►
From YouTube: May 15, 2017 Health, Environment & Community Engagement
Description
Minneapolis Health, Environment & Community Engagement Committee Meeting
A
Good
afternoon
everyone
I'm
calling
to
order
the
health
environment
and
community
engagement
committee.
My
name
is
Kim
Gordon
enter
the
committee
today,
I'm
joined
by
councilmembers,
Cano,
Gooden,
thunder
and
pry
I
believe
it
councilmember,
Andrew
Johnson
will
be
missing
today.
The
committee
has
three
items
to
consider
today.
First
will
be
a
public
hearing
and
the
third
will
be
a
discussion
item.
So
I
think
I'll
take
the
consent
item,
which
is
number
two.
A
First,
the
public
hearings
on
a
ordinance
amendment
to
our
amplified,
sound
equipment,
ordinance
and
the
third
one
is
about
the
consent
decree
between
northern
metals
in
state
Minnesota
in
the
city
of
Minneapolis,
and
my
plan
is
to
take
some
public
comment
after
presentation
from
staff
on
the
discussion
item,
I
believe
there's
also
a
motion
before
committee
members.
They
can
look
at
but
first
we'll
take
up
the
consent
item,
which
is
accepting
additional
grant
funds
from
Public
Health
Institute
to
assess
community
impact
of
climate
change.
A
This
is
accepting
ten
thousand
dollars
in
grant
funds
to
address
public
health
and
climate
change
in
Minneapolis.
Easy.
Seeing
no
hard
to
discuss
that
for
my
colleagues
in
all
in
favor
of
that
please
say
aye
any
opposed
say
no.
That
motion
carries
then
then
we'll
go
to
our
ordinance
amendment
and
then
we'll
have
a
brief
presentation
before
a
public
hearing.
B
B
Herb
is
why
we're
here
today
is
to
the
course
establish
what
is
going
to
be
one
too
far
go
back.
There,
Rio
establish
limits
on
the
time.
Duration
and
loudness
of
the
use
amplified
sound
an
established,
clear
criteria,
what
constitutes
a
violation
and
establish
a
fair
basis
for
issuing
permits
and
established
when
a
permit
is
required.
B
Curtain
rings,
we
have
one
type
of
permit
little
sensitive
here.
One
type
of
permit
permits
required
when
amplified
sound,
exceeds
five
decibels
in
the
surrounding
area
over
the
ambient
and
a
condemned
cannot
be
more
than
90
decibels,
50
feet
in
front
of
the
source
or
more
than
15
decibels
over
the
ambient
in
the
surrounding
neighborhoods.
It's
currently
measured
with
the
sound
meter
which
is
used
here,
a
fairly
sophisticated
piece
of
equipment
of
which
we
have
to,
and
he
also
has
no
requirement
to
notify
adjacent
properties,
but
not
other
properties
in
the
area.
B
That's
one
of
our
stamped
measurements
of
everything
sound
from
the
buffalo,
so
the
current
situation
is,
we
have
limited
staff
and
equipment
in
order
to
enforce.
We
have
force
for
inspectors
covering
the
entire
city.
Quite
a
few
permits
that
go
out,
particularly
in
the
summer
time,
and
we
have
one
size
permit
that
one
size
fits
all
matter.
What
regard
to
the
ax
type
of
activity,
we
also
have
an
unintended
consequences
of
making
it
illegal
some
of
the
civic
involvement
activities
that
are
going
on
with
labor
organizing
a
union
for
union
organizing
civic
protests.
B
First
of
all,
there's
the
concept
of
plainly
audible,
which
is
sound
that
could
be
detected
by
a
person
using
their
unaided
hearing
or
facilities,
and
it's
meant
to
be
something.
That's
understandable,
not
just.
I
notice
it.
This
comes
from
a
paper
by
his
early
in
2012
on
analysis
of
plainly
audible.
It's
been
adopted
within
New,
York,
Los,
Angeles,
San,
Francisco,
Boston
and
other
cities
as
a
way
to
use
to
expand
their
enforcement,
so
it
allows
us
what
we're
hoping
to
is:
allow
business
licensing
and
the
police
to
be
able
to
do
on
spot
enforcement.
B
But
if
he
can
hear
Elaine
Lee
here
the
activity,
the
amplified
sound
at
the
100
feet,
which
is
the
third
of
a
block
block,
we
determined
that
that
would
clearly
be
in
a
violation
over
five.
The
five
decibel
limit
and
a
require
permit,
but
a
little
our
business
and
license
inspectors
when
they're
out
patrolling
in
the
evenings
to
enforce
on
patio
noise
for
a
small
event
permit-
and
this
is
meant
to
be
the
things
like
the
back
air
parties
and
small
hours
of
the
small
silent
systems
etc,
which
are
low
risk.
B
We,
as
you,
don't
monitor
if
you
can
hear
it
at
300
feet,
which
is
a
block
they'd,
be
in
violation
and
for
a
standard
or
large
block
event.
Permit
plainly
audible
at
600
feet,
which
is
about
two
blocks
and
I
was
at
the
Stan
Lee's
event
yesterday
or
it's
on
Saturday
and
we're
one
Sunday,
but
the
we
went
out
about
two
blocks
out
couldn't
hear
it,
so
it
was
pretty
effective.
In
that
thing
and
a
quote,
it
was
nice,
a
nice
concert
if
you
know
civic
involvement.
B
Want
to
improve
the
neighborhood
notification,
the
current
standard
is,
for
all
type
of
events
is
to
notify
the
adjacent
neighbors.
Some
of
these
two
houses
down
wouldn't
get
notified,
which
doesn't
seem
to
make
sense.
We're
not
requiring
any
change
for
the
small
event
permits.
It'll
remain
the
same,
but
for
the
standard
permit.
B
So
it
did
sound
imperious
far
then
kind
of
miscellaneous
here
as
well.
We're
proposing
that
the
standard
and
small
event
permits
not
the
issued
past
9
o'clock
on
Sunday
in
order
to
allow
the
NIA
give
the
neighbors
arrests
from
noise
activities
before
started
in
the
standard
work
week
and
then
in
order
to
make
sure
that
we
get
the
permits
in
on
time,
we're
proposing
a
50%
penalty
on
the
directors
fee
for
not
obtaining
the
permit
more
less
than
36
hours
in
advance
of
the
activity.
B
C
You,
mr.
chair,
my
question
is
maybe
about
four
or
five
slide
backs
in
regard
to
the
distance,
which
is
acceptable
where
you
can
still
hear
sound
and
I
think
it
said
600
feet
and
so
would
be.
Six
is
my
understanding
correctly.
600
feet
would
be
allowable
for
large
events,
but
not
601
feet.
Oh
I
thought
I
saw
that
the.
C
B
C
Yeah,
that's
my
question.
Just
with
some
of
these
significant
block
parties
that
we
have
downtown
and
the
warehouse
district
over
the
summer,
I'm
sure
my
office
gets
complaints
about
them.
That
being
said,
a
lot
of
people
enjoy
having
them
as
well.
Correct
and
I
could
be
totally
wrong
on
this,
but
I.
Imagine
that
the
sound
travels
at
least
two
blocks.
The.
C
B
On
the
event,
there
was
one
of
the
other
things
we're
looking
at
is
one
of
the
things
I
should
sort
of
intended
to
have
on.
Here
is
the
fee
for
the
small
event
we're
having
a
half
feet,
because
it
doesn't
take
much
the
process.
We
have
minimal
complaints
and
minimal
romana
Tory
requirements
standard
fee,
we
a
standard
event.
We
have
100%
of
the
fee
schedule
which,
as
it
is
it
as
is
now
and
for
the
large
block
events
and
such
a
look
at
the
bill,
silica
block
party,
etc.
B
We
do
have
a
double
fee
because
of
the
compliant
the
complexity
and
the
coordination
and
the
increased
enforcement.
We
have
it's
more
more
likely
to
dispatch.
My
inspectors
to
the
x-games
of
the
Basilica
party
than
I
am
to
aunt
Mabel's
backyard,
and
so
we're
proposing
the
TT
on
that
200
percent
of
a
large
block
event
that.
B
D
C
Or
you
know,
on
some
surface
parking
lot
downtown
or
in
a
neighborhood
and
I
totally
get
shutting
down
in
the
neighborhood
I
know.
Councilmember,
remember
bender
dealt
with
a
really
frustrating
incident
last
year.
What
I
totally
agree
with
her
I
was
thinking
of
how
this
would
impact.
You
know
Alabama
Shakes
performing
a
boom
island,
which
you
can
hear
all
the
way
across
the
river
and
I.
Okay,
with
that
yeah.
B
The
that's
a
good,
that's
a
very
good
point
and
then
know
exactly
the
event
you're
talking
about
that
drove
a
lot
of
our
standards
Rob.
What
we're
looking
at
if
there
is
a
degree
of
discretion.
However,
when
you
take
a
look
at
the
law,
how
the
laws
working
at
it
depends
on
the
individual,
the
inspector
there,
but
the
intent
is
not
to
shut
them
down.
Can
you
intent
to
turn
down
the
volume
so.
B
B
The
standard
is
still
going
to
be
measured
at
90
90
decibels
at
50
feet
with
this,
and
no
more
than
15
decibels
over
the
ambient
and
surrounding
neighborhood
and
you'll
find
out
that
this
is
I
agree
with
you
on
a
lot
of
them.
You'll
see
areas
like
in
downtown
will
project
down
to
900
feet
right,
you'll
be
able
to
hear
because
of
the
canyon
effect,
but
the
standard
is
is
that
this
is
still
the
standard
here.
B
If
we've
got
inspectors
out,
there
they're
going
to
be
the
primary
enforcer,
but
the
main
intent
is
that
we
have.
We
have
for
inspectors
right
now
and
going
on
out,
but
I
tend
to
have
business
licensing
and
police
everywhere
in
visit.
We've
worked
with
business
licensing
and
the
police
and
the
development
of
these
standards,
and
so
business
license
quite
eat,
then
quite
eager
to
see
the
adoption
of
it.
So.
B
Know
know
what
I
did
is
basically
calculate
that
out
to
be
that
this
distance,
it's
a
it's.
If
what
we
hear
at
this
distance,
it
should
be
a
violation
that
this
challenge
should
have
attenuated
well
before
that
point,
and
that's
one
of
the
things
I
feel
check
this
weekend
going
out
to
one
of
the
events,
but
as
there
is,
there
is
discretion
in
there,
but
the
standard
is
still.
B
This
is
the
gold
standard,
the
song
meter
with
our
people
and
it's
the
tendency
is
that
the
larger
events
that
we
have
higher
risk
we're
going
to
have
people
out
there
doing
the
monitoring?
What
we
can't
beer
everywhere
every
time
inter
trying
to
put
a
standard
in,
allows
business
licensing
a
place
to
ask
them
to
turn
it
down,
if
necessary,
to
minimize
the
impact
on
residents
and.
A
The
way
I
read
the
ordinance,
the
it's
the
small
events
that
will
be
the
300
feet
and
that's
where
there's
a
lot
of
flexibility,
so
that
others
can
come
and
walk
a
distance
away
and
figure
out
what
it
is
and
if
we're
going
to
be
intervening
in
a
large
event,
we're
still
going
to
go
back
to
measuring
the
decibels
and
using
that.
Is
that
correct,
correct
sir,
thank
you
said:
is
that
help
comes
from
over
fine
I.
Think.
A
See
any
other
questions
so
I
think
what
I
will
do
now
is
open
up
the
public
hearing
and
see
if
anybody's
come
to
speak
on
this
issue.
Thank
you
very
much
thanks.
So
now
the
public
hearing
is
opened.
If
you
want,
if
you're
here,
to
speak
on
the
amplified,
sound
ordinance
amendment
anybody
here
to
speak
on
that
matter,
I'm
assuming
no
man
has
signed
in
I'm,
seeing
nobody
come
forward
and
I'm
going
to
close
to
public
hearing
on
that
and
maybe
I'll
turn
to
councilmember
bender.
You
like
to
make
a
motion
or
speaking
Thank.
F
You
mr.
chair
I'll
move
the
item.
I
do
want
to
note.
You
know
if
there's
anything
between
now
and
council,
when
we
vote,
then
then
you
know,
maybe
staff
can
sit
down
fire
any
other
council
members
that
may
want
a
more
detailed
briefing
on
for
this
technical
aspects
of
where
the
decibels
are
measured
and
how
far
away
and
all
that
stuff
we
did
have
a
so
I
have
a
huge
number
of
events
in
my
ward,
which
we
support
and
welcome,
and
for
the
most
part.
F
Bird
Johnson's
were
but
a
probably
often
besides,
just
that
one
instance
where
there
was
a
really
small
gathering,
and
we
only
have
this
one
system
for
getting
in
a
permit.
So
that
was
becoming
a
barrier
again
as
snack
mentioned,
to
people
who
wanted
to
do
these
smaller
gatherings,
but
I
also
think
we
want
to
support
Lissa
tea
again.
We
have
pretty
short
warm
season
so
folks
getting
out
and
have
a
block
party
their
gatherings
in
their
own
home.
We
don't
want
to
sort
of
over
over
regulate
that.
F
B
C
C
Okay,
so
it
says
so
at
number:
seven,
it
says:
amplified
sound
point,
inaudible,
police,
business,
licensing
or
Health
Department
personnel,
or
there
doesn't
use
at
three
hundred
feet
from
the
property
line.
Shelby
Shelby
considered
a
violation
of
the
small
event
permit,
which
makes
sense,
I
think
so
one
block
away.
What's
the
standard
for
the
large
no.
B
You're
you're
right
here
we
had
it
in
there
I,
don't
know
why
this
version
does
not
have
it
in
here.
So
you're
all
have
to
reapply
here.
The
what
I
have
here
right
now
is
you're
correct.
We
have
the
fifty
at
fifty
feet
so
as
you
need
to
basically
need
a
permit
at
a
hundred
feet,
you're
in
violation,
but
the
it
the
three
hundred
feet
for
the
small
events,
but
you're
right
I
do
not
see
the
six
hundred
feet,
but
that
was
the
intents.
B
A
H
C
A
B
That
is,
that
is
correct,
but
the
intent
was
we
said
with
this
version
that
came
through
here:
I'm,
not
sure
how
we
add
the
six
hundred
feet
in
there
prior
for
the
large
and
standard
events
to
allow
the
basically
a
lot
of
the
business
license
and
police
didn't
force
on
that,
so
they
can
understate,
they
can
understand
it
at
two
blocks.
We
can
ask
them
to
turn
it
down.
It
was,
but
it
did
not
make
this
a
final
version
that
I'm
this
I'm
embarrassed.
No.
A
That's:
okay!
That's
something
that
we
can
certainly
fix
between
now
in
the
council
meeting,
or
we
could
lay
it
over
here
in
committee.
If
we'd
like,
we
could
move
it
forward
without
recommendation.
We
could
also
move
it
forward
as
it
was
moved
with
recommendation.
Maybe
I'll
defer
to
the
author.
Do
you
have
any
suggestion
for
how
you'd
like
to
do
this?
Okay,.
F
A
A
If
I
could
call
it
a
request
and
also
I
intended
after
the
presentation,
just
I,
think
take
about
10
or
20
minutes
of
public
comment.
Maybe
I'll
ask
people
if
they're
here
and
they're
hoping
to
speak
on
this.
Could
you
just
raise
your
hand
so
I
have
an
idea
how
many
people
that
is
anybody
here,
hoping
to
speak
on
this
matter?
Okay,
I
think
10
minutes
looks
like
you'll.
Be
fine,
then,
because.
A
G
Of
mr.
Care
Council
members,
my
name
is
Daniel
Hoffman,
the
director
of
environmental
health
with
the
city's
Health
Department
some
background
at
the
pier
last
council
meeting
of
the
year
last
year
you
authorized
the
city's
Attorney's
Office
to
participate
and
intervene
as
necessary
in
two
cases
that
were
moving
forward,
one
in
Ramsey,
County,
Court,
District
Court,
and
one
which
was
a
contested
case
hearing
before
an
administrative
law
judge
in
as
a
result
of
that,
the
city
became
an
intervener
in
the
lawsuit
between
the
Minnesota
Pollution,
Control
Agency
in
northern
metals
LLC.
G
As
a
result,
a
consent
decree
was
signed
by
the
city,
the
PCA
and
northern
metals
LLC
and
accepted
by
the
district
court
in
March
of
this
year.
In
that
consent
decree
there
is
a
2.57
million
dollar
settlement
that
northern
metals
has
agreed
to
pay.
1
million
dollars
of
that
is
a
civil
penalty
goes
the
Pollution
Control
Agency.
G
Another
five
hundred
and
ten
thousand
dollars
goes
to
pay
the
court
and
attorney
fees,
the
Pollution
Control
Agency
and
finally,
six
hundred
thousand
dollars
of
that
comes
to
the
city
of
Minneapolis
for
health
mitigation
and
that's.
What
we
are
talking
about
today
is
really
that
last
portion,
the
six
hundred
thousand
in
order
to,
even
though
this
is
it,
was
a
lawsuit
and
often
in
lawsuits.
G
Things
are
worked
out
behind
closed
door.
The
Pollution
Control
Agency
did
want
to
hear
from
the
community
and
they
asked
if
we
would
assist
them
in
setting
up
some
meetings
to
really
listen
to
what
the
community
is
interested
in.
Seeing
for
the
six
hundred
thousand
dollars.
That
would
be
part
of
a
health
communication,
so
we
helped
to
meetings
in
January
a
really
good
participation.
G
We
reported
all
those
comments
and
those
are
summarized
in
your
council
agenda
today,
both
the
the
raw
comments
and
then
kind
of
categorized.
In
summarized
comments.
We
then
met
with
your
colleagues
and
their
offices
as
well
as
mayor
Hodges
office,
and
then
we
met
with
some
members
of
the
legislative
delegation
went
through.
Those
comments
went
through
what
people
heard
at
the
at
the
meetings
and
from
there
we
developed
guiding
principles
which
I
have
here.
G
One
is,
let's
make
sure
that
whatever
we
spend
it
on
mitigates
health
issues
that
would
be
associated
with
the
pollution
pollutants
of
concern
in
that
area,
primarily
with
particles
and
metals.
We
want
to
make
sure
we
had
good
cost-benefit.
We
want
to
get
a
good
bang
for
a
buck.
$600,000
doesn't
necessarily
go
that
far
over
three
years.
G
How
do
we
make
the
best
use
of
that
utilize
things
that
we
have
already
developed,
don't
reinvent
a
wheel
and
then
it
needs
to
to
benefit
residents
who
have
been
impacted
or
close
to
the
shredder
operations
for
northern
metals?
From
those
discussions,
then,
when
we
came
up
with
the
health
mitigation
strategies
that
are
outlined
in
a
consent
decree
and
if
you're
interested
those
are
ending
at
the
top
of
the
RCA
there,
the
the
staff
letter
and
I
have
just
summarized
them
them
here:
the
consent
decree.
G
G
We
have
we
also
looking
at
some
additional.
We
heard
additional
concerns
from
the
community.
One
was,
let's
have
more
monitoring.
We
want
to
know
what
else
is
happening
in
air
quality
there,
and
so
we
have
committed,
as
is
the
PCA
in
looking
at
that
area.
How
do
we
take
our
existing
resources
or
existing
work
plans
and
make
sure
that
we
have
a
good,
robust
monitoring
program
there?
G
G
Regulated
and
zoned
in
that
area
and
then
also
looking
at
safe
drinking
water,
we're
looking
at
using
another
grant
and
some
additional
just
staff
resources,
specifically
with
asking
our
schools.
How
can
be
of
assistance
for
them
and
our
next
steps
here,
we've
heard
from
the
community.
They
definitely
want
to
be
involved
continually
involved
in
this
process.
Sort
of
may
need
to
reach
out
developing
an
advisory
committee.
First
thing
we
need
to
do
is
develop
what
the
charge
of
that
Advisory
Committee
is.
We
we
have
some
parameters.
G
We
obviously
have
are
limited
by
the
amount
of
money.
That's
here
we're
limited
by.
We
have
to
comply
with
what
is
in
the
consent
decree
and
then
obviously
we
have
our
own
City
processes
and
requirements
that
we
will
follow,
but
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we
work
with
the
community
as
we
go
forward
with
this
and
we'll
begin,
the
program,
implementation
and,
as
outlined
in
the
consent
decree
we're
going
to
report
back
to
the
Pollution
Control
Agency
annually,
on
how
we
use
the
money
and
what
we
accomplish.
G
I
wanted
to
make
sure
that
my
contact
information
was
part
of
the
presentation
here.
So
that
if
people
have
concerns,
if
they
have
questions
or
comments,
they
can
reach
out
to
me
directly
via
email
or
phone,
we
can
have
a
chat
and
happy
to
always
go
out
in
the
community
and
meet
with
folks.
So
thank.
A
G
G
G
I
do
know
that
it
takes
a
long
time
to
move
an
operation
to
get
permitting
in
a
new
location
and
from
what
I
understand
all
the
metals
is
looking
at
a
site,
Becker
Minnesota,
and
that
the
PCA
is
committed
to
working
with
the
company
to
have
that
as
expedited
as
possible
and
I
think
that
it's
the
that's
the
last
possible
date
that
they
have
to
operate,
and
the
hope
I
think
is
that
they
would
move
even
sooner
than
that.
Well,.
A
G
I
Mister
chair,
could
you
describe
if
there's
any
legal
if
the
court
ordered
any
specific
ways
that
this
money
needs
to
be
used
by
the
city,
because
I
know
I've
been
getting
a
lot
of
questions
from
residents
about?
How
will
the
six
hundred
thousand
dollars
be
used?
Specifically?
Is
the
money
going
to
pay
for
city
staff
to
do
work?
I
Is
it
going
to
go
out
into
community
groups
that
are
working
on
some
of
these
issues
or
related
issues,
or
can
you
you
know
just
kind
of
go
into
detail
about
you
know
what
is
the
process
for
using
the
funds?
What
will
it
go
towards
and
are
we
legally
mandated
to
do
it
that
way,
or
is
there
some
flexibility.
G
Mr.
chair
councilmember
Cano
the
we
are
bound
to
do
exactly
what
it
says
in
the
consent
decree
which
gives
us
a
lot
of
flexibility.
I
like
to
look
at
this
as
these
the
outcomes,
our
tactics
are
flexible.
We
have
obvious
the
parameters
that
this
is
how
much
money
there
is.
We
have
the
parameters
of
here's
the
city
process
of
how
we
do
things,
but
there
is
flexibility,
that's
what
I
we
hope
to
engage
with
the
Community
Advisory
Group.
G
We
in
the
Health
Department
have
looked
at
how
we're
proposing
to
plant
to
spin
this,
and
that
is
also
in
one
of
the
attachments.
You'll
see
it's
in
your
packet
sort
of
a
summary
of
what
we
are
proposing.
We
have
a
breakdown
where
we
use
thirty
thousand
dollars
to
enhance
some
of
our
our
lead
testing
activities
and
we
say
a
hundred
and
seventy
thousand
dollars
on
the
asthma
programming.
That
is
flexible,
there's
nothing
in
the
consent
decree
that
says
we
have
to
split
it
that
way.
G
A
I,
don't
see
any
other
questions
and
thank
you
very
much.
It
may
be
the
least
more
to
come
up
and
now
I
would
like
to
open
the
floor
to
community
comments.
It
seemed
like
there
were.
Maybe
three
people
who
wanted
to
comment
just
keep
your
comments
to
three
minutes
and
it
would
be
appreciated
and
just
begin
by
stating
your
name
and
address
so
the
clerk
has
it
in
the
record
good
afternoon,
chairperson.
H
H
They
moved
to
close
them.
They
were
sued
by
MPC,
MPT
a
was
sued
by
northern
metals.
Finally,
in
2016
they
started
to
prevail
at
the
11th
hour.
The
city
joined
the
suit,
so
you
could
get
some
money
to
help
remediate
things,
but
none
of
this
money
would
be
if
citizens
from
both
sides
of
the
river
who
are
represented
here
today
had
not
been
advocating
for
public
health
all
that
time.
This
$600,000
would
not
be
here.
It's
our
money.
It's
our
money,
Health
Department
didn't
write
a
grant
for
it.
H
It's
our
money
and
we
deserve
not
to
Sabbath,
say
after
you
approve
some
parameters.
We
deserve
to
say
that
this
money
should
be
spent
to
show
what
cause
lead
poisoning
at
such
a
high
rate
in
the
community.
What
is
causing
asthma
at
eight
hundred
and
forty
four
percent
higher
rate
of
our
death
in
Hawthorne
and
Bottineau,
and
Marshall
Terrace
and
McKinley
those
four
census
tracts
what
is
causing
such
a
level
of
asthma
hospitalizations
at
the
highest
rate.
We
believe
it's
air
pollution,
but
no
causal
study
has
ever
been
done.
No
correlation
studies
has
been
done.
H
H
Because
if
you
look
at
what
it
costs
for
one
cancer
caused
by
them,
it's
about
two
million
dollars
in
hospitalization.
If
50,
if
50
people
we
can
show,
50
people
were
caused
by
health
budget-
that's
100
million
dollars
that
they
should
be
paying.
This
northern
metals
is
not
just
this
corporation
here
on
the
river.
They
have
hundreds
of
plants
all
over
the
country.
H
They
have
hundreds
of
plants
more
all
over
the
world.
They
are
exchanged
on
the
British
stock
exchange,
but
they
are
the
British
company.
They
are
headquartered
in
the
Caymans
and
this
company
has
Blood
Money.
This
is
Blood
Money.
They
don't
care
how
many
people
get
asthma,
they
don't
care,
how
many
people
get
lead
poisoning
and
there
are
children
whose
parents
never
smoked
and
they.
H
H
We
watch
studies
to
prove
that
they
should
be
held
accountable
and
not
just
northern
metals,
but
also
TAF,
and
the
city
did
not
get
that
extended
air
pollution
of
monitoring.
It
was
the
citizens
this
October,
that
was
awarded
the
camp.
The
community
monitoring
program
that
the
MPCA
put
on
first
over
at
Philips
and
then
of
that
owens-corning
and
now
on
the
river.
We
did
that
we,
the
citizens,
not
the
city
health
department.
H
We
need
you
to
direct
them
and
I
think
they're,
good
people
and
they're
hard-working
people,
but
we
need
you
to
direct
them
to
help
us,
because
never
in
the
history
of
changing
environmental
problems
has
anything
ever
been
done
unless
Public
Health,
Studies
Shore
it
up
with
community,
already
knew.
When
judge
Myles
Lord
will
return
reserve
mining
in
the
70s
to
stop
the
asbestos
from
going
into
the
Lake
Superior,
which
was
poisoning
all
the
people
and
giving
them
s
of
any
OMA
into
lose
and
in
silver
Bay.
H
H
Please
I
entreat
each
and
every
one
of
you
to
seriously
think
about
how
this
this
gift
of
$600,000
got
given
to
us
and
how
it
should
be
spent,
because
hundreds
of
millions
of
dollars
of
remediation
and
there's
a
path
on
that
site
of
twelve
inches
of
concrete,
because
it's
so
polluted
the
soil
so
polluted
when
they
expanded
it
in
2009.
They
had
to
cap
their
soil
pollution,
water
pollution,
air
pollution,
lead
pollution.
H
J
My
name
is
Roxanne
O'brien
and
when
you
say
my
address
because
I
feel
like
working
on
environmental
justice,
issues
is
kind
of
dangerous.
J
J
Not
for
the
people
and
then
now
now
that
the
settlement
money
is
in
question
or
now
that
this
the
lawsuit
started,
and
it
was
settled
there
were
concerns
that
I
had
about
how
every
time
a
lawsuit
occurs.
There's
like
this
backroom
deal
where
the
company
gets
a
chance
to
secretly
discuss
what
they
are
going
to
do,
regardless
of
how
the
residents
feel
so.
Alas,
one
way
I
feel
like
the
money,
was
kind
of
stuffed
down
our
throats.
J
It
was
like
what
do
you
guys
want
to
do
with
the
money
you
know
before
it
either
guys
I
mean
quite
a
few
of
us
that
we
just
want
this
company
to
shut
down.
It's
been
very
irresponsible
matter
of
fact.
The
reason
why
the
lawsuit
started
was
because
they
were
trying
to
shut
down
pollution
monitors.
They
were
trying
to
sue
the
MPCA
for
poor,
even
monitoring
and
protecting
us,
so
that
concerns
me
that
we're
still
allowing
a
company
that
clearly
is
wrong
to
keep
working
in
our
community
making
millions
of
dollars.
J
J
J
I'm
also
concerned
with
I'm
Dan
house
being
in
control
suddenly
by
himself
to
pick
and
choose
who's
going
to
be
on
a
community
committee.
I
think
I
mean
I,
don't
know
if
they're
from
my
neighborhood
but
I
think
that
I
think
that
that's
inappropriate
I
think
that
people
who
are
actually
really
affected
by
this
should
have
more
power,
more
power
and
more
space.
J
And
what's
getting
done,
I'm
concerned
that
we're
using
some
of
the
money
to
work
on
lead
issues
when
the
whole
conversation
was
that
northern
metals
really
wasn't
responsible
for
the
lead
issues
that
it
was
a
housing
paint
issue.
So
then,
why
are
we
putting
money
into
that?
I
mean
I'm
all
for
getting.
You
know
children
and
families
whatever
they
need
to
be
healthy
in
and
supporting
them.
I'm
just
concerned
that
this
money
is
going
to
disappear
in
the
pockets
of
people
who
continuously
are
unaccountable
in
our
communities.
J
You
see
one
other
thing,
so
my
request
is:
is
that
whoever
decides
to
make
a
Community,
Council
or
community
committee
that
would
oversee
these
funds?
I
would
hope
it
would
be
more
than
just
one
person.
I
would
hope
that
it,
the
City
Council,
actually
make
this
group
I,
don't
think
he
has
a
lot
of
good
relationships
with
people
in
our
community
matter
of
fact,
I've
been
like
I've,
not
even
been
told
about
half
of
the
meeting.
J
J
A
K
Hello,
council
members,
my
name
is
shawni
Gupta
I'm,
with
the
Center
for
Earth
energy
and
democracy.
We're
an
environmental
justice,
research
and
policy
center
is
located
at
45,
11,
South
34th
Avenue.
In
Minneapolis
we
were
national
advances.
Justice
organizations
that
we
are
based
here
at
Minneapolis
I
just
want
to
say
that
northern
metal
is
a
great
win
for
environmental
justice.
In
that
fashion,
it
needs
to
be
a
great
win
for
community
residents
in
terms
of
process,
as
well
as
in
terms
of
content.
K
So
there's
no
doubt
that
the
$600,000
will
be
going
to
good
use
for
the
residents,
but
our
concern
is
that,
in
order
to
cure
by
the
principles
of
environmental
justice,
there
needs
to
be
a
strong
commitment
to
resident
led
voices
in
the
decision-making
process
and
how
those
monies
are
spent.
That
means
that
community
residents
have
been
organizing
against
or
the
metal
should
be.
K
Deciding
who
sits
on
some
through
review
panel
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
great
models
that
this
can
be
fashioned
after
the
Health
Department
itself
has
a
green
business
to
review
committee
where
there
are
cross
sector
of
community
groups,
as
well
as
other
resident
based
organizations
that
will
participate
in
decision-making
processes.
There's
a
lot
more.
That
can
be
done,
but
there
is
that
fair
headwaters
foundation
for
justice
has
where
communities
grant
led
making
process
and
I'm
sure
there's
other
models
out
there.
K
That
can
be
fashioned
where
residents
are
really
in
charge
of
determining
where
these
monies
are
spent.
There's
a
lot
of
good
projects
that
this
could
go
to
no
doubt
in
North
Minneapolis.
It
was
targeted
as
a
green.
Both
thanks
to
the
great
work
you
all
did
on
April
28th
to
designate
it
as
such,
but
in
that
sense
it
has
to
have
a
strong
process
component
that
is
accountable
to
community
residents
and
that
what
that
is
what
we're
hoping
for
that
really
comes
out
of
this
as
well.
Thank
you.
A
D
D
The
other
thing
that
strikes
me
is
that
our
public
school
system
needs
to
like
really
shift
gears
at
this
time,
so
that
they're
making
decisions
based
upon
21st
century
realities
and
to
me
that
means
that
the
science
and
sociology
need
to
prepare
children
to
work
in
a
world
where
they're
really
plugged
into
their
Nesta
necessity
and
reality
of
creating
a
green
economy.
We're
resolving
our
environmental
problems
through
the
work
that
we
create
locally.
D
So
that's
about
it,
I
think
that's
pretty
much
to
the
point
and
if
I
feel
like,
if
those
things
aren't
happening,
listening
to
the
people
and
educating
the
children
to
really
create
the
kind
of
culture
and
society
that
we
need
in
the
20th
century
to
survive,
we're
at
a
real
turning
point
as
a
species,
and
unless
we
make
some
difficult
decisions
and
deal
with
the
challenges
of
really
having
a
different
culture.
We're
going
to
be
in
deeper
trouble
than
we
are
now.
A
E
She
literally
glittered
in
her
brilliance
and
so
I
ask
you:
how
can
you
take
environmental
justice
and
community
and
throw
it
under
the
bus
when
you
have
that
example,
that
you
presented
to
the
world
and
the
nation
can't
it's
not
justice
to
throw
this
money
outside
of
the
community
per
view?
The
community
has
to
tell
you
advise
you
and
give
you
direction
and
guidance.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
A
C
C
We
need
to
take
responsibility
for
that
and
move
towards
fixing
it
and
the
the
pollution
that
has
emanated
from
a
combination
of
a
whole
lot
of
the
heavy
industrial
along
the
river.
Whether
it
was
know,
is
northern
metals
or
or
gif,
or
a
number
of
the
other
heavy
industrial
plants
in
that
location
do
have
an
impact
on
both
North
Minneapolis
near
North,
as
well
as
across
the
river
in
Northeast.
You
know,
I
can't
tell
you
how
many
calls
I
get
to
my
office
on
a
very
regular
basis.
C
Talking
about
the
really
noxious
smell
that
that
we
we
have
on
the
novotná,
neighborhood
and
I
do
want
to
thank
Nancy
prisoners
as
well
as
the
Bottineau
Neighborhood
Association
for
their
work.
Undoubtedly,
I
don't
think
we
would
be
in
this
place
today,
where
we
have
northern
metals
that
is
moving
out,
albeit
not
as
quickly
as
we
would
like,
and
we
do
have
firm
objective
statistics
as
to
what
the
the
level
of
toxin
is
in
the
level
of
particulate
matter
in
the
atmosphere
without
so
seriously.
Thank
you
and
and
I
do
agree
with
the
I.
C
Do
agree
with
the
speakers
that
we
we
do
need
to
make
sure
that
the
money
from
this
settlement
goes
to
the
community
that
has
been
experiencing
the
the
uptick
in
pollution.
I
mean
you
can
literally
I
mean
it's
no
coincidence
that
when
we
we
go
and
we
test
that
there
are
higher
levels
of
toxins,
whether
it's
LED
or
otherwise,
in
the
blood
of
people
who
live
in
North,
Minneapolis
and,
to
a
certain
extent,
North
East.
C
Pleased
to
see
this
moving
forward
right
now
and
I
would
like
to
see
the
that
money
allocated
directly
to
the
community.
That
has
been
impacted
for
so
long
and
you
know
I
do
recall,
seeing
a
boundary
that
was
drawn
up
as
to
where
the
location
of
the
area's
most
impacted
it
would
included
all
of
that
area
of
near
North
just
across
the
highway.
C
It
also
included
a
smaller
section
just
across
the
river
and-
and
you
know,
I
would
I
would
like
to
and
I've
I've
read
through
your
the
resolution
council
members
kind
of
in
Gordon,
and
thank
you
fully
supportive,
there's
a
there's,
a
minor
addition
that
I
would
like
to
make.
If
you
would
be
so
amenable-
which
is
so
it's
in
that
last
paragraph,
it
says,
be
it
FURTHER,
RESOLVED,
etc,
etc,
etc.
A
Thank
you
very
much.
I
appreciate
that
I
didn't
want
to
thank
everybody
for
coming
in
and
making
those
comments.
I
appreciate
it
a
great
deal
and
I
think
within
the
consent
decree
it
does
seem
like
they're.
They
give
us
quite
a
bit
of
latitude
as
I'm
reading
it.
It
does
say
that
they
shall
solely
be
used.
I
should
say,
shall
be
used
solely
for
mitigation
projects
and
northeast
and
North
Minneapolis.
A
So
that's
pretty
wide
area
actually,
but
then
it
also
says
the
mitigation
project
shall
include
projects
and
the
impacted
neighborhoods
and
it
lists
for
items.
It
doesn't
say
that
it
couldn't
potentially
also
include
additional,
but
it
makes
sure
it
include
these
and
some
of
them
that
I
read
when
I
read
it
says,
identify
and
connect
in
affected
individuals
with
resources
to
help
reduce
environmental
exposure
to
lead
well,
some
kind
of
study
about
where
that
lead
poisoning
is
coming
from
or
whatever
could
fit
in
there.
So
I'm,
not
sure.
A
If
it
consent
decree
contradicts
anything
that
we
heard
from
the
community
in
terms
of
what
they
would
like
to
see
happen
or
that
it's
as
weak
as
long
as
it
fits
in
those
parameters,
we
can't
run
anything
through
a
community
process.
So
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
opportunity
for
here
to
have
some
kind
of
a
win-win
situation.
A
Sort
of
two
look
at
how
how
to
spend
these
funds-
and
there
is
in
the
in
the
supporting
material
in
the
staff
report.
There's
a
northern
metal
settlement
help
mitigation
strategies
that
are
listed.
The
council
is
not
approving
these
strategies
today
or
approving
accepting
the
money
and
we're
approving
increasing
the
health
department's
budget.
So
they
can,
they
can
put
the
money
somewhere
and
that's
all
we're
approving,
but
all
this
other
information
is
fantastic
and
I
think
we're
acknowledging.
A
We
have
to
live
under
the
consent
decree
and
we
would
anyway,
even
if
we
rejected
the
money
I
mean.
So
it's
not
that
we're
going
to
be
able
to
reject
the
money
and
I
think
and
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong.
But
if
we
didn't
accept
the
money
I,
don't
think
it
means
that
that
they
would
change
their
consent,
decree
or
anything
at
all.
So
that's
settled
it's
done.
The
judges
ruled
on
it
and
we're
dealing
with
what
we
have
and
so
now
we
want
to
deal
with
what
we
have
in
a
way.
A
L
I
actually
had
just
like
a
question
for
staff
and
reading
the
consent
decree
I
didn't
see
in
here,
but
I
may
not
be
reading
it
carefully
enough.
There's
nothing
in
here
that
says
when
we
have
to
spend
the
money.
It
says
you
get
two
hundred
thousand
dollars
each
year
for
three
years
or
whatever
I
think,
but
there
is
no
direction
in
here
as
to
when
we
spend
the
money
to
me
and
that's
a
question
that
kind
of
goes
to
how
much
process
could
be
involved
in
giving
direction
how
the
money
could
be
spent.
G
Mr.
chair
council,
vice
president
button,
great
question
and
I
will
touch
base
with
our
City
Attorney's
Office
and
see
if
they're,
reading
the
same
and
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
are
open
to
whatever
is
not
laid
out
and
and
I
think
it's
really
important
to
say
what's
legally
binding
and
what
else
is
open
discussion.
L
Just
a
practical
question
there,
though,
and
I
don't
think
I
have
anything
else,
that's
for
staff,
but
so
then
just
a
couple
more
points.
One
is
just
as
council,
member
coordinated
and
actually
also
has
major
have
said
I
in
reading
this
I
really
see
that
there
is
a
lot
of
flexibility
and
what
are
the
options
available.
So
that
just
says
to
me:
there's
a
lot
of
room
for
community
direction
in
how
much
to
spend
where
or
what
are
the
full
range
of
projects
and
all
sorts
of
different
things.
L
The
third
thing,
though,
that
I
heard
from
some
of
the
community
members
here
and
I
honestly
I,
don't
think
that
this
is
at
least
in
my
opinion,
any
knock
on
our
own
staff,
but
just
a
question
of
kind
of
how
much
more
oversight
can
there
be
from
the
council
and
ensuring
that
there
is
a
full
and
developed
process
and
that
we're
thinking
very
carefully
through
this
process.
I
think
this
kind
of
goes
to
the
underlying
issues
of
just
trust
and
what
is
there
to
justify
that
trust
from
community
to
government?
L
Again,
I,
don't
know
that
this
is
so
particular
to
the
city
Minneapolis
or
the
Health
Department
per
se,
but
just
you
know
we're
operating
in
a
environment
right
now
in
a
national
and
a
state
environment.
That
really
just
does
not
engender
trust,
and
you
know
we
just
had
in
the
news
recently
about
an
organization
whose
executive
director
has
been
I
think
just
sentenced
to
four
years
in
jail,
and
this
is
an
organization
that
was
there
to
implement
services
to
community,
including
red,
LED
reduction.
All
these
kinds
of
things
I
think
really
go
to
just.
L
What
is
the
trust
that
community
has
in
the
processes
that
are
suggested
by
the
bureaucracy
so
to
speak?
So
I
just
think.
That's
a
important
thing
to
keep
in
mind
and
I
think
it
also
goes
to
the
question
of
tena.
What's
the
time
we
need
to
kind
of
get
it
right
and
make
sure
we
have
a
good
process
with
a
full
range
of
community
members.
These
are
the
community
members
who
were
able
to
come
today
to
a
public
meeting
in
City,
Hall
and
I'm
sure
there
are
others
who
are
highly
engaged
and
involved
as
well.
L
So
I
just
wanted
to
put
that
other
I.
Don't
know
that
this
resolution
really
doesn't
go
to
kind
of
what's
the
feedback
loop
back
to
thinking
through
the
process
piece,
and
that
may
be
something
maybe
not
here
on
the
fly,
but
maybe
something
that
we
want
to
come
to
in
regarding
I'm
just
kind
of
looking
at
your.
K
L
A
That's
I,
guess
I
think
that's
a
great
idea
too.
There
really
isn't
a
report
that
time
on
this
or
anything
or
feedback
I,
also
with
some
of
the
discussion
here.
How
does
this,
or
does
this
not
fit
with
the
designation
of
the
Green
Zone,
which
isn't
referred
to
in
the
resolution
either?
Maybe
there's
some
potential
here
to
ask
staff
a
direct
staff
to
coordinate
those
efforts
or
something,
but
maybe
we
also
need
to
talk
a
little
bit
to
the
sustainability
office
and
others
about
that
between
now
and
the
council
meeting.
So.
I
A
Saying
I've
got
an
idea
on
the
fly,
but
definitely
it's
something
that
reached
out.
We've
also
talked
about
participatory
budgeting.
What
does
that
actually
mean,
and
how
is
that
involved?
We're
going
to
I
think
a
grant,
a
federal
grant
right
now,
where
they're
trying
to
implement
some
of
those
strategies
about
how
can
you
give
some
Democratic
discretion
for
some
of
the
recast
funding?
So
there
might
be
some
some
other
tools
or
ideas
we
could
try
to
implement,
but
I'm,
not
I,
don't
have
an
amendment
for
this
resolution
right
now,
the
council,
nor
there
coño.
A
A
It
had
to
do
with
the
final
resolves
clause
and
I
believe
it
said.
I'll
read
the
whole
clause
and
I'll
put
it
in
there
and
note
where
it
comes
up.
He
had
further
resolved
that
Minneapolis
Health
Department
staff
are
directed
to
work
with
community
members
from
North
and
Northeast
Minneapolis
to
plan
for
the
use
of
the
$600,000
earmark
for
community
health
projects
in
the
impacted
areas
of
northern
metals,
as
well
as
any
additional
funding
that
comes
to
the
city
from
the
consent
decree
with
northern
metals,
so
I
had
it
coming
after
health
projects.
It's.
L
So
it's
broad
language,
I
will
say
you
know
I,
just
I
I,
just
I
have
a
hesitation
about
adding
language
that
doesn't
mirror
what's
in
the
consent
decree
which
already
describes
what
are
the
areas
that
then
could
see
the
benefits
from
any
of
the
funding
in
any
of
the
mitigation
efforts
that
the
community
will
vest.
Direct
I
am.
C
L
So
let
me
just
pull
up
my
document
here.
What
the
consent
decree
says
on
page
14,
section
F
is
that
northern
metal
says
agree.
Intervention
in
the
city
of
Minneapolis
in
the
RAM
and
the
Rams
excuse
me
agrees.
It's
going
to
provide
Missy
Minneapolis
agrees
that
this
money
shall
be
used
solely
for
mitigation
projects
in
North
and
Northeast
Minneapolis,
so
that
is
the
language
utilized
in
in
the
consent.
Decree
I.
Think
part
of
the
reason
for
that.
C
Member
glyn,
I
I
understand
your
point.
What
I
am
hoping
to
do
in
this
is
is
limit
the
area
to
areas
to
to
neighborhoods
that
are
actually
impact
and
I'll.
Give
you
one
example:
I
arguably
live
in
North
many
in
Northeast
Minneapolis
I
live
just
off
of
East
10th
of
an
Avenue.
This
is
not
an
impacted
area.
I
do
not
think
that
the
money
should
be
going
to
projects
in
the
neighborhood
where
I
live.
L
It
probably
would
be
something
good
to
review
with
any
Advisory
Committee
once
it's
established,
because
I
think
they
found
like
very
reasonable
guiding
principles.
There
are
a
little
different,
though
than
saying
what's
in
the
consent
decree,
which
ends
up
saying,
what
kind
of
the
breadth
of
what
you
might
end
up
doing
and
I
just
don't
want
us
to
shortcut
what
the
community
might
end
up
recommending
by
you
know
now
then
we're
going
to
have
three
different
things,
a
language
we
have
what's
in
this
resolution
we
have
a
consent
decree
which
is
very
broad.
A
A
Think
this
last
the
resolve
clause
that
mentions
the
six
hundred
thousand
dollars
that's
earmarked
for
community
projects
was
talking
about
that,
but
whatever
we
call
it
I,
don't
know
that
it
matters
all
that
much,
but
so
I'm
open
to
including
something
or
saying
impacted
neighborhoods,
because
it's
in
the
consent,
decree
or
just
leaving
it
out
because
it
will
still
have
to
those
projects,
shall
be
implemented
in
there.
So
I
don't
know
that
that
would
be
a
solution
to
I.
Don't.
C
A
A
F
F
M
F
F
There
were
some
specific
four
points
of
what
the
funding
would
be
directed
to
in
the
consent,
decree
and
I
just
wanted
to
check
and
make
sure
that
that
we
did
feel
that
that
was
broad
enough
to,
for
example,
entertain
the
idea
of
funding
a
study
or
kind
of
some
of
the
other
things
that
community
members
brought
up
today
or
that
were
not
constrained
to
those
four
specific
bullet
points
in
the
consent
decree.
Mr.
M
Chair
members
of
the
committee,
I've
read
it
like
councilmember
Glidden,
reads
that
which
is
I,
don't
believe
that
those
four
specifically
mentioned
mitigation
strategies
are
limiting.
I
do
think
you
know
the
city
needs
to
be
careful
and
follow
the
consent
decree,
but-
and
you
know,
do
what
the
consent
decree
was
meant
to
do
and
meant
to
accomplish.
But
that's
that's
my
reading
of
that
language.
That's.
M
F
Lee,
okay,
they
give
him
that
helpful
just
to
clarify
and
then
do.
We
have
a
sense
of
when
staff
might
sort
of
report
back
about
the
process
or
another
question
I
had
was:
how
will
the
budgetary
allocation
be
approved?
Will
it
be
an
administrative
decision
by
staff,
or
would
that
decision
likely
come
back
through
the
council
at
some
times.
A
K
A
Don't
ask
for
it:
it's
like
it
could
be
a
staff,
something
the
staff
could
decide.
I
do
know
that
the
consent
decree
requires
the
city
to
submit
an
annual
report
to
the
MPCA
that
so
at
least
there'll
be
an
annual
reporting
that
would
go
to
them
and
if
it's
coming
from
the
city
the
chances
are,
it
would
go
through
the
City
Council
before
it
went
to
them.
A
Does
anybody
else
have
any
better
understanding
of
how
the
money
I
think?
Once
we
allocated
to
the
department?
I,
guess
that's
a
big
question:
would
you
have
any
preference,
any
suggestions?
We
did
talk
about
amending
the
resolution
to
get
a
better
report
back
mechanism
and
add
some
clarity
to
that
issue.
I
think
there's
issues
were
raised
about
how
are
people
selected
on
the
stakeholder
group
and
now,
how
are
we
fun?
A
How
do
we
finally
approve
how
the
money
is
actually
spent
I'm,
picking
up
what
there's
some
interest
in
having
some
council
committee
oversight
and
involvement
and
council
committee
involvement
in
that
I?
Don't
have
a
staff
direction
for
it
right
now,
but
we
can
work
on
that
between
now
and
the
other
council
meeting.
Thank.
F
L
You
I
was
just
going
to
add
I
thought,
that's
what
kind
of
informally
we
had
decided.
We
would
work
on
some
language
kind
of
looking
to
you
as
a
chair
to
maybe
do
that
on
both
those
pieces
to
come
back
just
because
there's
high
interest
in
this,
so
one
would
be
the
process
piece
and
the
other
with
nvivo
the
other
reporting
back
on
the
funding
and.
A
F
You
mr.
chair,
this
is
maybe
a
theme
now
with
me,
but
I
also
just
want
to
know
that
I
still
continue
to
have
concerns
about
our
staff
capacity.
To
do
some
of
this
additional
work.
On
top
of
all
of
the
other
things
that
we
have
staff
working
on
and
and
that's
not
to
say,
they
shouldn't,
do
it
by
any
means.
F
But
I
raised
this
issue
when
we
were
talking
about
green
zones
as
well,
because
that
is
already
a
commitment
that
we've
made
to
doing
some
significant
canwe
outreach
about
really
important
issues
in
the
community
and
I.
Just
want
to
note
again.
We
haven't
added
any
staff
that
I
know
of
maybe
I'm
missing
something
from
last
budget,
but.
F
A
F
This
is
just
again
a
note
to
say
that
when
we
have
policy
makers
are
directing
staff
to
do
new
significant
pieces
of
work.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
either
redirecting
them
to
not
do
something
else
or
adding
staff
capacity
or
just
kind
of
understanding.
What
that
level
of
staffing
that
we
need
in
the
city
to
take
on
a
lot
of
new
tasks.
A
I
just
wanted
to
highlight
before
we
vote
on
this,
the
second
resolved
clause,
because
I
think
this
is
a
pretty
significant
and
a
lot
of
concerns
have
been
raised
about
the
civil
penalty.
Earlier
in
the
presentation
we
saw
where
the
money
was
going
and
there's
a
million
dollar
civil
penalty,
but
somehow,
in
the
wisdom
of
the
state
legislature,
that
million
dollars
is
absolutely
locked
into
going
into
the
city
into
the
general
fund.
We
believe
I
believe
probably
all
of
us
on
the
committee.
A
But
at
this
point
certainly,
the
authors
of
the
resolution
believe
that
this
should
be
reconsidered,
and
so
this
resolved
clause
is
saying
that
the
City
Council
of
the
city
Minneapolis
calls
on
the
state
to
allocate
the
1
million
dollar
civil
penalty
not
to
the
state
general
fund,
but
to
projects
that
serve
the
residents
of
North
and
Northeast
Minneapolis,
who
have
borne
the
brunt
of
the
negative
impacts
associated
with
the
presence
of
northern
metals
near
their
communities.
I
think
that
sense,
I,
think
that
would
be
adjusting
to,
and
that
would
also
maybe
bring
more
resources.
A
So
we
could
even
have
a
more
robust
process,
but
even
more
than
that
have
more
robust
solutions
and
mitigations
in
place.
So
that's
also
part
of
the
resolution
and
I
think
we
can
don't
get
overly
hopeful
if
they're
going
to
listen
to
us,
but
nevertheless
making
that
stable
and
we're
really
helping
the
more
people
and
the
more
entities
that
can
make
those
kinds
of
statements
bigger
difference
that
it
can
make
and
I'm
not
seeing
anymore
people
who
want
to
talk
about
this
council
member
Frye.
Maybe
I.
C
A
That
on
request,
okay,
seeing
no
further
comments
and
all
those
well
there's
actually
three
things.
Why
don't
we
vote
on
the
resolution
and
then
we'll
go
back
to
the
other
two
items?
All
those
in
favor
of
the
resolution.
Please
say:
aye
and
opposed
that
motion
carries
and
then
on
a
staff
report
we're
also
approving
acceptance
of
the
$600,000
and
then
as
the
resolution,
to
allocate
that
to
Health
Department
budget
on
those
items.
Seeing
no
discussion,
all
those
in
favor,
please
say:
aye
any.