►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
C
C
E
B
F
G
C
C
D
C
Council
member
palmisano
has
moved
the
committee
report
for
this
item.
We
do
amendments
that
have
been
offered
in
a
packet
which
is
available
on
the
lym
system
and
was
emailed
by
the
clerk
to
the
council
numbers
similar
to
our
budget
meeting.
The
clerk
has
helped
to
arrange
these
items,
so
the
first
is
by
council
member
fletcher
I'll
just
recognize
the
council
members
to
present
their
amendments
tonight.
I
think.
H
Thank
you,
council
president.
This
motion
is
intended
as
a
technical
amendment.
This
is
following
up
on
an
item
that
we
passed
with
slightly
different
language
on
monday
and
after
conferring
with
finance
staff
and
legal
staff.
Here
at
the
city,
people
suggested
a
better
and
clearer
way
of
presenting
the
information
in
a
way
that
would
allow
us
to
better
communicate
to
people
what
we're
actually
funding.
H
As
we've
discussed,
there
was
a
bit
of
a
disconnect
between
knowing
that
we
were
funding
fewer
than
888
officers,
but
we
had
888
as
our
authorized
sworn
number
authorized.
Sworn
has
been
kind
of
a
moving
target.
We
talked
about
how
hard
it
was,
even
within
the
context
of
the
conversation
on
monday
to
know
which
numbers
we're
talking
about
which
officers
were
included.
Do
they
count
when
they're
in
field
training?
H
The
idea
here
is
to
describe
what
we're
actually
funding
in
the
2021
budget,
which
turns
out
to
be
748
positions.
So
knowing
that
it's
748
ftes
for
active
duty
officers,
my
approach
on
monday
had
been
to
just
say:
we
should
set
the
number
to
something
more
realistic
to
that
to
represent
what's
happening
in
reality.
So
the
mayor's
budget
had
said
888.
H
I
said:
let's
set
it
to
750
and
we
voted
on
that
in
the
past.
What
we're
proposing
instead
is
to
actually
reflect
and
refer
to
this
in
the
budget
by
what
we're
actually
funding,
and
so
that's
what
will
be
reflected
in
schedule.
Five,
as
the
number
of
ftes
that
are
reflected,
and
so
what
we're
effectively
doing
is
we
are
removing,
and
this
has
been
discussed
as
removing
police,
but
it
is
in
fact,
removing
positions
that
are
being
held
vacant.
H
So
it
is
removing
non-people
people
who
do
not
exist
in
the
city,
removing
those
positions
from
the
accounting,
and
if
we
decide
that
we
want
more
police
in
2022,
we
can
have
that
discussion
in
the
2022
budget.
So
that's
the
the
change
that
I'm
proposing
after
consulting
with
staff.
I
think
that
it's
a
much
cleaner
way
of
describing
the
same
thing
I'll
note
that
this
does
not
change
the
number
of
officers
either
from
what
we
authorized
in
the
safety
for
all
budget
that
was
passed
on
monday
or
from
the
mayor's
budget.
E
E
C
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
Thank
you
councilmember,
gordon,
I'm
just
trying
to
rearrange
some
papers
here.
I
want
to
preserve
flexibility
and
there's
a
motion
after
this
that
I'll
be
bringing
forward
that
I
think,
accomplishes
the
same
technical
pieces
of
this,
and
I
appreciate
council,
member
fletcher
and
his
office's
help
in
looking
at
that
today.
But
to
me
the
amendment
that
I
will
be
bringing
forward
next
does
restore
that
sworn
authority,
and
so
I
will
not
be.
D
I
Thank
you.
Madam
president.
I
just
wanted
to
speak
briefly
to
this
and
clarify
some
things,
because
it
seems
that
there
was
there
seems
to
be
some
misunderstanding
among
some
residents
after
listening
to
the
public
hearing
that
changing
the
number
of
officers
with
this
amendment
means
that
there
will
be
fewer
officers
next
year
in
actuality,
the
councils
and
the
mayor's
budgets
have
the
exact
same
number
of
officers
for
2021..
I
The
difference
is
that
the
amendment
brought
forward,
including
the
amendment
technical
amendment
today
brought
forward
by
council
member
fletcher,
is
based
on
what
we
can
realistically
expect
for
the
near
future,
with
current
staffing
levels
projected
attrition
and
pacing
of
bringing
on
new
officers
where
the
mayor's
budget
would
needlessly
waste
a
pot
of
money
that
we
could
put
towards
good
use
elsewhere.
It
doesn't
make
sense
to
keep
that
additional
money
in
for
mpd
when
we
won't
actually
have
the
officers
to
achieve
that
number
of
888.
I
We
can
use
that
money
in
places
to
help
address
budget
shortfalls
or
invest
in
our
communities.
We
heard
tonight
that
that
is
what
so
many
residents
want
us
to
do
in
the
meantime.
If
the
staffing
study
does
come
back
and
they
determine
it
that
we
need
more
officers,
then
we
can
have
a
discussion
at
that
time.
I
The
mayor
has
the
ability
to
bring
that
forward
in
his
2022
budget
proposal
as
of
right
now,
given
what
we
know
about
the
actual
limitations
and
our
ability
to
bring
on
more
officers
within
the
time
constraints,
it's
a
waste
of
taxpayer
dollars
and
a
detriment
really
to
the
safety
of
minneapolis
residents.
If
we
don't
use
that
money
actively
to
keep
our
community
safer,
good
governance
requires
us
to
be
nimble
and
responsible
with
taxpayer
dollars.
I
I
If
this
is
what
we
passed
today,
you
know,
so
I
just
have
to
wonder:
do
they
realize
that
that
means
that
it
impacts
their
streets
being
plowed
or
their
streets
being
repaired,
or
the
impacts
that
that
has
on
black
and
brown
business
owners?
Who
won't
then
be
able
to
access
capital
from
through
the
city
to
be
able
to
become
business
owners?
I
I'll
just
say
that
I
ran
for
and
was
elected
to
office
on
a
platform
of
solving
the
rule
cause
of
violence.
Not
only
that,
but
constituents
can
trust
me
to
make
sure
that
the
city
is
being
responsible
and
good
stewards
of
their
past,
their
taxpayer
dollars.
So
that
is
something
that
I
feel
we
can
never
forget
that
this
money,
we're
talking
about,
belongs
to
the
residents
and
taxpayers
of
minneapolis,
not
the
police
department.
I
C
There
is
some
confusion
in
the
public
because
we
don't
usually
take
that
sort
of
forward-looking
approach
to
our
budget,
but
it
is
important-
and
I
think
for
me,
the
question
is:
do
should
we
as
a
city
in
this
moment
in
our
city's
history,
assume
that
mpd's
budget
should
stay
at
this
inflated
number?
That
does
not
reflect
the
reality
of
the
number
of
officers
we
have
for
me.
The
answer
is
no
for
me.
The
answer
is
if
the
mayor
or
council
member
has
a
real
plan
to
hire.
C
150
officers
in
2022
that
proposal
should
be
brought
forward
next
year,
along
and
on
equal
footing
with
every
other
proposal
for
city
funds.
Setting
aside
money
in
mpd's
budget
pits
every
single
other
city
priority
against
the
police
department,
assuming
that
the
police
department
has
that
very
high
budget,
which
again
does
not
reflect
the
reality
of
the
staffing
level
in
the
department.
C
J
K
J
Thank
you,
mr
intermel.
I
appreciate
that
and
I
know
I
spoke
to
this
item
the
other
night
on
monday.
You
know
as
a
systems
engineer
for
me,
it's
important
that
we
have
a
basis
for
the
decisions
we're
making.
I
understand
the
explanation
or
the
theory
around
trying
to
set
it
to
where
we're
at
with
the
attrition
crisis
that
we're
experiencing
today,
but
we
also
have
a
number
of
outstanding
variables
that
are
very
important
in
how
we
make
future
year
decisions
beyond
2021.
J
We
know
that
the
pandemic
is
currently
having
an
effect,
for
instance,
on
crime.
We've
heard
that
from
experts
I
think
most
of
us
expect
that
the
pandemic
will
lift
sometime
in
the
spring.
As
vaccines
are
rolled
out.
We
have
yet
to
see
what
effect
that
will
have
on
the
increase
in
violent
crime
that
we
have
seen
that's
been
very
significant.
J
We
will
have
an
independent
staffing
study,
which
I
did
co-author
with
colleagues
coming
back.
That
does
have
the
possibility
of
recommending
operational
changes
such
as
having
one
unit
squads
rather
than
right
now
the
predominance
number,
which
is
two
unit
squads
that
we
see.
So
there
is
a
real
opportunity
that
may
exist
to
increase
response
capacity
without
adding
more
staff,
in
which
case
we
could
have
lower
numbers.
We
also
are
making
a
number
of
investments
and
alternative
response
systems
that
we
don't
know
exactly
when
they'll
be
operational.
J
J
We
also
have
upstream
investments
in
crime
prevention
that
I
hope
will
have
significant
impacts,
changing
the
downstream
workloads
and
then
we
also
have
attrition
level
levels
right
now
which
have
not
stabilized,
and
we
don't
know
exactly
how
many
officers
will
return
from
that.
So
these
are
a
number
of
significant
variables
that
are
before
us.
J
B
B
We
have
a
lot
of
things
that
will
come
into
play
and
it's
going
to
be
important
as
we're
we're
looking
at
the
full
budget
to
make
sure
that
we're
investing
in
reducing
crime
and
not
just
have
an
imaginary
number
of
how
many
officers
will
have,
and
another
thing
I
I
think,
really
supports
this
resolution-
is
we
we
only
increase
officers
by
you
know,
recruit
class,
and
so
that
makes
a
very
clear
case
of.
If
we're
going
to
increase
the
amount
of
officers
you
have
to
invest
in
recruiting
classes
like
we
did
in
this.
B
This
year's
budget,
like
we
did
in
previous
budgets-
and
you
can,
you
can
actually
add
those
numbers
up
and
you'll,
have
a
pretty
good
idea
of
what
what
the
actual
number
of
officers
are.
Best
case
scenario
is
for
a
budget
to
have
a
number
higher
than
that.
Without
investing
in
that
money,
it
makes
it
confusing
for
the
public.
I
don't
want
to
have
an
illusion
of
safety.
B
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
are
addressing
all
parts
of
public
safety
and
that
that
really
starts
with
having
a
real
budget
with
having
the
actual
numbers
that
people
can
understand
without
trying
to
to
say
that
we're
we're
funding
a
both
and
subject
without
actually
putting
any
money
behind
some
of
these
other
ones.
So
I
will
be
voting
for
this.
I
really
appreciate
the
author's
attention
to
detail
to
make
sure
that
this
is
as
transparent
to
the
public
as
possible.
H
H
We
are
going
to
have
748
officers
this
year.
That's
what
we
funded.
That's
what
we
funded
for
the
recruiting
class,
that's
what
we
have
in
our
budget,
and
so
if
the
data
says
we
should
have
8
25,
it
doesn't
matter.
We
still
have
748
and
we're
there's.
So
I
I
don't
understand
saying
the
responsible
thing
is
to
look
at
the
data
when
we
don't
have
any
way
to
respond
to
that
data,
because
it
is
not
possible
to
magically
recruit
more
officers.
H
So
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
having
a
conversation,
that's
grounded
in
reality,
open
positions
do
not
solve
crimes.
Open
positions.
Do
not
write
tickets.
Open
positions
do
not
prevent
anything;
they
do
not
deter
anything,
they
do
not
create
a
sense
of
safety,
and
so
I
think
it's
very
important
that
we
start
to
get
to
a
better
practice
about
representing
reality
in
our
budget.
That's
what
we
do
with
all
the
other
departments.
H
Any
council
member
can
bring
forward
a
proposal
to
increase
the
staffing
level
in
any
department
and
if
they
can
get
seven
votes
for
it,
they
can
do
that,
whether
it's
in
our
current
service
level
or
not
that's
how
our
budgeting
process
works.
So
the
only
thing
that
changes
as
director
intermil
said
is
what's,
in
the
current
service
level,
what
happens
by
default,
and
what
do
you
have
to
make
the
case
for?
H
So
I
I
really
do
hope
that
we
can
get
to
a
place
that
we
represent
reality
on
our
budget,
so
that
everybody
can
be
talking
about
the
same
numbers,
and
we
don't
have
the
mayor
saying
770.
Well,
I'm
saying
750
and
somebody
else
is
saying
888
which
has
been
confusing
to
everybody
and
has
some
people
thinking
we're
making
huge
cuts.
H
H
C
I
don't
see
anyone
else
in
queue
I
will
just.
I
did
want
to
just
add
one
more
thing
I
do.
I
did
also
want
to
acknowledge
that
I
know
the
the
mayor
has
put
incredible
pressure
on
council
members
with
his
threat
to
veto
the
entire
expenditure
budget
over
this
hypothetical
number
of
officers
in
2022,
that
there
is
no
plan
to
actually
hire,
and
I
have
deep
respect
for
every
member
of
this
council.
I
know
that
we
have
come
together
with
debate
and
compromise
and
we
have
invested
in
incredible
transformative
things
for
2021..
C
I
know
that
the
commitment
that
we
made
back
in
june
when
we
unanimously
adopted
a
resolution
committing
to
transforming
public
safety
is
real.
I
will
keep
fighting
for
it.
There
will
be
enormous
community
discussion
as
we
move
forward,
so
I
I
also
was
very
surprised
to
see
the
mayor
put
so
much
pressure
on
council
members
over
the
2022
number,
with
no
plan
to
hire
that
many
officers
and
threaten
all
of
these
incredible
investments
for
2021
that
we've
come
together
to
fund.
C
L
J
D
B
A
M
G
C
D
D
C
B
B
B
if
we
have
748
that
the
number
does
not
equal,
880.
and-
and
my
concern
with
this
amendment
is
the
same
reason.
I
supported
the
previous
motion-
it's
we're
not
getting
to
that
number
and
to
say
that
we're
going
to
have
that
creates
an
illusion
of
safety
for
people
that
for
people
that
feel
that
we
need
a
higher
number
of
officers.
This
motion
doesn't
get
us
there.
If,
for
folks
that
are
saying
we're
not
investing
enough
in
alternatives
to
traditional
law
enforcement,
this
resolution-
doesn't
this
motion
does
not
get
us
there.
B
B
B
H
Fletcher,
thank
you
council
president,
so
I
I
I
do
think
it's
important
to
be
clear
that
we
really
shouldn't
be
talking
about
the
2021,
recruiting
classes
as
being
relevant
to
the
change
between
this
motion
and
the
previous
motion,
because
all
of
the
graduates
of
the
recruiting
classes
that
will
graduate
in
2021
and
be
a
part
of
the
2021
budget
are
accounted
for
in
the
748
positions
that
are
funded.
So
the
140
are
all
positions
that
will
be
unfilled
even
with
the
entirely
full
recruit
classes
that
we
have
all
agreed
to
fund.
E
Gordon
thank
you,
and
I
don't
actually
have
the
schedule.
5
proposal
in
front
of
me
is
the
140
actually
an
increase.
I
thought
it
was
closer
to
118
vacancies
that
we
were
holding
over
or
is
that
exactly
what
the
the
mayor's
proposal
was
indicating
to
kind
of
hold
over
in
the
five-year
projection?
Can
anybody
perhaps
mr
intermelon.
C
K
Thank
you,
council
president
councilmember,
gordon,
the
the
during
the
markup
process.
I
think
everybody
on
in
this
meeting
will
remember
it
as
amendment
14
a5
removed
all
of
the
unfunded
positions
from
the
mayor's
recommended
budget,
so
the
mayor
had
recommended
holding
118
unfilled
positions
in
the
police
department
that
14a5
action
took
those
away
so
that
the
number
of
unfunded
positions
and.
E
It
seems
like
this
is
more
for
show.
I
forget,
but
the
former
council
president
used
to
always
accuse
me
of
stuff,
and
I
forget
what
her
phrase
was
and
I
think
she
called
got
it
from
walt
dietzick
or
somebody
else,
but
I
don't
know
why
we're
even
doing
this,
because
we
don't
have
money
that
we're
talking
about
for
2022.
E
We
don't.
We
don't
even
have
a
dollar
a
figure
that
we're
softly
saying
this
is
our
projection
for
and
now
we're
even
increasing
118.
That
already
seemed
like
it
was
such
a
stretch
to
get
to
to
140.
I
think
it.
I
think
it's
a
way,
maybe
of
us
saying,
look
how
pro-law
and
order
we
are
or
something
I
don't
it's
confusing,
and
I
think
it
I
think
I
agree.
E
I
think,
with
a
couple
of
my
colleagues
who
are
suggesting
it's
not
exactly
honest
and
then,
if,
if
we're
supposed
to
be
waiting
on
the
information
that
we
get
from
our
staffing
study
and
everything,
starting
with
a
number,
this
high
is
going
to
be
challenging.
And
then
I
wonder
what
happens
in
2022
when
we,
maybe
this
is
setting
it
up.
E
So
it's
easy
to
propose
funding
at
this
level
to
come
in
and
then
it
will
look
like
just
because
we're
getting
back
to
what
we
can
realistically
actually,
staff
at
will
be
accused
of
doing
dramatic
cuts
to
the
police
department
budget
for
positions
we
could
never
even
fill
so
I
don't
know
this
is
pretty
odd.
I
don't
think
I'll
be
supporting
it,
but
it's
interesting
thanks.
N
N
N
And
so
I
feel
very
indebted
to
every
one
of
you
for
all
of
the
conversations
and
energy
and
decisions
that
we
have
taken
together
and
separately
over
the
last.
You
know
six
seven,
eight
months
and
and
I'm
really
I'm
really
grateful
for
that,
and
that-
and
I
want
to
very
much
so
land
in
a
place
with
this
budget
that
truly
symbolizes
that
that
difficult
moment
that
we're
in
in
our
city
and-
and
I
say
that
it's
difficult
because
it's
being
experienced
so
differently
by
so
many
different
people.
N
And
we
get
the
privilege
of
hearing
those
stories.
We
get
the
privilege
of
being
invited
into
those
tables
and
into
those
conversations
in
very
intimate
ways
that
that
I
know
other
groups
throughout
our
city.
Don't-
and
I
take
that
privilege
pretty
seriously
and-
and
I
want
us
to
to
talk
a
little
bit
more
as
a
body
about
how
we
can
better,
including
each
other,
in
our
proposals
and
in
the
work,
so
that
so
that
it
doesn't
feel
like
we're
always
in
disagreement,
because
I
don't
think
we
are.
N
N
And
so
you
know
in
the
future.
It
would
be
great
to
find
ways
to
really
weave
in
the
voices
of,
for
example,
the
metropolitan
urban
indian
directors
group,
who
wrote
us
a
letter
saying
that
they
don't
support.
What's
happening
right
now
in
our
in
our
public
conversations
and
in
some
of
the
votes
that
we've
proposed.
N
And
I
I
include
myself
in
those
proposals.
You
know
it
would
be
great
to
find
ways
to
really
center
the
voices
of
all
communities
of
color
in
these
discussions
and
ask
our
white
allies
and
the
folks,
with
with
wealth,
to
try
to
step
back
and
really
allow
those
communities
of
color
to
create
the
space.
N
I
think
that
we
have
advanced
a
lot
of
conversations
not
only
locally
and
statewide
but
nationally
and-
and
I
would
like
us
to
be
better
about
uplifting
those
moments
for
our
community
and
explaining
that
progress
with
and
for
our
community.
So
it
would
just.
It
would
just
be
great
if
you
know
next
year.
These
conversations
could
much
better
reflect
the
needs
around.
How
do
we
end
and
eradicate
commercial
sexual
exploitation
on
lake
street?
N
And
how
do
we
make
sure
that
you
know
all
of
the
challenges
that
new
americans
and
immigrant
business
owners
are
experiencing
with
covet
19
and
the
burning
down
on
lake
street?
And
now
safety
issues
are
really
embedded
and
leading
our
strategies,
because
I
certainly
don't
feel
that
way.
Right
now
about
the
proposal
that
that
was
put
together
and
it
was,
it
was
really
good
to
be
able
to
do
something
as
a
body
earlier
this
year,
and
I
know
that
you
know
not
not.
N
So
so
with
that,
you
know,
I'm
I'm
happy
to
support
this
amendment.
I
think
that
overall,
the
package
that
we
might
adopt
at
the
end
of
the
night
will
be
very
reflective
of
the
people
of
minneapolis
and
the
experiences
of
the
many
many
different
groups
and
neighbors
that
that
we
have
been
hearing
from
all
year,
and
I
want
us
to
give
us
give
each
other
the
the
grace
of
time,
because
I
I
really
reject
the
notion
that
everything
has
to
happen
now
and
everything
has
to
be
today.
N
Obtainment
is
is
the
ultimate
goal
versus
the
process
of
how
we
get
there
and
who's
involved
and
who's
at
the
table,
and
how?
How
strong
is
that
you
know?
Is
that
base
and
and
that's
really
what
I'm
looking
for
and-
and
I
think,
a
lot
of
people
who
have
tried
to
to
lobby
me
on
on
these
particular
votes.
This
time
around
have
heard
me
talk
about
this.
A
dozen
times
lake
street
needs
support.
N
But
ultimately
you
know
out
of
all
the
testimonies
we
heard
over
the
last
couple
of
days
and
maybe
a
week
now.
I
was
really
disappointed
in
the
lack
of
allyship
that
was
demonstrated
towards
lake
street.
It's
almost
as
if
lake
street
didn't
burn
down,
and
that
makes
me
really
really
sad,
because
I
can
tell
that
there's
so
many
people
willing
to
help
and
there's
so
much
energy
at
the
table.
N
For
folks,
from
folks
from
privileged
positions
who
want
to
help
really
badly
and
there's
so
much
need
on
lake
street
and
some
for
some
reason
we're
like
not
matching
those
two
two
things
up,
and
so
so
I
won't
be
able
to
move
along
with
some
of
my
more
brave
council.
Colleagues
on
this
call.
Until
my
people
can
move
along
and
until
they
have
a
fully.
N
I
can
probably
get
to
a
different
place
next
year,
but
I
I
won't
be
there
alone.
I
will
have
to
come
with
a
lot
of
people
and
getting
all
those
people.
There
will
be
a
lot
of
work
and
I'm
waiting
to
see
who's
willing
to
do
that
work
and
if
it's
just
me,
then
we
probably
won't
get
there
next
year,
but
but
I
do
appreciate
all
of
the
diverse
voices
that
have
been
stepping
into
this
moment
that
have
been
engaging
that
have
been
reaching
out
to
us.
N
The
conversation
is
so
much
more
rich
today
than
it
was.
You
know
a
couple
of
months
ago
and-
and
I
think
we
as
a
body
are
doing
that
work
that
we
said
we
were
going
to
enter
into
this
is
what
that
work
looks
like
this
is
what
it
feels
like,
and
I'm
looking
forward
to
the
time
where
we
can
really
stop
normalizing
or
ignoring
or
lying
about
the
gun,
violence
in
our
city
and
how
it's
impacting
communities
of
color
and
how
we're
losing
people
of
color
to
that
gun
violence.
N
P
Thank
you,
madam
president.
You
know
I.
I
would
say
that
I
fully
understand
the
amendment,
but
I
I'm
as
I
as
I
look
at
it
and
I
read
it
over
and
over.
I
don't
fully
understand
what
has
been
brought
forward
or
I
guess
what
I'll
say
is
that
I
understand
that
that
nothing's
really
being
brought
forward,
except
maybe
a
bit
of
cover
for
for
a
narrative,
that's
been
put
out
there.
P
That
sort
of
deceives
people
into
thinking
that
you're
adding
officers
when
you're
not
now
the
last
motion
failed
and-
and
I
get
it
that
if
folks
don't
want
to
be
proactively
forthright
with
the
public
about
what
we
are
and
aren't
funding.
But
this
action
sort
of
steps
a
little
bit
in
the
other
direction,
and
I
think
it
is
very
muddled.
It's
very
unclear
and
I
will
go
as
far
as
to
say
a
little
deceiving
about
what
it
means
you
know.
Folks
are
gonna.
P
We've
heard
on
the
call
that
folks
are
very
confused
about
whether
the
cat,
whether
the
mayor's
funding
more
positions
than
we
are.
We
already
know
that
people
are
very
confused
about
that.
We
know
that
this
action
is
going
to
lead
people
to
believe
that
we're
increasing
the
number
of
officers
by
140
positions-
and
we
know
that-
that's
not
true,
and
so
I
think
that
those
being
all
the
things
that
that
we're
looking
at
here
that
if
the
first
motion
failed,
then
people
don't
want
to
be
necessarily
forthright.
P
I
I
You
know
I
do
my
best
as
a
council
member
to
be
able
to
thread
all
of
that
by
being
a
good
policy
maker.
Doing
my
research
doing
my
due
diligence
as
many.
If
not
all
of
you
know,
I
dig
into
the
work
and
so
some
of
my
constituents
who
feel
very
strongly
that
the
answer
to
the
issues,
the
safety
issues
and
the
social
issues
that
we
have
in
north
minneapolis
will
be
solved
by
adding
more
police.
They
would
see
something
like
this
and
say.
I
Yes,
then
you
know
that's
exactly
representing
how
I
feel
and
what
I
want
to
see
this.
You
know
if
this
were
to
pass,
then
those
same
constituents
are
going
to
be
mad,
that
they
don't
actually
see
more
officers
on
the
street,
because
that's
not
actually
what
this
does.
This
does
not
do
that
and
then
they're
going
to
look
at
me
and
say
the
city
council
made
it
hard
for
blah
blah
blah
tied
the
hands
of
the
chief
and
in
the
reality.
I
The
reality
is
that
there's
just
no
way
for
us
to
be
able
to
fill
this.
These
many
positions
within
the
time
frame
that
we're
talking
about,
and
I
stand
by
the
fact
that
this
is
not
responsible.
I
do
not
believe
that
this
is
responsible
framing
it,
as
this
is
the
responsible
direction
to
go.
What
this
is
doing
is
it
is
misleading
my
constituents
who
agree
with
council
members
who
support
this
in
terms
of
what
they
believe
the
pathway.
I
The
best
pathway
forward
is
to
achieving
the
shared
outcome
that
we
all
have,
which
is
a
safer
community,
safer
city.
They
will
see
this
and
feel
that
they're
reflected
in
it,
but
they
actually
aren't
because
this
does
not
produce
more
police
for
them.
This
does
not
produce
what
they're
asking
for
it
is
unclear.
I
I
So
with
the
kind
of
consensus
that
we
have
to
navigate
here
in
these
sort
of
con
conversations
is
that
the
status
quo
wins
and
when
the
status
quo
wins.
That
means
that
people
who
look
like
me
and
people
who
live
in
my
community
lose,
and
so
I
r
democracy
is
okay
for
us
to
have
conversations.
We
have
a
shared
outcome
that
we
want
to
have
a
safer
community.
We
have
different
ideas
of
how
to
get
there.
I
C
To
make
sure
excuse
me,
council,
member,
oh
so
we
have
council
vice
president
in
queue,
and
then
we
have
council,
member
palmisano
with
some
questions
for
robin
mcpherson
from
the
police
department
council.
Vice
president
jenkins,
would
you
like
to
go
next
as
you're
in
queue
or
turn
it
over
to
councilmember
palmisano,
to
ask
those
questions?
Thank.
G
C
D
No
just
that
there
have
been
a
lot
of
accusations,
and
I
think
mrs
mcpherson
can
talk
about
the
increased,
recruiting
academy
staffing.
I
mean
I
might
be
the
only
council
member
here-
that's
been
to
some
police
training
and
and
understand-
maybe
a
little
bit
more,
but
certainly
I'm
not
no
expert
at
how
our
training
department
works,
but
ms
mcpherson
can
certainly
speak
about
it
with
the
financial
perspective.
In
view.
C
F
F
Yeah,
thank
you
very
much
council
president
bender.
I
appreciate
it.
Yes,
I
I
can
give
you
some
information.
This
is
making
the
assumption
that
the
two
additional
recruit
classes
are
approved,
so
there's
a
total
of
two
full
classes
in
2021
and
the
start
of
a
third
class
towards
the
end
of
the
year
in
2021.
F
Our
current
number
on
the
street
right
now
is
so
that's
a
pretty
substantial
increase
in
in
the
single
year
in
2021
in
2022,
we
have
been
talking
about
with
additional
resources.
We
could
add
recruit
classes,
especially
now
that
hennepin
tech
is
going
to
through
an
accreditation
process,
be
able
to
increase
their
class
sizes
for
cadets.
F
F
C
F
Council
president
bender,
it
is
assuming
that,
when
this
group
of
people
who
are
currently
on
leave
are
gone,
that
our
attrition
should
go
back
to
a
more
normal
attrition
and
you're
right.
That
is
an
assumption,
but
I
I
think
it's
a
pretty
fair
assumption
that
it
will
drop
back
down
to
something
more
approaching
what
we've
had
in
the
past,
which
has
been
about
45
a
year
for
our
division.
C
C
H
I
I
have
done
the
same
and
in
our
previous
conversations
and
I
think,
even
in
testimony
that
we
received
in
a
conversation
and
the
public
health
and
safety
committee
recently,
we
were
essentially
told
that
the
capacity
to
train,
because
we
can
typically
have
about
38
officers
in
a
recruit
class
as
sort
of
the
max,
and
so
if
we
try
to
run
three
a
year,
we
end
up.
You
know,
training,
you
know
about
110,
let's
say:
there's
probably
some
drop
off.
H
I
think
there's
usually
calculated
for
not
everybody
to
finish,
and
so
we
can
train
about
100
people
and
then
there's
been
40
to
50
people
departing,
and
so
the
the
net
gain
has.
Typically,
the
max
we've
been
able
to
do.
Has
we've
usually
calculated
that
around
40
per
year,
if
we
were
trying
to
grow
the
department,
that's
sort
of
incrementally
what
we
could
do,
and
so,
if
we're
starting
at
690,
I'm
just
trying
to
figure
out
how
you're
getting
into
the
high
800s
anytime
in
the
near
future.
F
Yeah,
council
president
vendor
council,
member
fletcher
yeah
great
question.
One
of
the
things
that
we've
been
working
we've
been
looking
at
is
we've
been
working
with
some
of
the
other
community
colleges
and
colleges
in
the
area
to
see
if
they
have
are
willing
to
look
at
maybe
out
of
the
box
thinking
a
little
bit
one
of
the
things
when
we
were
doing
that
is
to
we
found
out
that
hennepin
was
increasing
through
their
accreditation
process.
Right
now,
there's
a
limit
of.
F
F
You
know
a
little
easier
to
manage
from
a
time
standpoint,
and
I
I
don't
want
to
minimize
this
would
be
an
aggressive
schedule.
But
you
know
we
do
have
what
I
think
is
one
of
well
she's,
an
awesome
commander
in
our
training
department,
and
if
anybody
can
do
it,
I
think
she's,
the
one
who
can
do
it,
but
I
do
think
that
the
the
combination
of
cadet
and
recruit
makes
it
much
more
makes
it
much
more
able
for
us
to
handle
the
additional
training.
I
wouldn't
want
to
do
that.
H
And
aren't
there
some
other
natural
bottlenecks
in
the
training
process
related
to
available
field
training
officers?
I
know
there's
been
some
recent
scrutiny
about
who
should
and
shouldn't
be
a
field
training
officer
and
whether
we
have
enough
qualified
people
to
receive
people
out
of
those
recruit
schools.
So
there
are
several
places
where
we
have
to
have
the
capacity
it's
not
just
about
the
community
college.
F
So
there
are
some
options
of
doing
that,
but
there's
there's
probably
two
bottlenecks
that
we're
looking
at
dealing
with
and
actually
commander.
Blackwell
already
has
a
solution
for
the
ftos.
We
did
lose
some
ftos
also
in
this
leave
process
during
the
year,
and
she
is
already
starting
a
training
course
to
get
more
people
who
are
available
for
fto
training.
So
she
does
think
that
that
she'll
be
able
to
deal
with
that.
The
other
bottleneck
is
the
range
and
again
that's
more
of
a
determination
on
scheduling
and
those
can
be
scheduled,
obviously
24
7.
C
J
G
G
G
B
G
G
G
G
G
Do
I
believe
that
this
effort
will
resolve
all
of
our
problems
all
of
our
crime
issues
overnight?
Absolutely
not.
Neither
will
all
the
social
services
and
social
service
programs
and
initiatives
it's
going
to
take
all
of
these
things
together
to
to
lower
the
crime
rate
in
our
communities.
We
need
a
mother's
love.
We
need
mad
dads,
we
need
agape,
we
need
the
interrupters.
G
M
I
think
councilmember
jenkins
covered
and
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
there
are
a
part
of
our
community
that
are
voiceless
and
it's
very
important
to
listen
to
those
that
bring
bring
them
on
the
table
and
you
know
get
their
voices
heard.
It's
very
important
and
when
I
talk
about
that,
I'm
talking
about
the
immigrant
community
and
in
in
our
city,
they
are
having
the
toughest
time
right
now,
chronoviruses
the
low
paying
jobs
they
had
and
they
lost.
F
M
Officers
of
color
this
gives
them
opportunity
to
do
that,
and,
and
we
want
to
make
sure
we
are
providing
that
opportunity
for
them
moving
forward,
21,
21,
2022
or
so
on.
We
are
creating
that.
So
I
am
supporting
these
amendments
because
that
puts
that
gives
them
opportunity
to
be
trained
to.
You
know,
represent
their
community
and
serve
their
community,
and
I'm
encouraging.
M
The
to
diverse
the
police
officers,
I'm
not
sure
what
the
percentage
is,
but
majority
of
the
officers
that
serve
minneapolis,
as
I
heard,
is,
are
from
outside
minneapolis,
but
we
have
professionals,
we
have
people
like
me
or
people
that
are
immigrants,
east
african
latinos,
that
want
to
serve
their
community,
but
we
want
to
make
sure
we
are
bringing
that
opportunity
for
them
to
go
to
classes
and
community
classes
and
community
colleges
and
training
and
serve
their
community.
So
let's
increase
the
opportunity
for
them
for
future
years.
Thank
you.
P
I
put
myself
back
in
queue
just
because
I
wanted
to
keep
my
original
comments
very
focused
on
the
task
at
hand,
but
I'm
noticing
that
we've
gotten
significantly
off
topic,
so
I
thought
I
would
just
sort
of
address
this
a
little
bit.
There's
a
few
things
one
is,
I
mean
I've
heard
a
lot
of
talk
about
the
other
investments
that
we're
making.
I
heard
a
lot
of
talk
about
the
recruitment
classes
and
whether
or
not
we're
we're
funding
those.
P
This
is
not
a
conversation
about
about
about
the
number
of
officers
that
we're
funding.
We
know
what
that
number
is.
We
were
in
meetings
as
recently
as
this
morning
talking
about
exactly
this
and
that
the
level
that
we
funded
is
exactly
the
level
that
the
mayor
has
funded.
We
don't
need
to
discuss
recruitment
classes
here
in
this
forum,
because
we
know
that
those
are
already
funded
in
this.
This
decision
we're
making
right
here,
has
no
bearing
on
that.
I
think
that's
important
to
know.
P
The
budget
chair
was
a
part
of
those
meetings
there.
No,
at
no
point
has
anyone
ever
ever
predicted
that
we
were
going
to
reach
the
number
of
I
think
as
high
as
890
that
I
just
heard
tonight
and
we're
not
going
to
reach
that
level.
But
we
are
conveniently
sort
of
setting
the
number
there
councilmember
johnson
mentioned
that
there
were
100
other
vacancies
being
held
open
in
other
department
departments.
This
is
140
in
one
department.
This
isn't
proportional
right.
So
what
exactly?
Are
we
making
this
decision
based
off
of?
I
I
I
It
is
very
hard
for
us
to
get
rid
of
bad
police
and,
if
we're
going
through
the
process
of
trying
to
get
140
more
officers,
we
don't
know
if
they
align
with
the
chiefs.
Every
single
one
of
them
aligns
with
the
chief's
vision.
We
don't
know
if
they're
walking
in
committed
to
de-escalation
we'd,
like
that
particular
point,
like
there's
no
plan
for
accountability,
there's
no
plan
for
how
we
actually
are
changing
the
culture
of
the
folks
who
are
coming
in
and
then
the
culture
eating
the
policy
for
breakfast
like
there.
I
I
These
numbers
actually
are
people
who
are
then
going
out
on
the
streets
in
our
communities
with
guns,
and
I
have
some
serious
concerns
about
that.
I
wish
that
we
would
have
had
more
time
to
process
and
dig
into
what
this
recruitment
plan
is
and
what
not.
If
we
even
were
able
to
get
this
many
people.
I
just
don't
think
that
that
is
healthy
governance,
and
it
is
definitely
not
in
the
direction
that
our
community
has
asked
us
for
in
terms
of
better
policing.
That
is
not
inherent
in
adding
this
many
more
officers.
G
C
So
this
body
again
just
of
course
has
its
has
its
discussions
as
we
should
in
our
democracy,
they're,
transparent,
they're
here
in
the
public
public
view-
and
you
know
I
think
you
know
as
we
move
forward
as
we
look
to
2022.
You
know
this
is
those
decisions
will
be
made
next
year?
The
mail
mayor
will
propose
the
budget
in
august.
The
council
will
do
this
process
in
the
in
the
late
fall
in
the
winter.
We'll
have
all
kinds
of
things
happening
next
year.
C
That
will
force
lots
of
very
difficult
conversations
about
public
safety
and
police
violence.
So
you
know
that's
a
we're
in
a
part
of
a
long
haul
together.
So
with
that
I'll.
Thank
you
all
for
the
discussion,
not
just
for
this
item,
but
across
the
days
we've
spent
together
on
the
budget
and
I'll
ask
the
clerk
to
call
the
role.
D
D
K
I
G
C
C
That
motion
passes
and
is
adopted.
We
have
three
more
items
in
our
packets
item.
Two
is
a
motion
by
cunningham
related
to
health
department.
Item
three
is
a
motion
by
gordon
related
to
construction
code
services.
I
think
otherwise
known
as
the
elevators
and
item
six
as
a
staff
direction
by
cunningham
and
fletcher
related
to
public
health
and
safety
committee.
I'll,
take
up
item
3
next
and
recognize
councilmember
cunningham.
I
I
I
just
wanna
share
briefly
that
nowhere
in
my
ward
is
there
a
permanent
food
shelf.
I
represent
half
of
north
minneapolis
and
we
are
incredibly
resource,
starved
in
this
part
of
north
minneapolis.
I
think
that
there's
this
general
misconception
that
a
ton
of
resources
are
just
constantly
being
dumped
in
north
minneapolis
and,
if
that's
the
case,
we're
not
seeing
it
north
of
lowry.
So
this
is
a
very,
very
desperately
needed
food
shelf.
I
It
is
a
permanent
food
shelf
and,
what's
even
better
about
it
and
exciting
about
it,
is
that
the
location
is
north
of
the
railroad
tracks,
which
is
even
even
more
of
a
resource
desert.
So
I
really
hope
that
you
all
will
support
this
amazing
work
that
community
leaders
are
are
bringing
forward
in
our
community
to
be
able
to
help
address
food
instability
in
north
minneapolis,
as
well
as
really
be
able
to
help
our
community.
That
has
been
disproportionately
impacted
by
coven
and
the
economic
impacts
of
that.
L
N
A
G
C
E
Thank
you
very
much.
I
appreciate
that.
I
appreciate
all
the
discussion.
This
is
a
different
item.
It
was
referenced
at
least
once
during
the
public
hearing,
and
I
think
folks
heard
some
information
about
this
and
received
some
probably
via
email.
This
has
to
do
with
our
electrical
inspectors,
and
one
of
the
things
proposed
in
the
marriage
budget
is
to
eliminate
the
elevator,
I'm
sorry
elevator
inspectors.
E
E
I
got
interested
in
it
because
I'm
trying
to
really
be
careful
about
who
gets
laid
off,
and
I
was
a
little
bit
surprised
that
we
hadn't
gone
through
any
kind
of
process
at
looking
at
this
and
making
a
decision
about
what
this
would
mean
for
the
city
and
having
any
kind
of
discussion.
And
then
it
also
came
to
me
that
the
labor
organizations
involved
didn't
either.
E
I
think
the
the
hope
and
the
assumption
is
that
we
probably
won't
even
need
to
use
those
reserves
because,
over
the
last
10
years,
revenue
from
the
elevator
permits
and
licenses
has
averaged
about
one
to
1.2
million
a
year.
Last
year,
the
licenses
alone
brought
in
751
000
in
revenue
and
elevators
licenses
are
based
on
the
number
of
elevators
in
the
city.
I'm
sure
there's
a
lot
downtown,
but
also
that
number
stays
pretty
much
the
same.
E
So
I
I
think
we
have
a
pretty
graceful
way
to
get
through
this
here.
I
also
think
that
we
need
to
before
we
make
these
kind
of
decisions.
Take
a
careful
look
at
what
we're
doing
so.
There's
some
staff
directions
here
to
help
us
look
at
this
in
terms
of
the
future,
and
I
have
to
say,
I
actually
remembered
something
when
this
came
up
about
the
electrical
inspectors
which
were
for
a
while
taken
out
of
the
city
and
they
were
removed.
E
E
We
have
an
opportunity
when
we
have
them
that
we
can
enforce
city,
specific
requirements
and
issues
and
look
at
those
we
have
a
better
ability
to
answer
customer
inquiries
that
currently
might
not
be
answered
by
the
state.
We
also
know
we're
not
relying
on
the
state
to
do
this
work,
and
this
is
critically
important
to
make
sure
our
elevators
are
functioning
properly
and
are
licensed.
E
E
So
if
we,
if
we
take
these
this
division
away
right
now,
we
will
end
up
having
to
go
back
and
try
to
fix
our
ordinances,
so
we're
not
violating
them
themselves,
and
I
think
that's
an
interesting
idea
to
think
of.
We
actually
are
removing
this
before
we
have
any
kind
of
hearing
at
all
about
our
ordinance
change
and
what
we
should
do
and
an
opportunity
to
discuss
this.
So
I
just
as
for
my
colleagues
to
support
this.
C
O
O
I
I
would
like
to
make
a
couple
of
comments
just
to
the
effect
that
there
will
absolutely
if
we
are
directed
to
continue
this
business
line.
There
will
be
an
opportunity
cost
here
and
that
there
is
no
question
that
this
will
have
to
become
the
priority
of
our
construction
code
services.
Division
to
make
sure
that
we
can
rebuild
this
program.
O
It
will
also
come
at
the
cost
of
the
work
that
our
construction
code
services
group
is
leading
in
expanding
shelter,
access
to
persons
who
are
experiencing
homelessness,
especially
since
the
city
council
just
adopted
an
ordinance
on
emergency
shelters
as
well
as
the
city
council
has
approved
a
significant
amount
of
funding
to
support
the
expansion
of
of
shelter
in
our
city.
So
I'm
happy
to
answer
more
questions
about
this,
but
I
I
just
wanted.
O
I
think
it's
really
important
just
to
for
me
to
share
with
you
that
our
our
amazing
staff,
including
our
leadership
staff
and
construction
code
services,
our
our
building,
trades
members
and
all
of
our
staff
and
construction
code
services,
are
really
doing
an
amazing
job
and
our
stretch
extremely
thin,
and
this
this
amendment
and
the
staff
direction
will
establish
the
priority,
this
being
the
priority
for
this
division
in
2021.
If
it's
approved.
D
Thank
you.
I
didn't
want
to
step
in
front
of
the
director.
I
knew
she
had
some
comments,
but
I
have
a
question
for
director
intermil.
If,
if
he
would
I'm
just
curious
if
he's
reviewed
the
numbers,
I
know
there
was
some
dispute
about
them
and
I
just
wanted
to
hear
from
him
a
little
bit
about
how
the
revenues
work
for
this
program.
K
Thank
you,
council
president
and
councilmember
palmisano,
so
councilmember
gordon
did
ask
me
to
help
him
work
on
the
numbers
earlier
today.
Unfortunately,
because
staff
were
deeply
engaged
in
a
number
of
other
conversations
around
the
amendments
that
have
been
discussed
tonight,
I
didn't
have
a
chance
to
connect
with
him
on
these
specific
numbers.
K
I
think
the
downtown
assets
fund
as
a
source
is
troubling,
because
you
know
the
downtown
assets
fund
has
taken
the
absolute
most
hits
this
year.
So
much
so
that
so
just
to
clarify
here,
the
downtown
assets
fund
is
where
the
city
collects
all
of
our
our
local
sales
taxes
and
those
are
the
the
single
largest
revenue
source
that
has
taken
a
hit
in
2020
and
will
continue
to
sustain
a
hit
in
2021..
K
So
I
think
that,
just
to
underscore
the
the
severity
the
city
took
action
to
even
delay
our
final,
our
final
payment
on
the
debt
service
for
the
convention
center,
which
also
is
supported
by
the
downtown
assets
fund,
and
so
I
think,
to
to
further
erode
the
resource.
I
understand
there's
a
large
balance
there
now,
but
the
large
balance
has
been
built
intentionally
to
continue
to
sustain
the
economic
shocks
that
we're
currently
under
and
so
to
draw
down.
That
balance
would
would
be
difficult
also
as
we're
talking
about
staff
impacts.
K
The
the
convention
center
has
similar
to
because
they've
sustained
the
the
greatest
hit
to
their
revenues.
Their
their
staff
have
been
the
most
single
most
impacted
group
in
the
city
this
year
and
they
they
have
had
over
60
layoffs.
They
have
a
great
many
near
nearly
100
staff,
just
on
continual
budget
budgetary
leave.
C
I
Thank
you.
Madam
president,
I
just
director
intermil
spoke
to
quite
a
few
of
the
sentiments
that
I've
been
feeling
since
having
some
conversations
with
city
staff
today.
I
just
think
that
you
know
if
we
as
a
council,
give
direction,
alongside
with
the
mayor,
give
direction
to
city
staff
to
do
the
work
that
we
asked
them
to
do,
and
they
came
back
with
recommendations
that
we
should
respect
their
professional
recommendations,
of
course,
thinking
critically.
I
How
does
he
feel
like
this
furthers
racial
equity,
as
we
have
asked
for
staff
to
do,
given,
particularly
that
staff
have
said
that
other
work
that
is
racial
equity
focused,
would
have
an
impact
in
terms
of
staffing
capacity.
So
I
just
was
hoping
to
hear
maybe
from
the
council
member
what
his
thoughts
were
on
that,
if
that's
appropriate.
C
E
Well,
I
would
certainly
expect
and
work
hard
to
make
sure
that
it
didn't
have
any
unintended
consequences
in
terms
of
the
work
towards
equity.
I
think
we
need
to
have
a
larger
conversation
and
perhaps
look
at
where
this
work
actually
belongs
within
the
city
structure.
I
don't.
There
are
already
three
people
that
are
doing
this
work.
I
think
there's
actually
four,
but
one
of
them
is
giving
notice
because
they're
afraid
they're
losing
their
job
their
the
state.
E
E
I
D
I
I
So
that's
just
the
concern
that
I
have
and
and
that's
what
I
I
why
I
brought
that
up
and
just
to
reiterate
that
that
concern
that
the
work
that
actually
really
does
further
racial
equity
and
addressing
intergenerational
poverty
and
and
wealth
gaps
that
and
home
homelessness
issues
that
that
would
get
put
to
further
back
in
the
line
of
the
work,
with
the
limited
staff
capacity
that
we
have.
So
I
just
wanted
to
circle
back
on
that
and
director
brennan,
if
I
miscategorized
or
what
you
said
in
any
way.
Please
please
correct
me.
L
Thank
you,
madam
president,
I'd
like
to
call
the
question.
I
see
that
councilmember
johnson
jumped
in
after
I
suggested
that
why
don't
we
see
where
the
votes
are
and
then
we
can
determine
if
it
passes.
If
there's
a
staff
direction
needed,
ms
brennan
could
not
have
been
more
clear
about
the
situation
and
I
think
it's
okay
go
ahead.
Andrew.
J
J
All
right,
thank
you,
madam
chair.
You
know,
obviously
what
director
brennan
said
was
concerning.
I
think
it
would
be
helpful
if
we
maybe
had
a
little
more
clarity
on
that.
I
know
that
we
have
four
people
today
with
the
program,
and
I
know
that
in
discussions
it
sounds
like
that
fourth
was
going
to
retire,
but
they
would
stay
on
if
this
program
was
kept
around.
J
That,
frankly,
I
feel
is
a
lot
more
important
and
why
this
isn't
something
that
could
be
integrated
continuing
this
service
as
it
stands
today
and
obviously
there
would
have
to
be
one
additional
position
or
one
additional
higher,
but
why
it
could
not
be
continued
on
today
and
why,
in
the
way
it
is
or
what
what
exists
about
it
today?
That
would
cause
it
to
be
so
disruptive
to
all
of
these
other
priorities,
for
I
mean
a
fairly
large
department
cpad.
So
I
think
that
would
just
be
helpful,
as
colleagues
are
thinking
through
this.
O
O
None
of
them
are
actually
allowed
under
under
our
existing
zoning
and
and
code,
and
so
again
that
takes
multiple
staff
and
construction
code
services
to
to
meet
on
a
daily
basis,
on
multiple
shelters
that
we
are
trying
to
get
online
and
that
isn't
going
to
just
end.
That's
not
going
to
end
at
the
end
of
the
year.
That's
going
to
continue
into
2021
and
it's
not
going
to
just
end
with
the
shelters.
I'm
extremely
grateful
that
that
members
of
the
council
are
authoring.
O
O
O
The
state
of
minnesota
has
a
robust,
elevator
inspections
program
and
they
have
they
are
willing
to
take
this
on
and
they're
willing
to
take
this
on
without
asking
for
any
of
the
revenues
that
we
have
collected
in
in
previous
years.
So
that
is,
that
is,
will
be
a
significant
financial
benefit
and
it
it
and
it
will
result
in
in
delivery
of
comparable
services
in
in
minneapolis
the
the.
O
So
you
know
whether
or
not
the
first
you
know
we
will
have
three
or
four
inspectors
at
the
end
of
the
year,
regardless
of
of
of
how,
even
if
this
is
approved,
I
don't
know.
I
can't
answer
that,
because
I
can't
I
I
don't
know
what
the
intentions
of
of
all
of
those
inspectors
are.
But
what
I
can
say
is
that
we
have
had
huge
challenges
in
in
recruiting
and
retaining
staff.
O
J
J
I
think
I
was
maybe
more
looking
for
some
commentary
around
how
that
trying
to
hire
for
one
position
or
keep
the
existing
program
just
the
staff
that
are
already
doing
the
work
them
continuing
to
do
the
work,
how
that
would
take
away
so
significantly
for
cped
from
things
like
addressing
homelessness
or
rebuilding
from
civil
unrest.
I
think
that
was
more
kind
of
where
I
was
going
with
that
and
then
I
don't
know
also,
I
guess
just
a
point
to
mention.
J
J
O
O
It's
not
just
keeping
the
there
isn't
just
the
issue
of
retention,
there's
also
we.
We
have
a
lot
of
turnover
in
this
position.
That's
why
why
this
has
been
a
challenging
business
line
for
us
for
a
number
of
years
several
years
and
in
order
to
adequately
provide
services,
we
need
more
than
five
inspectors
over
the
course
of
the
last
five
years
we
have.
O
We
have
we've
had
a
range
of
six
to
eight
inspectors,
the
majority
of
that
time,
and
that
is
what
we
think
is
really
necessary
to
deliver
the
level
of
service
that
that
that
is
required
of
this
program.
So,
if
we're,
if
we're
looking
at
maintaining
this
as
a
business
line
in
the
future,
then
we
are
absolutely
going
to
have
to
do
a
compensation
study,
we're
going
to
have
to
understand
why
it
is,
and
we
we
have
a
lot
of.
O
We
have
received
a
lot
of
feedback
from
employees
in
the
past,
so
we
understand
that
the
state
pays
more
than
the
city
pays
for
these
positions,
so
we
very
likely
will
need
to
to
work
with
human
resources,
continue
to
work
with
them.
We've
we've
we've
asked
for
these
these
studies
in
the
past
to
do
a
compensation
analysis
and
to
go
through
the
city
council
approval
process,
if
that's
required,
to
change
the
salary
structure
for
these
these
positions
in
order
to
be
competitive
out
there
in
the
marketplace.
O
So
it's
not
just
a
matter
of
you
know
hiring
a
couple
of
positions.
It's
looking
at
the
overall
program
evaluating
why
it
hasn't
been
effective
in
many
years
and
what
we
need
to
do
to
structure
this
program
so
that
it
can
effectively
deliver
the
services
that
that
we
need
to
be
delivering
in
the
city,
and
that
takes
time
and
attention
and
priority,
given
the
importance
of
the
safety
function.
O
C
You
director,
I
put
myself
in
cue.
I
won't
support
the
motion
from
councilmember
gordon.
I
appreciate
the
work
that
went
into
it
for
me,
you
know
I.
I
often
have
conversations
with
department
heads
and
ask
our
departments,
our
leaders
and
our
departments
to
really
prioritize
that
work
that
we
have
identified
as
priorities
through
our
various
processes,
including
the
strategic
race,
equity
action
plan,
and
so
when
I
hear
a
department
head
saying
you
know
these
this
work
that
you
have
directed
us
to
do.
That
is
very
important.
C
C
Everything
can
be
a
priority,
and
so,
if,
if
we're
hearing
from
our
department
head
that
all
of
the
information
that
we
have
about
the
opportunity
costs
of
this
program
and
the
necessity
of
staff
time
to
even
make
it
a
functional
service,
especially
with
the
importance
of
the
safety
function,
that
it
provides,
seems
to
be
a
reasonable
argument
to
have
the
state
take
this
function
over
with
their
program
as
described.
So
an
explanation
of
my
my
vote
to
come.
Is
there
any
other
discussion
on
this
item.
C
E
Well-
and
I
probably
don't
need
to
belabor
it
at
all-
I
do
know
that
there
are
thousands
and
thousands
of
poor
people
who
live
in
high
rises
in
our
city
and
having
this
set
closer
to
home
somewhere,
where
we
could
cover
it
somewhere,
where
we
weren't,
subject
to
what
the
state
might
decide
that
they
were
going
to
do
with
this
would
be
much
better.
I
also
don't
think
that
it
has
to
be
a
huge
priority
and
I'm
not
sure
why
it
hasn't
been
successful
when
all
this
revenue
has
been
coming
in
consistently.
E
I
understand
maybe
there's
turnover,
so
maybe
there
needs
to
be
a
little
help
with
management
or
maybe
it
could
go
to
reg
services,
and
we
could
have
it
more
combined
with
our
fire
inspections
of
commercial
buildings
and
other
buildings
like
that
and
see
if
it
can
be
managed
a
little
bit
better
there.
So
it's
just
disappointing
to
hear
all
this
resistance
coming
up
to
doing
this,
so
it's
really
disappointing
to
hear
that
it
certainly
doesn't.
C
J
C
L
C
C
A
N
A
G
G
C
I
M
I
H
H
We
wanted
to
just
provide
some
specificity
about
how
and
when
they
would
report
back
on
the
work
to
make
sure
that
we're
getting
steady
and
timely
updates-
and
we
drafted
this
in
coordination
with
staff-
and,
I
hope
you'll
all
support
it,
and
I'm
hopeful
that
it's
not
a
particularly
controversial
thing.
We
just
wanted
to
give
this
some
structure.
C
C
A
N
H
G
G
C
C
C
D
P
G
C
C
C
C
Motion
cnn,
I
will
briefly
just
comment
my
deep
thanks
to
all
of
the
staff
who
build
and
maintain
our
infrastructure
system.
We
don't
often
have
much
comment
or
discussion
on
our
capital
budget,
but
it
is
so
critically
important
to
the
day-to-day
lives
of
our
residents.
So
thank
you
to
the
staff
that
are
out
there.
Fixing
the
water
system,
building
our
roads,
building
the
transit
systems
of
the
future
and
to
all
of
the
staff
in
public
works.
They
are
innovating.
C
We
are.
As
far
as
I
know,
we
are
the
first
city
in
the
country
to
use
a
race
equity
equation
of
a
specific
formula
to
program
our
capital
budget
with
streets,
following
with
work
that
the
park
board
did
in
their
own
capital
budget.
So
this
is
one
way
that
we're
connecting
our
residents
to
where
they
need
to
go
we're
providing
those
core
services
that
our
residents
need
and
we're
leveraging
those
dollars
to
fulfill
the
city's
race
equity
goals.
C
D
L
I
G
G
C
That
carries
on
the
six
year.
Capital
improvement
program
is
adopted.
Next
we
have
a
series
of
four
bonding
resolutions
that
total,
just
under
108.7
million
dollars
all
reflected
in
the
agenda
as
items
four
through
seven.
Each
of
these
actions
requests
that
the
board
of
estimate
and
taxation
authorize
the
city
to
encourage
indebtedness
to
issue
bonds
for
these
specific
purposes,
all
tied
to
the
approved
2020
capital
improvement
program.
Councilor
palmasana.
Will
you
give
this
committee
report.
D
Please,
madam
president,
as
you
noted,
the
budget
committee
is
forwarding
four
resolutions
requesting
the
issuance
and
sale
of
city
bonds
by
the
board
of
estimate
and
taxation
in
a
total
amount
of
108
798,
108
million
seven
hundred
ninety
eight
thousand
dollars
which
are
tied
to
the
2021
capital
program
and
within
the
six-year
capital
bonding
period
of
2021
through
2026.
I
move
approval
of
all
resolutions
reflected
in
items
four,
five,
six
and
seven
on
our
meeting
agenda.
C
A
L
L
C
G
C
D
C
C
L
C
J
C
C
L
Goodman,
thank
you,
madam
president.
I
just
and
I'm
as
exhausted
as
anybody
I
want
to
just
take
a
moment
to
thank
you
and
council
members,
palmisano,
fletcher
and
jenkins
for
running
a
great
meeting.
I
really
hold
you
in
very
high
regard
for
the
way
that
you
all
handled
this
in
a
kind
and
compassionate
way
towards
everybody
who
spoke.
I
want
to
thank
councilmember,
palmisano
and
council
member
fletcher
for
doing
a
great
job
with
the
budget.
L
This
is
always
an
afterthought
as
we
do
organization,
and
no
one
really
realizes
that
we've
been
in
a
permanent
state
of
budget
adoption
for
a
good
long
time
and
the
amount
of
work
it
takes
from
the
leadership
of
these
committees
is
absolutely
incredible
and
I
don't
always
vote
for
the
budget.
Those
of
you
who
know
me
well
know
that
I
really
felt
like
this
was
a
budget
worth
adopting
this
year
on
a
whole
number
of
levels.
Despite
the
disagreements,
there's
a
lot
of
really
good
things
in
this
budget.
L
I
also
want
to
thank
casey
and
the
tech
team
and
micah
and
mr
ruff
and
all
of
the
people
who
have
been
on
endless
calls
for
a
very
long
period
of
time.
I
realize
hopefully
no
one
was
left
watching
this
in
the
middle
of
the
night,
but
I
think
that
the
portrayal
that
everyone
doesn't
get
along
is
you
know
it
makes
for
good
newspapers,
but
it's
not
really
the
truth.
L
The
truth
is
that
there
are
great
strong
personal
relationships
between
a
lot
of
people
who
have
to
work
together,
and
I
think
that
the
fact
that
we
got
to
this
point-
and
we
had
such
great
leadership
from
so
many
people
in
the
organization-
is
really
meaningful.
So
I
didn't
want
the
moment
to
pass
without
thanking
a
whole
number
of
you.
I
did
relatively
nothing
comparatively
and
I'm
just
really
grateful
for
your
leadership
and
the
way
you've
all
handled
yourselves
during
this
time.
Thank
you.
I
I
G
Thank
you,
madam
president.
You
know
I
I
just
want
to
start
out
by
really
appreciating
you
and
and
councilmember
fletcher
and
councilmember,
cunningham
and
ellison
for
your
leadership
and
bringing
forth
the
safety
for
all
plan,
which
you
know.
I
I
view
as
the
a
compromised
document
that
brings
us
closer
to
some
of
the
visions
that
that
so
many
in
our
community
have
have
talked
about,
and
so
just
kudos
for
all
the
hard
work
that
you
guys
have
done.
I
also
want
to
just
acknowledge
all
of
our
staff
who.
G
We
we
can't
do
this
work
without
our
without
input
from
our
residents,
our
constituents
and
so
just
really
grateful
to
live
in
a
city
that
cares
so
deeply
and
that
is
really
at
the
forefront
of
of
leading
and
and
showing
how
a
community
can
come
together
and
care
for
each
other.
So
I
just
want
to
thank
everybody
and
and
appreciate
councilmember
palmisano
for
for
her
work
and
leading
us
through
this
really
complex
budgeting.
I
mean
to
do
this
in
a
in
a
virtual.
At
two
months
ago.
G
D
D
You
know
that,
despite
whether
it
was
a
technical
issue
that
he
could
help
break
down
into
something,
we
could
all
understand
or
emergency
issues
like
having
to
redo
the
whole
budget,
mid-year
due
to
kovid
or
legal
issues
that
just
come
up
it's
hard
to
understand
and
to
see
where
things
break
down
he's
been
very
patient
with
us
and
very
steadfast
in
his
commitment
to
making
sure
that
we
have
all
the
information
we
need
to
make
decisions.
So
I
just
wanted
to
thank
him
and
his
budget
team
as
well.
C
C
Our
leadership
at
the
city,
really,
I
think,
in
a
completely
new
way,
understand
the
city's
role
in
the
role
of
every
single
person
at
the
city
in
creating
a
city
that
is
just
and
that
is
equitable,
and
that
is
safe,
and
that
is
the
work
that
every
single
one
of
us
has
together.
So
I
just
want
to
see
and
appreciate
how
much
our
staff
in
every
department
have
stepped
up
so
much
this
year.
C
This
body
has
been
working
together
all
term
and
I
think
it
showed
so
much
the
investments
that
we've
made
in
those
relationships
and
to
creating
an
environment
where
we
can
disagree
and
debate,
as
is
our
job
in
a
democracy
and
come
together
and
and
rise
to
the
challenge
of
governing
in
this
unprecedented
time.
So
I
think
the
city
council
has
really
stepped
up
with
incredible
leadership
this
year
and
it's
an
honor
to
serve
with
each
of
you.
C
I
don't
think
there
is
anyone
else
in
queue,
and
I
will
then
end
this
meeting
by
saying
we
have
concluded
all
of
the
actions
for
the
2021
budget.
We
have
no
further
business
before
us,
so
I
will
declare
this
meeting
adjourned.
Thank
you
so
much
again
to
everyone
who
has
participated
in
the
budget
process
this
year.