►
From YouTube: August 3, 2023 Bloomington Planning Commission Meeting
Description
August 3, 2023 Bloomington Minnesota Planning Commission Meeting
0:00:00 Start
0:02:29 ITEM 1 Swearing in of New and Reappointed Commissioners
(study item)
0:03:39 ITEM 2 Discuss Bloomington Forward
(study item)
0:57:08 ITEM 3 Mural Ordinance and Policy – City Code Amendment
(public hearing)
1:48:14 ITEM 4 City of Bloomington
(study item) Consider approval of draft June 8th, 2023 and June 22nd, 2023 Planning Commission meeting synopses
1:50:25 ITEM 5 City of Bloomington
(study item) Planning Commission Policy and Issues Update
A
A
A
Good
evening
and
welcome
to
the
August
3rd
2023
meeting
of
the
Bloomington
Planning
Commission,
the
Planning
Commission
is
made
up
of
seven
volunteer
Bloomington
residents
appointed
by
the
city
council.
Tonight
we
have
a
full
house.
The
commission
advises
the
city
council
on
development
proposals,
development
standards,
long-range
planning
and
transportation
issues.
Our
work
is
informed
by
the
city's
comprehensive
plan,
various
District
plans
and
the
city
code
for
some
items.
The
city
council
makes
a
recommendation
with
the
city
council
having
the
final
decision-making
Authority,
which
we
have
one
item
of
that
nature
tonight.
A
A
All
right,
the
first
item
of
business
tonight
is
an
item
of
business
of
the
commission.
We
have
the
swearing-in
of
two
new
and
two
reappointed,
Commissioners
and
so
I
will
after
I
ask
the
Commissioners
to
stand.
I
will
go
through
in
a
column
repeat
of
the
oath
of
office,
so
would
Commissioners
Albrecht
cooked
in
Moreno
and
Curry.
Please
stand
and
if
you
would
raise
your
right
hand
and
repeat
after
me,
I
state.
A
A
D
A
D
D
I've
been
going
to
each
of
the
boards
and
commissions
to
share
what
the
city
council
is
doing,
to
move
forward,
planning
initiatives
around
significant
capital
reinvestments
in
the
city
of
Bloomington,
for
the
benefit
of
Bloomington
residents
and
the
Bloomington
Community
as
a
whole.
So
our
role
in
this
process
is
to
inform
and
educate
when
we
have
well.
This
is
involving
a
ballot
initiative
in
November,
where
we
will
have
a
question
for
residents
to
approve
a
financing
vehicle
to
move
these
four.
D
These
projects
forward
and
the
city's
role
in
in
a
referendum
like
that
is
to
provide
information
and
education.
So
we
can't
advocate
for
the
project.
That's
not
what
we're
doing
in
these
presentations.
I
can't
stand
here
and
tell
you
that
you
should
or
should
not
vote
for
something
I'm,
just
sharing
with
you
what
it
is,
why
we're
doing
it
and
details
around
that
as
well?
Okay,
and
then,
when
we
get
through
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
D
A
D
Right
then,
I
I'm
gonna
drink
my
soda
as
we
go
because
I've
been
doing
a
lot
of
talking
today.
So
hopefully
it
doesn't
bother
anybody
all
right.
So
Bloomington
forward
is
the
long-range
capital
investment
plan
that
we
have.
It
involves
primarily
three
projects,
at
least
that's
what's
in
front
of
the
community
right
now
that
have
a
total
of
159
million
dollars
for
those
three
projects:
new
Community
Health
and
Wellness,
Center
Renovations
of
the
Bloomington
Ice
garden,
and
then
an
enhancement
and
preservation
project
in
The,
Nine,
Mile,
Creek
corridor.
D
D
D
You
can
only
have
it
for
specific
projects.
You
can
only
have
it
for
a
specific
amount
that
has
to
be
identified
and
you
can
only
have
it
for
a
specific
period
of
time.
Any
change
or
reauthorization
of
a
sales
tax
if
it's
approved,
has
to
go
back
to
the
legislature
for
approval
a
second
time
and
would
have
to
come
back
to
voters
to
be
approved
once
again
if
there
were
changes
in
any
of
those
conditions.
D
So
the
half
percent
sales
tax
is
what's
on
the
ballot.
November
7th,
the
155
million
dollars
for
projects
is
the
total
that's
being
asked
for
approval
from
the
voters.
The
additional
four
million
dollars
came
from
State
bonding
in
this
in
the
2023
legislative
session.
To
do
pre-design
and
planning
work
on
the
ice
garden
and
on
a
public
health
building
that
will
be
part
of
the
Health
and
Wellness
Center.
D
D
The
the
fact
is
that
Bloomington
is
of
a
certain
age
and
when
you
get
to
be
a
certain
age,
things
just
start
to
wear
out
and
they
need
to
be
replaced.
So,
as
somebody
you
know
who
is
of
a
certain
age,
I
can
I
resemble
these
remarks
right
and
the
buildings
here
and
the
facilities
that
we
have
are
no
different
and
I'll
get
into
the
details
about
each
one
of
these,
but
with
the
ice
Garden.
D
There
are
critical
infrastructure
improvements
that
need
to
happen,
and
we
are
reaching
the
point
of
urgency
on
some
of
those
things
that
we
would
we
we
potentially
have
a
significant
system.
Failure,
Creekside
and
public
health
are
both
approaching
functional
obsolescence.
They're
1950s
60s
vintage
buildings
not
designed
for
the
type
of
use
that
they're
currently
used
for
and
then
the
Nine
Mile
Creek
Corridor
is
both
part
of
our
Park
system.
Master
plans,
improvements
and
also
to
do
some
necessary
Natural
Area,
a
restoration
and
preservation
and
elimination
of
invasive
species.
D
So
I'm
going
to
talk
about
each
one
of
them
here,
so
the
Creekside
Community
Center
in
Bloomington
Public
Health
buildings,
are
both
more
than
60
years.
Old
Creekside
was
an
elementary
school
that
opened
in
1960.
It
was
open
for
13
years
because
that
was
the
big
boom
in
Bloomington
closed
in
1973,
the
school
district
conveyed
the
property
to
the
city
and
we've
been
using
it
as
a
senior
center
and
and
Community
Gathering
space.
Since
that
time,
it
is
the
amount
of
the
amount
of
cost
to
make
improvements
to.
D
It
essentially
exceeds
the
value
of
the
property
right,
and
so
it's
not
a
good
investment
to
just
try
to
renovate
or
repair
what
is
there
and
so
we're
looking
at
a
replacement.
We
also
have
just
some
conditions.
Ada
related.
You
know
there
are
primary
participants,
there
are
older
and
if
you've
used
facilities
in
an
elementary
school,
you
know
that
those
two
don't
necessarily
match
up
so
trying
to
fix
some
of
those
issues.
D
That's
all
part
of
the
rationale
for
why
the
Creekside
Community
Center
is
in
need
of
replacement,
and
then
we
also
just
have
had
significant
population
growth.
So
as
we're
looking
at
what
services
we
want
to
deliver
out
of
a
whether
it's
a
senior
center
or
Community
Center,
that
Center
isn't
necessarily
optimal
for
doing
that.
D
D
The
third
one
was
actually
done
following
the
U.S
Olympic
gold
medal,
when
there
was
a
craze
everywhere,
the
the
trend
was
to
put
in
olympic
sized
sheets
and
those
have
since
fallen
out
of
favor
they're,
really
hard
to
schedule
frankly
for
youth,
especially
younger
youth
hockey,
because
the
ice
sheets
just
too
big
right,
but
more
importantly
than
that
is
the
condition
of
the
building
itself.
The
roof
is
in
need
of
repair
repair.
It's
a
really
large
roof.
It's
a
big
project.
The
refrigeration
system
needs
to
be
replaced.
D
D
We
have
to
do
that
on
the
secondary
market,
and
since
it
is
a
declining
Supply
and
there
continues
to
be
demand
for
it,
you
understand
the
conditions
of
supply
and
demand.
We
actually
just
used
our
last
Supply
supply
of
R22
to
recharge
the
system.
If
we
have
a
failure
there,
if
it
were
an
all
system,
failure
for
the
whole
Arena,
it
would
be
150
000
just
to
buy
the
R22.
So
it's
a
significant
and
Urgent
issue
for
us.
D
We
also
just
have
again
Ada
issues
that
need
to
happen
and
then
a
lot
of
the
building
repairs
that
need
to
be
done:
Nine,
Mile
Creek
corridor.
One
of
the
things
we
know
is
that
our
Park
system
and
our
natural
spaces
and
our
green
areas
are
highly
valued
by
residents.
That
shows
up
in
all
of
the
surveying
that
we
do
behind
things
like
police
and
fire.
The
things
that
people
feel
most
strongly
about
is
their
park
system
and
so
making
sure
that
we're
reinvesting
in
the
Parks
has
been
a
really
high
priority
for
the
council.
D
So
here's
a
little
bit
more
of
the
details
for
the
Community
Health
and
Wellness
Center.
It
would
incorporate
both
public
health
and
the
community
center
Recreation
type
activities
into
the
facility.
The
cost
would
be
100
million
dollars
for
the
the
project
costs.
The
101.8
1.8
million
dollars
is
the
pre-design
money
that
came
from
the
legislature
this
year,
so
100
million
dollars
of
actual
construction
and
project
related
cost.
The
amenities
that
you
see
there
are
based
on
work
that
was
done
back
in
2018
and
2019
to
develop
some
Community
Center
options.
D
Some
of
you
may
remember
that
back
then
we
were
looking
at
doing
a
new
community
center.
We
had
focused
on
the
Creekside
site
and
then
later
looked
at
the
Valley
View
site
as
an
option,
and
that
became
the
preferred
option.
There
was
a
fair
amount
of
community
resistance
to
that
location
and
the
council
decided
not
to
go
forward
at
the
time.
D
In
addition
to
just
having
a
pandemic,
which
has
maybe
changed
the
way
that
people
behave
or
the
way
that
they
think
about
things,
we've
had
significant
turnover
in
the
community
and
so
finding
out
from
the
voice
of
the
community.
What
they
want
to
have
included
is
going
to
be
important
and
then
we'll
we'll
come
forward
with
the
program
that
reflects
that.
This
is
a
pretty
fair
representation,
though
of
what
we
expect
in
terms
of
what
people
have
identified
before
for
the
ice.
D
D
Right
and
so
the
locker
rooms
were
just
designed
for
one
gender
and
so
we've
we've
made
some
modifications
there,
but
the
whole
the
whole
locker
room
area
is
in
need
of
improvement
and
then
I
talked
about
reconfiguring
rink
number
three
from
an
olympic
size
bag
to
an
NHL
standard
size
sheet,
and
here
are
the
program
components
for
the
Nine
Mile
Creek
Corridor,
renewal
project,
12
000,
feet
of
new
trails.
This
project
is
focused
around
the
areas
of
Central
and
Moyer
Park.
D
One
of
the
questions
that
have
has
come
up
during
our
engagement
around
this
project
is
concerned
that
we
were
going
to
be
straightening
out
the
creek.
That's
not
the
case.
We're
not
going
to
do
anything
to
alter
the
existing
path
of
the
creek
Corridor.
It's
really
about
making
sure
that
erosion,
control
and
control
of
invasive
species
is
maintaining
that
as
a
healthy
ecosystem.
D
We
brought
it
forward
in
2019.
There
was
a
whole
round
of
community
engagement
there
before
the
decision
not
to
move
forward
at
the
same
time
or
about
the
same
time,
we
started
our
Park
system
Master
planning
process.
That
was
an
intense
Community
engagement
experience
for
a
couple
years
before
finally,
adopting
the
park
system
master
plan,
we've
utilized
scientifically
valid
random
surveys
to
gauge
resident
opinions,
for
you
know
the
the
amenities
that
Bloomington
offers
the
things
that
they
would
prioritize.
What
they'd?
D
D
They
each
have
to
be
identified,
the
cost
of
them
has
to
be
identified
and
then,
if
all
three
of
them
are
approved,
that
total
amount
of
155
would
be
the
maximum
amount
that
we
couldn't
spend
okay,
and
we
would
spend
that
by
issuing
debt
and
then
servicing
the
debt
with
the
revenue
that
comes
in
from
the
sales
tax
on
an
annual
basis.
If
the
debt
is
retired
earlier
we
have
to
stop
collecting
it.
We
can't
continue
to
collect
it
for
the
whole
20
years.
D
Once
the
project
has
been
paid
for
the
sales
tax
turns
off
and
again
we
can't
continue
it
for
other
purpose
without
going
back
to
the
legislature
and
back
to
voters
for
reauthorization
the
local
sales
tax
rate,
again,
half
a
percent-
and
that
is
no
matter
if
all
of
the
projects
are
approved
or
just
one
or
two
of
them
is
approved.
So
in
a
scenario
where
say,
one
project
gets
approved
and
the
other
two
are
are
not
approved
by
voters.
D
Why
are
we
looking
at
a
local
option?
Sales
tax?
So
we
go
back
to
the
beginning
when
I
talked
about
the
council's
look
at
Capital
reinvestment
needs
in
the
community.
This
started
back.
This
was
a
conversation
almost
from
my
very
first
day
here
in
2015.,
the
council
recognized
that
we
have
a
lot
of
facilities
that
need
to
be
maintained
in
buildings,
but
also
in
our
Park
system.
We
have
a
hundred
parks
and
that's
a
lot
to
keep
up.
D
We've
got
a
lot
of
buildings
and
we
have
a
lot
of
reinvestment
and
replacement
needs
in
the
next
10
years.
We're
going
to
be
building
four
more
new
fire
stations
over
the
next
eight
years,
or
so
we
have
a
new
maintenance
garage,
mechanics,
a
garage,
that's
going
to
be
built
in
the
next
couple
years.
The
park
system
master
plan
that
I
talked
about
is
going
to
be
doing
a
couple
of
parks
every
two
years.
That's
a
significant
reinvestment.
D
D
So
the
idea
of
getting
a
local
option
sales
tax
is
a
way
to
relieve
some
of
the
burden
of
the
taxes
to
the
to
the
local
community.
Now
the
legislature
will
only
approve
a
local
option-
sales
tax
if
it
has
some
sort
of
regional
benefit.
So
in
order
for
them
to
approve
it
this
session,
we
had
to
demonstrate
to
them
that
these
projects
are
Regional
nature
right.
The
ice
arena.
There's
no
doubt,
is
a
regional
amenity.
D
People
come
from
all
over
the
state,
not
just
the
Twin
Cities,
all
over
the
state
to
play
at
Bloomington,
Ice,
Garden,
The,
Nine,
Mile,
Creek
Corridor
is
a
recreation
and
Natural
Area
Corridor
that
spans
multiple
communities
and
it
serves
a
much
larger
area
and
with
the
Community
Health
and
Wellness
Center,
our
Public
Health
Services
are
provided
not
just
to
the
city
of
Bloomington,
but
also
to
the
cities
of
Edina
and
Richfield.
We
work
in
a
Tri-City
Consortium
to
deliver
those
necessary
public
health
services.
D
So
we
meet
the
regional
tests
on
all
three
projects
and
that's
why
the
legislature
okayed
us
to
ask
voters
to
approve
it.
So
what
the
rationale
is
is
that
regionally
benefiting
projects
can
be
shared
in
the
cost
with
people
from
around
the
region,
so
it
doesn't
necessarily
have
to
be
born
just
by
the
local
community,
that's
hosting
that
facility.
Okay.
So
when
we
look
at
it,
we
have
information
from
the
Minnesota
Department
of
Revenue.
These
are
not
made
up
numbers
by
us
by
the
way.
These
are.
D
D
Hotels
were
mostly
closed
in
2020,
retail
was
significantly
impacted.
Entertainment
venues
were
significantly
impacted.
A
lot
of
the
things
that
generate
sales.
Tax
activity
here
were
mostly
shut
down,
so
there
was
a
pretty
significant
decline,
so
this
number
has
actually
been
creeping
back
up
and
I.
D
Think
when
we
see
our
new
report
in
about
two
weeks
from
the
University
of
Minnesota
extension
office
will
be
closer
to
70
percent
I,
don't
think
we're
going
to
be
all
the
way
back
up
to
that
73
to
75,
but
in
any
event,
the
the
impact
to
the
resident
as
a
taxpayer
for
these
projects
is
significantly
reduced.
If
we
were
to
actually
I
think
that's
my
next
slide
yep.
If
we
were
to
do
City
bonding
for
these
projects
and
pay
for
them
with
property
tax.
D
The
bar
on
the
right
is
what
the
median
value
home
would
pay
for,
that
155
million
dollars
of
project
costs.
It's
about
230
dollars,
increase
in
property
taxes,
utilizing
the
local
option.
Sales
tax
average
household
will
probably
spend
more
in
the
neighborhood
of
85
dollars,
so
you
can
see
for
a
Bloomington
resident
there's
a
pretty
significant
difference
in
the
tax
burden
to
get
these
projects
constructed.
So
that's
the
rationale
of
why
we've
looked
at
a
local
option.
Sales
tax
is
the
best
way
to
do
this
to
relieve
burden
from
the
Bloomington
taxpayer.
D
Okay,
the
things
on
the
right
side
are
really
important,
though,
so
the
sales
tax
can't
be
extended
or
used
for
any
other
project.
I
said
that,
but
down
at
the
bottom
there,
the
exemptions,
you
know
currently
groceries
and
clothing
medications,
feminine
hygiene
products,
baby
products,
automobiles,
those
are
all
Exempted
from
state
sales
tax
and
it
doesn't
change
by
having
a
local
options.
Local
option
sales
tax,
so
we
won't
be
collecting
the
half
percent
on
any
of
those
items.
Okay,
we
can't
make
something
not
taxable
today,
taxable
at
a
local
level,.
D
I
touched
on
most
of
this
in
my
comments,
but
the
timing
is
one
of
the
questions
that
we
run
into.
So
if
the,
if
a
project
or
all
of
the
projects
pass
in
November,
what's
going
to
happen,
we
would
especially
with
the
Community
Health
and
Wellness
Center,
go
back
and
do
significant
amount
of
Engagement
to
make
sure
that
we
have
the
program
in
building
design
reflective
of
input
from
the
community.
D
The
community
of
the
Bloomington
Ice
Garden
is
mostly
ready
to
go
right
now,
so
we're
actually
working
with
a
design
team
that
will
be
starting
shortly
to
get
those
final
plans
ready
to
go,
so
we
would
be
underway
next
summer
with
the
ice
Garden.
If
that
one
is
approved,
and
that
would
probably
be
about
an
18-month
construction
phase,
the
intent
is
try
to
leave
some
ice
open.
While
we're
doing
that
project
we've
been
looking
at.
Do
we
have
to
shut
the
whole
thing
down?
D
One
of
the
issues
that
is
urgent
related
to
that
is
the
Public
Health
Building
I
talked
about
Creekside
a
little
bit.
I
didn't
talk
about
our
Public
Health
Building,
built
in
the
late
50s.
It
currently
houses
about
twice
as
many
staff
as
it
was
designed,
for
it
is
a
little
bit
of
a
rabbit
Warren
over
there.
D
But,
most
importantly,
we
have
a
real
Equity
issue
in
that
the
people
that
we
serve
through
our
Public
Health
division
primarily
are
lower
income
and
bypoc
populations,
black
indigenous
people
of
color
and
the
manner
and
the
facility
from
which
we're
delivering
those
Services
has
a
very
different
standard
than
and
the
building
that
you're
sitting
in
right
now,
which
many
other
people
in
the
community
benefit
from
right.
And
so
we
have
an
expectation
that
we're
going
to
deliver
services
in
a
way
that
is
Equitable
across
our
community
and
we're
not
meeting
that
expectation
with
that
facility.
D
So
that's
one
of
the
things
that
needs
to
be
resolved,
we'll
find
a
path
forward
on
that.
My
guess
is
that
public
health
would
probably
move
separately
from
a
community
center
in
finding
them
a
new
facility.
But
we've
been
talking
about
replacing
that
facility
for
almost
10
years
now
and
that's
a
project
that
we'll
probably
get
prioritized
whether
or
not
the
referendum
passes.
D
So
here's
how
you
can
participate
early,
in-person
voting
starts
September
22nd,
absentee
balloting
is
still
an
option.
The
ballot
question
will
be
on
the
the
main
ballot.
Ballots
can
only
be
a
front
and
back
for
this
election,
we
have
municipal
offices
this
year.
All
seven
of
our
Council
seats
are
on
the
ballot
this
year,
as
well
as
three
School
Board
seats,
and
so
the
back
side
I
believe
the
ballot
is
going
to
be
the
the
question
on
the
local
option:
sales
tax
and
then
November
7th
is
in-person
voting
for
election
day.
D
D
They
can
see
the
mechanical
and
the
building
the
structural
issues
that
need
to
be
addressed
so
that
you
can
visualize
it
because,
frankly,
if,
if
you're
just
doing
this
as
sort
of
a
an
academic
exercise,
it's
hard
for
people
to
understand
what
the
need
is,
but
the
the
staff
working
in
those
facilities
and
the
communications
team
has
done
a
really
nice
job
of
helping
people
understand
visually
and
experientially
why
those
facilities
are
being
prioritized
for
reinvestment
right
now.
The
other.
D
The
other
thing
we
have
there
like
I
said,
is
frequently
asked
questions
and
way
for
people
to
submit
questions
which
we're
responding
to
relatively
quickly.
The
one
thing
I
do
want
to
share
with
each
of
you
again.
Our
role
is
to
inform
and
educate,
and
so
as
Planning
Commission
members,
you
are
bound
by
the
same
prohibitions
from
the
state
in
terms
of
speaking
about
this,
in
your
role
as
a
planning,
commissioner,
okay,
so
your
friends
and
family
and
neighbors
probably
know
that
you,
you
do
stuff
for
the
city
right.
D
That
would
seem
to
convey
a
position
by
a
city,
representative,
okay,
but
you
don't
lose
your
first
amendment
rights
as
a
resident,
so
you
can.
You
can
Advocate
either
side
as
much
as
you
want
on
behalf
of
or
against
the
project.
Just
don't
do
use
City
resources
to
do
it,
and
the
same
goes
with
the
staff
here
and
with
the
council
members.
Our
our
staff
members
who
live
in
the
community
are
free
to
tell
as
many
people
what
they
think
just
can't
use
their
email.
D
A
F
D
It
was
part
of
the
consideration,
commissioner
golsman
back
in
2018,
and
even
before
that
we
were
looking
at
different
options
and
we
had
quite
a
bit
of
conversation
with
the
YMCA
about
a
shared
approach
on
managing
and
operating
the
facility.
And
ultimately,
the
council
decided
not
to
move
forward
in
that
kind
of
a
partnership.
I
think
there
was
concern
that
the
level
of
capital
investment
for
the
amount
of
control
and
cost
savings
that
we
would
get
wasn't
necessarily
the
value
that
the
council
at
the
time
thought
about.
D
G
D
We
have
a
map,
commissioner
cookton,
on
the
on
the
web
page,
so
people
can
see
where
these
are,
but
I
don't
think
it
really
does
a
good
job
of
specifying
the
surrounding
uses.
So
for
the
current
Creekside
site,
it's
located
at
Penn
and
98th
and
just
to
the
South,
is
the
Presbyterian
Homes
Senior
Living
facility
and
then
there's
a
park
right
along
Newton
right
on
the
other
side
of
Newton
is
residential,
so
between
here
at
Civic,
Plaza
and
the
creek
side,
we've
got
about
three
blocks
of
residential,
mostly
single-family
homes.
D
D
We
have,
in
the
past,
had
some
conversation
about
acquisition
of
property
in
that
area,
and
the
council
at
that
time
chose
not
to
move
forward
with
those
kind
of
conversations.
So
the
to
the
north
of
the
property
on
the
other
side
of
98th
is
a
combination
of
multi-family
right
on
the
corner
and
then
some
commercial
just
to
the
east
of
it
as
well.
D
H
D
Mr
chair
commissioner
Curry,
when
we
were
looking
at
it
in
2018
and
2019,
we
didn't
have
any
traffic
redesign,
so
we
tried
to
utilize
the
site
and
maximize
it
with
the
existing
conditions.
I,
don't
think,
there's
a
there.
You
know,
there's
an
access
off
of
Penn
and
there's
access
off
of
Newton
and
I.
Don't
know
that
there's
an
alternative
to
adding
additional
access.
D
A
This
is
a
question
that
might
be
actually
more
for
the
playing
manager,
since
commissioner
cookton
was
asking
about
properties
to
the
east.
This
there,
yes
about
properties
in
general
and
the
city
manager
talked
about
properties
of
the
East.
Do
we
know,
generally
speaking,
the
properties
that
were
discussed
are
those
more
market
rate.
Are
those
naturally
occurring
affordable?
If
you
had
to
categorize
broadly
or
is
it
a
mix.
E
F
E
D
F
That's
great
to
hear
one
of
the
other
questions
that
I
had
too
is
you
talked
about
20
or
12
400
feet
of
new
trails?
Is
that
really
looking
at
the
upper
Loop
that
currently
exists
or
creating
new
trails?
You
mentioned
it
within
the
moyer
Park
area.
So
let
me
elaborate
a
little
bit
more
on
what
that
looks.
Like.
D
D
F
D
I
would
look
at
as
as
a
comparison,
the
the
pave
Trail
down
in
the
river
valley
was
relatively
controversial,
especially
by
the
mountain
biking,
Community
or
the
off
Community
there,
but
on
the
other
side
of
it.
Advocates
for
accessibility
were
strongly
supportive
of
putting
a
paved
trail
down
there.
G
D
Mr
chair,
commissioner
cookton:
if
you
take
the
debt
service
out
of
the
building,
then
it
is
Cash
flowing
on
an
operations
basis,
and
that's
not
unusual.
For
Enterprise
operations
within
a
local
government
is
often
the
the
day-to-day
operations
will
be
in
the
black,
but
when
you
put
Capital
costs
on
top
of
it,
that's
the
decision
that
you
know
local
governments
have
to
make
is
the
extent
to
which
they're
going
to
support
improvements
in
those
facilities.
D
D
I
know,
other
cities
have
looked
at
expanding
on
to
their
arenas
by
either
doing
another
ice
sheet,
or
some
places
have
done
like
an
outdoor
covered,
Pavilion
type
ice
sheet.
We've
talked
about
those
things
just
based
on
community
input
and
just
staff
ideas
and
the
site
is
limited
because
of
the
you
know,
the
site
coverage
and
the
parking
requirements
that
we
don't
have
a
lot
of
expansion
room
on
that
site
limitation
is
we
don't
have
a
lot
of
other
places
in
the
community
that
would
afford
that
same
opportunity
as
well.
G
D
Sure
we
have
a
facilities,
condition
index
rating
for
all
of
the
buildings
in
in
the
city
of
Bloomington,
and
so
that
is
updated
annually
and
it
tells
us
you
know,
there's
a
there's:
a
zero
to
100
score
for
each
building
and
then,
when
you
get
into
certain
areas,
tells
us
when
you
should
be
rehabilitating
something
or
when
you
should
be
replacing
something.
And
we
have
Architects
and
design
teams
that
come
in
and
take
a
look
at
these
buildings
as
well
contractors.
D
G
D
D
D
For
many
years
it
was
largely
the
purview
of
core
Cities
Minneapolis
has
had
some
local
option
sales
taxes,
St
Paul
has,
and
then
they
started
to
open
up
to
more,
like
Regional,
centers,
Duluth
and
Saint
Cloud
Bemidji
those
types
of
more
Regional
locations,
but
in
recent
years
many
more
cities
and
Counties
have
stepped
forward.
So
now
there
are
over
80
that
have
been
granted
the
authority
and
have
a
local
sales
tax
in
place.
Most
of
those
are
at
a
half
percent
tax,
because
that
seemed
to
be
where
the
legislature
was
comfortable.
D
This
year
this
past
year
2023,
we
actually
saw
a
significant
significant.
We
saw
at
least
two
communities
get
approved
at
a
higher
amount,
and
one
of
them,
I
would
say,
was
significantly
higher.
I
think
it
was
a
one
and
a
half
percent
local
option
sales
tax.
So
the
the
legislature
generally
provides
a
fair
amount
of
feedback
on
what
they
think
is
reasonable,
because
the
process,
most
people,
don't
watch
the
legislative
process.
Each
of
these
gets
off.
D
You
know
the
requests
get
authored
by
a
local
representative
or
Center,
and
then
it'll
go
through
committee,
and
it's
really
at
the
committee
level
that
the
legislators
will
take
apart
to
request
right.
Is
it
Regional
nature?
Is
this
the
right
amount?
Is
it?
Is
it
reasonable
for
the
local
community
and
then
when
it
gets
rolled
up
into
the
larger
Bill?
There
isn't
much
discussion.
G
D
G
A
So
related
to
that
again
recognizing
that
the
economic
activity,
the
taxable
economic
activity-
changes
as
we
learned
three
years
ago,
the
back
of
the
envelope
duration
of
this
sales
tax
option
we
think,
might
be.
If
again,
our
projection
are
20
years
at
25
years,
I
know
we
probably
issued
debt
for
25.
yeah.
D
We've
done
our
Mr
chair,
we've
done
our
projections
based
on
the
more
conservative,
Revenue
split
right
so
coming
in
in
the
60s
areas,
and
well
not
the
six,
not
the
split
so
much
as
what
we've
seen
on
an
annual
basis
of
Revenue
right
and
so
that
lowest
year
of
2020
and
2021
would
still
generate
enough
to
do
these
over
20
years.
So
the
likelihood
is
that
revenues
will
continue
to
grow
at
some
amount.
D
A
H
D
There
there
is
exposure
to
the
local
community
that,
if
the
sales
tax
revenue
generated
is
not
sufficient
to
service
the
debt
that
we
would
have
to
find
additional
Revenue
to
service
the
debt
on
an
annual
basis.
The
way
that
we
do
our
debt
issuance
is
there
there's
a
cushion
that's
built
in
there
that
accounts
for
some
of
that
variability
right,
so
we
usually
have
some
sort
of
a
reserve
that
tends
to
build
up
over
subsequent
years
as
you're
servicing
the
debt.
D
The
other
thing
that
that's
a
good
question,
commissioner
Curry,
is
that
it
helps
me
to
clarify
too
that
we
wouldn't
issue
just
one
Bond
sale
for
155
million
dollars.
We
would
likely
issue
three
for
one
for
each
of
the
projects
and
I
think
you
know
the
biggest
thing
getting
back
to
the
chairs
question
about
the
the
length
of
time
that
will
be
necessary
to
service
these.
You
know
we've
done
them.
D
D
I
think
one
of
the
biggest
variabilities
for
us
frankly
is
going
to
be
interest
rates
and
where
the
interest
rates
are,
when
we're
actually
issuing
the
debt
on
these
projects,
because
that
that's
a
pretty
significant
driver
in
your
your
annual
Debt
Service,
and
if
we
can
bring
that
number
down,
that's
almost
certain
to
guarantee
earlier
retirement,
based
on
the
forecast
that
we've
made
so
where
we're
at
today.
You
know
one
of
the
things
we'll
be
watching
really
closely
is
what
the
interest
rates
are
doing
over
the
course
of
the
next
year
or
two.
H
So
then,
on
the
flip
side,
if
there's
additional
sales
tax
revenue
that
comes
in
above
you
know
the
minimum
Bond
payments,
does
the
bond
allow
for
just
early
payment,
just
pay
whatever
you
get
whatever
excess
income
you
have
from
that
to
the
bond?
Or
do
you
have
to
basically
collect
that
and
hold
on
to
that
until
the
end
and
essentially
pay
off
the
whole.
D
Bond
right
so
typically,
what
we
would
do
is
if
we
have
Revenue
above
we
would.
We
would
put
it
in
the
reserve
and
then
sometimes
depending
on
what
kind
of
a
project
we
have
here.
If
it's
just
general
city
property
taxes,
we
would
go
out
and
do
a
refinancing
maybe,
but
in
a
case
like
this,
we
would
probably
let
the
reserve
grow
enough
to
the
point
that
we
could
service
the
remaining
principle
in
one
lump
sum,
and
so
that's
the
that's.
The
benefit
of
of
having
that
Reserve
fund
grow
from
year
to
year.
A
D
D
We
have
videos
that
show
each
of
the
facilities
and
then
one
that's
just
more
comprehensive
in
nature,
but
then
having
these
kind
of
conversations
available
on
the
city's
website
that
people
can
go
back
and
listen
to
more
of
the
detail
is
really
helpful
and
to
the
extent
that
you
want
to
be
involved
or
engaged
in
advocating
outside
of
your
role
as
a
Planning
Commission.
Whatever
side
of
the
question,
that's
on
we're
more
than
willing
to
provide
information
that
you
need
to
help
you
in
whatever
role
you're
going
to
do
moving
forward.
D
A
I
I
Come
through,
okay,
good,
so
members
of
the
board,
who
are
longer
tenured
kind
of
had
a
similar
presentation
a
short
while
ago.
So
not
my
intent
to
be
too
redundant
with
the
content,
but
in
the
benefit
of
the
newer
members
as
well
as
for
the
public
base,
the
public
hearing
and
the
public
record,
we
will
be
going
over
some
of
the
similar
material
one
more
time.
I
So,
let's
get
started
so
in
terms
of
the
process
that
we're
going
through
here.
So
basically,
what
we're
doing
is
proposing
an
ordinance,
as
well
as
a
supporting
policy,
to
further
expand
the
opportunity
for
the
installation
of
murals
in
Bloomington,
in
terms
of
where
this
project
came
from,
we've
been
in
ongoing
basis,
been
working
on,
updating
and
studying
the
city
sign
ordinance
and
when
we
originally
came
to
the
Planning
Commission
in
city
council
back
in
January
of
this
year,
murals
as
it's
currently
structured
in
city
code
is
highly
woven
through
the
sign
Ordnance
section.
I
So
that's
why
it
was
brought
forward
as
part
of
that
router
project,
in
terms
of
when
we
previously
presented
that,
and
so
as
part
of
those
previous
study
sessions.
There
was
unanimous
support
from
both
bodies
to
move
in
a
policy
direction
to
make
the
opportunity
for
murals
more
expansive
and
so
moving
from
that
point
forward.
Our
original
plan
was
to
incorporate
all
of
those
updates
in
the
broad
sign
ordinance
update,
but
the
more
we
dug
into
it.
I
The
more
we
actually
realized
that
the
best
policy
approach,
as
recommended
by
staff,
was
to
actually
decouple
and
separate
these
two
things.
They
are
both
forms
of
expression,
so
they
do
have
similarities
in
terms
of
the
regulatory
approach
or
kind
of
some
of
the
policy
decisions
that
you
have
to
make
with
both
of
those
things.
But
ultimately,
what
we
decided
is
that
they
are
two
distinct
things
and
do
require
separate
considerations.
I
So
moving
from
that
point
forward,
we
started
going
forward
with
this
kind
of
separate
or
alongside
mural
policy
pathway,
in
terms
of
where
we've
been
thus
far.
The
first
body
that
we
presented
before
in
terms
of
our
general
approach
was
the
creative
Place
making.
Commission
I
would
say
that
our
creative
Place
Bank
staff
has
been
kind
of
locked
arm
and
arm
with
us
on
this
process
in
terms
of
providing
input
they're.
I
I
The
modest
differences
are
that
we've
gone
through
in
terms
of
our
process,
but
that
version
that
we
presented
to
you
back
in
June
does
have
a
lot
of
similarities
to
what's
before
you
this
evening.
So
we
went
back
following
that
study
session.
We
did
go
back
to
creative
Place
making
in
order
to
get
a
formal
recommendation
on
their
behalf.
Their
recommendation
letter
is
in
your
agenda
packet.
They
are
recommending
approval
of
this
policy
and
then
that
gets
us
of
course
to
this
evening.
I
The
one
thing
I
wanted
to
point
out
about
this
in
between
the
creative
Place
mating
making
meeting
as
well
as
tonight's
public
hearing,
is
that
the
city
has
been
working
as
part
of
the
sign
ordinance
project
we've
been
working
with
a
nationally
recognized
expert
in
land
use
policy,
around
expression
and
science
as
kind
of
his
wheelhouse.
His
name
is
John
Baker
he's
a
attorney
with
green
espinal,
which
is
a
Minneapolis
attorney
firm.
I
So,
in
addition
to
supplement
the
the
review
that
we're
getting
from
our
own
in-house
legal
staff,
we've
gone
out
and
had
this
ordinance
reviewed
by
this
nationally
recognized
expert
in
order
to
make
sure
that
our
policy
can
survive.
Legal
challenge
is
kind
of
meeting
all
of
the
Constitutional
components
that
have
to
do
with
murals
as
well
as
signs,
and
that's
one
of
the
things
we'll
talk
about
is
that
with
expression.
I
There
is
a
lot
of
there's
a
lot
of
legal
things
that
can
come
into
play
both
in
terms
of
you
know,
in
some
cases
jurisdictions
just
denying
people
installing
murals
based
up
for
content-based
reasons
or
for
vagueness.
Some
of
the
things
we've
found
out
or
for
just
you
know,
Community
communities,
kind
of
not
being
in
favor
of
murals
that
have
been
installed
and
then
kind
of
retroactively,
adapting
policies
to
kind
of
diminish
some
of
those
things.
So
there's
a
lot
of
different
legal
considerations
when
it
comes
to
expression.
I
Let's
keep
moving
here,
I'm
having
the
same
problem
as
here
we
go
okay,
so
another
another
way
that
this
policy
is
a
little
bit
different
than
most
of
the
things
that
you
deal
with
in
the
zoning
code
is
that
this
is
one
of
the
instances
where
we
are
recommending
kind
of
a
multi-pronged
approach
to
deal
with
the
administration
of
this
policy.
And
the
reason
for
that
is
you
know
most
things
you
deal
with.
Everything
is
just
going
to
be
in
the
city
code,
all
the
procedures,
the
application
processes.
I
All
the
rules
are
just
going
to
be
laid
out
in
the
city
code.
This
model
was
selected
based
off
this.
The
staff
success
related
to
the
administration
implication
of
our
Landscaping
requirements
and
the
reason
why
we
think
that
this
is
a
good
fit
to
take.
A
similar
approach
is
with
Landscaping
there's
a
lot
of
components
that
really
are
somewhat
discretionary
in
nature
and
really
form
a
best
practice,
as
opposed
to
a
hard
and
fast
rule.
I
So
there's
a
lot
of
things
with
murals
that
fit
more
in
that
category
of
a
best
practice
versus
what
a
city
should
adopt
or
use
government
power
in
terms
of
a
hard
and
fast
rule,
so
think
of
landscaping.
You
know
some
material
is
more
salt,
tolerant
than
other
material
and
therefore
it's
better
in
parking
lots.
I
We
don't
adopt
that
as
a
requirement,
but
it
is
a
best
practice
in
our
Landscaping
supplemental
policy,
so
we're
talking
about
here
as
an
approach
that
very
much
follows
that
same
line,
we're
going
to
put
the
hard
and
fast
rules
in
city
code,
all
the
things
that
you
must
do.
These
are
things
that
are
non-negotiable
and
then
some
other
elements,
such
as
the
application
procedures.
I
You
know
what
are
some
best
practices
that
we
think
are
important
to
make.
You
know
murals
enduring
how
you
know.
How
should
you
deal
with
you
know,
artists
and
copyright,
and
things
like
that.
Those
are
more
all
best
practices,
and
so
that's
why
we've
put
forth
this
murals
policies
and
procedures
manual,
which
we
would
propose
be
administered
by
the
planning
manager
and
creative
Place
making
director.
I
So
I'm
not
going
to
read
the
definition,
but
we
are
proposing
to
establish
a
new
definition
for
a
mural.
One
of
the
things
that
changed
from
your
earlier
meeting
is
that
we
previously
had
a
phrase
in
there
that
talked
about
generally
used
for
decoration
or
artistic
expression.
That
was
one
of
that's
an
example
of
one
of
the
things
that
was
flagged
by
our
legal
department
and
our
outside
Council
as
saying
City
can't
really
be
in
the
Judgment
of
what
is
artistic
expression
or
something
that
is
for
decoration.
I
So
that's
an
example
of
something
where
a
city
can
kind
of
get
into
trouble
with
that
content,
neutrality
component
and
making
those
kind
of
subjective
decisions
about
what
kind
of
meets
a
murals
test
and
what
doesn't
so.
We
removed
that
language,
but
otherwise
this
definition
should
meet
or
match
kind
of
what
was
presented
to
you
previously,
just
especially
for
our
new
newer
members
but
and
we'll
talk
about
the
Coatings
restriction.
I
But
elements
of
the
definition
I
do
want
to
point
out
is
that
uniform
painting
of
a
building
just
one
simple,
solid
color
and
our
view
does
not
constitute
a
mural,
and
we
also
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we're
separating
out
graffiti,
specifically
as
it's
defined
in
city
code
from
murals,
that's
not
graffiti.
The
art
form
that's
graffiti
is
in
things
that
are
done
on
buildings
without
the
property
owners
consent,
if
that
makes
sense,
and
that
is
defined
in
code.
So
our
environmental
health
staff
wanted
that
differentiated.
I
Yes,
so
moving
on
to
the
exterior
materials
and
the
Coatings
restrictions,
so,
as
many
of
you
know,
as
the
newer
members
might
not
be
aware,
but
we
currently
have
a
Coatings
restriction
on
our
exterior
materials
of
commercial
and
industrial
buildings.
So
if
you
have
a
concrete
building,
you
have
a
brick
building.
I
You
can't
just
go
out
and
paint
it
unless
it
was
painted
prior
to
the
adoption
of
that
restriction
or
those
standards,
and
so,
when
you
think
about
kind
of
what
the
primary
barriers
to
the
implementation
of
murals
have
been
in
Bloomington,
it's
all
kind
of
right
here
in
our
exterior
material
standards,
you
can't
paint
primary
exterior
materials
and
in
addition
to
that,
there
was
actually
some
Provisions
that
are
existing
in
the
code.
That
say
that
murals
cannot
be
applied
directly
to
the
exterior
surface
of
a
building.
I
So
those
two
things
alone
that
exist
today
are
highly
are
big
obstacles
for
the
deployment
of
more
murals
in
Bloomington
people
ask
okay,
so
we
do
have
some
murals
around
Bloomington.
How
are
those
done?
Those
are
actually
created
on
a
substrate
and
affixed
to
the
build
building,
either
in
like
a
panelized
style
or
there's
been
some
murals
that
have
been
created
that
are
not
on
buildings.
They're
on
screen
walls,
they're
on
other
types
of
structures
in
our
exterior
material
standards
are
specifically
tailored
to
buildings.
I
Not
the
screen
wall
say
around
the
power,
substation
or
other
parts
of
the
community
that
might
have
have
murals.
So
what
this
ordinance
would
do
is
it
basically
would
eliminate
that
prohibition
on
installing
a
mural
directly
on
a
building,
as
well
as
create
an
exception
to
our
Coatings
prohibition
for
Approved
murals?
The
coding
prohibition
would
remain
in
place.
It's
long-standing
Bloomington
policy
having
to
do
with
Building
Maintenance
and
durability
considerations,
but
what
this
would
do
is
basically
create
a
relief
valve
to
that
only
for
murals
that
go
through
an
approved
mural
permit
process.
I
So
hopefully
that's
pretty
straightforward
get
into
the
mural
permit
process.
So,
if
you're
going
to
create
some
standards,
you
have
to
actually
create
a
way
for
people
to
submit
their
proposed
mural
for
review
and
have
staff
review
it
and
ensure
that
it's
meeting
all
those
standards.
So
this
ordinance
would
create
a
mural
permit
process
to
be
very
similar
to
a
sign
permit.
We
would
take
it
in
as
staff.
We
would
review
it
with
creative
Place
making
staff
and
we
would
review
it
making
sure
that
it's
meeting
all
the
standards
in
the
ordinance
before
you.
I
If
it
meets
it,
we
would
approve
it.
They
would
install
the
mural
staff
would
perform
a
final
inspection
to
ensure
that
it
was
installed
according
to
the
approved
plan,
and
we
kind
of
move
on
our
merry
way.
The
the
specific
components
of
a
mural
permit
process
would
be
establishing
a
fee.
Of
course,
I
did
note
that
that
was
revised
slightly
from
your
previous
version.
It
would
create
the
establish
the
review
and
approval
process.
I
It
does
establish
that
an
appeal
is
possible,
say
staff
denies
the
permit,
for
whatever
reason
the
applicant
would
have
the
ability
to
appeal
that
decision
up
to
the
city
council
as
proposed
I,
do
want
to
note
that,
but
a
good
question
came
up
at
our
last
discussion
is:
would
a
general
member
of
the
public
have
the
ability
to
appeal
a
decision
and
under
the
this
current
ordinance?
That's
not
the
case.
I
We
will
review
it
to
make
sure
that
it's
not
one
of
the
prohibited
mural
classes
or
that
it's
otherwise
meeting
our
other
standards
in
terms
of
dimensions
and
projection
and
kind
of
all
these
other
things,
but
we
don't
want
to
be
in
the
business
and
I
would
urge
you
and
the
city
council
is
that
we're
not
going
to
accept
for
those
and
we'll
talk
about
the
prohibited
mural
classes,
but
we
don't.
We
can't
be
in
the
business
of
saying
we
like
this
one.
I
Let
me
just
put
it
that
way,
so
that
is
that's
kind
of
what's
informing
the
lack
of
a
public
appeal
from
the
public
component
of
it
there's
some
elements
here
with
expiration
and
completion.
Those
were
previously
in
the
mural
standards.
We
actually
felt
that
content
was
more
appropriate
in
the
permit
section.
So
that's
content
that
I
believe
you've
seen
before,
but
we
just
moved
it
to
a
different
location
so
getting
to
those
prohibited,
mural
types.
I
So
and
again,
if
there's
specific
questions
about
this,
I
might
call
on
Kevin
taskey
from
legal
to
speak
to
it.
But
basically
the
First
Amendment
of
the
Constitution
is
very
protective
of
a
wide
range
of
speech,
and
so
the
ways
that
the
city
can
regulate
content
is
very
limited
to
ways
that
have
been
approved
or
stood
legal
challenge
according
to
the
the
Supreme
Court
of
the
United
States.
I
I
Imitating
traffic
signals
where
cars
are
driving
or
imitating
a
sidewalk
or
you
know,
on
an
extreme
version-
maybe
you
put
the
road
like
in
the
old
cartoon
the
road
drives
into
the
side
of
the
building,
I
kind
of
thing-
that's
probably
just
came
out
of
my
head,
but
yeah,
basically,
that
that's
a
traffic,
that's
a
safety
hazard,
and
so
we
can
it's
important
to
the
city's
traffic
engineer
that
people
aren't
painting
traffic
signal
lights
right
next
to
an
intersection
right.
Does
that
make
sense,
obscuring
or
concealing
life
safety
equipment?
I
So
this
has
to
do
with
fire
prevention
equipment,
sprinkler
systems,
fire
department
connections,
where
they
pump
water
in
other
things,
on
a
building
that
are
there
for
Life
Safety,
and
so
a
mural
can't
obscure
those
things
so
that
a
responding,
Public,
Safety
type
person
can't
see
them
because
it's
just
blending
into
the
mural,
if
that
makes
sense.
So
these
are
the
three
things
that
are
probably
most
relevant
but
inciting
or
producing
imminent
Lawless
action,
conveying
threats
of
violence
at
persons
or
groups
and
then
sexual
content
in
a
patently
offensive
way.
I
I,
don't
have
the
full
text
of
those
things
on
the
slide.
I
can
certainly
pull
them
up
if
need
be,
but
these
are
the
three
things
that
have
been
the
subject
of
case
law
review
and
those
are
the
things
that
the
city
can
protect
against
just
based
on
public
safety,
so
yeah
I'll
keep
moving
here.
General
standards,
the
one
I
want
to
emphasize
or
focus
on
most
is
maybe
a
maximum
area.
I
There
was
some
discussion
at
Planning
Commission
last
time
about
potentially
what
we
would
want
to
do
with
that
right
now,
staff
is
proposing
a
50
percent
maximum
allowance
to
install
with
on
a
building.
This
one
is
definitely
a
policy
call
on
the
part
of
city
in
terms
of
what
your
preferences
are.
What
I
would
say
from
the
staff
level
perspective
is
that
if
the
more
you
increase
that
allowance,
it
makes
it
more
tenuous
to
continue
to
maintain
a
Coatings
prohibition
if
you're
doing
so
for
building
maintenance
Provisions.
I
Murals
are
actually
quite
expensive
to
install
and
we
are
not
anticipating
that
full
buildings
would
come
forward
as
part
of
this.
Maybe
the
fourth
thing
I'd,
say
too,
is
that
this
is
a
new
policy
and
I
think,
as
the
chair
might
have
mentioned,
which
I
agreed
with
that
point
or
thought
it
was
a
cogent
point.
Is
that
you
know,
certainly,
if
there's
a
need
to
reevaluate
that
later,
as
you
know,
these
products
and
materials
get
better.
I
We
would
suggest
that
murals,
not
because
some
of
them
are
penalized
and
can
extend
above
the
roof
line.
Depending
on
how
you
install
them,
we
would
suggest
that
it
not
extend
above
the
roof
line,
which
is
similar
to
our
sign
code
restrictions
projections.
Some
murals,
do
incorporate
three-dimensional
components,
so
they
actually
Mount
objects
or
elements
on
the
wall
and
it's
extending
out
from
the
wall.
I
We
would
suggest
a
maximum
two
feet
and
that's
for
structural
Integrity
reasons,
safety
reasons,
but
also
some
buildings
are
right
up
along
the
public,
right-of-way
or
close
to
sidewalks,
so
kind
of
limiting
that,
to
a
degree
signs
you
can
right
now
in
the
sine
code
you
can
have
mirror.
Signage
can
be
incorporated
into
murals
only
at
car
dealerships
and
the
reason.
Why
is
that?
I
That
happened
through
a
privately
initiated
city
code,
Amendment
and
staff
doesn't
think
it's
either
kind
of
going
One,
Direction
or
the
other
direction
it
shouldn't
be
for
a
special
subset
class
of
uses.
We
would
suggest
that
still
that
there's
a
limitation
on
it
of
10
percent
of
the
mural
area
and
any
sign
that
is
proposed
as
part
of
a
mural
and
that's
really
we're
more
focused
on
the
commercial
messages
than
we
are
non-commercial,
but
you
still
have
to
meet
the
requirements
of
the
sign
ordinance.
I
In
other
words,
a
mural
isn't
a
way
to
artificially
bump
up
your
signage
allowance.
Beyond
what
any
particular
building
a
facade
would
get
lighting.
We
have
architectural
lighting
standards
in
the
code.
They
must
be
followed,
they
can
be
incorporated,
but
it
really
limits
brightness
and
then
motion
and
flashing.
We
would
suggest
being
not
allowed
incorporated
into
a
mural
and
again
that's
just
trying
to
maintain
consistency
with
our
sign
ordinance
standards.
I
So
there
was
some
discussion.
I
know,
there's
a
request
on
the
part
of
the
chair
to
look
at
kind
of
examples
of
Maintenance.
What
does
that
mean?
So
just
the
general
Provisions?
First,
the
code
would
establish
that
every
application
include
a
maintenance
plan
specifying
what
they're
going
to
do
to
keep
it
up,
what
their
anticipated
life
you
know,
life
of
it
is,
and
how
are
they
going
to
accomplish
that?
I
It
does
establish
a
minimum
maintenance
requirement
if
a
mural
is
not
being
maintained
according
to
the
maintenance
plan,
or
if
it's
clearly
in
a
state
of
disrepair,
then
that's
not
allowed
by
the
ordinance,
and
then
that
gets
to.
The
third
thing
is
that
staff
can
order
a
mirror
will
be
repaired
or
removed
within
a
certain
period
of
time,
typically
60
days.
Unless
there
is
a
you
know,
an
a
tangible
reason
why
it
can't
be
rectified
within
60
days
in
Minnesota,
that's
winter,
sometimes
sometimes
that
can
be
an
issue
but
yeah.
I
So
I
think
what
chair,
Roman
was
asking
for
last
time
was
examples
of
like
okay.
What
does
that
mean
and
with
respect
effect-
and
you
know
if
the
creative
placement
director
wants
to
speak
to
this
too?
That's
would
be
good,
but
basically
there's
a
range
of
options
and
all
of
these
options
have
different
Financial
costs
to
them,
and
all
of
these
options
involve
I
would
say
a
staff
preference
level
is
like
we.
This
is
what
you
want
you
to
do,
and
this
is
at
the
on
the
bottom
side
of
the
scale.
I
This
is
what
we
would
prefer
you
not
do,
and
so,
on
the
light
side
of
the
interventions,
you
know
spot
Corrections,
so
obviously,
at
certain
points
of
a
mural
there's
going
to
be
parts
that
just
degrade
over
time
or
might
be
subject
to
graffiti
or
might
who
knows
what
just
create
just
correcting
those
basic
areas?
The
second
most
preferred
option.
Intervention
would
be
just
repainting
reinstalling,
the
mural,
correcting
it
to
its
approved
design
or
replacing
it
with
another
approved
design.
I
The
third
thing,
the
third
thing
they
can
do
is
their
solvents
there's
various
chemicals
that
can
be
used
that
actually
help
the
paint
strip
the
paint
away
in
a
way
that
would
just
get
you
back
to
your
basic
in
combination
with
power,
washing
typically
back
to
your
typical
exterior
material.
A
more
substantial
intervention
along
those
lines
typically
might
include
sandblasting,
so
that's
like
even
a
more
powerful
way
to
remove
them
and,
for
the
most
part,
we're
talking
about
Painted
murals,
the
two
more
substantial.
I
The
most
substantial
intervention
is
actually
like
a
replacement
of
an
exterior
material,
so
take
take
a
stucco
wall,
for
example,
you
might
need
to
re-coat
a
stucco
wall
and
then
the
last
Intervention,
which
would,
in
most
cases
not
be
staff's,
preferred
method,
would
just
be
painting
over
the
wall
with
a
generic
paint.
Again
we
have
a
Coatings
restriction,
that's
not
the
direction
that
staff
wants
to
go,
but
the
way
that
the
ordinance
is
written
is
that
it
does
allow
some
discretion.
Every
mural
is
going
to
be
a
little
bit
different.
I
Every
exterior
material
is
going
to
be
a
little
bit
different
and
what
staff
from
the
early
conversations
I've
had
is
going
to
want
to
press
push
for,
is
just
correcting
and
reinstalling
the
mural
or
replacing
it
with
another
approved
mural
in
cases.
But
it's
definitely
some.
You
know
some
part
of
the
discussion
with
the
applicant
on
the
front
end
of
okay.
What
is
your
plan?
I
So
the
mural
policies
and
procedures
document
I'm
not
going
to
spend
a
lot
of
time
on
this.
This
is
really
those
things
that
are
more
discretionary
in
nature.
It's
we
do
have
some
best
practices
and
things
on
the
the
back
end
of
the
document,
which
aren't
hard
and
fast
rules,
but
are
more
recommended
actions,
but
we,
our
Communications
division,
helped
us
create
a
much
more
attractive
and
appealing
document.
So
thank
you
to
them,
but
also
the
legal
department
and
the
outside
Council
helped
us
some
of
the
changes
that
were
made.
I
What
it
really
had
to
do
was
differentiating
content
that
is
required
versus
best
practices,
so
they
helped
us
put
a
harder
pencil
to
the
things
that
should
really
slide
under
those
different
boxes.
Okay,
your
design
standards,
that's
required,
but
if
it's
a
best
practice,
we
need
to
shift
this
content
down
or
maybe
eliminate
it,
because
it
violates
content,
neutrality
or
vagueness.
Some
of
those
things
undo
undo
discretion
kind
of
stuff.
I
So
that's
the
main
factor
about
that.
In
terms
of
what
we've
done
for
engagement,
engagement
along
this
process,
we've
really
relied
heavily
upon.
Our
various
list
serves
that
we
have.
The
creative
placement
director
has
been
using
her
networks
quite
a
bit
to
try
and
disseminate
that
Bloomington
is
working
on
this.
Please
provide
comment
if
you
want.
Certainly
we
have
the
standard
methods
that
we
use
in
terms
of
Planning,
Commission
development
and
the
zoning
ordinance
list
serves.
We
did
make
use
of
those,
and
then
we
have
provided
updates
on
our
online.
I
Let's
talk
Bloomington
page
for
the
signed,
ordinance
and
mural
policy
along
the
way,
so
other
parties
who've
been
following
that
also
would
have
access
to
that
information.
To
date,
we've
received
no
correspondence
about
this
ordinance,
except
for
the
letter
from
the
creative
Place
making
Commission
and
that's
my
last
slide
is
that
they
reviewed
it.
They
recommend
approval
so
with
that
I
will
stand
for
questions
and
I'm
we're
recommending
approval
and
there's
a
motion.
There.
A
Thank
you
very,
very
good.
I
do
have
one
question
and
thank
you
for
the
follow-up
and
the
additional
detail
on
maintenance.
I.
Think
that's
my
things
I
was
concerned
about,
is
you
know
something
gets
to,
let
go
and
it
just
turns
into
a
white
painted
wall.
What
is
the
let's
say
that
I
I
have
a
mural
permit
and
I
install
a
fantastic
mural,
and
then
commissioner
goldsman
acquires
the
property
and
and
lets
the
mural
fall
into
disrepair?
What
is
what
is
the
obligation?
A
I
Yeah
chair,
that's
a
good
question.
The
responsibility
would
fall
to
the
property
owner.
So
if
the
property
did
change
hands
just
like,
if
a
fence
was
in
disrepair
or
you
know,
if
you
purchased
a
home
in
Bloomington
that
had
peeling
paint
or
had
some
kind
of
other
property
maintenance
issues,
you
would
assume
that
responsibility.
So
if
that
were
the
case,
you
know,
even
though
that
owner
was
not
involved
with
the
commissioning
or
the
installation
of
that
mural,
they
would
absorb
that
responsibility.
C
C
The
great
you
know,
companies
of
Minnesota
are
portrayed
so
3M
spam
things
like
that
when
you
talk
about
10
of
the
sign
not
being
10
of
the
mural,
not
being
quote
unquote
signage.
How
does
that?
How
does
that?
How
does
that
interplay
with
a
mural
that
potentially
wants
to
highlight
brands
or
companies
or
locations
in
Minnesota,
with
like
Gold
Medal
Flour,
for
example,.
I
Yeah
chair
commissioner
Albrecht
thanks
for
that
question:
that's
good
I'm
really
going
to
rely
on
kind
of
more
signage,
related
Provisions,
then
specifically
back
to
murals,
but
we
currently
prohibit
off-premises
signage
in
the
sign
ordinance.
So
if
they're
kind
of
representing
a
clear
brand
and
product
of
something
that's
not
sold
at
that
location,
then
I
would
consider
that
an
off-premises
sign
similar
to
like
a
billboard.
I
Basically
if
they
were
doing
so
like
a
product
or
an
object
in
a
more
generic
way,
then
it's
likely
that
that
would
not
trigger
that
commercial
sign
consideration,
but
I
mean
there
is
some
kind
of
discretion
on
that
back
and
forth
as
we've
gone
through
this
process
and
I
hope
I'm
not
repeating
anecdotals
before.
But
you
know
it's
like
flowers,
a
mural
of
flowers,
a
park
scene
and
a
flower
shop
you
know
is
the
flowers
a
sign.
It
is
a
product
that
they
sell
technically.
I
But
if
done
so
in
a
generic
way,
we
would
not
consider
that
staying
a
trademarked
product,
if
that
makes
sense,
so
there's
definitely
some
discretion.
That
has
to
be
utilized
as
you
as
staff
reviews,
these
things
and
that's
something
that
will
keep
a
close
eye
on.
But
in
terms
of
you
know,
if
3M,
let's
we're
just
going
to
use
them
as
the
example
wants
to
put
their
logo
on
the
side
of
a
building
that
they
have.
No,
that
they
have
no
occupancy
of.
That
would
be
an
off-premises
sign
and
not
allowed.
C
Mr,
chair,
Mr
Johnson,
if
the
so
what?
If
it
was
just
a
let's
say
it's
a
local
hardware
store,
and
it
is
nothing
to
do
with
the
local
hardware
store,
but
it
has
to
do
with
highlighting
businesses
in
in
Minnesota.
What
you're
saying
is
because
they
are
signs
that
are
trademarked,
they
would
be
considered.
I
F
Thanks
chair
one
question
that
I
have
and
I
apologize.
I
was
not
at
the
22nd
meeting.
Do
we
have
definitions
on
types
of
properties
or
even
zones?
These
murals
are
located
at
one
question
that
I
came
up
with
is:
can
a
residence
can
a
person
paint
appear
on
the
side
of
their
house,
and
so
I
want
to
clarify
that
and
ask
that
question.
I
Yeah
chair,
commissioner
goldsman,
forgive
me
for
not
bringing
that
up.
I
think
we
did
talk
about
that
briefly
in
our
last
meeting,
but
so
the
way
that
this
policy
lays
out
is
that
there
would
not
be
any
locational
restrictions
on
that
and
the
reason
for
that
has
some
to
do
with
kind
of
where
the
current
Coatings
restriction
applies.
It
doesn't
apply
to
your
single-family
residents
or
other
lower
density,
Residential
Properties.
There
isn't
a
painting
restriction
on
those
and
so
I'm.
I
Someone
could
potentially
do
that
and
we
wouldn't
have
any
we
wouldn't
they
wouldn't
have
anything
to
point
to
in
the
city
code
that
would
preclude
them
from
doing
so.
The
other
reason
that
we,
when
we
went
through
this
and
evaluated
whether
to
do
locational
restrictions
and
I,
should
add
that
some
communities
do
tailor
these
they
limit
them
to
their
downtown
district,
say
or
their
only
commercial
industrial
properties.
I
That
type
of
thing,
but
the
reason
that
we're
not
suggesting
to
do
that
has
to
do
with
the
the
number
of
non-residential
uses
that
are
allowed
within
our
residential
districts.
The
R1
District
specifically,
is
the
zoning
District
that
has
a
lot
of
government
facilities,
Parks
fire
stations
places
of
assembly.
So
if
you
wanted
to
have
the
ability
to
deploy
a
mural
at
say
the
fire
station
or
at
a
place
of
assembly-
and
you
created
a
location
or
restriction
on
that,
limiting
it
to
commercial
or
industrial
properties,
they
would
no
longer
be
afforded
that
opportunity.
I
G
H
I
Yeah
chair
commissioner
Courier
thanks
for
that
question,
and
so
we
do
have
a
provision
within
that
projection
standard
that
does
not
allow
them
to
go
within
a
public
easement
of
record
without
the
approval
or
authorization
of
the
director
of
Public
Works.
So
Public
Works
manages
all
of
our
public
easements
and
anytime.
There's
any
kind
of
structure.
Offense
I'll
keep
using
that
analogy.
People
wanted
to
put
a
fence
and
an
easement,
for
example,
or
some
other
type
of
structure
retaining
wall.
You
need
to
get
the
permission
of
Public
Works
to
do
that.
I
G
I
Chair
commissioner,
cookton
no
I
would
not
argue
you
can't
the
yeah
the
provisions
you're
referring
to
have
to
do
with
opacity
of
our
fencing
and
fencing
in
front
yards
has
to
be
50.
Open
is
the
basic
principle,
and
so
installing
a
mural
you
know
on
a
fence.
It
would
have
to
be
fully
opaque
at
that
point.
In
order
to
do
so
so
null,
that's
not
that's,
not
a
mural
permit
that
staff
would
sign
off
or
approve
on
because
of
the
it
would
violate
the
fence
ordinance.
Basically,.
A
A
E
A
I
guess
I
will
say:
I
appreciate
the
thought.
That's
gone
into
this
I
think
I.
Think
it's
you
know
it's.
It
gives
us
a
lot
more
latitude
than
we
had
it
doesn't
go.
You
know
full
open
up
the
floodgates.
It's
you
know
for
those
who
have
heard
me
opine
on
any
number
of
issues.
I
think
this
is
a
little
bit
of
another
example
of
let's
get
us
from
1970
Bloomington
to
2020
Bloomington.
So
I
am
in
support
of
this
commissioner
cookton.
G
Mr
chair,
thank
you.
I
would
like
to
again
bring
up
the
50
coverage
being
that
commissioner
Goldman
wasn't
here.
We
have
a
couple
of
new
Commissioners,
give
some
folks
a
chance
to
comment
on
that
I.
Take
the
position
of
I,
am
in
favor
of
100
coverage
on
a
building.
I
have
heard
status,
comments
and
I
understand
them,
but
I
do
disagree
with
them.
We
have
standards
in
place
that
if
a
mural
starts
to
deteriorate,
they
have
to
fix
it
and
I'm
comfortable
with
that
and
I
know.
G
There's
concern
about
well
putting
a
mural
on
a
whole
building
might
be
a
way
to
skirt
around
the
Coatings
and
coverage
thing.
I
actually
would
be
in
favor
of
that.
If
a
billing
owner
wants
to
just
paint
it
white,
but
we
say
no,
but
you
can
do
a
mural
and
they
choose
to
do
that.
I
think
that
would
be
a
win
and
so
I
remain
in
favor
of
100
coverage.
I
think
it's
unlikely.
C
C
If
you
did
have
a
billing
that
was
100
mural,
which
I
do
think
would
be
lovely
it's
expensive
to
replace
and
repair,
and
what
does
that
do
to
the
building
valuation?
What
does
that
do
to
potential
sale
of
the
property?
There's
just
I
My
head
goes
down
a
rabbit
hole
of
potential
issues
with
more
of
it,
though,
I
do
think
that
even
50
probably
hasn't
a
financial
impact.
C
F
I
One
of
the
key
findings
of
variance
is
that
it's
a
unique
situation
not
created
by
the
landowner,
but
in
effect,
if
they've
installed
this
mural
and
created
the
non-conformity,
then
they
wouldn't
have
the
ability
to
meet
that
finding.
So
at
that
point
it
would
be
a
violation
of
some
kind.
They
would
have
to
do
some
kind
of
intervention
to
match
the
approved
design
that
was
issued
in
the
mural
permit.
A
A
We've
had
requests
for,
variances
come
for
that
and
every
one
of
them
has
been
summarily
dismissed
and
I
was
conscious
that
recently,
when
I
was
in
a
neighboring
Community,
which
I
won't
call
out-
and
it
was
a
building
that
clearly
the
brick
had
either
been
painted
or
coated,
and
it
was
not
clearly
going
to
stand
the
test
of
time
or
well.
The
coding
doesn't
look
like
it's
very
high
quality,
so
it
was
a
good
reminder
to
me
of.
A
G
Someone
who
surrounds
himself
professionally
with
a
significant
number
of
Architects
I,
can
tell
you
that,
when
I've
brought
up
this
code,
provision
of
ours
before
I
get
some
raised
eyebrows,
and
so
perhaps
going
to
100
on
murals
only
is
a
way
to
wet
our
beak
a
little
bit
in
different
types
of
coatings
on
walls.
So
we're
not
jumping
into
it.
We're
we're
just
letting
it
letting
it
go
loose,
but
murals
would
be
a
very
small
way
where
we
can
test
our.
Is
the
industry
really
ready
to
do
this
or
not
fair.
I
That
that
building
was
previously
painted,
and
so
when
a
building
is
coded
before
the
adaption
of
those
standards,
it
can
be
repainted
any
number
of
times.
So
that's
how
that
situation
kind
of
resulted
from
there
and
yes,
I,
would
consider
that
if
you
know
if
we
were
to
adopt
this
new
definition
and
maybe
even
under
our
existing
definition,
I
would
consider
that
a
mural
under
those
under
that
language.
I
So
the
reason
that
that
went
forward
is
because
it
was
a
previously
painted
building.
Okay,
if
I,
if
I
may
add
one
thing
variance
likely
to
my
comment
about
the
variance
variance,
would
likely
not
be
a
good,
a
pathway
based
on
the
required
findings
in
under
State
statutes.
I,
don't
believe
there
is
any
provisions
in
our
PD
flexibility
that
would
preclude
someone
from
seeking
PD
flexibility
for
that,
if
they
could
demonstrate
that
there's
a
public
benefit
to
such
so
the
PD
and
I'm,
not
suggesting
someone
would
seek
a
plan
development
solely
for
that.
F
Thank
you
to
find
me.
Yes,
so
I've
asked
a
lot
of
questions
and
I
I
like
to
visualize
what
would
50
of
a
building
look
like
versus
a
hundred
percent
of
a
building
and
I'd
like
to
use
examples,
and
that's
why
I'm
asking
the
questions?
So
you
know
I
think
that
building
that
I
referenced
it's
almost
100
of
that
building,
if
not
100
I'm,
not
quite
sure
what
the
percentage
is,
and
it's
beautiful
and
I
really
think
it's
an
interesting
building.
I
F
H
Thank
you,
chair,
yeah,
I,
guess,
I
do
have
a
bit
of
a
concern
about
the
residential
piece
and
I
understand
you
can't
kind
of
regulate
it
through
zoning
I,
don't
know
if
you
can,
if
it
can
be
regulated
through
the
use
of
the
property,
but
in
terms
of
the
cost
to
maintain
it.
You
know
I,
wonder
if
people
are
gonna.
If
somebody
wants
to
put
a
mural
on
the
side
of
their
house
and
then
can't
maintain
it
and
then
what
do
you?
A
E
C
C
To
follow
up
on
that-
and
this
is
just
a
clarifying
question-
Mr
Johnson
would,
if
commissioner
Roman
decided
he
was
going
to
paint
his
house,
he
would
have
to
go
through
the
application
process
at
this
point,
but
at
this
current
state
right
now
there
would
be
no
application
process
and
someone
could
just
paint
a
mural
on
their
house.
Sure.
I
I
The
one
that
I
guess
the
positive
component,
because
there
is
a
question
about
the
property
owner,
absorbs
that
risk
in
the
instance
of
a
commercial
industrial
property
that
has
limitations
on
Coatings
that
becomes
more
problematic
and
more
of
an
issue
we're
on
a
residential
home.
You
can
simply
paint
right
over
it
because
there's
no
restriction
on
coatings
on
a
residential
home
so
I
mean
I.
Think
that
lowers
kind
of
the
level
of
intervention
necessary
to
correct
the
problem.
If
it
is
a
problem
so
to
speak
or
if
it
gets
into
disrepair.
F
A
H
I
Yeah,
chair
Roman,
that's
correct:
it's
that
we
would
calculate
the
total
wall
elevation
area
and
you
know,
think
of
a
rectangular
building.
Some
elevations
are
bigger
than
others,
and
so
we
wouldn't
look
at
it.
As
you
know,
just
two
walls
we
would
actually
have
a
total
square
footage
and
say
if
it
was
a
thousand
square
feet
of
wall
area,
it's
usually
bigger
than
that,
but
say
it
was
a
thousand.
I
Then
you
could
have
500
square
foot
of
mural
on
that
Total
Building
and
one
thing
we
didn't
talk
about
relating
that
to
open
another
can
of
worms.
But
one
thing
we
didn't
talk
about
with
signs
is
that
currently
signs
are
limited
to
elevations
that
are
along
public
streets.
For
the
most
part,
that's
not
well,
that's
not
totally
true,
but
allowances
for
wall
signs
typically
are
based
on
the
sides
of
the
building
that
face
the
public
way,
and
there
is
some
allowances
for
that.
I
So
I
kind
of
back
up
a
little
bit,
but
unless
right
so
with
the
current
signage
order
and
its
Provisions,
we
would
also
be
looking
at
the
sign
code
in
terms
of
where
commercial
signage
can
be
deployed.
On
the
basis
of
our
current
sign
code,
we
will
look
at
that
in
the
new
sign
ordinance
and
see
what
we
think
is
appropriate
in
that
regard,
but
just
kind
of
a
heads
up
about
that.
It
was
just
a
question.
We
were
kind
of
discussing
internally.
A
Is
there
a
second
thank
you?
We
have
a
motion
and
a
second
to
recommend
approval
of
city
code,
Amendment
and
policy
supporting
murals
in
the
city.
Any
further
discussion,
all
those
in
favor
say
aye
aye
opposed
the
motion
passes.
This
item
will
appear
as
a
public
hearing
on
the
August
28th
city
council
meeting.
Thank
you.
A
The
next
item
is
to
consider
the
draft
Planning
Commission
synopsis
from
June,
8th
and
June
22nd
I
do
have
one
question:
I
don't
know
if
this
is
for
the
planning
manager
or
our
assistant,
City
attorney,
but
I
notice
in
both
of
these
commissioner
Corman
is
listed
as
absent
and
she
had
resigned
her
seat
at
the
end
of
May.
Is
that
still
this
is
absent
because
their
seat
had
not
been
filled
or
is
that
just
a
typo.
E
G
J
You
yeah
I'm
Kevin
toski
to
the
new
Commissioners
nice
to
meet
you
I'm,
the
assistant,
City
attorney
work
with
planning
I
think
the
most
important
thing
is
to
have
it
be
accurate
so
to
his
to
commissioner
cookton's
suggestion
that
might
be
a
good
idea
and
then
planning
manager
can
look
and
see
if
there
was
an
effective
date
on
the
resignation
or
when
it
was
so
okay.
We
can
approve
them
accurately
next
time.
So,
okay.
A
A
Motion
we'll
bring
it
back
next
time.
All
right,
then
we
will
revisit
item
four
at
a
future
meeting
item
five
is
for
our
new
Commissioners,
the
policy
and
issue
of
me.
This
is
a
piece
of
our
agenda
where
staff
and
the
Commissioners
can
raise
items
for
consideration
either
today
or
in
the
future
that
are
not
on
the
agenda
and
we
usually
start
with
the
planning
manager
for
any
items
they
have.
E
E
E
E
E
It
will
be
done
via
secret
ballot
at
that
meeting
and
we'll
be
preparing
the
ballots,
and
in
past
years
we've
heard
from
some
Commissioners
that
they
do
not
want
to
be
considered
for
for
either
office.
And
if
that's
the
case
this
year,
you
know
just
let
me
know
about
it.
You
can
do
it
tonight
or
you
know
after
the
meeting,
and
then
we
just
won't
put
your
name
on
the
ballot,
so
you
don't
accidentally
get
appointed
to
a
position
that
you
don't
want
to
be
appointed
to.
A
Down
their
list
a
bit
I
think
that's
helpful.
Also
in
case
there
are,
let's
say
three
or
four
people
interested
in
to
leadership.
Positions
to
people
can
have
conversations
individually
if
they
are
trying
to
figure
that
out.
So
that
would
be
fine
too.
If
people
would
like
to
do
that
so
I
guess.
Are
there
any
people
who
just
for
the
good
of
the
order
for
for
this
group
for
each
other?
Who
would
be
interested
in
being
considered
at
the
next
meeting
for
either
a
chair
or
vice
chair
role?.