►
From YouTube: June 28, 2017 Committee of the Whole
Description
Committee of the Whole Meeting
A
Good
afternoon,
excuse
me
good
morning,
everyone
and
thank
you
very
much
for
your
patience
as
we
are
starting
about
half
an
hour
later
than
we
had
scheduled
to
start
so
that
we
could
make
sure
we
had
all
the
proper
paperwork
for
council
members
who
are
thinking
about
different
motions
or
things
that
they
would
like
to
make.
We
have
a
full
house
here
today
and
I
want
to
say
thank
you
to
everyone
for
being
here
and
thank
you
I'm
sure
that
many
more
are
watching
this
meeting
at
a
at
a
location
outside
of
City
Hall.
A
My
name
is
Elizabeth
Glidden
I
am
the
chair
of
this
committee,
which
is
the
committee
of
the
whole
and
joining
me
today.
Are
council
members,
Gordon,
Cano,
right
vendors
council
president
Johnson
councilmember,
Andrew,
Johnson
health
numbers
game,
quincy,
goodman,
fry
and
Palmisano
and
councilmember
oddly,
where
Tommy
is
out
of
the
country
on
a
planned,
absent
I
have
a
we.
Our
main
order
of
business
today
is
consideration
and
potential
amendments
to
the
proposed
municipal,
minimum
wage
ordinance
and
before
we
do
that,
I
just
have
two
very
short
items
of
housekeeping
to
get
to.
A
The
first
is
directing
the
city
clerk
to
include
all
public
testimony
and
comments
regarding
a
municipal
minimum
wage
ordinance,
including
comments
submitted
following
the
conclusion
of
the
public
hearing,
which
was
conducted,
June,
22nd,
2017
and
through
final
action
by
the
City
Council
as
part
of
the
public
record,
and
this
is
because
we
continue
to
receive
comments
via
email
and
other
ways.
We
want
to
make
sure
that
we
are
including
all
that
in
our
public
record
for
the
future.
So
any
discussion
on
that
motion
councilmember
fry
did
you
have
discussion
on
that
staff
direction?
A
B
You,
madam
chair,
normally
we
would
have
the
information
technology
subcommittee
meeting
today
to
receive
the
annual
open
data
compliance
report,
but
given
the
very
large
item
before
us,
with
this
minimum
wage
ordinance,
we
will
be
making
an
exception
this
year
and
postponing
this
item
until
our
next
meeting,
which
is
on
July
19
2017
I'd,
encourage
everyone
to
attend
and
hear
more
about
our
open
data
and
government
transparency.
All.
A
Right,
so
this
is
a
motion
to
postpone
that
item.
All
in
favor,
please
say
aye
aye
opposed,
and
that
item
is
postponed
until
our
next
meeting
I
return
now
to
discussion
of
a
municipal
minimum
wage
ordinance
and
to
be
able
to
ensure
that
this
item
is
properly
before
us.
I
will
move
the
original
version
that
was
introduced
and
the
subject
of
the
public
hearing
so
that
it
is
before
us,
and
this
is
what
allows
us
then
to
make
motions
to
amend
provisions
of
this
ordinance
and
then
I
know.
A
Several
council
members
have
passed
out
amendments
they
intend
to
make.
There
are
a
few
additional
copies
up
by
the
clerk,
but
we
will
discuss
each
motion
as
we
go
through
it
and
then
they
will
also
be
available
on
line
after
this
meeting.
So
the
first
council
member
in
queue
is
council,
member
Koretz.
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
so
I
have
a
series
of
three
amendments
that
will
be
moving
forward.
The
first,
the
first
two
I
will
take
at
the
at
the
same
time.
You
should
have
a
page
in
front
of
you
and
it
starts
with
Frye
moves
to
amend,
section,
40.39,
zero,
b
and
c
of
the
ordinance
to
read
as
follows,
and
so
I'll
explain
briefly
what
this
does
and
then
I'll
go
through
the
amendments
in
detail
this.
C
This
takes
our
large
businesses
and
phases
them
into
15
dollars
within
five
years,
and
it
takes
small
businesses,
as
defined
as
under
100
employees
and
phases
them
in
over
seven
years
and
specifically
and
I
just
want
to
thank
a
councilmember
Glidden
I
want
to
thank
all
of
my
colleagues
on
the
work
and
the
collaboration
to
to
arrive
at
this
result.
You
know
I
feel
strongly
that
we
should
be
treating
small
businesses
different
than
large.
It's
there's
a
different
functionality.
C
Small
businesses
do
not
have
the
same
cost
restrictions
and
profit
margins
as
large
entities
and
I
do
think.
We
should
account
for
that
in
the
ordinance
you
know,
you're,
small
and
local
pizza
joint
is
not
McDonald's
and
I.
Think
the
ordinance
at
the
end
of
the
day
should
reflect
those
differences
so
in
front
of
you.
If
this
has
and
I'll
just
I'm
going
to
read
portions
of
it
anyway.
This
has
large
businesses,
beginning
phase
in
on
January
1st
of
2018
phasing
in
through
July
1st
of
2022,
when
they
will
arrive
at
$15.
C
C
Instead
of
reading
$13.25,
it
should
instead
read
$13.50.
That
was
a
mistake.
So
if
you
correct
that
with
a
clerk
and-
and
secondly,
this
is
this-
is
the
item
FRA
move
to
amend,
section,
40.39
0e
of
the
ordinance
to
read
as
follows?
What
this
does
is
it
starts
the
inflationary
kickin
of
the
five-year
points
when
large
businesses
phase
into
$15.
So,
as
of
that
point,
the
inflationary
period
will
be,
inflation
will
be
judged
by
either
two-and-a-half
percent
or
that
set
by
the
director.
C
So
it
says
it
will
read
as
minimum
subminimum
wage
subsections,
B,
C
and
D,
based
on
the
percentage
increase
calculated
by
the
Commissioner
of
industry
in
labor
in
Minnesota
Statutes
one.
Seventy
seven
point,
two
for
subdivision:
one
F
divided
by
two
in
2022
and
based
on
the
full
percentage
increase
in
each
subsequent
year,
rounded
to
the
nearest
cent.
So
we
have
a
mechanism
built-in
whereby
the
Commissioner
will
determine
the
inflationary
rate
and
then
that
inflationary
rate
will
apply
to
small
businesses.
C
C
You
know,
I
think
we
need
to
be
moving
forward
in
a
way
that
uplifts
workers
and
simultaneously
accounts
for
the
reality
small
local
businesses
are
facing
in
our
city
and
I.
Believe
this
just
does
that
so
I'm
happy
to
stand
for
any
questions
on
this
on
this
topic
and
I
will
move
that
those
two
forward
Thank.
A
D
You,
madam
chair
I,
just
wanted
to
say
that
I
did
reach
out
to
a
few
of
the
businesses
in
my
ward
to
get
feedback
on
the
draft
proposals
that
was
published
online
and
definitely
all
the
small
businesses
in
the
Ninth
Ward
support
a
two-track,
a
timeline
to
have
large
businesses
phase
in
sooner
than
smaller
businesses.
So
I'm
generally
supportive
of
this
I've
talked
to
many
of
you.
D
How
I
think
we
should
actually
make
large
businesses
move
on
to
a
four
year
timeline,
but
the
feedback
that
I
got
was
just
that
the
books
were
perhaps
not
there
for
that.
So
I
understand
that
a
lot
of
this
has
been
vetted
by
many
groups,
some
stakeholders.
So,
while
you
know
morally
I
wish
this
said
for
four
years
for
large
businesses
and
and
seven
for
small
I'm
likely
going
to
support
this.
As
it's
been
presented,.
A
Thank
you,
I've
put
myself
in
queue,
I
wanted
to
say
I'm
supportive
of
this
motion.
I
think
we
knew
from
the
time.
Even
this
draft
ordinance
was
introduced
from
public
comment
by
colleagues
here
that
there
would
be
more
discussion
and
likely
amendments
to
the
phase-in
to
try
to
think
about
how
to
do
that
fact,
fully.
I
think
that
this
is
responding
to
issues
that
we've
heard
both
from
workers
and
from
business,
and
so
I
really
appreciate
that
to
those
multiple
perspectives
into
account
and
again,
I
support
this
as
an
appropriate
compromise
council
member
Gordon.
E
E
People
actually
started
talking
about
this
ten
years
ago,
eight
years
ago.
It
was
a
really
big
issue,
I
think
even
in
the
campaign
before
we
took
office,
the
last
campaign-
and
so
people
are
impatient,
and
we
also
delayed
things
further
when
we
were
unable
to
accept
going
forward
with
its
charter
amendment
in
some
ways.
Maybe
this
ordinance
is
improved
a
little
bit
over
the
charter
amendment
in
some
ways.
F
We'll
also
be
supporting
the
motion.
I
think
this
is
the
strongest
policy
for
workers
that
we
can
pass
through
this
council
and
some
of
the
things
that
I
have
prioritized
are
reflected
here
and
that's
why
I
am
willing
to
support
this
today.
One
of
the
big
things
was
making
sure
that
we
didn't
define
largest
mall
business
by
a
cut-off
number
that
would
exclude
a
huge
percentage
of
our
workforce,
and
this
number
of
100
employees
plus
or
minus
is
a
number
that
again
doesn't
leave
behind
too
much
of
the
workers
in
Minneapolis
like
a
higher
number.
F
F
A
G
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
A
second
amendment
here,
I
moved
to
amend
section.
Forty
point,
three,
eight
zero
of
the
ordinance
to
read
as
follows,
and
this
particular
subsection
outlines
the
definition
of
what
constitutes
both
small
and
large
businesses
and
specifically
I
added
a
subpart
D,
stating
that
employers
that
operate
at
more
than
two
locations
in
the
city
and
more
than
ten
in
the
state
shall
be
considered
large
business.
Otherwise,
the
above
language
applies
for
each
business
storefront,
and
this
this
has
a
the
intention
is
to
have
a.
C
A
H
Thank
you,
madam
vice
president.
You
know
I'm
confused
for
this
one.
Just
because
you
know
there
can
be
small
businesses,
that
are,
let's
say
one
person
or
two
person
shops
that
can
have
several
locations,
and
so
now
we're
either
really
counting
for
use
or
running
accountant
businesses,
but
I,
don't
think
we
should
do
both
and
so
I'm
not
going
to
support
this.
E
So,
just
to
get
clarity
on
this,
this
has
to
do
with
locations
and
not
employees,
and
so
even
if
you
had
only
one
employee
at
every
location,
which
means
you'd
only
have
the
total
of
12
employees
and
I,
don't
know
if
that's
realistic
to
imagine
there
might
be
something
like
that,
but
a
little
no
consulting
business
and
that
would
even
apply
to
you
so
I'm,
just
I'm,
just
not
I'm
worried.
There
might
be
an
unintended
consequence,
I
just
heard
about
this
today
and
I'm
just
reading
it.
E
Now
it
might
be
nicer
if
it
somehow
it
said
with
all
those
locations
if
it
equals
100
B
and
even
though
they're
not
in
the
city
of
Minneapolis
I'm,
just
not
sure
how
to
improve
it.
To
fix
that.
But
I
wanted
to
put
that
out
there
that
there
might
be.
You
might
have
a
small
architecture
firm
for
some
reason
you
decide
to
have
an
option
to
Lou.
Think
I,
don't
really
know
what
kind
of
business
it
would
be,
but
think
about
that,
because
it
could
be
a
significantly
lower
number
than
100
of
employees.
E
C
Thank
you,
madam
Vice
Chair,
council
member
Gordon.
Thank
you
for
the
questions.
What
this
would
tackle
is
the
indents.
In
is
the
instances
there
are
the
instances
when
a
single
storefront
may
have
less
than
100
employees
like,
for
instance,
McDonald's,
but
is
independently
owned
and
has
many
many
locations
throughout
both
the
city
and
the
country.
So
I
don't
think
too.
Many
of
us
are
under
the
impression
that
McDonald's
should
be
counted
as
a
small
business.
Instead,
they
should
be
counted
as
a
large
business.
C
A
I
Madam
chair,
under
the
the
draft
ordinance
employer,
means
any
individual
partnership,
etc,
etc.
Different
business
kinds
of
entities
or
any
person
or
group
of
persons
acting
directly
or
indirectly,
in
the
interests
of
an
employer
in
relation
to
an
employee,
and
then
there
are
exclusions
for
other
governmental
entities.
So
the
city
lacks
the
jurisdiction
to
legislate.
Okay,.
I
E
So
I
thought
of
a
better
example,
my
brother-in-law,
when
his
business
was,
was
really
going
strong.
He
had
something
called
the
Cooper
fix
Reid
where
he
repaired
watches.
He
had
his
original
shop
on
the
second
or
third
floor
of
some
business
on
Nicollet
Mall.
Then,
when
he
married
my
sister
and
they
had
kids,
he
started
opening
these
kiosks
in
the
mall,
so
he
had
one
at
Rosedale.
He
had
I
think
for
a
while.
He
even
had
one
at
the
big
mall
on
Bloomington.
He
lived
in
Duluth,
so
he
had
one
in
Duluth.
E
He
very
easily
could
have
got
to
ten
of
those
scattered
around
and
he
would
have
one
employee
working
at
a
time
at
the
kiosk
doing
the
business
for
him
and
the
watches
will
get
collected
and
repaired
and
sent
back
and
he
probably
never.
Maybe
he's
got
200.
But
let's
say
he
never
actually
had
100
employees
if
he
had
had
to
in
in
Minneapolis,
maybe
one
out
at
the
quarry
or
something
where
he
had
a
little
spot
where
he
could
set
up.
E
E
I,
probably,
wouldn't
even
have
been
that
big
of
a
deal
whether
he
gets
to
15
in
the
5
or
the
7
I,
don't
know
no,
but
that's
an
example
that
comes
to
mind,
which
I
think
is
better
than
my
they're
ones,
where
I
was
punting
on
a
law
firm
or
an
architectural
firm,
or
something
like
that,
because
it
really
happened
so
I'm
not
sure
where
I
land
on
this
uptime.
We.
E
C
You,
madam
chair,
answering
councilmember
Gordon's
question
in
the
example
that
you
gave
that
individual
would
be
considered
a
small
business
because,
if
there's
an
end,
not
a,
but
so
it
says,
employers
that
operate
at
more
than
two
locations
in
the
city
and
more
than
ten
locations
outside
of
the
city.
And
something
tells
me
that
that's
a
particular
individual
did
not
have
more
than
ten
outside
the
city.
So
they
would
still
be
within
the
small
and
it
would
accommodate.
Your
concern
sounds.
F
Thank
You
Man
I'm
sure
that
that
clarification
was
helpful.
I'd
I
had
intended
to
say
I
support
the
intention
that
comes
member
Frye
articulated
when
he
described
this
and
I
think
I'm.
Just
not
sure
that
I
think
that
my
questions
would
have
to
do
kind
of
a
couple.
Important
thing
is
that
it
doesn't
specifically
would
reach
what
you
articulated
with
the
larger
Kings.
E
I'd
be
more
comfortable
if
it
had
an
additional
and
and
said,
and
has
a
total
of
at
least
100
employees
in
all
these
locations,
or
something
because
I
think
my
brother
could
have
gotten
to
ten
stores
around
the
state
and
maybe
not
hit
that
my
brother-in-law
I'm
not
at
that
threshold.
So
that
makes
any
sense,
and
we
can
always
think
about
this-
a
little
bit
more
and
come
back
on
Friday
to
make
some
of
these
amendments
to
if
we
get
stuck
I,
don't
want
to
hold
this
back
too
much.
Okay,.
A
You
think
further
comes
from
before
I,
okay,
so
okay,
so
he
has
moved
this
will
vote
on
this,
and
if
we
need
to
make
a
language
tweak
on
Friday,
we
can
do
that.
So
come
from
reprise
motion
is
in
front
of
us.
We've
had
a
lot
of
discussion,
own
favor,
please
say
aye
aye
opposed.
That
item
is
accrue
Hoverbike.
A
J
The
first
amendment
that
councilmember
fry
offered,
with
apologies,
it
seems
that
we
may
have
a
Scrivener
Aaron
I
wanted
to
clarify
the
council.
Member
did
clarify
for
us
that
on
subsection
C
number
five,
it
should
be
$13.50
right
on
number
six.
It
says
$14
but
indicates
1450
in
numerals,
and
so
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
what
the
actual
action
should
be,
that
we
record
in
the
record.
C
F
You,
madam
chair
I,
would
like
to
move
the
motion
by
councilmember
rights
myself
and
Gordon,
and
this
is
regarding
the
language
around
youth
wages
and
it
there
should
be
a
copy
in
front
of
everyone
and
I
defer
to
councilmember
Reich.
If
you
wanted
to
comment
first
and
then
I
could
add
myself
after
that,.
K
Thank
you,
madam
chair
and
Thank
You
councillor
bender
yeah.
This
is
sort
of
reflection
on
some
of
the
input
and
testimony
that
we
had
on
our
hearings.
It's
also
a
reflection
of
direct
constituent
feedback
from
the
youth
themselves.
I
had
a
few
classrooms
that
dedicated
three
two
to
three
months
on
what
this
meant
to
them.
As
the
youth
that
are
implicated
in
this
policy,
they
did
the
research
three
months
worth
they
made.
The
case
was
quite
articulate
and
recognizing
that,
when
they
are
employed,
they're
employed
in
a
serious
manner-
and
this
reflects
that
notion.
A
F
I
know
in
our
city
that
have
a
job
shortage.
Essentially,
they
are
looking
for
more
trained
workers,
so
we
want
to
make
sure
we're
supportive
of
the
training
programs
that
our
employers
offer,
but
this
also
just
is
making
clear
that
we
don't
mean
to
exclude
people
of
a
certain
age
from
the
minimum
wage
just
because
of
their
age
when
they're
working
the
same
job
as
an
adult
of
an
you
know
of
a
different
age
right.
So
that's
what
the
details
here
articulate
thank
senator
councilmember.
L
Goodman,
thank
you.
Ma'am
chair
philosophically
I
agree
with
councilmember
benders
point
with
regard
to
youth
workers,
but
I
have
I
can't
imagine
the
last
sentences.
Legal
and
I
cannot
imagine
how
we
would
enforce
that
I'm
interested
in
the
City
Attorney's
opinion
about
this.
That
sounds
good,
but
are
we
going
to
have
people
claiming
discrimination
they're
going
to
come
to
the
city
every
time
somebody
potentially
could
be
replaced,
maybe
for
a
reason
that
would
be
a
different
worker.
A
L
When
I
see
it
I'm
super
interested
in
how
the
city
attorney
would
be
enforcing,
no
employer
can
do
this,
I
mean
essentially,
what
we're
saying
is
you
can't
hire
and
fire
it?
Well,
you
will
have
all
these
discrimination
complaints.
Isn't
this
potentially
a
concern
about
taking
down
the
entire
ordinance
in
terms
of
putting
this
kind
of
language
and
making
promises?
We
can't
keep.
I
L
I
just
feel
like
this
leaves
us
open
for
anyone
who
doesn't
like
the
whole
ordinance
to
come
in
and
I,
don't
understand
how
this
would
work
at
all,
and
also
would
this
fall
under
a
private
cause
of
action,
or
is
the
city
actually
going
to
be
the
legal
entity
enforcing
this?
Does
that
just
start
a
whole
bunch
of
litigation
I
mean
we've
already
been
sued
by
the
chamber?
Is
this
just
basically
saying
to
the
chamber
and
everybody
else:
here's
a
part
that
potentially
could
have
a
legal
problem.
I
Madam
chair
and
councilmember
Goodman
of
my
wonderful
civil,
deputy
or
Nelson
just
refreshed
my
memory
on
that.
In
fact,
this
language
is
taken
straight
out
of
the
state
wage,
our
law,
and
so
it's
been
in
state
statute
for
a
while.
That's
where
that
language
came
from.
In
addition,
the
current
draft
of
the
ordinance
does
contain
a
private
right
of
action.
So
so
not
all
the
burden
would
fall
on
the
city
to
try
to
enforce
that
okay,
but
yeah,
so
it
would
be
a
basis
for
a
complaint
coming
to
the
civil
rights
department.
F
M
Person
in
this
reduced
wage
for
60
days
and
displace
someone
who
mean
that's
the
challenge-
displace
someone
to
take
advantage
of
the
training
wage
for
60
days,
but
I
actually
I'm
not
going
to
support
this
today,
because
I
do
think
this.
Does
it
provide
a
challenge
for
I'm
just
going
to
mention
the
cookie
cart
in
North
Minneapolis,
where
children
receive
a
children
work
longer
than
60
days,
and
it's
a
training
wage,
but
again
they
will
be
forced
to
serve
fewer
children.
M
N
Thank
you,
madam
chair
I
had
a
question
I.
Think
again.
This
may
have
to
go
to
the
city
attorney
for
a
response,
but
I
was
just
interested
in
the
question
of
the
age
of
20
versus
18.
One
of
the
reasons
I
believe
it
was
20
that
we
included
in
the
original
ordinance
language
had
something
to
do
with
state
law
and
I
wondered
if
we
were
introducing
another
interest
area
to
how
to
defend
that
should
a
suit
arise
and
although
I
certainly
appreciate
what
the
authors
are
trying
to
accomplish
here.
I
N
B
You,
madam
chair
I,
agree
with
the
intent
of
this
something
we
heard
testimony
of
college-age
students
that
are
worried
about
getting
paid
less
and
having
trouble
making
their
bills,
and
you
know
if
you're
doing
equal
work
as
adults.
You
should
be
paid
the
same.
It
shouldn't
be
you
getting
less
just
because
of
your
age,
so
I
can
support
that
concept
in
here.
B
That
are
really
there
to
help
those
kids
get
their
feet
wet
in
the
workplace
because
they
had
that
opportunity
themselves
and
they
want
to
give
them
that
taste
of
the
work
environment
and
get
a
chance
to
have
some
of
those
workplace
responsibilities.
So
I
think
there's
more.
We
can
do
around
that.
I
want
to
acknowledge
that.
But
I
also
believe
that
if
you
are
doing
the
same
work
as
other
employees
at
a
job
site
that
you're
paid
the
same
wage.
O
You,
madam
chair,
there's
a
lot
of
concerns.
I
share
with
those
that
have
already
spoken.
Another
piece
of
this
puzzle
are
organizations
that
are
training
programs
themselves,
like
better
futures,
for
example.
I
would
suspect,
though,
I
don't
know
for
sure
that
this
could
significantly
impact
organizations
like
better
futures
I
know,
they've
had
a
lot
of
concerns
with
the
minimum
wage
proposal
as
a
whole.
O
Also
I,
just
I
greatly
worry
about
keeping
the
structure
less
confusing
to
me,
make
keeping
the
structures
as
close
to
the
state
law
as
possible
and
not
making
little
changes
within
those
same
structure.
Segments
to
me.
This
is
about
compliance.
I,
think
we'll
have
more
compliance
if
we
keep
it
simple,
but
also
to
me
this
is
about
being
able
to
spread
this
and
making
making
Minneapolis
a
catalyst
instead
of
an
island
and
so
I.
Don't
know
that
I
can
support
this.
For
those
reasons,
Thank
You
councilmember.
K
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
not
a
legal
opinion,
but
layman's
observation.
We
already
are
significantly
deviating
from
state
policy
by
every
action
we're
taking
today
and
so
within
that
context,
I
think
the
small
thing,
if
there's
adjustments
to
make
sure
there
aren't
unintended
consequences
for
programs
that
have
a
special,
unique
situation
that
are
serving
youth
in
a
unique
in
a
definable
way.
Certainly
we
can
work
on
that
between
now
and
then,
but
in
terms
of
the
broader
question
of
deviation
from
state
policy.
That's
what
we're
doing
here
today
on
the
whole.
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
While
what
I'm
about
to
point
out
does
not
tackle
all
of
the
legal
concerns
that
have
been
addressed,
I
will
say
that
there
is
presently
state
statute
that
says
you
can
pay
less
than
the
minimum
wage
if
you're,
a
non-profit
with
the
career
leadership
track,
and
that's
predominantly
for
1415
year
olds,
so
I
would
there
is
probably
some
form
of
preemption
in
that
law
that
would
tackle
the
concerns
regarding
nonprofit
treatment.
C
A
I
put
myself
into
here
and
there's
pieces
of
this
that
I
support
that
there
are
some
other
pieces
that
I
have
questions
about.
I
will
say
I
not
that
I
have
to
know,
but
I
didn't
know
that
this
particular
motion
was
coming
forward
and
so
I
met.
I,
don't
think
I
can
support
this
today.
I'll
say
specifically
I
support,
something
that
would
reduce
the
age
of
who
can
be
an
employment
training
program.
A
A
Is
it
worth
it
to
create
any
employment
training
programs,
if
you
can
only
offer
them
for
60
days,
so
these
are
sort
of
like
in
the
weeds
questions
that
I
just
feel
like
I
need
some
some
help,
understanding
and
so
I'm
not
able
to
support
this
as
specific
as
it
is
today,
I
kind
of
wish.
This
was
something
that
was
coming
back
to
us,
so
we
could
hear
a
little
bit
more
feedback
from
more
stakeholders
and
from
our
own
staff
and
something
that
that's
very
important
clearly
to
a
lot
of
stakeholders.
E
E
When
we
went
into
this,
it
was
all
to
give
somebody
a
chance
to
get
their
first
job
to
get
some
training
so
that
there
was
some
time
and
that
the
employers
would
be
more
likely
to
give
them
a
chance,
because
they
could
start
them
at
a
wage.
The
training
wage
and
then
give
them
more
orientation,
have
them
work
with
the
master
craftsmen
or
wherever
it
was
so
that
they
could
learn
to
do
that
and
I
am
definitely
supportive
of
this.
Also
be
supportive
of
tweaks
and
changes
of
it.
E
I
think
we
can
come
up
with
alternatives.
Maybe
we
can
even
come
up
with
an
alternative
if
this
doesn't
pass
now
we
can
come
back
on
Friday
and
look
at
other
considerations,
but
I
think
this
could
pass
now
and
then
we
could
also
make
changes
to
it
on
Friday.
If
we
wanted
to
originally
it
was
90
days
that
made
some
sense.
It
might
be
really
clear
to
us.
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair
I'll,
just
note
if
this
doesn't
pass,
I
have
a
couple
of
alternatives:
I
have
a
couple
of
motions:
I'll
bring
next
that
also
deal
with
these
wages
and
I
think
they
take
kind
of
a
smaller
piece,
and
then
one
gives
us
a
bit
more
time
would
give
us
three
more
months
to
ask
our
staff
to
develop
a
recommendation.
We
did
that
with
one
piece
of
there
is
even
sick
time
where
we
didn't
quite
get
all
the
details
worked
out.
So
I
would
offer
that
again.
If
this
one
doesn't
pass.
A
P
F
A
L
Q
F
G
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
so
I
have
two
motions:
I'm
passing
out
the
first
one
as
I
just
subscribed.
This
is
something
it
works
on
actually
with
Calculon,
recording
and
Reich.
It
takes
this
Keith
that
was
in
the
emotion
and
we
just
vote
on,
but
this
is
very
narrowly
just
saying
that
the
existing
treatment
of
youth
workers
is
specific
to
youth
training
program.
So
we
do
not
mean
any
job
that
a
youth
happens
to
have
like
at
McDonald's
or
the
grocery
store.
F
If
a
use
of
a
certain
age
is
doing
a
regular
job,
this
would
clarify
that
they
should
earn
the
wage
that
everyone
else
does,
but
it
specifically
says
that
for
training
programs
we
would
expect
we
would
accommodate
this
lower
youth
training
wage
and
everything
else
is
consistent
with
the
state
law,
including
the
age.
It
has
the
original
90
date
portion,
so
I
moved.
A
It's
always
right
when
you
feel
the
pressure
of
the
moment.
The
technology
failed
you.
So
we
have
other
ways
to
do
this,
but
it
just
helps
people
turn
a
line
up
in
queue
and
that
we
don't
call
people
out
of
order,
and
this
actually
is
you
can
take
away.
This
met
amendment
the
First
Amendment,
because
it's
not
a
Second
Amendment
looks
like
we're
having
to
some
technology
difficulties.
A
E
You
very
much
I
I
I
support
this
motion.
I
think
this
is
actually
a
nice
callback
to
what
this
did
didn't
pass.
This
still
articulates
clearly
that
we
want
to
focus
are
the
exemptions
to
those
organizations
that
are
in
a
city
approved,
training
or
apprenticeship
program.
It
also
stipulates
that
that
criteria
will
be
developed
by
cpad,
but
also
go
through
our
city's
Workforce
Investment
Board,
which
is
the
group
that
does
approve
all
the
workforce
development
programs
and
and
supports
their
work
moving
people
forward.
I
think
it
does
anything.
E
It
still
includes,
of
course,
that
last
sentence,
a
councilmember
Goodman,
had
issues
with
the
vets
in
the
original
ordinance
and
I.
Don't
think
it
creates
a
problem
again.
I
think
this
is
a
great
way
to
address
the
concerns
that
were
raised
by
people.
Many
of
them.
It
still
goes
up
to
20
year
olds,
so
that
would
allow
20
year
olds
also
to
be
hired
under
this
provision
if
they
were
part
of
a
city,
approved,
training
or
apprenticeship
program.
L
You,
madam
chair,
I,
really
appreciate
this
approach
by
councilmember
bender.
This
is
something
we
know.
We
do
you
some
point
at
the
city.
It's
a
massive
budget
item
within
cpad.
We
spend
millions
on
youth,
employment
and
many
of
you
saw
the
email
that
just
came
forward
where
we
just
lost
a
half,
a
million
dollars
from
the
federal
government
for
our
youth,
employment
programs
from
state
prep
and
so
and
that's
over
a
two-year
period.
These
programs
that
have
been
so
good
at
helping
youth
find
career
pathways
to
employment
are
already
being
eliminated
I.
L
So
this
is
an
area
we
know
so
I
in
particular
support
the
staff
direction
by
councilmember
bender
to
have
a
broader
group
of
people
who
work
in
this
area.
Look
at
how
how
this
can
be
accounted
for
and
returned
with
recommendations.
This.
This
is
something
that
we
do
and
I
think
the
intent
is.
There
I
appreciate
councilmember
vendors
nuance.
A
M
Manager
and
I'll
support
this
I
do
think
it
is
important
to
recognize
that
you
know
there
is
a
season
that
young
people
are
looking
for
for
work
and
this
ability
to
use
their
summer
time
and
it
you
know
it
is.
It
is
90
days
almost
90
days
that
they're
available
for
as
councilman
Gordon
said
their
first
first
job.
We
want
to
incentivize
people
to
hire
them
to
get
them
into
these
training
programs
and
I,
really
like
the
staff
direction.
M
I
have
to
say
councilmember
vender
about
having
us
look
at
these
programs
and
understand
them
more
fully
about
you
know,
perhaps
how
long
people
have
in
their
program
young
people
in
their
program
that
kind
of
thing
and
also
recognize
councilman
Gordon's
concern
that
you
wouldn't
want
someone
to
be
in
the
same
place
three
years
in
a
role
or
something
like
that.
So
I
think
this
gives
us
some
chance
in
time
to
understand
where
we're
coming
from.
M
In
this
council
member
Goodman
said
we
have
these
young
people
that
are
involved
in
step
up
our
park
board
hires
around
five
hundred
people,
young
people
every
year,
usually
young
people,
not
all
young
people,
that
their
the
playground
supervisors
there.
The
the
people
that
help
you
know,
get
the
meals
out
at
parks
in
the
summer,
and
it's
great
employment
for
young
people
and
it's
I,
don't
think
we
want
to
disadvantage
that
in
any
way.
M
C
I
C
My
concern
is
with
that
final
sentence,
then
eliminating
the
ability
to
get
it
done
and
get
the
result
because
of
a
legal
concern
that
I'm
not
aware
of
yet
so
councilmember
bender
I,
don't
know
if
you
would
be
interested
in
making
this
a
separable
clause
so
that
it,
the
remaining
portion
of
your
amendment,
retains
its
force
and
legality.
Even
if
that
final
sentence
is
determined
to
be
not
legal.
F
A
N
A
F
You,
madam
chair,
this
is
a
satisfaction
that
many
council
members
are
referenced,
but
this
says
that
the
city
recognizes
that
many
employers
in
Minneapolis
have
youth
training
programs
that
provide
valuable,
valuable
opportunities
for
youth
workers
and
also
recognizes
that
many
youth
work
in
regular
jobs
for
income
needed
by
their
families,
and
so
it
directs
our
staff
to
bring
back
some
recommendations
about
how
we
can
meet
both
of
those
goals.
And
it
gives
the
timeline
through
September
2017.
A
B
O
O
This
motion
is
cognizant
of
the
fact
that
we're
looking
to
move
a
minimum
wage
starting
January
1st
next
year
for
for
some
employers
in
our
city-
and
it
recognizes
the
need
to
do
this
very
carefully
and
to
take
a
baseline
from
the
aspect
that
we
want
some
kind
of
longitudinal
study.
They
need
to
start
that
work
is
really
right
now.
O
So
what
this
motion
does
the
acts
for
finance
to
help
us
find
that
small
amount
of
money
to
do
the
baseline,
pre
work
study
for
this
large
business
change,
effective,
January
1st
that
we
can
do
that
right
away?
It
also
says
the
study
should
be
external.
The
coordinator
has
already
been:
has
some
things
I
have
forwarded
to
in
your
email?
So
it's
not
ready
for
prime
time
some
of
the
thoughts
on
what
a
minimum
wage
study
would
look
like
that.
That's
more
of
a
draft!
O
A
F
O
Would
would
defer
to
staff
on
what
they're
thinking
of
with
this
portion
of
the
study?
Do
you
think
it
already?
It
resorts,
and
it
looks
at
businesses
in
different
categories,
the
ones
that
we've
outlined
in
the
ways
that
we
have
categorized
them
as
small
and
large
business.
It
does
work
with
implementation
schedule
that
we've
put
forward
now
in
ordinance,
I
would
defer
to
an
area.
It
seems
like
she's
moving
so.
A
I
think
that
our
deputy
city
coordinator
is
here
but
I
just
want
to
say,
I
think
just
maybe
as
a
clarification.
This
is
a
this
is
in
response
to
the
recommendation
that
was
in
the
staff
report
to
us
for
conducting
a
regular
evaluation,
which
may
be
a
different
type
of
report
regarding
market
conditions
than
happen
to
evaluate
potential
minimum
wage
increases
for
the
correct.
R
R
R
We
have
sent
you
emails
about
the
plethora
of
studies
that
we
have
accumulated
in
the
research
topic,
but
we
do-
and
we
have
already
anticipated
doing
that
this
year
and
for
next
year,
as
well,
continuing
to
gather
data
on
our
region
on
our
specific
industry
to
make
sure
that
we
are
conscious
of
what
that
looks
for
moving
forward.
I
know
that
there's
an
interest
to
to
make
sure
that
we
do
this
in
the
future,
in
advance
of
increases
to
future
phase
and
for
minimum
wages
so
having
the
baseline
study.
A
E
Just
appreciate
this
coming
forward,
I
think
it's
critical
that
we
do
a
study
and
we
get
the
baseline
information
as
soon
as
possible,
and
so
I
am
very
supportive
of
this
I
think
make
sense
in
lines
up
with
everything
else.
We've
directed
staff
to
do
and
to
work
on
and
I
know
that
they're
already
they
teed
up
what
the
study
would
include
in
that
already
so
I
think
we're
on
our
way
to
getting
RFP
done
in
plenty
of
time.
A
I
K
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
sort
of
as
a
companion
piece
to
have
a
staff
direction
embedding
this
further
into
the
ordinance
itself,
similar
language
with
similar
intent,
and
it's
before
you
recluse
to
amend
section,
44
50,
so
the
ordinance
basically
stating
that
we
will
be
doing
a
study
and
it's
part
of
the
mechanics
of
the
ordinance
moving
forward.
Okay,.
A
J
C
B
Madam
chair
come
on
break
and
I,
bring
forward
a
staff
direction,
directing
seedbed
staff
to
prepare
recommendations
for
creating
an
ongoing
matching
grant
program
to
help
qualifying
restaurants
and
small
businesses
pay
the
cost
of
sewer
access
charges
and
a
DA
compliance
facility,
improvement
staff
or
port
back
to
the
CDRs
committee,
with
recommendations
no
later
than
the
end
of
July,
2017
like
to
speak
to
the
staff
direction
as
well.
So
we
have
a
lot
of
great
work
happening
by
the
small
business
office
and
I
look
forward
to
presentation
before
the
City
Council
on
that
work.
B
That's
coming
up
a
lot
of
great
supports
that
are
really
necessary
for
our
small
businesses.
These
two
particular
items
taxis
in
a
DEA.
Compliance
are
big
expenses
that
businesses
space,
they
can
oftentimes,
be
a
hurdle
for
opening
up.
They
can
be
a
hurdle
for
expansion
and
they
can
also
be
the
straw
that
breaks
the
camel's
back
in
some
cases
as
well.
These
two
items
and
looking
at
a
matching
grant
program
was
not
in
scope,
something
not
in
scope
for
our
small
business
office
and
it's
not
part
of
the
work
that
they've
been
doing
thus
far.
B
But
this
is
a
huge
opportunity
to
step
up
and
help
out
our
small
businesses
and
provide
support
for
that
and
is
something
that
is
time-sensitive
as
well
with
the
upcoming
budget.
So
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we
have
any
recommendations
around
such
a
program
ahead
of
the
budget
so
that
we're
not
trying
to
take
away
from
other
departments
or
anything
like
that.
If
we
proceed
with
this
and
so
I
think
this
is
an
item
that
our
small
businesses
have
been
asking
for
and
it's
something
we
could
do
to
help
show
our
support.
F
Councilmember
bender.
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
well.
I
appreciate
that
intention
of
this,
but
I'm
not
going
to
support
this
council
member
Johnson
and
I
were
actually
working
with
some
folks
in
a
small
business
community,
along
with
our
coordinators
office
and
planning,
for
a
much
bigger
presentation
of
all
of
the
work
that
our
staff
is
doing
around
small
business
support,
and
that
includes
things
I
mentioned
earlier.
But
some
of
the
things
are
expanding.
Our
revolving
loan
program,
looking
at
how
we
provide
technical
assistance
and
I
think
many
of
them
may
actually
have
a
budget
component.
F
So
I
don't
feel
comfortable
today
with
no
kind
of
information
about
what
this
might
be
competing
with,
or
what
the
overall
strategy
that
our
staff
has
been
working
so
hard
on
with
their
small
business
team
that
tells
member
Johnson.
Actually,
that
was
a
response
to
a
motion,
a
staff
direction
that
he
had
made
and
I
know
they're
ready
to
come
to
committee
of
the
whole
at
any
time.
F
They
were
ready
to
go
in
May,
so
they
could
make
that
presentation
even
yet
at
the
next
Committee
of
the
Whole
meeting
and
give
us
a
chance
to
look
at
their
overall
recommendations.
The
changes
they're
planning
to
make
and
then
anything
that
might
have
a
budgetary
component
to
it
and
kind
of
consider
them
all
as
a
holistic
package.
Rather
than
just
taking
up
this
one
item
on
its
own.
K
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
sort
of
inspired
by
a
councillor,
Andrew
Johnson's
notion
that
we
should
start
now
sooner
than
later,
of
supporting
small
business
in
our
contemplations
around
that
and
with
our
studies
and
programming
and
additional
budget
items
and
program
support
them.
I
have
before
you
for
purposes
of
city
of
Minneapolis
wage
policy.
The
definition
of
a
micro
business
is
a
business
with
20
or
fewer
employees
and
that'll
be
an
important
marker.
A
All
right,
councilmember
right
and
let
me
just
make
sure
I'm
gonna,
put
myself
in
queue
I
feel
a
little
bit
confused
on.
Is
this
a
motion
to
amend
the
ordinance
just
because
I
don't
see
where
it
would
fall
within
the
ordinance
so
and
I
just
asked
that,
because
perhaps
you
meant
it
as
a
staff
direction
to
ask
for
feedback
from
staff
that
then
we
could
consider
incorporating
into
the
ordinance
and
based
on
your
answer.
I
have
some
some
feedback
on
this,
but
if
you
could
maybe
clarify
your
intention
first
in.
A
A
If
I
might
just
suggest
and
I
can
kind
of
take
a
look
at
this-
maybe
something
that's
a
little
bit
more
of
a
question
to
staff
to
respond
to
and
again
because
I
want
to
make
sure
I'm
understanding.
Your
intent-
and
this
is
just
my
being
in
queue
here.
I
will
say,
it'd,
be
helpful
to
me
to
understand
the
context
within
which
you're
you're
thinking
this.
This
might
be.
A
The
insert
with
this
information
might
be
used
and
I
just
say
that,
because
we
have
one
other
place
in
ordinance
where
we
have
defined
micro,
business,
I
believe
with
a
title
micro
business
and
that's
in
the
in
the
sick
leave
ordinance.
Maybe
we
didn't
use
that
exact
title,
because
I
have
to
actually
ask
I'm
not
sure
if
there
are
other
places
within
city
policies
and
an
ordinance
where
we
also
have
different
definitions
of
small
I'll,
say
when
I
know
when
we
were
looking
for
what
would
be
the
definition
not
of
micro
but
of
small.
A
How
do
we
then
see?
Are
there
programs
that
are
appropriate
to
serve
this
range
of
business
and
I'm?
Just
not
sure
if
this
part
of
the
question
I
would
just
say
to
staff
might
be
what
should
be
the
definition
based
on
what
your
intent
is
to
kind
of
get
back
and
I'm
sort
of
rambling
here?
But
that's
because
this
is
sort
of
a
big
big
topic.
I
know:
we've
also
looked
at
the
state
uses
markers
of.
What's
your
revenue
to
determine
small
versus
large
and
sometimes
number
of
employees
is
helpful,
sometimes
not
so
helpful.
K
K
A
F
Madam
chair
I
mean
I
just
would
say,
but
the
intention
is
to
exempt
to
all
employers
who
have
20
or
less
employees.
I
would
not
support
that
and
just
appointing
on
again
that
our
burn,
safe
and
sick
time
ordinance
even
went.
We
did
have
some
treatment
there,
where
it
was
unpaid
time,
but
that
was
in
part
because
of
the
logistics
of
a
small,
very
small
employer
needing
to
find
staff
to
cover
shift,
and
so
I
just
have
a
lot
of
concern
about
exempting
businesses
from
our
wage
laws
feel
like
I
should
throw
that
out
there.
F
M
N
Thank
you,
madam
chair
I,
just
I
wanted
to
add.
My
support
to
this
particular
motion.
I
know
is
important
to
one
of
the
small
healthcare
providers
in
my
ward,
and
we
talked
about
this
and
we
understand
the
reimbursement
rate
can
be
adjusted,
and
this
will
provide
a
little
extra
time
for
that
adjustment
to
happen,
as
they
probably
would
fall
under
the
category
of
a
small
business
anyway.
But
this
just
cards
that
out
and
make
sure
that
we're
treating
these
a
little
bit
differently.
Understanding
the
as
the
council
president
mentioned
the
jurisdiction.
L
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
So
this
is
a
very
personal
issue
to
me:
I
work
as
a
volunteer
in
a
nursing
home
in
North
Minneapolis
one
day
week
and
the
nursing
home
where
I
work.
Every
single
person
is
poor
and
they
rely
on
Medicare
and
Medicaid
to
pay
the
bills
for
everybody.
There's
not
a
single
person
paying
their
own
bills
at
this
nursing
home
and
when
the
cost
of
doing
business
at
this
nursing
home
goes
up
and
the
state
or
federal
government
don't
reimburse
for
that
cost.
L
The
nursing
home
needs
to
cut
something
and
I've,
unfortunately,
had
the
privilege
of
seeing
what
happens
when
there's
a
financial
crisis
in
a
nursing
home,
because
it
means
that
lights
are
on
longer,
because
the
poor
nurses,
who
are
there
can't
respond
as
fast
as
they
need
to
and
there's
also
issues
with
Believe
It
or
Not
food,
which
is
a
big
component
of
what
it
takes
to
run.
A
nursing
home.
So
I
see
it
on
a
daily
basis,
a
weekly
actually
basis
where
I
volunteer.
This
does
not
exempt
these
businesses.
L
It
gives
just
simply
gives
them
a
longer
phase-in
period
for
the
reimbursements
from
the
federal
government
to
catch
up.
Now
we
can
talk
about,
and
quite
frankly,
Simone
what's
happening
at
the
federal
level
as
it
pertains
to
health
care,
and
maybe
this
latest
disaster
will
lead
us
toward
the
single-payer
payer
healthcare
system
that
we
need,
but
until
that
time,
I
I
can't
knowing
what
I
know
working
where
I
do
as
a
volunteer.
L
I
just
can't
vote
for
something
that
I
think
in
the
end
will
result
in
less
care
for
people
in
in
a
nursing
home
or
in
a
home
with
people
with
developmental
disabilities.
So
this
does
not
get
them
out.
To
be
honest,
the
LT
ends
and
our
ends
and
people
who
work
in
these
nursing
homes
are
not
high
paid
and
they
do
really
super
hard
work
every
day
and
they
deserve
to
have
a
higher
wage.
L
I
do
not
I
think
that's
an
important
thing,
but
when
the
feds
and
the
state
don't
keep
up,
something
has
to
be
cut
somewhere
and
so
I
really
think
the
longer
phase-in
period
is
a
huge
deal
for
them.
I've
been
talking
about
this.
In
this
debate
from
the
very
beginning,
when
council
member
Gordon
came
to
me
yesterday
and
said
he
was
hearing
about
it,
too,
I
was
very
grateful
that
he
stepped
up
as
well
and
I.
F
You,
madam
chair
I,
also
have
a
senior
care
facility
and
my
warden
met
with
them
many
months
ago
and
my
understanding
is
actually
bit
different.
So
I
think
customers
are
making
important
points
about
the
stresses
on
these
facilities.
But
my
understanding
is
that
when
the
state
minimum
wage
increase
was
passed,
that
the
state
legislature
also
passed
a
change
to
how
the
reimbursement
rates
are
set
in
order
to
accommodate
that
minimum
wage
increase,
and
so
that
does
allow
for
the
reimbursement
rates
to
increase
as
wages
go
up.
So
I
don't
plan
to
support
the
motion.
F
Because
again,
my
understanding
is
that
that
issue
of
reimbursement
rates
is
not
really
an
issue
anymore.
Under
the
state
law
and
again
I
mean
we've.
We've
made
a
lot
of
compromises
to
move
out
the
amount
of
time
that
it
takes
for
employees
in
our
city
to
get
to
what
isn't
even
a
living
wage
and
so
I.
Just
from
my
perspective,
is
I.
Just
don't
want
to
have
more
employees
to
that
category
and
I
also
I'm,
just
not
actually
sure
that
it's
going
to
really
so
I
know.
F
I
just
wanted
knowledge
that
the
these
facilities
are
asking
for
this
change.
However,
when
I
talk
through
it
with
one
the
one
in
my
award,
it
actually
sounds
like
they're
paying
higher
than
the
state
minimum
wage
now
significantly
higher,
and
also
a
lot
of
them
are
offering
like
training,
programs,
English
language
programs,
nursing
training
programs
for
the
employees,
because
they're
having
a
lot
of
trouble
recruiting
and
retaining
employees.
So
anyway,
just
based
on
where
all
the
information
I've
collected
on
this
issue
I.
Just
that's.
Why
I
won't
support
that
motion.
C
A
So
come
summer,
fry
I
guess
I
would
ask
if
there
is
a
staff
member
who
would
answer
this
I'm
sure
you
know
this
is
not
a
meeting
for
public
comment.
I'm
sure
there
are
experts
out
there
that
that
we
can
ask-
or
you
yourself
can
ask
if
that
would
help
you
and
trying
to
understand
the
issue
between
today
and
Friday.
A
So
I
will
just
say:
I,
don't
know
if
any
of
our
staff
members
had
requested
information
on
this
pursuant
to
counselor
questions
that
they
feel
confident
and
sharing,
and
if
not,
then
we
should
probably
ask
those
questions
to
the
experts
who
feel
directly
in
this,
and
that
would
probably
happen
after
this
meeting
to
your
question.
Okay,
council
president
johnson,
thank.
M
I'm
sure,
actually
I
did
do
a
bit
of
work
on
this,
because
this
is
something
I've
been
concerned
about,
and
it
is.
It
is
the
case
that
the
reimbursements
have
been
changed
and
I
want
to
thank
Brian
Elliot
from
SEIU
for
educating
me
on
on
this
issue.
But
there
is
a
lag
time
because
your
your
reimbursements
are
based
on
what
you
extend
it,
and
so
there
time
lag
for
your
ability
to
get
that
new
higher
rate,
because
your
cost
have
gone
up,
but
I
also
think
and
I
am
I.
Think
people
are.
M
M
Reimbursement
rate
that
is
tagged
to
what
their
costs
are,
they've
asked
for
it,
they
haven't,
got
it
yet,
and
so
I
think
this
is
just
a
really
challenging
area
for
us
and
as
a
city,
you
know
we
are
the
home
to
a
lot
of
these
facilities,
and
these
are
people,
if
you,
you
know,
even
even
at
receiving
these,
these
rates
that
they
get
from
Medicare
and
Medicaid.
Most
of
these
facilities
also
have
to
raise
private
funds
to
even
come
up
with
the.
M
Standard
of
care,
that
is,
that
is
a
reasonable
standard
of
care
for
their
for
their
patients,
and
so
I
would
say
yes,
nurses
in
LPNs
in
in
these
facilities,
probably
do
make
more.
Perhaps
the
the
nursing
assistants
also
make
more
than
what
we
are
requiring
in
this
minimum
wage,
but
there
are
also
people
in
those
facilities
that
don't
meet
our
criteria
or
right
now
minimum
wage
standards.
So,
aside
from
the
state
minimum
wage
standards,
they
will
not
meet
our
new
wage
standards.
So
that's
that's.
Why
I'm
putting
this
forward
today?
M
The
one
thing
I
want
to
say
about
this
whole
health
care
discussion.
That's
going
on
is
I
think
that
it
has
opened
people's
eyes
as
to
the
challenges
that
are
in
place
in
the
healthcare
industry.
I
mean
to
hear
the
statistic
in
Minnesota,
half
of
the
people
in
nursing
homes
are
there.
They're
paid
for
by
Medicaid
and
Medicaid
has
Minnesota
has
a
unique
requirement
in
that
they
can't
charge
any
more
to
a
person
who
is
on
Medicaid
Suzy,
who
is
a
private
paid,
then
on
Medicaid,
and
so
it
is
a
limiting
factor
for
those
facilities.
M
A
A
A
And,
additionally,
honestly,
you
know
stories
of
businesses
that
may
not
have
that
model,
but
our
small
margin,
businesses
that
also
put
a
lot
of
heart
and
soul
and
trying
to
figure
this
out
so
I
just
feel
like
it
creates
a
little
bit
of
a
winners
and
losers
situation
and
I'm,
not
supportive
of
that
for
the
structure
of
the
ordinance
I'm.
Not
seeing
further
discussion
on
this
motion
so
o
come
from
the
FRA.
C
A
K
Thank
You
Madame
chair
before
you
have
a
motion.
It's
basically
in
addition
to
what's
already
in
the
ordinance
of
Corey
380,
and
it
basically
includes
and
it's
ABC
was
in
and
he
is
the
addition
and
it
basically
it
as
ex-offender
transition
or
Employment
Program
shall
be
considered
small
businesses,
and
let
me
speak
to
that.
Please.
K
You
I
have
several
what
are
called
social
enterprises
in
my
ward
and
they
basically
provide
a
set
of
time
frame
work.
They
have
counseling
and
other
services
that
gets
them
ready
to
do
the
work
that
they
have
in-house
and,
of
course,
that's
not
permanent
work.
That's
to
get
them
out
mainstreamed
into
the
employment.
A
P
A
A
We
do
traditionally
at
the
committee
of
the
whole,
as
committee
chairs,
to
make
reports
I'll
kind
of
look
to
committee
chairs
to
see
if
you
would
like
to
go
through
that
process
to
highlight
important
items
on
your
agendas.
Okay,
so
we
will
then
turn
it
out.
If
folks
would
like
to
leave
we'll
give
a
moment
for
you
to
go
ahead.
L
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
The
community
development
of
regulatory
services
committee
is
bringing
forward
17
items
for
our
approval
on
Friday.
I
will
note,
perhaps
one
of
the
city's
longest
standing
goals
of
purchasing
the
land
surrounding
the
Kmart
to
be
able
to
eventually
reopen
Kmart
at
Lake.
Street
is
on
this
agenda
and
I
would
argue
that,
in
addition
to
the
sentiment
wage
proposal,
that's
a
pretty
major
item
and
should
not
go
unnoticed
on
Friday.
L
In
addition
to
that,
there's
a
report
on
our
agenda
on
item
number
15,
which
is
some
grant
agreements
that
we're
moving
forward
with
with
regard
to
our
business
technical
assistance
program,
called
B,
tab
and
I,
would
urge
folks
interested
in
small
business
issues
to
read
this
report.
This
report
talks
about
how
we
are
working
with
a
variety
of
partners
in
the
community
development
community
in
order
to
help
immigrant
and
minority
businesses
startup
businesses,
it's
a
technical
assistance
program.
L
That's
had
incredible
results,
including
employing
hundreds
and
helping
more
than
a
dozen
people
start
and
open
businesses
in
the
city.
So
it's
it's
an
important
report.
I
think
those
of
you
who
question
whether
or
not
we're
doing
work
in
this
area
as
it
pertains
to
equity
will
be
very,
very
surprised
with
regard
to
the
results,
and
so
I
would
urge
folks
to
read
that
report.
I
also
want
to
know
we're
moving
forward
with
our
year:
2018
locum
housing,
tax,
credit,
qap
procedure
and
manual.
L
This
is
the
point
at
which
we're
requiring
developers
to
extend
their
affordability
period
in
order
to
rank
high
enough
to
get
these
tax
credits.
This
is
also
a
very
important
piece
of
work
that
a
lot
of
us
have
been
working
on,
in
particular,
councilmembers,
Reich
and
Quincy
and
I
with
regard
to
making
sure
that
those
that
use
our
bonding
authority
in
a
competitive
environment
are
required
to
have
affordability
longer
than
15
years.
A
E
A
K
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
Most
items
would
be
considered
routine
actions
of
the
department
and
their
activities,
though
number
item
11,
is
a
routine
of
the
nature
of
it
being
the
ESPN
X
Games,
proving
that
application
for
a
large
black
event
was
a
little
bit
different
and
kind
of
exciting,
and
then
we
did
have
by
way
of
a
report
and
discussion
item
16
of
our
16
items
with
the
Complete
Streets
policy,
update
I
think
was
a
pretty
good
set
of
data
before
us
and
a
great
conversation
that
was
had
a
committee
of
staffer
questions.
Thank.
N
N
We
also
have
a
new
appointed
position
in
the
Health
Department
for
the
director
of
environmental
programs
and
I
also
wanted
to
highlight
number
eight,
which
is
responses
to
staff
directions
on
banking
services
as
part
of
the
17
budget.
Adoption
happy
to
answer
any
questions
on
those
eight
items
all.
A
A
P
Thank
you.
Madam
chair
I
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
speak
in
committee
and
members
of
the
committee.
There
was
there's
a
postponed
item
and
I
have
been
able
to
have
conversations
with
members
of
the
community.
They
have
also
been
communicating
with
everyone
here
that
the
preference
of
the
lillith
community
would
be
to
remain
with
the
original
decisions
made
by
the
community
and
that
has
been
detailed
to
us.
In
a
letter
from
the
little
earth
resident
association,
the
mud
group
actually
passed
a
resolution
last
night
that
we
should
be
hearing.
P
There
are
some
children
who
put
a
petition
together
that
we
should
be
getting
as
well
today
or
tomorrow,
and
so
in
that
spirit,
there
is
a
motion
which
I
can't
make,
but
we'll
pass
around
that
has
and
I
know.
I've
had
an
opportunity
to
talk
to
some
council
members
and
a
councilmember
Cano,
and
because
there's
one
group
that
has
withdrawn
there's
another
group
that
has
said
they
might
withdraw,
but
that
is
an
ongoing
conversation
in
the
community.
So
there
is
a
motion
that
has
been
agreed
upon.
That
basically
says:
let's
stick
with
the
original
allotments.
P
There
is
a
group
that
has
pulled
out
if
there
are
any
others
that
nasty
has
agreed
to
step
in
as
the
of
the
fiscal
agent
of
a
neutral
intermediary
to
put
a
process
together
where
the
community
can
decide
how
to
redistribute
those
funds,
and
so
that
is
what
the
conversation
with
the
community
has
been.
I
think
it
is
an
elegant
solution
to
the
situation
in
which
we
have
found
ourselves
and
gives
opportunity,
for
example,
for
any
groups
that
didn't
feel
like
they
got
enough
time
to
get
some
more
time
through
maxi's
work.
D
You,
madam
chair
mayor
Hodges,
you
did
not
inform
me
that
you
were
doing
this
today.
Some
really
trust
that
this
is
coming
forward
in
this
way,
especially
because
I've
followed
the
spirit
of
our
vote
last
week
in
working
with
you
every
step
of
the
way
to
try
to
figure
out
what
resolution
we
could
bring
forward
on.
Friday
I've
had
the
opportunity
to
only
speak
to
a
couple
of
council
members
here,
because
most
of
us
have
been
busy
dealing
with
the
minimum
wage
compensation,
so
I'm
not
ready
to
bring
this
forward.
D
So
I
can't
support
this
the
way
it
is
right
now,
specifically,
because
I
am
also
in
conversations
with
some
of
the
people
projects
who
are
on
this
very
piece
of
paper,
so
I'm,
just
yeah
I'm,
just
like
really
shocked
that
this
is
being
brought
forward
in
this
way
and
I'm
disappointed
that
you
did
not
talk
to
me
about
doing
this.
So
I
would
urge
my
colleagues
to
not
consider
this
and
wait
until
I
bring
something
forward
on
Friday
that
has
been
vetted
by
both
the
mayor's
office,
the
council
and
the
community.
Any.
P
On
the
other
hand,
it
wasn't
necessarily
an
intention
to
have
this
move
today,
but
to
have
this
in
front
of
people,
because
I
know
that
things
that
are
brought
at
the
last
minute
are
often
not
kindly
looked
upon
and
to
let
signal
to
folks
that
these
conversations
have
been
happening
and
not
the
situation
was
being
Candles,
and
so
that
was
the
my
understanding
was.
That
was
a
tone
and
tenor
of
the
conversation
we
had
yesterday.