expansion
of
responsibility,
meaning
that
you're
focusing
in
and
then
expanding
in
the
places
where
you
know
you
know
you
have
the
the
literal
authority
but,
more
importantly,
the
the
best
interests
of
the
clients
involved,
but
your
take
we're
taking
staff
from
hra
and
moving
it
to
port.
So
I
just
want
to
double
check
again.
D
N
I've
used
the
example
of
some
of
the
inspections
that
are
going
on
for
the
rehab
program
that
are
going
to
be
picked
up
by
the
building
and
inspection
inspectors.
That's
going
to
free
up
staff,
and
so
I
think
we're
starting
and
we're
starting
to
see
some
of
that,
and
then
you
know
we
have
had.
We
had
one
employee
that
had
been
here
26
years,
who
was
used
to
doing
things
a
certain
way,
so
some
of
the
changes
that
the
administrator
was
implementing
perhaps
were
not
met.
N
D
D
I
don't
know
that
we
have
something
that
strongly
worded
in
our
stuff,
but
you
alluded
earlier
in
the
conversations
around
creative
place,
making
that
that
we
might
be
considering
that
I'd
love
to
either
know
a
little
bit
more
about
what
you're
doing
or,
if
we're
getting
to
a
point
where
we
are
going
to
require
a
certain
portion
of
a
property's
land
or
whatever
dedicated
to
that,
or
something
like
that.
Where
are
we
out
with
with
that?
I
would
love
to
know
if
you've
got
some
ideas
there.
Thank
you.
L
We
do
have
incentives
within
the
zoning
code
currently
where
in
lieu
of
either
glazing
or
gl
our
windows
that
they
can
reduce
that
that
requirement
by
putting
in
public
art
and
so
so
there
there
is
encouragement
within
the
code
that
does
allow
that,
and
I
think
you
know,
as
the
creative
place,
making
team
right
now.
It
is
one
person,
and
so
so
we
will.
L
But
we
are
starting
to
see
actually
some
private
developments
do
creative
place
making
on
their
own
and
we're
seeing
that
actually
in
the
bloomington
central
station.
The
next
phase
here
that
project
they're
looking
to
to
move
forward
with
career
placemaking
with
the
assistance
of
the
commission
and
helping
to
to
pick
and
and
pick
the
artist
that
would
move
forward.
Great.
Thank
you.
A
H
H
I
F
I
remember,
I
think
I
know
what
you
mean
there
there's
a
internal
process
by
which
they
create
the
agenda
and
then,
when
they
create
the
agenda,
then
it
populates
in
this
chart
here.
So
there
may
be
a
there
may
be
matt,
maybe
creating
all
of
these
and
ally
and
others
who
have
their
agendas
already
timed
out
and
the
dates
that
they
already
have
already
planned.
H
F
H
Okay,
thank
you.
I
assume
they
showed
up
because
I've
seen
packets
as
well
having
been
to
joint
meetings
and
stuff
so,
but
I
just
think
you
know
it's
all
in
one
place
easy
for
people
to
find
see
what's
coming
up
there,
instead
of
having
two
different
calendars,
a
minor
point
on
this
you've
brought
up
some
slides
with
regards
to
the
tax
support
for
development
and,
frankly,
those
slides
startled
me.
I
looked
back
at
you
had
the
historic
one
and
it
seemed
like
taxpayer.
H
H
H
One
of
the
big
reasons
that
I
saw
the
opportunity
housing
ordinance
would,
by
itself
be
able
to
you,
know,
reduce
costs
and
help
development
for
without
taxpayer,
support,
and
I
just
frankly
don't
know
that
that's
a
sustainable
way
to
go
forward
and
there's
probably
people
in
the
room
that
are
much
smarter
than
myself
on
housing
and
what
it's
going
to
take
to
fix
our
housing
market.
But
I
think
that's
really
something.
We
need
to
take
a
serious
look
at
because
you
know
if
every
project
is
requiring
assistance
or
most
projects
are
requiring
assistance.
H
You
know
that's
not
a
model.
We
can
continue
to
rely
upon
going
forward
in
my
mind,
and-
and
so
I
appreciate
you
sharing
that
information,
because
I
think
it's
very
enlightening.
I
don't
know
how
it
applies
to
the
port
authority
versus
hra
versus
whatever.
But
I
would
ask
that
the
port
authority
take
a
very
serious
look
at
that
and
find
solutions
to
that,
because
that
is
a
significant
expense
for
the
region
and
the
community,
and
so.
G
H
If
I
might,
and
with
all
due
respect
mr
city
manager,
most
of
the
units
we've
created
are
at
80
percent.
Ami
we've
created
a
very
few
of
our
targeted
ones
at
30
at
the
very
lowest
part
of
it.
You
know
candidly
and
I've
said
this
before.
I
think
we've
spent
a
tremendous
amount
of
money
to
create
workforce
housing
and
we
haven't
addressed
the
the
most
basic
needs
for
people
that
really
are
struggling.
H
H
I
would
completely
agree
with
that
assessment,
but
I
think
that
we've
utilized
a
ton
of
financial
assistance
to
get
a
lot
of
yeah
see
this.
I
mean
we're
three
times
at
sixty
percent.
Now,
that's
better
than
eighty
percent.
I
said
eighty
percent.
This
is
sixty
percent,
so
I'll
correct
that
record,
but
even
so
my
understanding
before
we
passed
it
is
you
know
our
goal,
and
this
is
actually
something
that
if
we
could
get
more
information
on,
I
appreciate
it.
H
We
were
we
were
producing
nine
percent
affordable
units
prior
to
oho,
and
that
was
part
of
the
analysis
of
of
moving
that
program
forward,
and
then
we
set
a
a
requirement
for
nine
percent.
Are
we
getting
more
than
nine
percent?
How
much
more
you
know.
Is
that
really
moving
the
needle
on
what
we're
trying
to
do,
because
you
know-
and
maybe
it
is,
but
it's
a
huge
concern
for
me.
J
Thank
you
mayor,
so
I
I
guess
I
would
just
maybe
say
we
need
to
flag
this,
for
a
deeper
conversation
seems
related
but
kind
of
separate,
and
I
also
I
thought
it
wasn't
that
long
ago
that
we
made
some
changes
to
the
oho
understanding
that
we
were
seeing
higher
numbers
on
the
60
and
that
we
wanted
to
shift
the
incentives
to
encourage
more
at
the
30
percent.
That
was
in
the
last
three
or
four
months.
A
D
I
just
want
to
thank
you
mayor.
I
just
want
a
point
of
clarification.
Can
could
you
go
back
to
the
the
two
pictures
that
councilmember
nelson
brought
up?
So
if
I'm
doing
the
math
correctly
right,
so
this
is
1798
divided
by
47.39,
which
is
approximately
36,
and
if
we
go
to
the
next
one
375
out
of
1829,
which
is
more
like
21.
D
H
I
I
So
what
I
thought
I
heard
when
we
talked
about
this
before
was
we're
going
to
see
a
reduction
from
a
taxpayer
from
a
budget
perspective
when
we
we
make
these
these
changes,
and
so
first
I
want
to
kind
of
confirm
that
that
is
kind
of
what
we're
going
to
see,
not
that
that
would
make
a
difference
whether
or
not
we're
going
to
do
this
or
not.
But
as
we
look
forward
you
know,
I
think
the
last
conversation
we
had
the
last
time
we
were
together.
I
We
talked
about
tales
and
so
I'm
curious
about
as
we
kind
of
do
this,
do
you
see
other
tales
that
will
grow
and
will
impact
future
budgets?
You
know
sort
of
like
we.
You
know
we
looked
at
the
capital
when
lori
was
here.
I
think
last
year,
at
the
end
of
the
budget.
So
when
we
make
these
changes
you
know,
is
it
going
to
stay?
The
same
is
it,
you
know,
increase.
G
Mr
mayor
and
council
members
council,
member
lowman,
I
don't
think
at
any
point
in
the
process.
We
said
that
our
intent
was
to
lower
the
levies
for
taxpayers.
What
we
are
attempting
to
do
is
to
make
this
transition
without
increasing
the
impact
of
the
taxpayer,
and
so
we
are
going
to
lower
the
hra
levy,
which
has
been
at
its
maximum
levy
amount
for
a
number
of
years,
and
there
currently
is
not
a
port
authority
levy.
G
We
are
authorized
to
have
a
levy.
We
have
never
turned
that
levy
on,
and
so
we
are
essentially
going
to
bring
one
down
and
bring
the
other
up
on
par,
so
that
the
impact
to
the
bloomington
taxpayer
will
remain
unchanged
by
these
by
these
transition
plans.
In
future
years,
that's
going
to
be
up
to
the
council
and
the
port
and
the
hra
to
determine
what
the
appropriate
levy
is.
Each
year.
I
So
then,
just
just
by
virtue
of
making
this
change
we're
not
looking
to
make
any
any
increases,
as
it
would
say,
basically
keep
it
flat
kind
of
moving
forward,
so
then
kind
of
just
moving
on.
Then
you
know,
as
we
kind
of
look
at
these
programs
and
and
changing
them
and
kind
of
you
know
the
I
like
the
little
diagram,
the
venn
diagram.
We
saw
there
so
there's
a
there's,
a
change
in
terms
of
how
we're
bringing
these
things
together.
Do
you
do
we
foresee
any?
I
You
know
if
we
were
to
pass
this
thing
and
move
it
on
any
changes
in
terms
of
commissions
or
work
groups
or
how
that
structure
is
operating.
Some
of
the
things
you've
seen
in
other
cities
that
operate,
you
might
say,
hey,
you
know
what
we
no
longer
need
this
commission
or
we
need
to
change
the
focus
of
that
commission
or
or
just
you
know,
kind
of
forward
as
we're
doing
it
as
we
have
been
doing
it.
I
M
L
And
mr
mayor
and
council
member
similarly
a
statutory
board
and
really
it
is
most
likely
we're
going
to
be
having
more
meetings
than
what
currently
happens
with
the
port
authority.
And
so
that
was
relayed.
And
we
will
definitely
get
that
on
the
agenda
management
council.
Member
nelson.
To
make
sure
that
everyone
is
aware
of
our
meetings.
I
G
A
And
I
think
also
a
council
member,
as
we
have
been
talking
through
this
and
some
of
the
things
we
brought
up
over
previous
years
about
development
about
how
can
we,
for
example,
jump
start
the
neighborhood
node?
You
know
the
commercial
nodes,
all
those
different
things,
I
think,
as
as
we
continued
those
discussions
and
as
staff
started
to
think
about
them,
you're
asking
about
changing
commissions,
changing
boards
and
so
on.
I
think
the
community
development,
the
hra
and
the
port,
I
mean
they
kind
of
fit
together
perfectly
and
we
did
make
those
changes
within
them.
I
That
makes
total
sense,
and
I
think
that
that's
where
I
thought
there
could
be
some
intriguing
changes.
You
know
where
you
got
sustainability
human
rights-
maybe
there's
some
way
of
pulling
those
together
differently
and
some
innovation
there,
but
we're
not
there
yet.
So
you
know
we
got
to
kind
of
put
this
thing
together
and
then
kind
of
let
it
go
down
the
road
I'm
kind
of
too
far
ahead
of
myself
here.
So
I
think
I'll
just
shut
up
and
watch
the
process
happen.
Good
enough.
L
J
A
L
Thank
you
mayor
more
just
a
a
quick
comment,
and
I
mentioned
this
briefly
before,
but
just
this
body
moving
forward.
I
know
we
had
great
discussion
at
the
hra
level
about
working
on
the
missing
middle
housing
to
the
broader
points
about
how
broken
the
housing
development
market
is
missing.
Middle
really
feels
like
a
keystone
in
putting
that
whole
arch
together,
but
I'll
just
say
for
for
this
body.
L
A
G
For
folks,
as
as,
hopefully,
you
know
and
and
folks
who
are
maybe
watching,
may
or
may
not
understand.
Monkey
pox
requires
relatively
close
contact
for
a
period
of
time
and
we
don't
think
that
any
of
the
activities
that
are
currently
planned
are
going
to
put
people
at
risk
for
that
kind
of
exposure.
G
G
A
A
We
continued
that
conversation
as
we
have
over
the
past
couple
of
months
in
our
in
our
listing
sessions,
and
mr
andy
thule
had
questions
about
customer
service
in
our
dispatch
center,
a
negative
interaction
that
he
had
and
reported
that
he
heard
from
somebody
else
about
a
negative
interaction
and
we'll
be
following
up
with
with
the
our
folks
in
public
safety
regarding
the
customer
service
in
dispatch.
Regarding
that,
I
wanted
to
report
a
couple
of
things
council.
A
First
of
all,
obviously
with
the
news
last
week
out
of
the
mall
of
america,
the
the
incident
over
there
can't
say
enough
good
things
once
again
about
the
work
of
the
bloomington
police
department,
not
only
in
managing
that
situation,
but
in
their
follow-up.
Their
investigation,
as
they've
moved
forward
we
had,
I
saw
I
sat
in
here
and
watched
chief
hodges
earlier
today-
do
a
press
conference
where
they
updated.
A
So
hats
off
to
all
of
those
folks,
hats
off
also
to
the
folks
at
the
mall
of
america.
There's
a
reason
why
our
police
department,
drills
and
works
and
coordinates
with
the
security
staff
at
mall
of
america
as
often
and
as
rigorously
as
they
do
and
just
to
watch
it
in
action
is,
is
impressive
because
it
keeps
people
safe
and
we
we
owe
a
debt
of
gratitude
to
both
of
those
groups
we're
working
together
so
closely,
and
so
many
different
things
also
wanted
to
report.
A
We've
been
talking
about
when
the
summer
started.
I
think
there
was
some
concern.
I
know
the
different
groups
that
I
was
working
with
there
was
concern
about
potential
for
a
spike
in
crime
over
the
summer,
and
it
was
looking
like
it
might
be-
a
kind
of
a
hot
summer
in
here
in
bloomington
and
in
the
southwest
metro
and
the
chief
sent
numbers
out
so
far.
We
we
have
numbers
from
from
june.
We
just,
I
think,
he's
still
updating
the
july
numbers,
but
the
june
numbers
this
summer.
A
A
So
despite
these
fears
that
there
might
be
a
spike
in
crime
this
summer
in
bloomington,
actually
the
opposite
has
been
true.
It's
it's
come
down
fairly
significantly
and
again,
I'm
my
hat's
off
to
our
officers,
to
our
investigators,
to
the
chief
and
his
leadership
team,
for
all
the
work
that
they
are
doing
to
keep
bloomington
safe.
But
this
is
this
is
good
news.
I
mean
this.
A
This
shows,
I
think,
the
the
commitment
that
the
department
has
toward
respectful
law
enforcement
and
the
expectation
setting
that
goes
on
with
it
and
the
work
that
they've
been
doing,
and
I
think
it's
just
outstanding
and
I'm
very
proud
of
them,
and
I
want
to
thank
them
publicly
for
for
what
they've
been
doing
and
the
efforts
that
they've
been
putting
in
because
we're
all
seeing
the
benefit
of
it.
So
council
anything
else
to
add
this
evening,
councilmember
d'alessandro.
D
Y'all
again
get
mad
at
me
because
I
got
a
list,
but
I
promise
you
they're
really
fast.
Thank
you,
mr
mayor.
Okay,
just
for
you
city
manager,
if,
if
you
could
do
you,
these
are
just
timeline
questions
more
than
anything.
So
in
3.4
today
we
we
went
ahead
and
made
the
the
adjustments
to
the
funding
so
that
we
our
strategic
priorities.
There
were
a
couple
things
in
there.
D
I
think
one
was
the
natural
resources
plan
for
350
000
and
then
there's
some
of
the
studies
that
we
had
around
traffic
safety
and
the
other
things
do
you
have
any
kind
of
timeline
for
when
we
would
see
either
details
on
those
or
updates
based
on
you
know
just
so
we
know
about
when
we
might
see
the
results
of
those
things
and
if
we
don't
have
it
today,
that's
fine.
I
just
wanted
to
ask.
G
G
There
are
a
couple
that
are
specifically
going
to
carry
over
into
2023
just
because
of
some
lead
time
planning
that's
involved,
but
the
intent
with
that
list
of
projects
that
was
presented
was
again
to
start
making
some
serious
investments
and
improving
our
parks
throughout
the
city,
as
well
as
trying
to
advance
the
council's
commitment
to
several
initiatives
around
sustainability
and
natural
resources,
and-
and
I
expect
we're
gonna-
make
some
pretty
good
progress
on
that.
We
will
keep
you
updated
as
we
move
forward
on
those
when
they
are
occurring.
G
D
G
I
G
D
D
Yeah,
great
okay,
so
then
the
two
things
that
are
substantive
one
is:
does
anybody
else
or
is
anybody
else
interested
in
having
dr
kelly
or
someone
from
the
public
health
team?
Give
us
a
quick
update
on
monkey
pox
here
in
the
bloomington
area?
I
haven't
heard
anything
in
terms
of
numbers:
maybe
it's
not
even
on
the
radar
anything
like
that,
but
since
it
has
been
brought
to
the
level
of
public
health
crisis,
I
also
think
that
left
to
its
own
devices,
it
could
be
stigmatized
and
I'd
really
like
to
avoid
that.
D
K
G
D
G
I
think
that
in
that
particular
example,
the
council
was
aware
of
what
the
issues
were
and
and
what
some
of
the
potentialities
were
and
made
a
specific
decision
at
that
time.
I
don't
know
if
there
is
a
specific
learning
to
come
from
that
case,
but
that's
certainly
something.
If
the
council
wants
to
discuss
further,
we
can.
We
can
try
to
frame
a
conversation
around
it.
D
A
D
No,
I
think
that
I
think
that,
in
terms
of
the
steps
that
were
taken,
I
think
the
public
is
aware,
but
but
I
do
think,
there's
some
open
questions
in
the
public's
mind
about
what
what
could
have
been
done
differently
that
would
have
potentially
either
made
it
go
faster
or
not
faster
or
you
know
I
mean
it's
not
very
common.
Maybe
it
maybe
I'm
wrong
about
this,
but
it
doesn't
seem
like
we
go
to
summary
judgment
very
often
as
a
as
a
council,
and
so
I'm
just
kind
of
curious.
A
A
G
I
Thank
you
mayor
a
couple
things
here.
We
we're
continuing
to
make
progress
on
the
organics
adoption.
I
think
last
I
heard
we
were
up
to
24.4
percent
or
almost
24.6,
or
something
like
that.
So
we're
nearing
25
adoption
of
that
organics
piece
still
getting
several
questions
about
that
and
emails.
I'm
sure
other
council
members
are
getting
that
those
questions.
I
I
obviously
you
know.
We've
residents
have
come
before
me
with
these
complaints
about
speeding
and
speeding
zones
and
that
type
of
thing-
and
then
also
just
some
questions
about
in
terms
of
106th
street,
just
some
history
on
that
they
want
to
understand
how
the
road
was
the
road
built
just
for
for
trucks
or
for
cars.
Just
they're,
also
experiencing
a
lot
of
passing
in
the
turning
lanes,
and
just
the
speed
is
just
out
of
control
on
106th
street
and
it's
kind
of
a
known
issue.
I
I
I
do
know
that
things
kind
of
pop
up
and
go
go
down,
but
we're
kind
of
back
at
that
point
where,
where
folks
are
starting
to-
and
I
want
to
get
ahead
of
that
just
to
make
sure
we're
we're
making
sure
that
the
speed
piece
is
understood
and
that
it
doesn't
go
any
further
than
that
mature
car.
If
there's
anything
else,
I
know
we,
you
talked
to
one
of
the
residents
today,
but
we'll
just
leave
it
at
that,
and
then
we
can
kind
of.
I
I
We
had
this
past
week
our
celebration
of
sustainability
council
member
d'alessandre
was
there.
Thank
you
for
being
there
and
also
mayor
tim
bussey.
Was
there
as
well?
We
missed
your
words.
I
normally
were
able
to
say
something,
and
also
our
manager
and
again
want
to
just
thank
our
continued
work
for
sustainability
and
in
the
community
here.
So
thank
you.
H
Thank
you
mayor,
just
a
quick
thing
based
on
the
penn
town
home
project,
a
number
of
people
have
seen
have
been
talking
about
the
emergency
exit
actually
at
the
108th
place,
saying
that
people
are
utilizing
that
to
go
on
to
108th
street.
I
personally
have
not
witnessed
it.
I
don't
know
if
councilmember
lohman
has
either.
I
know
he
doesn't
live
too
far
from
there.
H
So
I'm
just
wondering
if,
if
I
could
get
a
quick
update
from
police,
if
they're
aware
of
any
issues
with
regard-
and
I
don't
need
it
tonight-
it's
kind
of
a
very
specific
question
at
some
point
just
to
see
what
the
veracity
of
those
claims
are
and
things
like
that,
and
if
there
is
an
issue,
you
know
what
options
we
may
have
there.
So
I
know
that
that's
a
concern,
I
know,
is
a
concern
at
penn
as
well
so
just
see
if
we
can
preempt
something
there.
G
Yeah,
mr
mayor
and
council
members,
council,
member
nelson,
I
saw
similar
comments
and
those
those
are
new
to
me.
I've
not
had
those
concerns
that
have
bubbled
up,
at
least
to
my
level,
so
we'll
check
in
with
the
pd
and
see
if
they've
been
getting
complaints
and
if
they've
had
any
enforcement
activity.
H
A
No
hands
going
up.
I
would
entertain
a
motion
to
adjourn
so
move
motion
by
council
member
loman,
second
by
council
member
carter,
to
adjourn
this
evening.
No
further
council
discussion,
all
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye,
always
motion-
carries
7-0
thanks
much
for
tuning
in
this
evening.
Thank
you
to
staff
for
your
work.
Thanks
to
the
council
good
work
tonight,
everybody
have
a
good
evening.