►
From YouTube: June 8, 2017 Intergovernmental Relations Committee
Description
Minneapolis Intergovernmental Relations Committee Meeting
A
Regularly
scheduled
meeting
of
the
intergovernmental
relations
committee,
my
name
is
Elizabeth
Glidden
I'm,
the
chair
of
this
committee
and
I'm
joined
today
by
council
members
were
Sami
Cano
and
council.
President
Johnson
I
will
note
that
council
member
Andrew
Johnson
is
not
here
due
to
recovery,
some
from
surgery,
so
we
will
be
expecting
him
to
return
soon.
A
So
this
is
a
meeting
with
a
couple
of
very
major
items,
including
an
overview
of
what
happened
in
the
legislative
session
and
even
though
it
seems
so
soon
after
that
session
ended.
We
also
are
talking
about
our
capital
requests,
our
Bonnie
request
to
the
state
due
to
submission
deadlines.
First,
we
have
one
consent
item.
A
This
is
approving
the
appointment
of
counsel
member
John
Quincy
to
a
two-year
term,
beginning
June
26
2017
through
June
25th
2019,
as
the
city's
designated
representative
to
the
noise
oversight
committee
for
the
airport
and
the
appointment
of
Lauren
Olsen
as
an
alternate.
So
I
will
move
approval
of
that
item
and
see
if
there's
any
discussion,
seeing
none
on
approval,
PC,
aye,
aye
opposed
and
that
item
is
approved.
B
B
With
the
IGR
Department,
as
the
chair
just
noted,
we
just
finished
up
in
the
2017
legislative
session
for
the
very
sizeable
bonding
bill
at
the
state
capital
cities.
Minneapolis
was
successful
in
some
of
our
top
priorities
being
included
in
the
final
bonding
bill
that
was
just
passed
in
the
special
session.
The
city's
top
priority,
which
is
a
joint
project
with
Hennepin
County,
which
is
a
25
million
dollar
request
for
our
local
chair.
B
Our
contribution
to
the
35w
and
Lake
transit
access
project
was
funded
in
the
bill,
as
well
as
our
number
two
priority:
the
tenth
Avenue
Bridge,
which
was
a
request
for
thirty-one
point.
Eight
seven,
five
million
thrilled
and
pleasantly
surprised
to
have
been
successful
in
both
of
those
projects
and
then
the
third
item.
That's
a
city
project
that
was
funded
in
the
bill
was
the
restoration
of
the
pioneers
and
soldiers
Cemetery
fence,
and
that
was
a
request
of
one
point:
zero
to
nine
million,
and
that
was
also
successful
in
the
final
bonding
bill.
B
And
when
we
go
through
the
legislative
summary
we'll
get
into
a
little
bit
more
detail.
There
were
additional
projects
that
were
not
city
projects
but
are
located
within
the
city
of
Minneapolis
and
we're
very
happy
to
see
that
they
received
funding
as
well,
so
we'll
get
into
that
detail
a
little
bit
more
as
we
go
through
the
legislative
agenda.
Excuse
me
the
legislative
summary,
but.
A
For
now,
and
just
as
you
are
pausing
right,
there
and
I
know
we'll
have
more
time
to
talk
about
this
when
you
get
to
talking
through
the
legislative
session.
I
just
wanted
to
pause,
though,
and
note
how
significant
these
accomplishments
were.
Both
in
terms
of
these
are
very
significant
request
to
the
state
in
had
been
on
the
list
for
many
years,
I
will
say
for
the
35w
transit
access
project.
A
This
is
one
that
has
been
in
the
works
for
I,
don't
know
like
20
years
25
years,
and
this
iteration
is
just
one
of
the
last
generations
of
how
this
request
has
been
in
place
and
I
had
been
very
hopeful
that
before
I
had
left
the
City
Council
that
we
could
say
that
we
finally
accomplished
those
things.
The
bonding
law,
so
I
just
want
to
thank
our
very
talented
staff
and
misleading
this
worked
for
for
really
what
is
the
significant
statewide
accomplishment
done?
Can
all
those
friends,
but
also
this
one
in
particular?
B
You
manager
in
the
pleasure
so
with
that.
As
you
noted
madam
chair,
we
just
finished
the
2017
legislative
session
about
five
minutes
ago.
So
it's
certainly
time
to
start
preparing
for
2018,
and
the
reason
was
preparing
so
early
is
that
the
city
participates
in
a
process
with
the
state
for
our
projects
to
be
considered,
so
we
are
being
governed
and
elevated
in
some
dates
and
some
process.
B
In
a
moment
we
are
being
governed
by
a
larger
process,
so
we
appreciate
city
staff
responding
so
quickly
to
a
very
abbreviated
timeline
for
2018,
so
just
a
very
brief
overview
about
what
state
capital
investment
is
kind
of
bonding
101
and
I'll
use
those
words
interchangeably
capital
investment
bonding
is
really
with
the
shorthand,
just
as
the
city
has
the
capacity
to
participate
in
bonding.
So
does
the
state
of
Nevada.
B
The
state
pays
for
some
types
of
capital
improvement
projects
by
borrowing
money
by
issuing
bonds
which
are
promises
to
repay
the
money,
borrow
at
a
specific
time
and
interest
rate.
The
vast
majority
of
the
bonds
that
we
see
moving
in
a
legislative
bonding
bill
in
our
general
obligation
or
geo
bonds,
or
there
are
other
types
of
bonds
that
you
will
occasionally
see
in
state
bombing
bills
such
as
appropriation,
bonds
and
revenue
bonds,
but
they
are
certainly
the
minority.
B
The
vast
majority
of
the
bonding
bill
is
going
to
be
geo
bonds
and
they
are
backed
by
The,
Full,
Faith
and
Credit,
and
taxing
powers
of
the
state
of
Minnesota
and
finally
element
I'll.
Note,
then,
occasionally
you
do
see
cash
or
just
a
direct
general
fund,
appropriation
included
in
a
bonding
bill,
and
those
are
that
general
fund
cash
is
often
awarded
for
projects
that
don't
really
fit
the
very
strict
criteria
and
guidelines
that
are
required
for
those
other
types
of
bonds,
geo,
appropriation,
revenue
and
so
forth.
B
It
gives
a
little
bit
more
flexibility
and
sometimes
is
included
in
a
bonding
bill.
But
by
no
means
is
that
a
regular
occurrence
I
mentioned
that
there
are
some
requirements
that
accompany
a
geo
bonds
and
that's
what
I'm
going
to
be
focusing
right
on
today.
Not
the
other
types
of
bonds
are
the
bonds
that
really
support
the
city
projects
that
we
pursue
at
the
state
level.
These
bonds
are
governed
by
constitutional
requirements
and
statutory
requirements.
B
The
most
important
constitutional
requirement
that
we
really
focus
on
is
that
the
project
does
need
to
be
owned
by
a
public
entity
in
order
to
receive
state
bonding
awards
when
something
is
not
owned
by
a
public
entity.
There
are
all
sorts
of
other
revenue
sources,
as
I
mentioned,
appropriation
bonds
are
used.
Sometimes
that's
when
you'll
see
that
general
fund
cash
come
into
play
is
when
the
legislature
wants
to
support
those
projects
that
don't
happen
to
be
owned
by
a
public
entity.
B
The
Constitution
requires
that
these
projects
be
publicly
owned.
They
must
be
for
a
public
purpose.
That
purpose
must
be
specified
in
law.
The
bonds
must
be
authorized
in
the
Constitution
and
must
not
mature
for
more
than
20
years.
In
addition
to
these
constitutional
requirements,
there
are
also
statutory
requirements
that
govern
a
state
bonding
process.
Those
requirements
are
largely
laid
out
in
Minnesota
statute.
B
16
eight
point:
eight
six
at
least
the
requirements
that
govern
state
bonding,
that
is
awarded
to
local
units
of
government
and
political
subdivisions,
of
which
the
city
of
Minneapolis
is
one
one
of
the
largest.
The
most
significant
requirements
laid
out
in
statutes.
There
is
that
a
50
percent
match
from
non
state
revenue
is
required
for
all
capital
investment
Awards
to
political
subdivisions,
with
very
few
exceptions,
and
how
Minnesota
Management
and
Budget
evaluates
that
50
percent
match
really
is
going
to
depend
on
the
project.
Sometimes
they
will
consider
previous
experience,
expenditures
that
have
been
made.
B
They'll
look
back
in
time
and
see.
No,
you
paid
XYZ
for
the
land
or
you've
already
spent
this
much
on
a
pre
design
and
design.
So
we'll
count
that
for
your
50%
match,
but
those
do
need
to
be
non-state
sources
and
they
are
pretty
strict
about
that.
So,
if
part
of
your
local
50%
match
is
say
another
grant,
you
received
from
the
state
through
another
pathway,
that's
considered
a
state
resource,
even
though
you
didn't
get
it
from
bonding.
They
really
are
looking
for
non-state
sources,
so
that
could
be
federal,
federal
money.
That
could
be
money.
B
Just
from
from
the
local
unit
of
government
itself,
but
they
really
are
pretty
pretty
strict
at
looking
at
those
non
state
revenues
and
once
that
50%
match
is,
is
recognized
by
MMP.
It
is
at
that
point
that,
if
you
are
successful
in
getting
your
project
in
a
bonding
bill
and
envy
will
not
release
the
funds
to
that
unit
of
government
until
that
50
percent
match
is
either
in
the
bank
or
there's
a
very
clear
funding.
Plan
in
place
such
as
Nicollet
Mall
was
a
clear.
B
As
to
where
that
fifty
percent
match
is
going
to
be
coming
over
the
future
years
and
then
switching
to
our
discussion
about
the
city
process
and
how
the
city
goes
about
deciding
what
the
city
is
going
to
be
submitting
to
Minnesota
Management
and
Budget,
we
primarily
focus
on
city
owned
projects,
circle
a
back
to
that
constitutional
requirement.
That
projects
do
need
to
be
owned
by
a
local
unit
of
government.
So
that
really
guides
much
of
our
thought.
In
this
area
and
historically,
the
city
has
really
focused
on
preserving
existing
city
infrastructure.
B
Public
safety
needs
economic
development
and
historic
preservation
of
city
city
projects,
and
this
planning
does
involve
all
city
departments.
You
would,
of
course,
the
Spector
usual
suspects
of
Public
Works
and
see
Ted
often
have
the
most
number
of
projects,
but
as
you'll
see
when
I
show
you
our
current
list,
you'll
also
see
bonding
requests
from,
for
example,
the
fire
department
is
looking
at
expanding
the
current
emergency
operations
and
training
facility.
B
So
we
do
reach
out,
engage
and
engage
all
city
departments
in
this
process,
although
you
will
of
course
see
more
projects
coming
from
those
primary
departments.
Mmb,
excuse
me
I
just
skipped
ahead.
Minnesota,
Management
and
Budget
is
the
state
agency
that
Shepherds
Sheppard's
us
through
the
bonding
process,
and
they
are
the
ones
responsible
then
for
managing
those
bonds
once
they
are
let
and
they're
the
typically
the
agency
that
manages
the
reporting
requirements
for
the
bonds
that
are
awarded
to
local
units
of
government,
along
with
specific
state
agencies
that
might
oversee
a
particular
project.
B
Mmb
is
also
the
agency
that
oversees
the
governor's
bonding
bill
on
the
reason
the
city
always
participates
in
MMD's
process
is
because
projects
must
be
submitted
to
MMB
for
review
to
be
considered
for
inclusion
in
the
governor's
bonding
bill.
The
governor
has
the
authority
to,
but
historically
really
does
not
include
bonding
projects
in
his
bonding
bill
that
were
not
submitted
to
the
Minnesota,
Management
and
Budget,
and
did
not
go
through
that
process.
B
And
what
I
fail
to
note
here
is
that,
in
addition
to
being
submitted
to
MMB
once
projects
are
submitted
to
MMB,
we
also
have
tours
that
we
do
typically
in
the
summer
and
fall
of
the
odd-numbered
year,
which
will
be
this
year
leading
into
the
even-numbered
session,
which
is
the
traditional
bonding
session.
We
will
bring
the
Senate
and
House
Capitol
investment
committees,
along
with
their
partners
at
the
county
and
the
park
board
traditionally
on
a
day-long
tour
of
jurisdictions
projects
so
that
MMB
submission
process
also
really
jumped
starts
at
legislative
tour
process
as
well.
B
So
the
reason
we're
talking
about
this
today
mount
share
is
that
you'll
see
that
preliminary
submissions
are
due
to
minnesota
management
budget
next
Friday
on
June
16th,
a
council
resolution
needs
to
accompany
that
submission.
So
that's
why
we're
discussing
this
today
after
the
preliminary
submission
you'll
see,
the
next
deadline
is
July
17th,
when
MMB
will
submit
all
of
the
local
projects
that
they've
received
at
the
preliminary
submission
date
to
the
legislature
that
is
required
by
statute
between
then
the
July
date
and
october
20th
october.
B
B
Add
additional
visual
things
of
that
nature
before
those
projects
are
submitted
to
the
governor
for
consideration,
and
then
the
governor
is
required
to
submit
his
capital
budget
proposal
to
the
legislature.
January
15
sent
of
the
even-numbered
year
that
January
15th
is
the
required
date
of
the
even-numbered
year.
I'm,
going
to
get
a
note
that
that
council
resolution
must
accompany
our
submissions.
B
Mmb,
as
they're
governed
by
statute
is
required
to
require
us
local
units
of
government
to
rank
our
projects
in
priority
order.
This
does
not
bind
the
governor
or
the
legislature
from
funding
projects
in
that
priority
order,
but
those
rankings
are
taken
very
seriously
by
the
governor
and
by
the
legislature,
and
they
do
tend
to
respect
the
prioritization
of
local
units
of
government
with.
What's
the.
B
A
Really
can
I
just
ask
a
question
about
the
city
process
slide.
You
already
went
through
so
again,
because
this
is
so
soon
after
the
end
of
the
legislative
session,
where
we've
only
just
discovered
what
actually
did
get
funded
in
the
bonding
bill
for
this
session
is
what
opportunities
are
there,
if
any
for
us
to
change?
What
might
be
the
rankings
that
we
identify
or
modify
our
list
beyond
what
is
submitted
next
Friday
thank.
B
You,
madam
chair,
an
excellent
question:
you'll
note
that
the
June
16th
date
for
next
Friday
is
a
preliminary
submission
date
and
MMB
understands
that
there,
especially
due
to
the
late
nature
of
this
year's
bonding
bill,
that
there
will
be
changes
to
jurisdictions
with
some
of
there
is
flexibility
in
adjusting
those
prior
to
the
October
20th
final
submission
date.
Okay,.
A
B
B
And
just
to
touch
on
the
topic
of
non
city-owned
projects,
because
the
connection
between
how
we
rank
projects
and
the
non
city-owned
projects.
As
I
noted
in
the
beginning
of
my
comments
on
this
year's
bonding
bill,
there
are
a
whole
host
of
projects
that
are
located
in
the
city
of
Minneapolis,
but
are
not
owned
by
the
city,
and
the
city
has
historically
focused
our
lobbying
efforts
of
our
political
capital
and
energy
on
focusing
on
city
projects
for
the
constitutional
statutory
requirements
that
I
laid
out.
B
B
A
bonding
bill
requires
a
3/5
vote
by
the
legislature,
not
a
simple
majority
to
pass,
and
because
of
that,
there
was
a
very
wise
addition
to
the
Constitution,
because
that
really
does
require
that
the
legislature
create
a
balanced
bonding
bill
that
provides
equal
support
to
all
different
regions
and
entities
and
types
of
entities
and
cities
and
counties
around
the
state.
And
because
of
that,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
the
reality
is
when
the
legislature
is
looking
at
the
bottom
line
as
to
what
projects
are
in
the
city
of
Minneapolis.
B
What
projects
are
owned
by
the
city?
The
projects
are
University
of
Minnesota.
What
projects
are
in
Duluth
or
ahead
of
the
county
or
wherever
it
may
be,
that
they
are
looking
for
some
balance
of
some
parity
and
equity
amongst
those
types
of
jurisdictions,
and
that
is
a
project
is
on
our
list
that
the
implication
is
that,
if
something
is
listed,
it
could
very
easily
subtract
from
what
might
be
a
top
priority
or
a
number
two
priority
that
your
jurisdiction
really
is
only
going
to
be
in
the
minds
of
lawmakers
allotted
number
of
bonding
dollars.
B
And
if
that
is
spent
on
a
lower
priority
or
in
a
project
that
is
not
a
city
project
that
that
would
then
in
their
minds
and
then
on
the
ledger,
but
you
subtracted
from
what
would
be
the
city
priorities.
So
we
have
to
be
very
cautious
with
how
we
compile
a
list
and
how
we
advocate
for
our
projects
and
those
others.
A
A
Well,
we
we
have
a
park
board
that
has
a
separately
elected
board.
They
set
their
own
lists
of
bonding
priorities
that
align
with
their
mission.
We
at
the
city
do
not
change
change,
what
they,
what
their
decisions
are
and
I
just
mentioned:
st.
Paul,
because
st.
Paul
does
not
have
a
separately
elected
park
board
or
other
things
like
that.
So
how
does
the
park
board's
lists
affect?
What
might
be
the
dollars
awarded
to
the
city
of
Minneapolis?
Thank.
B
You,
madam
chair,
another
great
question.
So
when
we
have
joint
projects,
for
example
the
upper
copper
terminal,
which
will
be
enjoyed
endeavor
between
the
city
of
Minneapolis
and
the
Minneapolis
Park
Board,
because
of
those
just
the
technical
nature
of
the
MMB
process,
only
one
jurisdiction
can
formally
technically
push
the
send
button
and
submit
that
to
Minnesota,
Management
and
Budget.
So,
while
you
might
not
see
that
project,
for
example,
on
our
formal
list
that
we
submit
to
MMB,
that
will
be
a
top
priority
of
the
city
of
Minneapolis.
B
We
just
can't
both
formally
submit
that
to
the
MMB
process.
So
that
would
be
an
example
of
a
project
that
we
would
work
on
together,
that
we
would
lobby
together,
but
that
we
will
at
least
it
was
preliminary
submission
and
the
park
board
is
going
to
be
the
one
submitting
that
project.
For
example
politically,
when
when
you
leave
the
city
of
Minneapolis,
there
are
a
lot
of
legislators
who,
because
you
have
cities
like
st.
Paul,
that
have
their
park
board
as
part
of
their
city.
B
The
fact
that
there's
a
a
natural
political
subdivision
distinction
between
the
city
minneapolis
in
the
park
board
kind
of
inside
baseball
for
a
lot
of
people
around
the
state-
they
just
see
it
as
minneapolis,
and
so
a
project
like
that,
for
example,
being
on
the
park.
Boards
list,
would
still
be
looked
at
as
a
city
of
minneapolis
project.
B
B
Historically,
the
legislature
really
was
conservative
in
how
they
approached
whether
it
be
nonprofit
organizations
or
entities
that
just
were
not
other
units
of
government
or
political
subdivisions,
and
they
were
not
included
in
the
bonding
bill
and
then
starting,
maybe
about
25
years
ago,
and
there
was
this
idea
that
a
local
unit
of
government
acted
as
a
fiscal
agent
or
a
sponsor
of
a
project.
Then
that
would
create
some
space
for
and
nonprofit
organizations
or
other
non
public
entities
to
participate
in
the
bonding
bill.
B
B
The
the
owner
of
the
city.
Minneapolis
has
been
working
with
the
Minnesota
Council
of
nonprofits
and
NV
different
state
agencies,
the
governor's
office
and
other
public
entities
and
mobile
units
of
government
to
identify
alternative
funding
sources
for
these
valuable
resources
that
are
just
not
owned
by
the
jurisdictions
that
they
happen
to
be
located
in.
And
you.
A
Know
I
I
just
want
to
say:
I
got
a
copy
of
a
letter
recently
that
I
think
went
to
other
council
members
too
that
referenced
what's
the
process
for
a
non
city
project.
So,
for
example,
a
nonprofit
led
project
that
the
city
would
need
to
then
have
some
ownership
interest
in.
Is
there
a
separate
way
that
those
projects
are
submitted
to
the
state
or
is
there
just
one
process
I
just
I
feel
like
sometimes
that
is
confusing
to
people.
Madam.
B
But
what
we
really
do
focus
our
purview
on
our
city
projects
and
then
finally,
man
chair
for
the
2018
and
I,
say
the
state
bonding
MMB
submissions
and
I
I
said
that
very
specifically
to
capture
what
we
talked
about
a
few
moments
ago,
around
the
upper
harbor
terminal
that
we
might
not
be
submitting
that
project,
but
it
it
will
be
a
top
priority
for
the
city
of
Minneapolis
in
the
2018
cycle,
even
though
we
aren't
the
ones
you're.
Turning
in
the
paperwork
so
to
speak
to
MMB.
B
A
You
miss
lush
and
I
will
say
kind
of
I
think
it
would
be
good
to
come
back
to
this
committee
once
there
is
a
I
understand.
There
also
is
some
question
about
just
what
is
the
city
portion
of
the
upper
harbour
terminal
and
I
say
that
not
to
indicate
there
isn't
a
city
portion?
There
is
a
city
portion,
but
just
what's
the
definition
of
that.
A
What
actually
is
the
project
and
I
think
it
would
be
good
to
come
back
to
this
committee,
regardless
of
whether
there
stays
on
the
park
board
risk
or
whether
it
gravitates
to
the
city
list,
so
that
we
would
be
in
a
more
of
a
leadership
position
on
the
lobbying
around
this
project.
So
we
can
understand
what
would
be
the
scope
of
an
ask
so
surly
manager.
C
B
A
D
B
A
Just
I
will
say
knowing
that
upper
harbour
is
number
four
on
the
park
board's
list.
I,
don't
know
that
that
fully
reflects
how
the
city
might
think
of
what
the
priority
should
be,
and
so
that's
kind
of
another
issue
and
I
also
am
Not
sure
I
understand
kinda.
What
is
the
park
board?
You
know
so
they're
asked
is
about
park
board,
stuff
and
I
feel
a
little
confused
on
what
kind
of
the
park
board
into
the
project
versus
how
the
city
might
characterize
our
end
of
the
project
and
how
that
might
change.
A
B
Manager
will
be
working
on
this
with
this
being
a
preliminary
submission,
we'll
be
working
with
our
partners
at
the
park
board
to
really
nail
down.
What
does
that
ask?
Look
like
other
is
who's
going
to
be
the
lead
agency,
and
some
of
the
questions
that
you
raised
so
we'll
get
that
locked
down
before
the
final
submission
for
sure,
okay,
Council
President
Johnson
on.
C
The
flesh
view
I
realize
it's
a
preliminary
submission,
but
I
mean
do
we.
Do
we
anticipate
that
other
units
of
government
will
have
a
complete
list?
I
just
don't
want
to
be
behind
the
eight
ball
because
we
haven't,
you
know,
defined
exactly
what
you
know.
We
want
to
do
and
end
up.
You
know
not
not
having
some
things
that
are
really
important
on
our
list
quickly,
because
when's,
the
next
one
June
or
no
photo.
C
B
Chair
calls
the
president.
We
would
have
it
with
us.
We
would
know
for
sure
what
our
list
would
be
before
then
our
tour
tends
to
be
the
november/december
they'd
like
to
be
outside
with
us
at
the
end
of
the
year.
Apparently
the
legislative
delegates,
the
legislative
committees-
it's
not
terribly
unusual
for
local
governments
to
have
for
there
to
be
some
flux
in
the
beginning
of
a
bonding
cycle
for
that
preliminary
date
and
to
see
change
between
a
preliminary
date
and
the
final
submission
date.
B
That's
why
they
give
you
that
large
chunk
of
time,
especially
given
the
extraordinary
late
nature
of
the
2017
bonding
bill,
passing,
make
a
lot
of
entities
and
their
having
included
in
the
bills
that
they
weren't,
anticipating
or
excluded
that
they
thought
were
going
to
be
in.
So
it's
a
fairly
common
occurrence
that
there's
movement
between
your
preliminary
submission
in
your
final
so
and
we
don't
feel
behind
this
I
may
fall
in
that
regard.
You
would
say
yes
thank.
C
A
B
E
The
Central
City
tunnel
is
part
of
a
network
of
16
miles
of
tunnel
that
underlay
Minneapolis.
The
tunnels
are
a
critical
component
of
our
stormwater
system
and
they're
designed
they
are
designed
to
convey
stormwater
from
some
of
our
most
densely
populated
and
developed
areas
together
with
the
complimentary
MnDOT
tunnels.
These
tunnels
drain
approximately
10,000
acres
of
area
within
the
city
or
twenty-seven
percent
of
the
overall
city.
E
E
E
Please
cut
25,000
catch
basins,
25
pump
stations,
150
grit
chambers
and
a
number
of
storm
water
detention
ponds
to
improve
water
quality,
all
designs
to
minimize
risk
to
human
health
in
the
environment
like
much
of
our
underground
infrastructure
in
the
city,
our
stormwater
tunnels
are
aging,
the
oldest
tunnels
in
the
city
and
a
portion
of
the
central
cities
included
in
this
our
date
back
to
the
late
1800s.
They
were
constructed
again
to
facilitate
development
and
drainage
and
they
collect
runoff
from
tributary,
storm
pipes
and
direct
it
to
the
Mississippi
River.
E
The
tunnels
underneath
downtown,
including
the
Central
City
tunnel,
are
located
65
to
100
feet
below
the
surface
and
they're
in
the
sandstone
farming
formation.
They
were
originally
constructed
with
technology
of
the
late
19th
century,
using
shovels
and
fix,
and
they
were
then
lined
with
concrete
or
brick.
E
The
tunnels,
together
with
the
rest
of
the
system,
have
served
the
city
quite
well.
However,
they
are
deteriorating.
The
primary
cause
of
deterioration
is
pressurization,
resulting
from
hydraulic
overloading,
essentially
there's
too
much
water
in
the
tunnels.
As
noted,
the
tunnels
were
built
in
the
late
19th
century,
early
20th
century,
designed
to
handle
runoff
from
that
time
period
as
more
development
happened
in
the
in
the
city
as
more
water
came
to
the
tunnels
and
they
were
never
envisioned
to
operate
entirely
full,
let
alone
with
a
hundred
head
of
pressure
upstream.
E
Today,
many
of
the
tunnels
are
over
capacity
during
even
moderate
rain
events,
and
this
includes
the
central
city
tunnels
downtown.
The
pressure
in
the
tunnel
leads
to
cracks
and
during
rain
events,
when
the
tunnels
are
full,
water
is
forced
out
of
the
cracks
into
the
surrounding
sandstone,
creating
voids
and,
as
the
water
then
recedes,
the
sandstone
is
eroded
and
falls
back
in
as
sand
into
the
tunnel
decreasing
the
overall
capacity
of
the
tunnel
and
the
voids
that
are
created
on
the
exterior
side
can
compromise
the
integrity,
the
overall
tunnel
system.
E
E
E
This
video,
which
was
captured
at
a
manhole
at
25th,
Avenue,
southeast
and
como
drains
to
the
coma
tunnel,
and
we
fix
this
location
last
summer
with
the
construction
of
a
surge
chamber.
But
it
is
a
good
representation
of
what
can
happen
above-ground
when
you
have
pressurized
tunnel,
perhaps
even
more
dangerous
are
the
rip
risks
that
can
be
posed
on
the
ground
that
we
can't
see.
E
A
lot
of
that
sand
ended
up
in
the
Mississippi
River,
unfortunately,
and
what
was
left
took
months
of
expensive
construction
and
City
work
to
remove
underneath
the
second
Avenue
portion
of
the
tunnel.
Water
actually
exploded
out
the
side
which
then
unfortunately
penetrated
a
nearby
sanitary
mat
council
interceptor
as
the
water
receded.
Then
untreated
wastewater
migrated
back
into
the
sanitary
tunnel
and
resulted
in
an
overflow
of
untreated
wastewater
into
the
Mississippi
River.
E
Also
in
response
to
the
2010
events,
we
completed
an
entire
comprehensive
assessment
of
all
of
the
storm
tunnels
and
developed
a
plan
to
address
them.
Go
through
rehab,
going
forward.
The
city
increased
the
funding
to
the
storm
water
utility
fund
at
that
time
and
now
we're
spending
between
7
and
10
million
dollars
on
rehab
on
the
tunnel
system
every
year.
This
includes
quantifying
voids
looking
at
structural
integrity
as
well
as
minimizing
groundwater
infiltration.
E
The
bottom
left
photo
was
taken
during
rehab
that
occurred
recent
or
in
the
recent
past,
in
the
Central
City
tunnel
near
Washington
and
Portland
Avenue.
Just
downstream
of
this
is
the
oldest
segment
of
the
tunnel,
which
is
within
the
scope
of
this
project
and
it's
under
sized.
So
this
is
a
problem
that
we
have.
The
photo
on
the
right
was
taken
also
was
taken
this
winter
underneath
Nicollet
and
forth,
and
this
gentleman
is
identifying.
E
Voids
as
well
on
the
exterior
of
the
tunnel
minor,
the
need
for
the
Central
City
project
was
identified
in
that
2011
comprehensive
assessment.
The
goal
of
the
project
is
to
reduce
the
pressurization,
to
reduce
risk
of
tunnel
failure
to
reduce
costs
and
operation
and
maintenance,
and
to
extend
the
service
life
and
to
support
the
critical
infrastructure
that
overlies
this
part
of
the
city.
The
scope
is,
this
line
in
green
is
0.7
miles
that
collect
storm
water
from
those
upper
branches
of
the
downtown
tunnel.
E
This
is
the
oldest
again
and
most
undersized
portion
of
the
tunnel
and
I
just
want
to
point
out
that
this
project
will
not
dig
up
the
brand
new
Washington
Avenue
and
that,
as
we
consider,
the
options
to
address
the
need
to
increase
hydraulic
capacity
were
very
mindful
of
the
fact
that
that
project
is
ongoing
and
we
will
look
for
other
ways
to
do
this
work,
and
there
are
a
number
of
other
ways
to
do
that.
So
we
are
considering
options
right
now.
E
One
is
a
parallel
tunnel
and
another
would
be
kind
of
building
out
the
cross
section
of
the
area
that
is
in
most
need
of
additional
capacity,
so
the
feasibility
study
is
underway.
We
expect
the
results
in
July
so
just
next
month,
and
at
that
time
we
will
identify
the
preferred
alternative
and
move
into
the
design
phase.
We
expect
construction
to
last
several
years,
starting
in
2020,
and
the
price
tag
of
this
project
is
quite
quite
impressive:
thirty,
eight
million
dollars
and
as
it's
currently
programmed
in
our
storm
water
utility
funds,
we
are.
E
It's
time
intensive
and
it
it
really
is
something
to
see
firsthand.
The
top
of
the
top
photo
on
the
right
was
taken
this
winter,
as
we
did
work
in
the
central
city
tunnel,
nicholette,
Avenue
and
and
forth,
and
if
the
project
goes
forward,
we
would
be
happy
to
be
part
of
the
tour
to
show
people
what
this
looks
like
and
how
it
not
only
benefits
the
city
of
Minneapolis,
but
is
an
asset
for
economic
growth
for
the
region
as
well,
and
that
is
the
end
of
my
presentation
and
I'm
happy
to
take
questions.
We.
E
Done
is
just
projected
what
might
be
if
we
had
to
increase
the
rates
three
to
five
percent,
as
we
think
we
might
have
to
to
cover
that
38
million
dollars,
so
this
has
not
been
adopted.
This
is
something
that
we
are
looking
at
and
exploring
ways
to
fund,
but
if
we
did
move
ahead
with
increasing
rates
to
bear
the
entire
cost
of
the
city
ourselves,
that
is
potentially
what
you
might
see
if
you
fell
into
one
of
those
categories.
Okay,.
C
So
a
home
owner
is
paying
twelve
thirty
six
per
Bush
year
per
month
per
month
this
year,
and
then
it
would
if
we
had
to
pay
the
whole
balance
that
would
go
up
to
fourteen
seventy
nine
per
month
by
2023,
correct.
Okay.
The
other
question
I
want
to
ask
is
sort
of
goes
to
what
the
flesh
was
talking
about
earlier
about
the
comparisons
between
cities-
and
we
have
this
big
storm
water
need
what
happens
with
st.
Paul.
Do
they
have
a
mean?
They
obviously
have
the
same
kind
of
challenges?
E
E
C
Think
just
to
hear
of
st.
historically
sinful
son
and
if
that's
in
there
you
know
again
as
if
that's
in
their
structure,
because
they're
enough,
there
are
not
different
utility
arrangements
and
we
are
because
they
have
that
overall
utility,
it's
you
know
it's
a
difference
anyway.
I'd
be
interested
in
that
so
just
about
you
know
when
you're
asking
for
asking
for
something
that
you
know
is
outside
or
if
we
have
internally
and
somebody
else
doesn't
have
internally.
Just
kind
of
fairness
like
this
is
what
I
would
get
excellent.
D
A
Right
so
we
have
a
proposal
for
our
list
in
front
of
us.
I
did
want
to
ask
mallesh
a
couple.
Other
questions
I
know
that
we
have
some
friends
here
today
who
are
from
the
and
I
met
friends
and
some
friends
that
but
are
who
are
from
the
Friends
of
a
Lock
and
Dam,
and
they
have
approached
the
city
about
whether
we
would
support
a
Bonnie
request.
A
B
Chair
and
councilmembers
and
you'll
recall
in
our
presentation
one
of
the
top
priorities
and
really
the
primary
way
to
receive
state
funding.
Resources
is
for
a
project
to
be
publicly
owned
and,
when
I
say
publicly
owned.
That
also
means
that
the
public
entity
that
out
of
it,
they
actually
own
it
and
they
have
site
control
and
that
they
are
responsible
for
the
for
the
property.
B
So
I
would
I
would
say
that
for
any
project
that
is
either
not
avoided
by
the
city
or
the
city
doesn't
have
a
very
clearly
defined
relationship
with
whomever
does
actually
own
the
building.
It
becomes
very
challenging
for
us
to
seek
bonding
support
for
for
that
type
of
a
project,
so
that
would
because
our
initial,
that's
because
our
first
kind
of
litmus
test
is
actually
something
that
statutorily
constitutionally.
We
could
actually
even
own
and
and
and
have
and
be
able
to
fulfill
the
requirements
in
Constitution
and
statutes.
Yeah.
A
And
I
guess
one
thing
that
I
was
recently
reminded
of
just
because
we
have
had
actions
on
our
agenda
in
the
past.
More
policy
type
of
actions
that
were
on
our
federal
agenda
that
had
to
do
with
the
Lock
and
Dam
and
other
related
F
is
that
there
is
a
kind
of
a
complicated
array
of
federal
agencies
that
touch
this
property
and
understanding
some
of
those
relationships
as
well
as
what
might
be
future
interest
of
the
federal
government
in
this
project
is
something
I
think
we
also
want
to
make
sure
that
we
understand.
A
B
I'm
Adam,
Sharon,
councilmembers
I
think
there
are
a
wide
array
of
opportunities
for
the
city
to
be
helpful
in
navigating
the
really
complex
world.
That
is
a
federal
ownership
of
pretty
much
anything
you
know
we
have
other
Priti
is
in
the
city.
You
know
we
have
the
post
office
and
things
of
that
nature
that
that
we
know
that
you
know
are
in
our
city
and
that
are
challenging
dynamics
with
it
with
the
federal
government
and
who
owns
them
and
what
what
can
be
done
with
them.
B
So
I
can
say
that
we
will
be
happy
to
explore
those,
and
there
are
other
programs
at
the
state
that
just
don't
have
the
complex
strings
attached
to
to
them
that
geo
bonds
do,
whether
it
be
to
the
Historical,
Society
or
Metro
regional
parks
funding.
There
are
a
lot
of
other
resources
and
avenues
that
just
don't
have
the
the
complex
nature
of
the
bonding
requirements
that.
G
A
D
B
Madam
chair
and
cuz
we're
tanker
echt,
it
needs
to
be
publicly
owned,
it
doesn't
need
to
be
city
owned,
but
frankly,
I've
never
seen
an
entity
pursue
bonding
proceeds
for
a
project
that
it
either
didn't
own
outright
or
have
a
contractual
agreement
with
whoever
did
own
the
property
so,
for
example,
Orchestra
Hall,
the
city.
Maybe
it
was
that
15
years
ago,
or
so
agreed
to
be
physical
agent
to
use
that
shorthand
for
Orchestra
Hall,
where
we
served
in
that
role
when
it
came
to
state
bonding.
But
it
was
Orchestra.
B
Hall
was
a
willing
participant
in
that
arrangement
and
we
could
approach
the
legislature
together
where
they
still
operated
the
property
and
were
responsible
for
those
for
the
operations.
But
we
were
submitting
school
agent
and
if
you
get
into
a
situation,
then,
when
that
public
purpose
is
not
continuing
to
be
maintained
and
they're
not
operating
in
the
way
that
they're
required
to
statutorily
or
constitutionally,
then
you
often
end
up
in
a
situation
of
the
city,
almost
in
with
a
property
than
default
to
that
owner.
B
D
B
The
well
and
I
think
to
Madam
chairs
point
earlier:
is
that
there's
there
ongoing
discussions
right
now
that
the
city
owns
it,
and
there
are
discussions
right
now
about
programming
it
and
long
term?
What
portion
of
that
acreage
is
going
to
be
for
City
purpose
and
what
portion
of
that
acreage
is
going
to
be
park
board
purpose,
but
but
that
is
a
comment
that
is
a
joint
endeavour.
You
have
to
have
kind
of
a
to
willing
participants
so.
D
I
guess
yeah
I
guess
my
question
is
kind
of
where
we're
sort
of
in
a
chicken
or
the
egg
scenario
here,
because
before
this
until
the
city
gets
behind
the
project
in
some
way,
then
there
won't
be
the
ability
to
have
joint
ownership.
It's
because
Army
Corps
of
Engineers
is
requiring
that
in
order
to
contract,
so
I
mean
I.
D
Understand
if
there's
not
the
ability
to
do
it
this
this
time
around,
you
know
but
I'm
trying
to
figure
out
what
is
the
solution
in
the
future,
because
they're
looking
I
mean
we
will
have,
we
will
be
able
to
have
site
control
in
the
future.
The
question
is
whether
Army
Corps
of
Engineers
will
partner
without
the
city
behind
it
and
I,
don't
think
they
will
and.
A
And
I
just
want
to
say
too
I
do
think
it's
unfortunate
that
mr.
Frank
can't
be
here,
but
I
know
that
he
has
entered
into
the
conversation
and
I
think
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
working
with
them.
It
just
seems
like
especially
at
this
time
point.
There
are
some
other
options
where
we
can
work
in
partnership
to
see
here.
A
Think
we
also
the
other
thing
I
just
want
to
say
is
we
probably
want
to
make
sure
we're
careful
with
what's
the
context
for
multiple
projects
that
are
connected
to
the
river
and
the
riverfront,
and
how
do
we
make
sure
we
kind
of
stay
on
task
with
those
that
we've
identified
as
priorities?
So
these
all
seem
to
be
very
large
projects,
upper
harbour
terminal
being
one.
A
The
park
boards
project
around
halls,
Island,
which
is
more
solely
a
park
board
identified
at
priority,
but
also
then
impact
how
the
how
the
legislature
as
a
whole
might
look
at
the
multiple
priorities
of
the
city
of
Minneapolis.
So
I
think
those
are
just
some
points
to
consider
and
again.
I
am
NOT
the
most
involved
person
on
the
riverfront
issues
there
and.
G
A
D
I
greatly
look
forward
to
exploring
what
they
are
precisely
I
am
less
convinced
that
there's
the
possibility
of
the
city
owning
the
site
and
then
being
stuck
with
all
the
costs
in
the
future,
simply
because
the
reefs
at
the
Army
Corps
of
Engineers
presently
on
it
phones,
it
is
for
safety
mechanisms,
downriver
and
and
and
along
the
central
river
funds
to
prevent
flooding
so
I
mean
I,
don't
see
them
just
willingly,
giving
the
whole
thing
over
and
then
turning
it
over
to
the
hands
of
the
city,
because,
that's
totally
contrary
to
their
core
mission.
D
C
D
Seems
to
be
a
chicken
or
the
egg
situation.
I
don't
want
to
toss
a
really
good
proposal
out
in
the
future
when
we've
got
a
willing
partner
who
and
when
we've
got
matching
dollars
as
well.
D
C
C
Regarding
the
the
priority
for
the
upper
Harbor,
you
know,
they've
got
15
million
dollars
of
Park.
You
know
we
have.
We
could
probably
come
up
with
a
number
that
would
be
very
similar
to
that
just
in
utility
relocation,
which
is
one
of
the
things.
That's
a
big
ask
on
on
our
end.
On
that
on
that
land,
so
so
anyway,
I
think
that's
something
we
should
clarify
before
we
send
our
request
into
for
kappa
bombing.
C
So
report
back
to
us
coordinated,
whole
and
I
would
like
a
report
to
at
Fir
Community
Hall
on
Wednesday,
also
to
clear
up
what
our
concerns
are
about.
The
proposal
for
the
Lock
and
Dam
project
and
that
an
assessment
of
what
the
challenges
are
for
ownership
for
public.
You
know
what's
public
ownership,
but
if
it's
not
us
so
that
it
be
and
then
to
let
us
make
a
decision,
then
for
inclusion
or
not
inclusion
on
16th,
so
I
make
those
two
staff
directions.
Okay,.
A
D
D
Go
okay!
Thank
you,
madam
vice
president.
Madam
president,
I'm
very
supportive
of
these
two
staff
directions
and
and
I
agree
with
council
president's
desire
to
have
upper
Harbor
terminal
moved
up
on
the
list.
You
know
we
talk
all
the
time
about
about
funding
capital
improvement
projects
in
North,
Minneapolis
and
then
oftentimes.
It
gets
the
back
seat
to
others,
and
although
Water
Works
is
a
project
that
is
in
my
ward,
I
still
think
that
up
or
Harvard
Terminal
holds
precedence.
Okay,.
C
C
G
We
do
thank
you,
madam
chair
and
councilmembers
Sasha
Bergman,
with
the
IDR
department
good
afternoon,
Reece,
a
preview
of
what
we're
going
to
talk
about
today
in
terms
of
wrapping
up
the
2017
legislative
session.
I
will
be
providing
some
of
the
developments
that
have
occurred
since
we
were
last
here
in
April.
G
Providing
you
with
sort
of
a
mid
session,
update
talk
about
some
of
the
outstanding
issues
and
then
give
you
a
kind
of
a
rundown
of
the
different
policy
and
budget
issues
that
came
out
of
the
legislative
session
as
they
pertain
to
the
city's
legislative
agenda
and
then
we'll
give
you
a
brief
preview
of
things
that
we
anticipate
may
be
coming
down.
The
pike
in
2018.
G
So
when
we
were
here
in
April,
we
had
updated
you
on
the
House
and
Senate
on
the
best
budget
bills
that
had
come
out
of
both
bodies.
Since
that
time,
the
budget
bills,
the
first
round
of
budget
bills,
went
to
conference
committee.
The
House
and
Senate
have
worked
out
their
differences
and
then
the
bills
were
passed
and
subsequently
vetoed
by
the
governor.
So
he
vetoed
all
of
the
budget
bills
in
mid-may
shortly
thereafter.
G
Just
before
the
May
22nd
constitutional
adjournment
deadline,
new
budget,
those
were
released
and
about
half
of
them
passed
during
the
regular
session,
which
again
is
during
May
22nd.
The
House
and
Senate
leadership
and
the
governor
were
in
negotiations
and
had
been
making
progress
on
the
remaining
budget
bills,
and
so
the
governor
called
the
legislature
back
into
a
special
session
immediately
to
begin
at
12:01
a.m.
on
May,
23rd
I
believe
the
Tuesday
they
were
supposed
to.
They
agreed
to
complete
their
work
by
the
following
day
at
7:00
a.m.
G
G
You
think
that,
with
the
signature
of
all
the
budget
bills,
things
would
be
wrapped
up
nicely,
but
actually
there
has
been
some
recent
developments.
The
Department
of
Revenue
funding
in
the
state
government
finance
bill
was
tied
to
a
passage
of
a
tax
bill,
and
that
was
something
that
the
governor
had
expressed.
He
was
not
not
too
pleased
with.
G
There
were
also
five
other
items
that
he
wanted
to
negotiate
or
bring
back
negotiations
on
elimination
of
the
tobacco
tax
breaks,
cancellation
of
the
estate
tax
exclusion,
increase
and
removal
of
the
frozen
inflator
for
the
state
general
levy.
Those
are
all
items
that
were
in
the
tax
bill.
He
also
wanted
the
legislature
to
come
back
and
discuss
a
removal
of
the
driver's
license
provision
in
the
public
safety
bill.
G
We'll
talk
a
little
bit
more
about
that
shortly
here
and
then
he
wanted
to
renegotiate
the
teacher
licensure
provision
and
so
in
an
effort
to
bring
back
the
legislature
to
discuss
these
five
things
that
he
has
significant
concerns
with.
He
vetoed
their
line-item
veto,
the
Legislature's
appropriation
and
so
I
think.
The
development
since
then
are
essentially
that
the
House
and
Senate
believe
that
that
his
action
to
line-item
veto
their
funding
is
unconstitutional
and
violates
separation
of
powers
issues,
and
they
have
approved
a
resolution
to
hire
outside
legal
counsel.
G
I'm,
not
sure
if
lawsuit
has
actually
been
formally
filed
and
I
think
there's
a
discussion
that
they
might
have
a
meeting
some
time
to
discuss
the
status
of
things,
but
otherwise
it's
kind
of
in
limbo
and
we're
not
actually
sure
kind
of
what
exactly
the
next
steps
will
look
like
and
now.
I
will
turn
it
over
to
moves
left
to
talk
about
a
couple
of
the
those
bypass
transition.
B
Madam
chair
back
for
more
so
as
a
recap
of
the
topic
that
we
just
concluded
talking
about
the
2017
capital
investment
bill
again,
you'll
see
that
the
city's
top
two
priorities
of
25
million
for
35w
in
Lake,
Street
and
31.8,
seven,
five
million
for
tenth
Avenue
Bridge,
we're
both
included
in
the
final
bill
as
well
as
one
point:
zero
to
nine
million
for
the
pioneers
and
soldiers,
cemetery
fence,
restorations
and,
as
we
noted
other
projects
that
are
located
in
the
city's
Minneapolis.
You
see
that
list
here.
B
Family
partnerships,
people-centered
Norway
house
and
that's
in
Center
for
the
Arts,
so
in
Minneapolis,
Workforce,
Development
Center,
which
is
a
state
project
of
deed,
manages
and
then
five
million
dollars
for
Metro,
Regional
Park
and
the
park
board
will
receive
plus
or
minus
a
million
dollars
of
those
proceeds.
I'm.
C
B
The
second
point
you'll
see
here
is
the
shifting
of
the
motor
vehicle
lease
sales
tax
revenue
to
the
county
state
aid
fund,
a
new
Minnesota
transit
account
for
greatness
or
the
transit
Minnesota
State
Transportation
Fund
and
the
highway
user
tax
distribution
fund.
Something
I'll
noted
that
news
13%,
that's
going
to
be
dedicated
to
the
new
Minnesota
State
Transportation
Fund,
is
how
the
legislature
chose
to
approach
the
funding
of
bridges
around
the
state
and,
historically,
the
local
bridge
replacement
and
rehabilitation
fund
just
received
annual
appropriations,
whatever
the
legislature
deemed
appropriate
for
that
that
year.
B
For
that
biennium,
this
will
be
an
ongoing
funding
stream.
Now
for
those
bridges,
it's
that
13%,
you
see
there.
Another
new
policy
that
the
legislature
included
in
the
transportation
bill
was
to
create
a
large
bridge
account
and
a
small
bridge
account
with
the
delineating
line
being
seven
million
dollars
any
project
that
in
total
project
cost
is
above
seven
million
dollars
would
be
directed
towards
the
larger
bridge
account
and
any
project
that
has
a
total
project.
B
It's
so
important
to
our
residents
and
businesses
in
Minneapolis,
the
Met
Council
Metro
Transit
has
a
significant
structural
funding
deficit
and
the
legislators
this
year
did
not
choose
to
tackle
that
ongoing
deficit,
but
instead
took
a
one-time
approach
and
provided
70
million
dollars
in
one-time
funding
for
the
Met
Council
to
close
their
almost
seventy
million
dollar
budget
deficit
for
the
upcoming
biennium.
That
does
retain
the
current
level
transit
service.
If
you
remember
in
earlier
iterations
of
the
bill
of
the
transportation
bill,
we
were
looking
at
potential.
B
40%
reduction
in
local
bus
service
that
is
not
going
to
be
included
will
not
be
a
result
of
the
funding.
That's
appropriated
in
the
final
signed
bill,
another
item
that
showed
up
in
the
special
session
bill
that
was
not
included
earlier,
so
this
discussion
over
the
state's
share,
an
operating
cost
for
light
rail
transit
lines
and
where
the
legislature
ended
up
was
that
it
shifted
50%,
share
of
Southwest
light
rooms
operating
to
Hennepin
County.
It
is
just
for
Southwest
and
would
not.
B
It
would
not
include
that
no
or
additional
light
rail
lines
in
the
future
and
with
the
ability
I'll
see
in
point
number
three
with
the
ability
of
Hennepin
County
and
the
other
four
counties
that
are
currently
in
C
tib,
but
their
ability
to
raise
the
their
sales
tax
to
the
full
half
cent
up
from
the
current
quarter
said.
That's
where
Hennepin
County
would
then
identify
that
the
revenue
needed
to
cover
the
state's
50%
operating
share
for
Southwest.
You
see
that
in
point
number
three
there
we
also
have
a
study.
B
The
Met
Council's
required
to
fund
a
vibration
study
the
Calvin
Isles
condo
complex,
there's
a
policy
item
here
that
we
did
work
on
and
we
think
several
residents
came
to
the
Capitol
to
oppose
legislation
that
created
a
funding
cap
for
Freight
liability.
When
that
freight
rail
is
co-located
in
a
corridor
with
with
a
light
rail
line
and
in
particular
for
city's
purposes.
That
would
currently
be
the
Southwest
line
that
liability
Kathleen,
which
was
included
in
the
final
transportation
bill.
And
finally,
it
established
a
new
tracks
of
transportation
program.
B
When
this
legislation
was
discussed-
and
so
these
new
16
te
units
will
will
require
things
like
crisis
intervention
and
mental
health
crisis,
training,
conflict
management
and
mediation,
and
recognizing
and
valuing
community
diversity
and
cultural
awareness,
so
those
requirements
will
be
permanent.
But
these
funding
to
support
those
continuing
education
requirements
will
be
six
million
dollars
for
each
year
over
the
next
four
years.
And
then
at
that
point,
that
funding
will
sunset.
C
C
B
Training:
okay,
so
there
will
potentially
grant
opportunities
from
the
post
Board.
They
might
run
training
programs
themselves
that
the
law
enforcement
officers
could
are
taken,
and
this
could
be
used
for
funding
at
some
of
the
community.
Colleges
that
survive
law
enforcement
training
actually
to
support
that
build-out
statewide.
So
there's
a
common
type
of
training
throughout
this
day.
C
B
We
were
successful
in
extending
the
cities
and
others
days
driver
diversion
program.
It
was
set
to
sunset
on
June
30th
of
2017.
That
sunset
was
extended
until
June
30th
of
2019
a
priority
for
many
of
our
partners
in
the
communities.
Small
business
owners
residents,
property
owners
partners
in
downtown
Minneapolis
was
the
establishment
of
a
new
misdemeanor
for
the
willful
violation
of
a
geographic
restriction.
So
we're
happy
to
see
that
included
in
the
final
public
safety
bill.
There
was
some
language
around
the
carrying
of
firearms
were
off-duty
police
officers,
and
that
cannot
be
prohibited.
B
And
then
I'm
sure,
moving
out
into
the
jobs
and
workforce
development
section,
you
may
recall
a
2016.
There
was
a
significant
investment
on
the
part
of
the
legislature
in
reducing
racial
disparities
and
enhancing
equity,
and
there
were
grants
that
were
made
in
2016
session
appropriations
to
several
community
groups,
organizations
nonprofits
and
of
that
nature,
and
in
the
2017
session
what
the
legislature
did
was
juice
on
the
at
least
and
several
programs,
not
all,
but
in
many
programs
reduce
the
planned
increase
in
their
funding.
So
we
would
contend
that
that
is
a
reduction.
B
The
Legislature
would
contend
that
this
was
forecasted
increases
in
the
20
and
21
perennial
cycle,
and
that
that
we
should
to
count
on
that
money
and
but
that
was
a
forecast
that
increased
and
so
reducing
a
forecast.
That
increases
is
not
in
and
of
itself
a
reduction.
So
I
have
a
meeting
of
the
minds
on
that
one.
There
was
included
also
in
the
jobs
bill,
two
million
dollars
for
Pillsbury
United
communities
for
the
North
Market
project
$319,000.
B
Just
in
one
time
of
operation,
FY
18
for
the
east
phillips
improve
a
coalition
to
create
the
East
Philips
neighbourhood.
Institute
and
when
there
were
some
policy
items
that
I
will
defer
to
my
colleagues
to
focus
on
regarding
interim
ordinances,
the
prohibition
on
plastic
bag
bans
and
the
small
cell
bills.
G
Madam
chair
again,
special
burger,
multi
IG,
our
department
I,
think
we'll
talk
about
those
provisions
related
to
local
governance
in
a
slide.
That's
coming
up
here,
but
they
were
contained
in
the
Java
on
the
text
bill.
You
may
recall
that
in
earlier
versions
of
the
tax
bills,
this
legislative
session
there
has
been
targeted
in
phases,
are
using
targeted
cuts
to
the
city
of
Minneapolis
in
the
Senate
tax
bill.
G
As
it
passed
off
of
the
Senate
floor,
there
was
a
cut
of
twenty
eight
million
dollars,
or
rather
a
cap
on
Minneapolis
local
government
aid
at
50
million
dollars
a
year,
starting
in
2018,
which
amounted
to
an
twenty
eight
million
dollar
cut
and
in
the
House
bill
and
in
the
veto
text.
While
there
was
a
repeal
of
the
city's
library,
a
dead
service
library,
library,
aid
of
one
point
four
point:
one
two
million
dollars
per
year,
but
happy
to
report
that
in
the
bill
that
was
signed
by
the
governor.
Ultimately,
there
was
there
were
no.
G
Neither
of
those
two
cuts
were
included
in
the
bill
and
there
was
a
fifteen
million
dollar
LGA
program
increase
beginning
in
fiscal
year.
Nineteen,
which
would
amount
to
a
one
point,
one
37
million
dollars
increase
for
Minneapolis,
beginning
in
2018.
Of
course,
a
little
bit
of
that
would
go
to
the
park
board
and
that
the
15
million
is
in
future
years
as
well.
G
So
it's
not
just
one-time
increase,
there's,
also
a
one-time,
partially
early
LGA
distribution
in
2019,
just
meaning
that
we
would
get
a
percentage
of
our
of
our
July
payment
in
June
instead
of
interest
in
July,
which
for
us,
you
know,
I
think,
doesn't
probably
amount
to
any
issue
other
than
having
additional
cash
flow
and
for
the
state
I
think
it
was.
A
cash
flow
issue
also
is
related
to
their
fiscal
year,
starting
in
July
and
ending
in
June.
There
was
the
approval
of
a
lot
of
specific
local
government
requests.
G
They
didn't
get
their
provisions
and
bills
in
the
past
two
years,
but
they
a
lot
of
them,
were
passed
this
year
and
then
just
a
note
that
in
a
previous
version
there
was
a
construction
sales
tax
refund
mechanism
for
local
units
of
government
to
be
able
to
take
advantage
of
the
sales
tax
exemptions
for
local
or
for
for
cities
and
counties,
and
because
of
the
way
that
construction
contracts
are
are
structured
and
the
way
that
purchasing
of
construction
materials
occurs.
It's
difficult
for
local
units
of
government
to
take
advantage
of
that
sales
tax
exemption.
G
There
was
a
refund
mechanism
in
a
previous
bill
that
that
did
not
ultimately
make
the
final
tax
bill
and
then
also
happy
to
report
that
there
were
no
reverse
referendums
included
in
the
tax
bill.
In
previous
versions,
there
were
Reverse
referendums
on
increase
their
franchise
fees
that
raise
revenue
beyond
the
beyond
deferring
utility
operations
in
a
city
and
on
any
increase
from
one
year
to
next.
G
On
a
levy,
I
mentioned
the
library
aid
already
and
then
just
a
note
that
there
was
in
an
earlier
version,
a
prohibition
on
local
units
of
government
requiring
with
fee
on
plastic
or
paper
bags,
and
that
was
not
included
in
the
tax
bill
or
the
jobs
valoran.
Any
bill
that
we're
aware
of
that
was
signed
by
the
governor.
C
G
Chair
and
council
president,
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
clarify.
No,
the
looking
at
the
government
are
still
exempt
from
the
sales
tax.
Okay,
it's
just
that
when
we
purchase
construction
material
rate
because
of
I
think
usually
the
contractor
purchase
it
as
some
liability
issues.
It
was
difficult
for
cities
to
take
advantage
of
the
exemption
and
there
was
an
attempt
to
try
to
create
a
mechanism
so
that
I
put
so
maybe.
G
The
state
government
finance
bill,
madam
chair,
in
an
earlier
version
as
you
as
we've
mentioned
in
this
committee
before
there
is
an
agreement
in
state
law
to
provide
16
million
dollars
in
state
contribution
and
21
million
in
the
employer
contribution
until
2031
for
the
Minneapolis
Employees
Retirement
Fund
this
past
session,
which
of
which,
of
course
the
city
is
one
of
the
employers.
In
the
vetoed
bill,
there
was
a
10
million
dollar
removal
or
another
removal
of
ten
million
dollars
annually
in
the
state
funding
beginning
in
2017.
G
So
what
this
would
have
amounted
in
if
the
bill
weren't
vetoed
was
via
five
point.
Six
million
dollar
cut
to
the
city
in
2017
in
the
year
that
we've
already
passed
our
budget
for
what
ended
up
being
included
in
the
final
agreement
between
legislative
leaders
and
the
governor
was
a
cut
to
murph
by
removing
the
ten
million
dollars
annually
in
state
funding,
beginning
in
2019,
so
next
biennium.
So
this
is
something
that
we're
going
to
have
continued
to
work
on
up
at
the
legislature
and
then
also
in
both
versions
of
the
bill.
G
Both
in
the
veto
bill
and
in
the
one
that
was
finally
signed
was
some
authorization
for
additional
long-term
equity
investment
authority
for
qualifying
cities
and
counties.
The
qualifying
cities
is
based
on
your
credit
rating
and
then
also
for
for
cities
who
are
has
100,000
or
more
in
population.
So
we
would
be
one
of
them
and
it
would
allow
some
flexibility
for
investments
in
in
the
state
board
of
investment
and
some
other
items,
so
something
that
we
worked
with
the
League
of
Minnesota
cities
and
the
Association
of
Minnesota
counties
on
this
session.
G
In
the
world
of
affordable
housing,
there
was
the
home
sprawl
coalition,
of
which
the
cities
and
endorsing
organization
had
requested
or
had
been
advocating
for
a
100
million
dollar
investments
in
affordable
housing.
In
specifically
in
responding
what
ended
up
passing
was
10
million
dollars
in
general
obligation,
bonds
for
public
housing,
rehab
35
million
in
housing,
infrastructure
bonds,
20
million
dollars
for
2014
and
15
housing,
infrastructure
bond
authorization
from
excess
debt
service
in
2014
and
15.
That
was
due
to
low
interest
rates
and
then
12
million
dollars
for
Dorothy
Day
phase
2
in
st.
Paul.
G
There
were
also
some
other
other
investments.
Home
work
starts
with
home,
which
is
aimed
at
ending
student
homelessness
and
increasing
family
stability,
and
then
some
increases
one-time
increases
in
the
Department
of
Human
Services.
I'll
also
note
that
there
was
a
policy
change
in
the
believers
in
the
jobs
bill
to
authorize
cities
to
create
affordable
housing,
trust
funds.
Bill
was
authored
by
representative
Haley
from
Red
Wing
I.
Think
the
read
of
an
HRA
in
the
city
of
Minneapolis
are
the
only
two
entities
that
have
you
know:
a
so-called
affordable,
affordable
housing
plan
at
the
local
level.
G
This
was
intended
to
have
matching
front
funds
from
MHSA
for
any
HRA
Levy
revenue
that
would
be
flowing
into
this
created
Affordable
Housing
Trust
Fund.
At
the
local
level.
The
matching
funds
were
not
included
in
the
final
bill.
We
anticipate
that
could
be
something
that
has
continued
to
be
advocated
for
us
at
the
legislature,
and
we
were
cautious
to
make
sure
that
the
the
bill
was
not
adversely
impact
our
existing
trust
fund,
and
so
we
work
with
the
City
Attorney's
Office
to
make
sure
that
the
language
would
not
adversely
impact
our
affordable
housing
trust
funds.
A
Bergland
I'll
just
kind
of
weigh
in
there
I,
actually
hadn't
realized
that
there
was
some
legal
impediment
to
local
communities
being
able
to
establish
affordable
housing,
trust
funds.
Is
there
something
unique
some
mechanism
I
mean
see
mechanism.
This
allows
that
other
communities
weren't
able
to
utilize,
maybe
we're
different,
because
we're
a
charge.
City
I,
have
no
idea
I'm,
just
a
little
surprised,
yeah.
G
I
think
you've
an
answer
for
the
question.
My
understanding
is
that
there's
not
anything
preventing
local
units
of
government
from
authorizing
them
I
think
it
was
to
make
it
clear
and
statute
that
this
is
a
tool
that
cities
could
use
to
establish
and
I.
Think
my
understanding
is
that
what
we're
doing
now
matches
what
was
provided
in
the
Bell
language.
So
it's
it's,
not
anything
that
couldn't
have
been
done
previously
as
far
as
I'm
we're
from
talking
with
our
staff
and
others
at
the
Capitol.
Okay,
so
and
then
on
the
Health
and
Human
Services
bill.
G
There
was
a
two
point:
1
million
dollar
appropriation
for
sexually
exploited
youth,
youth
and
so
I
think
this
kind
of
rounds
out
the
needed
investment
that
began
several
years
ago
to
complete
the
safe
harbor
for
for
use
to
provide
shelter
and
services
for
sexually
exploited
youth
and
a
result
so
$73,000
appropriation
with
a
policy
direction
to
complete
the
safe
harbor
for
all
strategic
plans,
so
to
create
a
response
for
adult
victims
of
sex
trafficking.
So
that's
something
that
will
be
coming
down
the
pike
with
more
discussion,
probably
in
next
year.
G
Now
we're
going
to
talk
about
some
of
the
policy
issues
that
we
encountered
the
session
on
the
local
local
control
front
for
the
local
interference
rentals.
However,
you
want
to
look
at
it.
There
were
a
lot
of
bills
that
were
introduced
this
session.
I
think
we
talked
about
this
in
April
too
my
little
decision-making
and
I
know
the
council
took
action
on
a
resolution
to
support
local
decision-making
authority.
Earlier
this
year,
probably
the
most
widely
known
one
was
the
preemption
bill
on
a
local
wage
and
benefit
requirements.
G
You've
probably
heard
by
now
that
this
was
vetoed
by
Governor
Dayton.
It
was
included
in
one
of
a
special
session
though,
but
it
was
also
coupled
with
a
pen.
Some
pension
provisions
waged
best
prevention
provisions,
an
expansion
of
health
or
paid
family
leave
for
saving
state
employees
and
I.
Think
one
other
Oh
states
contacts
the
ratification
of
the
state
labor
contract.
G
Although
the
governor
liked
those
other
provisions,
he
did
veto
the
preemption
of
that
whole
bill
containing
the
preemption
provision
as
well,
because
he
had
he
had
committed
to
doing
that.
He
said
he
would
be
vetoing
it.
However,
I'll
note
that
the
preemption
bill,
as
it
was
traveling
through
the
legislative
process.
This
session
made
it
to
conference
committee
and
there
was
no
outcome
from
that,
and
so
that
would
be
probably
alive
for
for
next
year,
because
it's
just
the
second
half
of
the
biennium
in
2018,
none
of
as
I
mentioned
now.
G
The
reverse
referendum
bills
made
it
in
a
final
bill.
There
was
a
provision
to
repeal
or
a
bill
to
repeal
the
city
authority
to
establish
special
service
districts
and
that
one
did
not
make
it
in
the
final
bill,
but
we
understand
that
there
there
may
be
continued
discussion
on
that
issue.
In
the
future.
We
mentioned
the
plastic
bag
ban
that
was
included
in
the
jobs
bill
prohibiting
cities.
C
A
The
the
interference
and
local
control
sort
of
bucket
of
issues,
because
it
wasn't
just
issues
that
were
particular
the
city
of
Minneapolis,
but
these
were
really
statewide
issues
and
you
led
efforts
to
work
with
the
League
of
Minnesota
cities
and
Metro
cities
and
others
that
really
engage
cities
throughout
the
state.
I
think
I
heard
there
were
maybe
60
over
60
but
may
be
closer
to
70
resolutions
passed
by
City
Council's
across
the
state
of
Minnesota
from
cities,
as
small
as
Ely
to
st.
A
Paul
in
Minneapolis
and
from
all
over
the
state
who
offered
their
opinion
that
they
did
not
appreciate
the
state
legislature,
interfering
in
the
ability
of
local
government
to
pass
laws
and
ordinances
that
reflect
the
desires
of
their
community
members,
and
so
I
just
want
to
say.
Thank
you,
and
this
clearly
is
something
that
is
going
to
be
an
ongoing
theme
for
future
years.
That
you've
really
established
a
good
I.
Think
groundwork
of
a
big
coalition
across
the
state
that
understands
this
issue.
Much
better.
A
G
F
There's
a
lot
of
discussion
during
the
session
about
reorganizing
the
Metropolitan
Council.
There
is
even
an
attempt
to
suggest
maybe
a
27
28
member
council,
County
Commissioners
and
elected
officials
as
well
as
some
folks
from
the
Department
transportation.
Lots
of
discussion
and
those
some
bills
were
heard.
Nothing
occurred
this
session.
We
expect
probably
next
session
more
discussion
on
the
future
of
the
metropolitan
council.
F
The
other
issue
that
carry
over
from
the
prior
year
was
the
whole
issue
dealing
with
real
ID.
The
bill
was
passed.
It
does
take
it.
What
does
require
the
Department
of
Public
Safety
to
implement
and
comply
with
Real
ID
Act,
which
is
federal
by
October
1st
of
2018?
It
gives
us
to
be
choices
as
consumers
a
driver's
license
or
wanting
to
get
ID
cards.
We
can
do
a
compliant
or
a
non-compliant
car.
F
If
you
want
compliant
with
Real
ID
card,
it
would
be
more
information
acquired
and
it
would
also
permit
us
to
pour
on
airplanes
and
go
into
certain
federal
buildings.
So
it
is
a
choice
for
either
one
as
we
renew
our
driver's
license,
but
also
does.
It
also
requires
the
Department
of
Public
Safety.
If
there
are
any
changes
at
the
federal
level
to
bring
those
back
to
the
legislature
before
they
try
to
implement
them
to
do
all
this,
it's
3.27
million
dollars
of
implementation
and
it
does
not
include
undocumented
immigrants
driver's
license
issue
in
this
bill.
F
What
the
report
did
suggest
was,
or
did
prove
to
the
composition
of
the
minutes
of
the
NSF
a
be
the
same
as
it
is
today.
Five
members,
three
appointed
by
the
governor
to
appoint
advisors
by
the
mayor.
However,
there
are
a
couple
caveats:
one:
all
five
persons
have
to
be
approved
by
the
House
and
the
Senate,
in
other
words,
confirmed
by
the
house
in
the
Senate.
It's
my
understanding.
It
there's
only
two
other
agencies
in
the
state
government
that
had
that
requirement
of
both
House
and
Senate.
F
That's
the
campaign
finance
word
and
the
Public
Utility
Commission,
the
chair,
used
to
be
appointed
by
the
governor.
This
conference
committee
report
recommends
that
they
be
a
chair,
be
elected
by
the
other
members
and
I
think
it
would
serve
it
to
your
turn.
There
would
be
a
full-time
executive
director
and
the
chair
at
Lisa,
looked
from
the
beginning
for
at
least
I
think
a
year
or
two
would
have
some
sort
of
compensation
greater
than
the
other
members.
But
after
that
it
was
on
who
is
unclear.
F
There
are
several
rules
and
procedures
dealing
with
the
use
of
the
suites
that
are
owned
by
MSF.
They
are
controlled
by
an
SFA
and
in
this
position
of
all
those
suites
are
caused
lots
of
concerns
and
that's
I
think
one
of
the
reasons
why
the
bill
may
have
been
held
and
then
there's
lots
of
reporting
and
public
disclosure
the
website
of
the
NSF.
They
will
be
having
an
awful
lot
of
information
and
documents
that
would
be
required
to
be
published
they're
on
the
liquor
bill,
Sunday
sales.
F
As
we're
aware
clean,
came
earlier
in
a
session
I
think
it
was
on
Chapter
six,
then
the
Super
Bowl
also
is
in
the
tax
bill,
but
the
Super
Bowl
ends
with
a
little
bit
of
change.
It
is
now
statewide,
so
there
is
state
representative
Hal
from
Stearns
County
offered
an
amendment
on
the
floor
of
the
house.
He
did
offer
an
amendment
in
the
cent
in
the
committee
and
it
failed
but
hid
it
on
the
floor
and
it
was
adopted
so
the
hours
that
work
that
he
can
be
open
to
floor
o'clock.
F
It
was
Thursday
morning
to
the
Monday
after
the
Super.
Bowl
game
are
not
just
here
in
Ramsey,
in
Hennepin
County,
but
also
today,
why
there
are
also
some
local
bills.
One
was
for
up
in
43,
a
restaurant
I
think
in
the
13th
word,
any
food
hall,
which
is
in
the
second
Ward,
and
that
was
an
amendment
on
the
floor,
and
that
was
a
representative
MMR's
amendment.
There
are
also
many
changes
to
to
those
size
and
ours
for
a
for
Brewers
and
wineries
and.
F
Elections,
bill
is
signed
by
the
governor.
It
allows
for
the
use
of
a
electronic
polling
place
roster
system.
It
also
puts
a
seven
million
dollar
appropriation
up
for
counties
and
cities
to
purchase
replacement
equipment
or
the
electronic
polling
place
system,
and
there
seems
to
be
a
priority
put
on
the
electronic
polling
place
roster
system
because
you
can
get
up
to
75%
of
the
cost
cover
by
the
state,
but
other
equipment
will
be
up
to
50%.
F
I
would
think,
there's
going
to
be
an
awful
lot
of
folks
in
line
so
I,
don't
know
if
they'll
ever
get
up
to
75%
match,
but
it
would
be
up
it'll
be
implemented
by
the
Secretary
of
State
and
we
denied
this
was
we
sent
an
email
to
city
clerk
and
he's
on
top
of
it
and
we're
gonna
be
working
on
it,
and
then
it
also
establishes
five
specific
dates
for
special
elections.
So
there
are
five
dates
right
in
statute.
Now
they
need
to
have
a
special
election
and
then
I
know
can't
explain
it.
F
F
Another
issue
with
the
condo
bill,
even
though
it
passed
significantly
in
both
the
House
and
the
Senate.
There
was
some
opposition,
particularly
in
some
of
our
legislators,
what
the
whole
purpose
was,
or
the
idea
was
that
maybe
one
of
the
things
that's
causing
the
lack
of
condos
being
built.
Was
there
the
construction
defect
lawsuits
coming
in
the
eighth
and
ninth
year,
warranties
what
this
bill
does
and
then
hat
was
changed
on
the
Senate
floor.
Rather
significantly,
it
has
first
of
all,
it
is
prospective.
F
It
will
only
apply
to
those
condo
associations
established
after
the
first
of
August
and
2017.
It
requires
a
notification
process
to
the
owners
of
condos
in
the
Association.
If
there's
going
to
be
a
lawsuit
requires
approval
by
a
majority,
it
also
requires
for
all
condos,
even
those
that
are
established
before
2017,
a
maintenance
plan,
budget
scheduling
program
for
maintenance
and
then
also,
if
there's
going
to
be
litigation
mediation
and
accept.
If
you
follow
the
process
in
Chapter,
three
2780,
you
don't
need
to
go
to
mediation.
Also,
there's
a
concern
about
the
payment
of
attorney
fees.
F
That
was
not
changed
at
all.
It
was
changed
and
one
of
it
in
the
House
bill.
It
remains
under
current
law,
which
was
a
big
change
from
what
was
being
proposed
in
terms
for
authoring
too
many
questions
upward
potential,
208,
218
issues,
limousine
tinting
issue,
I-
think
listen,
go
into
detail
on
that.
If
you
eat
with
us
too,
it's
a
bill
that
was
sitting
on
the
floor.
Well,
I'm,
sorry,.
B
I'm
sure
customers.
This
is
a
bill
brought
forward
by
the
City
Attorney's
Office
in
our
policy
liaison
process,
just
a
technical
bill
on
cleaning
up
the
definition
and
who
tended
to
not
have
the
windows
to
dis
donc.
It's
a
pass.
The
committee's
just
sitting
on
the
floor
of
the
House
and
Senate
chambers.
B
You
may
recall
a
significant
issue
having
to
do
with
workers,
compensation
and
the
court
decision
in
terms
of
how
the
Tara
offset
for
work
comp
is
calculated
that
was
included.
The
Department
of
Labor
industries
fix
for
this
problem
was
included
in
the
work
comp
Advisory
Council
bill.
As
that
bill
moves
through
the
legislative
process.
There's
always
a
traditional
understanding.
The
back
bill
is
not
to
be
amended
in
any
way,
shape
or
form,
and
if
it
years
it
has
to
go
back
to
the
work
comp,
Advisory
Council
is
treated
unlike
most
other
legislations.
B
Well,
along
the
way,
some
an
amendment
was
added
on
the
Senate
floor
that
they
changes
to
how
post-traumatic
stress
disorder
is
handled
when
it
comes
to
workers,
compensation
for
lack
of
more
time
in
detail,
and
so
by
that
being
added.
On
the
Senate
floor,
the
cause
the
author
to
withdraw
the
bill
for
the
year,
because
I
had
circumvented
that
traditional
work,
comp
Advisory
Council
process,
so
that
will
probably
be
left
there
for
2018.
F
I'm
sure
we
have
to
talk
about
local
wage
benefit,
preemption
I
think
it
could
come
back,
reverse
effect
under
possibilities.
Enhanced
penalties
for
protesters
I
think
was
in
some
of
the
bills
and
was
drought
doubt
that
undocumented
immigrant
divers
license
issue.
The
like
people
could
be
already
revisited
and
I
said
they
transit
funding
gap
again
will
be
a
big
issue:
Met
Council
governor's
and
the
budget
issues,
depending
on
the
November
and
February
forecast.
One
item
I'd
like
to
add
annex
pensions.
F
There
was
a
omnibus
pension
bill
was
passed
by
the
Senate
didn't
get
through
in
the
house
was
actually
it
included
in
the
vetoed
preemption
bill.
An
ADD
pension
bill
has
an
awful
lot
of
sustainability
measures
to
sustain
and
maintain
all
the
pension
programs
and
all
the
pension
funds,
so
I
think
that'll
be
coming
back
in
2018
and
I'm
Tara
with
that
will
stand
for
questions.
C
Question
manager,
but
I
just
wanted
to
take
the
opportunity
to
compliment
Bhaiji
our
staff
on
what
was
such
a
challenging
year,
that,
as
the
chair
said,
we
did
as
well
as
could
be
expected
and
and
better
and
I.
Just
it's
your
professionalism
and
the
respect
that
people
have
for
you.
That
did
us
so
well
in
the
session.
So
thank
you.
A
Thank
you
and
I
couldn't
agree,
more
I,
think
I
heard
Mr,
Ranieri
and
I
won't
say
how
many
years,
but
in
his
career,
long
career
as
a
as
working
to
influence
policy
at
the
state
capitol
has
never
seen
a
session
like
this.
Just
with
how
unusual
it
was,
and
in
so
many
ways
and
I,
hear
every
time
honestly,
every
single
time
that
I
travel
to
meet
with
legislators
or
do
whatever
I'm
signed
to
do
the
Capitol.
A
How
much
respect
that
staff
over
there,
others
who
make
their
careers
working
as
lobbyists
and
legislators
have
for
our
staff
team
as
a
whole.
You
just
really
have
built
an
excellent
reputation.
I
think
the
fact
that
we
did
and
such
a
challenging
year
have
such
significant
accomplishments
for
the
city
of
Minneapolis
in
terms
of
safeguarding
our
critical
funding,
moving
forward
on
tremendous
capital
needs
for
the
city
and
other
policy
accomplishments
to
come
out
of
a
session
like
this
in
in
the
good
shape
that
we
are
for
the
future.
I
think
just
is
really
really
amazing.
A
F
Sorry,
that's
not
to
thank
my
staff
and
also
our
intern,
who
could
be
moving
on
to
working
for
another
nonprofit
organization,
Megan
a
jacket
and
she
was
from
st.
Olaf
and
help
us
all
session.
I
also
like
to
thank
our
staff
for
their
tremendous
work
and
also
thank
you,
madam
chair,
because
you
won't
be
here
next
year
in
this
position
and
we
thank
you
so
much
for
for
all
the
years.
You
carried
our
committee
and
we'll
see
it
in
the
next
couple
of
months.
Yeah.