►
From YouTube: May 26, 2021 Capital Long Range Improvements Committee
Description
Additional information at
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov
A
All
right,
so
as
a
reminder,
this
meeting
will
be
recorded.
Please
get
used
to
the
chat,
as
those
comments
are
not
invisible
to
the
public
and
we
do
not
want
a
conversation
going
on
separate
from
what
is
verbalized
in
the
meeting.
With
that
the
clerk
will
begin.
The
meeting
the
regular
meeting
of
the
capital
long-range
improvements
committee
will
now
begin.
B
Good
afternoon
my
name
is
jeffrey
strand,
I'm
the
chair
of
the
capital
long
range
improvements
committee.
Before
we
begin
I'd
like
to
note
that
this
meeting
includes
the
remote
participation
of
members
as
authorized
under
minnesota
statutes,
section
13d
.021,
due
to
the
declared
local
health
pandemic.
I
will
now
call
this
meeting
to
order
and
ask
the
clerk
to
call
the
role
so
that
we
may
verify
the
presence
of
a
quorum.
A
B
A
C
D
D
D
E
D
D
D
A
A
B
Present,
thank
you
with
that.
We
have
a
quorum,
we'll
proceed
to
our
agenda,
a
copy
of
which
was
posted
for
public
access
to
the
city's
legislative
information
management
system,
which
is
available
at
lims.minneapolismn.gov,
and
I
would
entertain
a
motion
to
approve
the
agenda
and
to
accept
the
minutes
of
the
last.
G
B
Will
be
may
6
and
when
you're
making
a
motion,
would
you
please
indicate
your
name,
so
the
clerk
can
capture
that
information,
along
with
the
person
who
makes
the
second.
So
is
there
a
motion
to
approve
the
adopt
the
agenda
and
approve
the
minutes.
I
Yes
under
number
four
there's
a
a
an
asterisk
is:
is
that
a
statement
that
anywhere
along
the
line
during
this
process,
someone
can
ask
to
have
an
item
pulled
from
consent
agenda,
or
is
that
already
completed.
B
I
B
B
J
Let's
see
this
is
the
could,
could
the
agenda
may
be
made
large
enough
on
the
screen
that
we
can
read
it.
K
Yeah,
thank
you.
I
I
I
just.
I
know
that
we
had
24
or
less
than
24
hours
to
review
comments,
and
I
know
we
have
on
the
agenda,
may
request
items
you
pull
from
consent
agenda,
the
the
purpose
you
know
I'm
on
the
executive
committee.
The
purpose
was
to
speed
us
up
here
and
to
get
people
to
put
in
their
their
items
to
be
pulled
before
8
o'clock.
Today,
I
do
want
to
make
it
still
that
we're
or
that
people
are
able
to
participate.
K
So
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
still
able
to
to
pull
items
today
if
people
feel
the.
J
I
do
have
it
raised,
I'm
a
little
unclear
on
where
the
consent
comments
are.
I
got
one
document
from
hd
and
one
document
from
transportation.
Is
there
a
third
document
of
consent.
L
Comments,
robert
yeah,
so
so
staff
circulated
the
the
comments
that
had
been
provided
and
had
been
advanced
by
the
individual
committees.
To
the
best
of
our
knowledge,
I
think
we
called
out
those
comments
that
are,
you
know
fully
formed.
There
may
have
been
one
or
two
that
were
still
in
development
that
should
have
been
called
out
on
the
documents
as
well.
Then
individual
committee
members
were
able
to
identify
which
comments,
if
any
that
they
may
have
objection
to,
or
otherwise
would
like
to
discuss
in
the
larger
committee.
L
So
we
haven't,
we
haven't
yet
circulated,
but
do
have
available
via
this
meeting
the
the
consent
comments
and
we've
also
noted
any
comment
that
any
member
has
asked
to
remove
from
the
consent
agenda
so
that
those
can
be
those
can
be
discussed
during
the
discussion
portion
of
this
meeting.
J
L
Steve
no,
we
we
haven't
sent
out
the
the
consent
comments.
Yet
we
have
just
noted
the
ones
that
members
did
respond
to
as
a
potential
option
we
could.
L
B
B
B
If
there's
no
objection
have
one
final
walk
through
to
identify
what
it
is
and
if
there's
any
additional
requests
for
discussion
so
rather
than
you
know,
debating
the
point
for
an
hour,
the
intention
was
to
move
our
process
fairly
but
expeditiously.
B
So
if
they're
john.
H
So
I'll
be
real,
quick,
I
I
don't
oppose
anything
you're
suggesting
I
just
want
to
make
it
clear
that
I
think
that
the
email
that
was
sent
out
was
fairly
clear
and
the
idea
was
that
the
two
documents
that
were
circulated-
one
from
each
task
force,
were
by
default,
going
to
be
the
consent
agenda
unless
any
individual
notified
city
staff
by
8
am
this
morning
of
any
comments
that
they
wanted
pulled
from.
What
would
develop
to
be
the
consent
agenda?
So
what
nobody
has
seen
yet
is
what
has
been
requested
to
be
pulled.
H
J
Well,
I'd
just
like
to
say,
as
the
person
who
raised
the
point,
reviewing
the
email,
it
wasn't
as
clear
to
me
as
it
could
have
been
that
that
was
the
consent
agenda.
There's
reference
to
a
consent
agenda,
but
it's
not
clear
that
the
attachments
are
that
consent
agenda
from
each
committee.
So
that's
why
I
raised
the
point.
Thank
you.
B
E
Yeah
I
just
want
to
let
you
know
I
was
not
able
to
see
either
of
the
attachments
on
the
email
and
replied
to
the
team
indicating
so
I
went
ahead
and
dug
through
the
document
sections
on
sharepoint
and
looked
at
what
I
thought
was
the
match.
But
I
never
heard
back
from
anyone.
L
Rich,
this
is
robert,
I'm
sorry
if
that
was
a
miss
on
our
part,
I'm
hoping
that
you
were
able
to
actually
access
the
documents
that
were
in
sharepoint
because
that's
where
that
is
where
we
have
been
saving
those
documents.
B
All
right,
thank
you.
Staff.
B
Well,
I
would
propose
to
be
fair
to
everyone
that
we
adopt
the
agenda
the
minutes
and
then
we
look
at
the
transportation
task
force,
comments,
consent
and
we
just
identify
all
the
comments
on
there
and
then
at
that
point.
If
someone
wishes
to
discuss
just
you
know,
raise
your
hand,
raise
your
voice
and
say
discuss
and
we'll
move
it
over
to
the
discussion.
E
No
objection:
the
system
is
not
letting
me,
somebody
must.
B
A
Luke
cunningham
hi
scott
engel.
A
William
gullickson,
william
graves
hi,
lisa
hugh's,
dad
hi
jones.
I
think
hi
richard.
F
A
A
B
Let
me
just
maybe
you
can
make
it
bigger.
L
Sure
I'm
just
going
to
scroll
down
until
I
find
the
area,
and
let
me
just
introduce
folks
to
the
comments,
because
we've
copied
and
pasted
directly
from
what
the
individual
task
forces
have
created
into
one
document
and
so
for
folks
that
are
they're
on
the
call
and
tuning
in
you
know,
we
have
a
few
of
the
general
comments
up
top
these
aren't
on
the
consent
agenda.
We
grade
them
out.
L
We
actually
have
some
human
development
comments
up
top
as
well.
These
are
also
grayed
out
where
they're
not
on
the
consent
agenda,
I'm
going
to
scroll
down
to
the
transportation
task,
force
comments
and
then
zoom
in
and
I'll
note
for
the
for
the
grid
of
the
group
which
comments
we
have
on
here
that
are
on
the
consent
agenda.
L
At
this
time.
Please
correct
us
if
you
did
in
fact
email
and
indicate
that
you
wanted
a
comment
to
to
be
pulled.
Hopefully
we
got
everything,
but
there's
just
been
a.
There
has.
L
Past
few
days,
so
for
the
consent
agenda
for
the
transportation
task
force,
we're
looking
at
a
comment
on
tr
o21
traffic
signals
you
scroll
down.
L
Some
more
looks
like
a
sub
comment
on
tr021
traffic
signals
regarding
timing
issues,
collaboration
between
paving
projects
and
r01
pv-001,
pv
parkway,
paving
program
related
to
traffic
markings,
pv-001
parkway,
paving
programs
related
to
funding
levels,
pv
122,
darling,
ave,
pb,
127,
37th
avenue,
northeast
pv,
137,
29th
avenue,
northeast
pb,
157,
33rd
avenue,
northeast
pv,
178
johnson
street
bp,
006
18th
avenue,
northeast
swk02,
sidewalk
gaps,
pr
101,
major
bridge
repair
and
rehabilitation,
water,
12,
water
distribution
improvements,
and
that
concludes
the
transportation
comments
that
are
on
today's
consent.
D
L
We
do
have
a
question
in
the
chat
about
where
the
document
is
in
sharepoint,
so
for
the
those
click
members
who
are
used
to
working
in
sharepoint.
This
is
saved
as
click
2022
2027
comments
all
and
then
it's
got
today's
date
after
it
and
saved
with.
I
should
be
saved
with
the
rest
of
the
comments
it
might
be
in
the.
B
H
I
I
Okay,
so
it's
calling
for
collaboration,
did
you
want
to
combine
it
into
one
comment
with
what
we
have
in
in
the
human
development
area,
or
how
do
you
want
to
treat
this.
H
B
I
I
I
think
that
would
be
the
wise
way
to
go
and
and
bring
both
teams
together
to
to
talk
about
how
we
might
bring
the
comments
into
into
one.
B
I
I
so
noted
we're
given
that
opportunity.
Let's
see,
we
have
robert,
I
believe,
and
then
steve
brandt.
L
My
my
hands
should
be
down.
I
just
wanted
to
know,
should
I
should
I
gray
this
one
out
and
take
it
off?
Yes,.
J
H
B
B
B
Okay,
rich
laro.
E
L
Correct,
I'm
I'm
sorry
rich,
I
I
don't
have
that
note.
I'm
not
sure
who.
E
Okay,
so
I
was
not
able
to
read
anything
from
the
email,
I'm
happy
to
let
it
go
if
most
people
on
the
human
development
team
had
a
chance
to
review
those
comments.
Could
I
get
a
show
of
hands
from
everyone
on
the
human
development
task
force,
who
had
a
chance
to
read
the
transportation
comments.
E
Okay,
so
it
looks
like
we
have
a
quorum.
Most
people
were
able
to
see
those
before
this
meeting.
So
if
that's
the
case,
then
I
don't
feel
the
need
to
review
them
myself.
B
N
N
I
If
I
might
share
katrina,
what
we're
going
to
do
is
look
at
this
particular
project
within
the
context
of
the
broader
comment
that
was
created
in
the
human
development
area,
the
one
you
worked
in.
B
To
get
get
to
that
today
on
the
agenda,
we're
looking
at
consent
on
transportation,
consent
on
human
development
and
then
the
discussion,
so
you
know
it
was
a
chair
chair's
idea.
Chair
accepts
full
responsibility.
For
this
part,
I
can't
control
the
staff
and
I'm
certainly
apologetic
and
wish
to
make
sure
that
we
in
the
future,
as
a
person,
who's
working
full
time.
B
B
So
I
see
john
has
his
hand
raised.
Then
the
next
item
that'll,
be
in
order,
will
be
a
motion
to
approve
the
transportation
consent
agenda
report.
John.
H
I
don't
want
to
believe
this
will
take
30
seconds.
This
might
help
rich,
because
I
had
a
similar
problem
a
couple
of
years
ago,
with
not
being
able
to
open
attachments
that
were
sent
from
the
city
if
you're
using
gmail.
What
I've
found
is,
if
you
don't
use
an
email,
client
and
instead
log
on
to
gmail
from
the
web,
all
of
those
attachments
seem
to
work
from
there.
So
again
I
don't
want
to
belabor
it,
but
if
that
fits
you,
you
might
want
to
try
that.
B
Okay,
so
is
there
a
motion
to
adopt
the
transportation
task
force
consent
agenda
as
it
has
been
revised
so.
B
F
B
Mute
is
neil
or.
F
L
Sorry,
sorry
jeff,
I
don't
I
don't
know.
Let
me
see
if
I
can
pull
up
a
low
call
or
double
check
that
neil's
not
been
voted
off
of
them.
Sorry,
I'm
sorry
about
it.
A
Okay,
so
thorbjorn
adam.
C
F
A
A
James
brown,
aye
luke,
cunningham,
hi,
scott
engel.
D
D
A
B
And
two
abstentions:
that's
correct!
Okay!
That
is
adopted.
Let's
next
move
to
the
human
development
task
force
comments,
consent
report
staff
can
update
the
membership.
L
Yep
so
jeff
and
and
members
of
the
committee
we
noted
as
comments
came
in
or
as
as
folks
indicated,
questions
that
they
wanted
to
discuss.
We
just
grayed
out
areas
of
the
human
development
task
force
comments
that
had
been
circulated
around.
We
have
some
additional
formatting
in
here.
That's
not
directly
pertinent
to
the
conversation.
We
grayed
out
all
these
comments.
So
at
this
time
click
members
have
indicated
that
they'd,
like
additional
discussion
on
each
of
the
human
development
task
force
comments.
B
B
H
Raised,
I
would
move
adoption
of
that
comment,
collaboration
between
paving
projects
and
art
101
as
written.
The
comment
does
not
overlap
with
the
hd
comment
about
art
in
public
spaces.
That
comment
is
specifically
about
increases
to
funding
for
art
and
public
faces
in
a
broad
sense.
This
is
a
specific
comment
that
is
asking
them
to
address
a
particular
intersection
in
a
similar
way
that
they
they
address
the
intersection
of
pv
122.
B
And
they
don't
laugh
all
right.
Sorry,
the
member
should
wait
for
a
second
and
then
we
can
second.
B
Okay,
oh
scrota,
right,
okay
staff
can
help
me
with
hands
because
of
the
screen
sharing
team's
up
steve.
J
No,
I
didn't
have
anything
on
this.
Eric
has
his
hand
up.
B
I
Yes,
so
in
in
reading
this,
my
thought
is
close
to
what
we
did
last
year
using
this
as
an
example,
because
this
directly
supports,
as
as
an
example
of
what
can
be
done
with
art
in
public
places
being
used,
and
I
I'd
like
to
turn.
I
have
the
the
the
creator
of
the
other,
the
other
statement
on
art
and
public
places,
katrina
if
you're
present
would
you
like
to.
B
Okay
katrina,
stratton.
N
Okay,
my
concern
about
integrating
them
is
that
it
will
dilute
the
statement
specifically
for
increasing
the
budget
as
compared
to
other
cities.
I
agree
with
john
that
this
is
an
independent
statement,
basically
kind
of
like
the
one
on
you
know,
for
dowling
avenue
and
the
bridge
kind
of
art
so
and
also
for
the
fourth
street
balustrades
or
whatever.
So
I
would
really
hate
to
water
down
the
human
development
statement
by
tagging
on
other
things,.
I
Okay,
I
sort
of
see
the
opposite
direction.
Yes,
I
I'm
sorry
chair.
I
see
it
going.
The
other
way,
which
is
this
is
a
concrete
example.
No
pun
intended
a
concrete
example
of
of
what
is
what
can
be
done
to
support
the
general
comment.
This
is.
This
is
a
concrete
example,
but
if,
if
that's
not
what
the
committee
sees,
I
I'm
glad
to
defer.
B
Thank
you.
So
we
have
katie
jones.
K
Yeah,
I
guess
I
would
just
recommend
that
we
just
reference
it
and
say
if
we're
gonna
go,
that
route,
that,
in
the
in
the
more
general
comment
about
art,
that
we
say
you
know
the
collaboration
between
paving
projects
and
ardo.
One
is
one
example
on
26th
avenue
north
not
having
to
actually
directly
restate.
F
B
D
A
William
graves
right,
this
is
housted
hi,
eddie
jones,
hi,
kazuka
hi.
This
is
laurel
hi.
F
A
E
A
A
A
That's
25.
D
B
B
I
B
No,
I
don't
think
that's
an
order,
because
we
we
just
ask
staff
to
do
that,
and
members
will
have
the
opportunity
to
raise
any
questions
or
concerns.
B
I
L
Steve
thanks
for
the
clarification,
I
think
this
is
a
point
that
that
could
be
cleared
up.
We
do
note.
Fleet
01
is
kind
of
up
and
included
with
was
up
and
included
with
the
general
comments
and
the
way
that
we
structured
this.
L
So
I
think
at
this
point
it
might
benefit
us
to
clarify
or
verify
whether
or
not
501
was
intended
to
be
a
general
comment
or
if
it
was
intended
to
be
a
project
specific
under
the
circumstances.
If
it
was
project
specific,
I
don't
know
that
we
have
a
a
comment
or
a
question
from
anybody
outstanding
on
it.
B
B
B
Okay,
so
hd
co-chairs
the
comments
that
are
labeled
general.
Is
it
your
intent
that
they
should
be
looked
at
when
we
get
to
the
introduction
of
new
click?
General
comments?
B
Yes,
very
good,
so
that's
so
then
we'd
start
at
legal.
I
K
Yeah
I'm
trying
to
follow
along
here
in
terms
of
our
process
today.
I
hope
I'm
not
the
only
one
that's
struggling
a
little
bit
here,
but
since
particularly
fleet
o1
has
been
pulled.
I
know
we
talked
about
it
briefly
in
the
transportation
section
or
a
subcommittee
task
force,
and
I
would
actually
like
to
we
had
made
a
comment
about
fledo
one
last
time
or
last
year
talking
about
the
desire
to
to
split
fuel
and
charging
stations,
and
I
think
it's
important
to
reiterate
that.
K
So,
if
I
guess
I
would
move
adding
to
this,
basically
the
comment
that
we
made
last
year
and
I'm
happy
to
pull
that
that
language
and
make
it
visible
for
folks.
I
Okay,
chair
could
we
accept
her
her
amendment
and
because
I
I
think
we
worked
on
that
language
last
year
and
I
believe
it's
perfectly
suitable
here.
B
Yes,
I
think
we'd
like
to
see
the
language
that
we're
voting
on.
I
have
the
report
in
my
hands,
but.
K
Yeah,
I
can
copy
paste
it
into
the
chat
and
then
whoever's
controlling
the
screen
can
fit
it
in
there.
If
that
works.
E
K
B
I
read
it
so
we
can
move
on
fuel
and
charging
stations,
click
request
that
sends
gasoline
and
diesel
infrastructure
and
electric
vehicle
chargers
achieve
and
address
city
goals
in
different
ways.
Fueling
and
charging
projects
should
be
treated
as
separate
projects
such
that
they
can
be
scored
appropriately.
K
B
So
that
is
an
amendment,
but
I
guess
I
may
have
been
remiss
did
we
get
a
motion
to
adopt
flt-01?
K
I
D
B
Not
katrina.
B
K
Sorry,
I
hate
to
be
the
one
to
do
this.
I
just
trying
to
be
the
you
know
consistent
from
year
to
year
and
how
we're
we're
approaching
public
works.
We
usually
ask
them
to
explore
and
to
to
evaluate
things
like
that
and
request,
and
so
the
the
use
of
install
a
couple
of
hydrogen
stations.
K
That
seems
very
prescriptive,
and
you
know
we
don't.
We
do
want
to
lean
on
the
expertise
of
public
works
and,
like
is
a
couple,
the
right
number.
So,
if
that
type
of
you
know,
I
would
urge
us
to
to
change.
You
know
to
change
that
language
slightly
to
say,
lead
in
the
use
of
forward
thinking
strategies
and
explore
hydro,
the
use
of
hydrogen
station
fueling
stations
to
support
new
blah
blah
blah.
K
B
All
right
point.
D
B
L
This
this
is
robert.
I
I
wouldn't
know
one
off
the
top
of
my
head.
I
feel
like
I,
you
know
it's.
A
great
question
I
feel
like
public
works
would
would
very
happily
read
the
intent
if
there
was
another
model
that
might
make
more
sense.
B
Okay,
I
see
katrina
has
her
hand,
but
I'll
just
say
that
so
katie
and
eric
as
the
maker
and
seconder
you're
happy
with
this
change.
B
N
I
I
I
would
suggest
taking
out
toyota,
I
I'm
fairly
confident
we
have
no
toyotas
in
the
fleet
at
the
moment,
and
I
think
it
would
be
just
as
as
meaningful
if
we
took
the
brand
out.
N
I
J
B
B
D
A
M
D
A
M
A
B
D
A
Eric
one
I
vice
chair,
willie
bridges,
aye.
A
B
A
B
J
Okay,
I
would
move
to
strike
the
second
sentence,
which
reads:
click
recommends
to
the
nbc
that
the
nbc
board
gives
serious
attention
to
the
need
for
screening
of
visitors
to
the
building
as
well.
Much
as
I
hate
to
disagree
with
my
good
friend
dan,
I
think
that
I
object
to
the
placement
here
for
two
reasons.
J
J
I
I
know
it
is
possible
and
it
has
been
done
to
harden
the
entrance
to
certain
offices
around
town
that
are
I'm
sorry
around
the
building
that
are
likely
to
attract
maybe
more
heated
visitors,
for
example,
the
city
council
offices
are
restricted
the
I
believe,
areas
in
the
police
department
as
well,
and
I
would
prefer
to
have
more
specific
information
from
the
mbc
staff
about
whether
this
is
an
issue
and
how
often
it
is
an
issue
before
I
worked.
You
know
before
I
would
support
going
forward
with
something
like
this.
J
I
think
the
character
of
this
building
is,
and
the
functions
in
it
are
are
somewhat
much
more
different
from
those
of
the
of
the
building
across
the
street.
The
government
center,
which
is
where
the
serious
trials
take
place
where
the
judges
are,
are
officed
and
and
so
on.
So
those
are
the
reasons
I'm
moving
to
strike
here.
B
So
steve
you're
moving
the
comment
as
you're
the
maker
of
the
motion
right
but
you're
just
moving
to
strike
the
second
sentence.
Correct.
Is
there
a
second.
H
So
I
agree
with
steve's
sentiment
here,
but
for
different
reasons.
It
strikes
me.
I
I'm
president
katzis
earlier
that
this
is
out
of
nbc's.
Baileywick
nbc
would
certainly
be
the
people
who
would
implement
if
the
people
in
the
building,
who
should
make
the
decision
about
whether
there
should
be
increased
screening
there
should
happen,
then
nbc
would
be
charged
with
making
the
physical
changes
to
have
that
happen.
But
it's
not
in
nbc's
baileywick
to
make
that
decision
or
to
consider
it.
H
B
Dan
and
then
willie.
O
Well,
thanks
and
thanks,
steve
and
and
john
for
your
comments.
You
know
for
me
this
is
you
know
about
protecting
employees
in
the
building,
some
of
whom
I
represent.
O
O
D
J
B
D
K
Thank
you,
sorry
as
muted.
I
just
wanted
to
say
I
wouldn't
support
this
this
line
either
in
this
comment
or
elsewhere.
First,
actually,
when
I
read
it,
I
was
thinking
of
screening
in
terms
of
architectural
screening,
and
so
I
think
that's
one
reason
why
this
isn't
a
good.
This
is
an
appropriate
place,
but
then.
Secondly,
I
worked
in
city
hall
for
five
years.
I
know
the
importance
of
this
being
a
public
building
that
people
can
come
into
freely.
K
There's
protests
in
the
rotunda
all
the
time,
and
I
it
just
it.
I
think
there
are
life
safety
things
that
that
can
be
made
at
certain
in
certain
areas
of
the
building.
As
willie
was
saying
certain
you
know
police
areas,
but
I
don't
think
that
necessitates
the
entire
building
requiring
security
measures.
J
Okay,
I
would
like
to
respond
to
dan's
comment,
which
I
respect
it's
his
job
to
represent
city
employees
and
see
to
their
working
conditions.
B
I
Okay,
I'd
like
to
offer
a
compromise
that
sort
of
blends
what
steve
was
saying
initially
a
bit
of
what
katie
was
saying
and
some
of
what
john
was
saying
if
we
were
to
remove
this
sentence
from
nbc
13
and
and
express
the
sentiment,
the
need
for
securing
to
ensuring
the
the
safety
of
our
employees
and
visitors
within
these
buildings.
As
a
general
statement
in
the
investments
in
public
safety
area,
I
I
think
that
would
be
a
worthy
compromise.
I
There's
a
word
which
I'm
on
second
thought,
I'm
having
trouble
with,
which
is
screening.
Screening
is
a
physical
action
and
that's
not
really
something
that
infrastructure
can
solve.
I
think
we
can.
I
B
We're
we
have
two
people
in
queue:
dan
and
katrina
just
want
to
remind
people
of
the
time
it's
now
102.
O
B
N
Okay-
okay,
sorry
I
couldn't
unmute.
Maybe
the
comment
can
be
written
more
creatively
because
listening
to
all
of
the
conversations
and
the
need
for
access,
maybe
we
recommend
that
they
creatively
look
at
some
way
of
being
able
to
provide
more
safety
and
security
within
that
space.
N
B
Okay,
I'm
going
to
ask
the
members
if,
since
we
have,
this
is
our
first
meeting
on
comments
of
the
full
body,
so
we're
spending
a
lot
of
time
wordsmithing
here
in
the
meeting
and
the
other
alternative,
would
be
to
just
table
something
and
have
people
identified
to
work
together
to
rewrite
and
bring
it
back
next
week.
I
Yeah
I'd
like
to
make
a
motion
to
remove
that
sentence
and
with
with
my
own
little
footnote
that
we'll
revisit
this.
When
we
get
to
the
general
comment
regarding
public
safety
and.
B
And
the
footnote,
I
guess
staff
can
try
to
put
a
footnote
in
the
margin.
So
is
there
any
further
discussion
on
this
comment
as
it's
been
moved,
so
the
second
sentence
is:
is
removed,
as
it's
proposed.
D
D
A
A
D
N
A
Guan
aye
vice
chair,
billy
bridges,
hi
here,
jeff
strand,
hi,
that's
25
eyes.
B
Very
good,
I
see
john.
H
So
if
the
chair
will
indulge
me
for
just
a
second,
I
I
just
want
to
let
dan
know
that
I
personally
would
be
supportive
of
a
comment
that
requests
hardening
security
in
specific
areas
of
the
building
instead
of
the
building.
Overall,
if
you
were
to
do
that
in
a
general
comment
instead
of
under
mbc,
I
would
be
supportive
of
that
next
week.
H
This
is
a
little
fuzzy,
but
it
strikes
me
that
the
next
comment-
investments
in
public
safety
and
the
comment
under
mpd04
and
mpvo5
are
actually
at
least
in
part
contradictory
of
one
another,
and
I
would
propose
that
a
new
comment,
the
the
general
idea
of
these
comments
I
am
in
agreement
with,
but
I
don't
like
the
way
they've
been
written,
I
think
they're
too
long
and
too
wordy
and
that
the
message
can
be
delivered
in
a
single
paragraph
for
both
and
I
base
well
sorry
so
that
the
motion
is
to
to
consolidate
these
into
a
single
comment
that
specifically
addresses
the
issue
of
the
city's
got
to
make
a
decision
about
policing
going
forward
before
we
start
funding
big
long-term
projects
that
that's
the
motion,
I'm
happy
to
craft
something
for
next
week.
B
H
So,
as
I
read
these
that
what
I
just
stated
is
basically
what
the
general
comment
says
is
that
they
really
shouldn't
be
asking
us
to
make
decisions
about
funding
new
police
precinct
buildings
when
there
is
still
equipment
about
what
is
going
to
look
like
in
the
city
so
and
then
the
the
comment
under
mpd
and
mpd04
goes
on
to
ask
them
to
do
specific
planning
around
those
precincts
starting
next
year
and
to
me
those
are
in
conflict.
I
don't
know
when
they're
going
to
resolve
this,
whether
it
gets
resolved
this
fall
or
not.
H
I
think
still
remains
to
be
seen.
It's
certainly
possible
that
will
happen,
but
I
think
our
ask
should
be
very
simple
and
I
think
we
should
stay
out
of
policy
around
policing.
Well,
we
all
have
opinions
about
that
and,
in
fact,
might
be
unanimous
on
the
committee.
That's
not
the
purview
of
click.
The
purview
of
click
is
to
make
recommendations
around
capital
infrastructure,
and
so
I
think
that
we
should
stick
to.
J
I
just
I
I
would
volunteer
to
be
one
of
the
people
that
works
on
this
comment,
and
my
contribution
would
be
to
not
only
right
after
the
precinct
projects
that
are
called
out
to
also
add
in
psd
23,
which
is
the
mpd
training
and
wellness
program
and
then
add
a
bullet
point
at
the
bottom.
That
says.
J
If,
if
that
project
moves
ahead,
we
suggest
that
the
department
investigate
co-locating
the
project
with
either
the
new
fourth
precinct,
if
that
happens,
or
on
available
city
land
at
the
city,
fire
training
facility
and
water
works
in
sibley,
saying
fridley.
So
I
I've
got
that
language
for
whoever
wants
to
work
on
the
comments
and
I'd
be
glad
to
contribute
as
well.
B
Okay,
I
didn't
see
it
john.
H
M
Yeah-
and
I
would
kind
of
defer
a
little
bit
to
thor
in
his
kind
of
drafting
and
imagining
of
this
comment,
but
I
do
think,
rather
than
making
these
statements
about
policing
policy,
what
we
were
we
were
attempting
to
do
was
to
kind
of
kind
of
within
click's
domain
of
of
interpreting
enumerated
city
policies
in
order
to
make
decisions
about
capital
bonding
that
there
was
not
a
lot
of
definition
in
those
documents
that
we
were
supposed
to
be
referring
to.
M
I
Yeah
another
another
point
to
raise
here.
I
The
level
of
detail
in
part
was
because
we
wanted
to
avoid
another
public
service
building
situation
where
we've
not
given
them
instructions
to
report
to
us
or
to
let
us
know
in
advance
if
a
project's
to
be
put
on
the
on
the
agenda,
so
the
specificity
about,
tell
us
if
there's
any
planning
going
on
or
pre-planning
going
on
and
and
suggesting
that
they
submit
it
as
a
budget
request
is
very
important
because
they've
done
it
before,
and
this
is
one
way
to
make
sure
they
don't
do
it
again
and
they're
very
transparent
with
us.
H
John,
so
thanks
everybody
and
just
to
be
clear.
Thank
you
for
some
of
that
clarification,
I'm
certainly
not
being
accusatory
of
of
the
con.
To
the
extent
that
the
comment
moves
into
policy,
I
think
it's
only
through
inference
and
I'm
not
not
suggesting
it
was
intentional.
I
just
think
we
could
make
it
even
cleaner
and
I
guess,
if
I'd
be
happy
to
work
with
the
authors
on
this
this
coming
week
to
try
and
come
to
a
compromise
with
this,
and
I
would
not
object
to
putting
some
specific
things
in
there.
H
But
I
think,
if
we're
going
to
do
that,
we
need
to
make
it
more
clear
that
number
one
they
got
to
make
a
decision
about
long-term.
What
policing
is
going
to
look
like
before
they
can
start.
You
know
investing
in
75-year
buildings,
but
then
we
can
say
once
you've
done
that
we
want
to
see
really
specific
plans
around
these
projects
as
they
fit
with
whatever
you
decide
to
do
going
forward.
I'd
be
totally
open
to
something
like
that.
I
think
it
just
needs
to
be
a
little
bit
more
clear.
B
Okay,
john,
I
think
I'm
assuming
your
hand
is
lowered
and
so
essentially
we're
looking
at
tabling
to
june
seconds
meeting
the
general
investment
in
public
safety
and
the
mpdo4
in
pdo5,
with
suggestion
to
wrap
in
mpd
23.
B
So
I
heard
authors
are
eamonn
thor
eric
jocelyn,
willie
and
steve
and
john.
M
D
D
A
Jocelyn
beard
john
bernstein
hi
brandt
hi,
james
brown,.
P
D
E
F
E
A
Hi
katrina,
stratton
aye,
dr
juan
hi,
vice
chair,
willie,
bridges,
hi,
chair,
jeff,
strand
hi,.
D
B
H
B
Okay,
so
we
have
motion
and
second
john
recognized
to
speak
to
the
motion.
H
Thank
you,
so
I
want
to
start
by
saying
that
I'm
very
supportive
of
our
public
places,
I
think
it's
a
great
program
and
I
think
it's
been
a
very
successful
program.
That
being
said,
this
comment
is
asking
for
dramatic
improvement
or
dramatic
increases
in
the
funding
that
art
in
public
places
receives
for
those
that
may
not
be
aware
of
the
roughly
130
projects
that
we
review
every
year.
This
is
the
only
project
that
is
guaranteed
funds.
There
is
no
other
project
on
this
list.
That
is
guaranteed
funds.
It's
actually
in
city
ordinances.
H
H
And
additionally,
if
you
look
at
that,
cbr
the
art
public
places
director
says
that
they
are
able
to
leverage
an
additional
25
percent
for
other
donations
outside
of
the
city,
so
that
puts
them
over
a
million
bucks
every
year
sure
it
would
be
nice
to
spend
more
on
art,
but
at
a
time
when
budgets
are
constrained
and
we're
asking
them
to
tighten
their
belts-
and
this
is
one
where
they
in
fact
can't
cut
it,
which
is,
is
fine.
That's
why
there's
a
city
ordinance
that
protects
it.
H
In
addition,
they
have
a
three
million
dollar
unspent
balance,
so
in
the
context
of
what
they're
allocated
every
year
they're
about
years
behind-
and
that's
been
the
case
for
quite
a
period
of
time-
and
it's
been
exciting
to
us
right-
I
mean
it
takes
time
to
identify
sites,
identify
artists
get
stuff
in
place,
all
the
rest
of
it.
So,
for
those
reasons,
I'm
moving
strike
to
comment
recognize.
B
N
So,
after
doing
a
lot
of
research
and
investigation,
the
reason
it's
to
me-
it's
only
eight
hundred
thousand
dollars.
If
we
tripled
the
budget,
it's
still
to
me
pretty
low.
When
you
go
back
and
look
at
the
history
of
the
aipp
minneapolis
didn't
start
to
hey
ipa
until
2015,
where
other
cities
of
comparable
size
and
even
cities,
smaller
than
minneapolis,
started
these
programs
in
the
80s
and
90s,
which
puts
minneapolis
behind.
N
Why
this
is
important.
Is
that
one
of
the
things
that
corporations
do
when
they
decide
to
come
to
cities?
Is
they
see
what
kinds
of
art
and
public
places
gets
within
that
budget?
How
long
it's
been
going
on
and
what
kinds
of
things
are
in
that
space?
So
minneapolis
is
already
quite
a
bit
behind
and
just
anecdotally.
N
Through
all
my
travels,
I
noticed
it
and
didn't
realize
I
had
noticed
it
so
it's
it's
also
reduces
crime
in
neighborhoods
that
have
art
in
public
places.
It
increases
education,
educational
attainment
in
places.
So
it's
not
just
a
to
me
a
desire,
desirable,
it's
critical
and
it's
critical
that
many
that
minneapolis
catch
up.
Seeing
as
how
one
of
the
statements
is
that
we're
a
leader
in
so
many
areas.
H
I
do
so
I
would
respectfully
disagree
with
a
number
of
those
statements.
I
too
have
researched
this
and
so
I'll
share
some
of
that
information
with
the
committee,
the
art
commission,
public
art
commission
in
the
city
of
minneapolis
was
codified
in
1974,
and
if
you
look
at
art
and
public
places
own
website
on
facebook,
they
identify
that
they
have
been
a
major
part
of
the
capital
improvement
program
since
1992..
H
Many
cities
do
not
have
that
in
general
around
the
country,
to
the
extent
that
their
funding
based
on
capital
improvements
that
ranges
from
a
half
a
percent
to
two
percent
reminder
we're
at
one
and
a
half
percent
and
in
fact,
one
of
the
cities.
That's
cited
in
that
common
as
an
exemplary
example
is
philadelphia
which
uses
one
percent
and,
ironically,
in
2021,
they've
dramatically
cut
their
budget
for
art,
presumably
because
it's
not
codified
in
philadelphia
and
they're
able
to
do
that.
Also,
the
way
a
lot
of
the
cities
do
this.
H
Is
they
do
one
percent
of
construction
costs
of
projects
which
is
different
than
what
minneapolis
does,
which
is
one
and
a
half
percent
of
net
debt
bonds
period?
And
it's
so
there's
in
a
lot
of
these
cities?
It's
qualified
projects,
there's
no
such
thing
as
qualified
projects.
Here
it's
just
a
blanket
number
on
the
on
the
total
net
debt
bonds.
Again,
I'm
not
debating
the
the
importance
of
this
project.
N
N
F
B
Was
that
willy?
Yes,
okay,
so
that's
non-debatable,
I
I
believe
so
we
can
have
the
clerk
call
the
role
on
tabling
this
and
then
we'll
identify
people
who
work
together.
The
authors
and
rich.
Do
you
have
a
quick
question?
It's
not
really
not
a
debatable.
E
It's
a
question:
if
we,
if
we
deny
the
table
this,
will
we
move
forward
with
the
motion
to
strike
it.
B
A
A
F
D
K
E
F
D
I
A
Eyes
three
names:
eight
extensions.
B
Okay,
so
that
is
table
and
the
authors,
katrina,
jake
and
john.
Are
you
volunteering
to
work
since
you
had
concerns.
H
B
B
Okay,
well,
we'll
we
have
a
table,
so,
let's
127,
so
we
do
have
quite
a
bit
more
work
to
go
and
we
have
the
new
click
general
comments,
and
then
we
had
an
overview
net
that
bond
preliminary
programming.
B
John
I'll,
get
you
in
just
one.
Second,
I
want
to
ask
the
staff:
do
we
have
we
thought
it
was
important
to
introduce
that
last
item?
Do
we
have
that?
L
Right,
so
we
don't
have
so
let
me
put
it
this
way.
We
we
have
the
netbond
resources
that
click
we'll
be
using
in
order
to
do
the
net
debt
bond
programming,
okay,
but
we
we
don't,
have
the
rankings
available
right
now
today,
all
right
preliminary.
B
H
H
You
so
I
just
have
a
fundamental
problem
with
the
basic
concept
of
this
comment,
which
is
that,
if
a
neighborhood,
if
the
park
system
receives
private
funding
from
a
neighborhood
that,
in
effect,
that
should
be
deducted
from
their
public
funding,
I
just
don't
view
that
as
the
appropriate
way
to
do
this
just
to
back
up
for
a
second,
the
the
park
board.
First
of
all,
has,
I
would
say,
led
the
city
on
equity
issues
in
terms
of
implement
in
terms
of
devising
a
plan
and
implementing
the
plan.
They've
been
exemplary.
H
They
have
a
seven
characteristic
system
that
they
use
when
they
look
at
parks,
improvements
to
parks,
additions
to
parks,
all
of
that
stuff
and
the
single
highest
weighted
characteristic
of
those
seven
is
racially
concentrated
areas
of
poverty.
In
addition,
if
you
go
through
their
document
about
the
criteria
that
they
use,
they
also
say
that
they
use
an
equity
lens
when
they,
when,
when
they
seek
other
funding
sources,
private,
you
know
outside
of
the
city.
H
H
You
know
those
areas
of
the
city
are
probably
through
their
property
taxes,
putting
more
into
the
system
than
they're
receiving
and
that's
fine,
that's
that's
a
form
of
progressive
taxation,
which
is
exactly
what
we
should
have,
but
to
ask
that
this
be
put
on.
On
top
of
that,
just
on
principle,
I
don't
believe
that
you
get
to
equity
by
taking
away
from
others.
I
believe
you
get
to
equity
by
giving
to
those
that
need
stop.
G
Thank
you.
So
I
guess
I'll
just
note
that
this
comment
is
intended
to
provide
additional
public
insight
and
disclosure
to
joint
public-private
funding
sources
for
policy
makers
when
making
decisions.
G
I
think
that
in
the
interest
of
the
park
board's
intended,
you
know,
equity
stance
that
we
as
a
city
be
very
clear
about
the
ways
that
we,
both
through
public
and
private
means,
are
funding
our
parks,
particularly
when
we
live
in
a
city
that
has
tremendous
differences
in
the
ability
to
do
that
from
park
to
park
and,
given
the
I
think,
universal
interest
in
a
high
quality
park
system,
that's
shared
across
the
city.
So
that's
the
intent
of
this
comment.
N
So
john,
I
agree
with
you
and
at
the
same
time
I
like
this
statement
in.
N
So,
instead
of
looking
at
it
the
way
in
areas
of
concentrated
poverty,
what
ends
up
happening
in
areas
of
concentrated
wealth
because
of
people
having
the
money
or
will
donate
to
certain,
for
instance
like
a
skating,
rink
or
tennis
courts
and
areas?
How
would
you
propose
that
that
can
be
said
or
how?
How
do
you
propose
that
that
can
be
put
in
this
so
that
no
matter
what
happens
areas
of
concentrated
wealth
can
continue
to
pour
the
money
into
their
parks
and
keep
it
unbalanced.
B
So
we
have,
I
guess
that
was
a
question
through
the
chair,
john
and
then
katie.
H
So
I'll
respond
to
both
phil
and
katrina.
So,
with
respect
to
what
bill
said,
I
have
no
objection
to
that
with
respect
to
private
and
public
money
that
the
park
board
solicits.
H
I
think
it's
fine
to
do
it
that
way
and
that's
in
fact
what
they
do,
and
it's
in
written
documents
that
you
know
you
can
find
online
that
states
that
that's
exactly
what
they
do.
I
don't
think
that's
what
they
should
do
when
a
neighborhood
raises
money
to
as
katrina
and
katrina's
example
to
fund
a
skating
rink.
H
I
think
that
should
be
outside
of
that,
and
I
don't
think
that
does
anything
to
harm
equity
to
katrina's
question
the
rating
system
that
the
park
board
uses
takes
that
into
account,
because
in
addition
to
looking
at
I'll
just
give
you
all
the
characteristics,
so
they
divide
them
into
two
categories.
Community
characteristics
are
racial,
racially
concentrated
areas
of
poverty,
youth,
population,
population
density
and
neighborhood
safety.
In
addition
to
those
four,
they
have
three
that
are
called
park,
characteristics,
that's
the
park,
asset
lifespan,
the
park
asset
condition
and
the
proportion
of
value.
H
So
if,
if
a
neighborhood,
if
a
wealthier
neighborhood
puts
in
the
skating
rink
they've
just
improved
the
condition
of
the
park
and
they've
put
in
newer
assets
right,
so
that's
gonna
when
the
park
board
goes
through
and
assesses
that
park,
that's
gonna,
ding
them
they're
already
getting
dinged
for
doing
that,
which
is
fine
right,
because
they've
put
in
some
new
infrastructure
so
to
additionally
say
because
some
private
money
got
put
in
that
should
get
pulled
away
from
public
money
should
get
pulled
away.
I
I
just
find
not
appropriate.
B
I'll
give
an
opportunity
for
william
or
katrina
to
re-comment
and
then
we'll
go
into
the
queue.
N
You
know
it's
a
quandary,
but
I
have
been
at
those
meetings
when
the
park
board
presents
the
plans
for
the
community
and
during
those
meetings,
they'll
present.
All
of
the
plans
for
all
of
the
parks
say,
for
instance,
I'll,
do
five
parks,
so
the
community
shows
up
and
and
and
gives
input
after
they've,
given
input.
N
Already
quite
a
bit,
so
if
a
community,
if
community
members
aren't
present,
in
fact
this
this
was
this
is
just
anecdotal,
but
it
happened
once
where
my
partner-
and
I
were
the
only
ones
at
this
meeting
where
they
were
voting
up
and
voting
down
plans
within
the
broader
community,
and
there
was
a
gentleman
sitting
behind
me
that
said:
oh
football
park
doesn't
need
tennis
courts
get
rid
of
the
tennis
courts.
That's
a
really!
N
N
B
All
right,
I
just
want
to
remind
members
that
our
debate
or
discussion
is,
you
know,
we're
not
having
a
one-to-one
respectfully.
So
we
could
we
could
have.
Alternatively,
you
know
if
we
can
get
members
to
agree
to
meet.
We
could
try
to
come
to
a
compromise.
G
Thank
you
and
it's
going
to
be
my
last
comment.
Yeah.
I
think
I
just
want
to
reiterate
that
disclosure
and
and
I'm
new
to
this
committee-
so
perhaps
there
already
is
a
precedent.
We
just
haven't
reviewed
any
parks
that
have
private
funding
sources
attached
to
it
so
far,
in
which
case
I
would
be
happy
to
amend
this
comment,
but
I
just
believe
that,
for
the
purposes
of
this
committee
review
and
prioritization
of
projects
that's
coming
before
it
that
we
have
a
right
to
know
and
and
take
into
account
private
fundraising
sources.
G
So
again,
the
comment
is
not
intended
to
to
change
the
way
that
that
funding
sources
are
allocated.
It's
just
is
just
intended
to
disclose
additional
funding
sources.
B
Thank
you,
william
jocelyn,
and
then
I
thought
katie
had
their
hand
raised
and
then
john.
P
So
this
is
jocelyn
I'll
try
to
be
concise
in
my
in
my
comment,
so
this
thank
you
bill
for
sharing
the
the
intention
behind
this,
and
so
I
support
this
comment
because
it
is
asking
for
disclosure
and
transparency,
maybe
and
as
has
been
discussed,
that
could
be
changes
to
the
language,
but
to
kitty's
point
of
if
you're,
not
in
the
room,
not
having
there
not
being
a
having
the
knowledge
of
what's
happening.
P
White
supremacy
has
a
lot
of
of
weight
in
the
written
word
and
it
only
being
one
way
for
their
for
people
to
engage
with
the
things.
So
I
continue
to
hear
that
it's
written
somewhere
for
those
of
us
that
are
engaged
in
this
process.
We
know
the
places
to
go
and
look,
or
we
can
ask
someone
for
support
in
finding
those
things.
I
think
this
comment
is
asking
for
the
disclosure,
because
people
that
have
a
fluency
or
will
pay
for
the
things
that
they
want.
P
It's
just
asking
the
question
of
where
it's
making
the
request
for
that
information
to
be
knowledgeable
to
be
knowledgeable
more
than
just
to
to
be
knowledgeable
to
be
available
to
us.
H
So
I
want
to
address
two
separate
things
here,
I'll
start
with
what
bill
said.
That
may
be
the
intent
of
the
comment,
but
it's
not
the
way.
The
comment
reads
at
all.
The
comment
clearly
suggests
that
there
should
be
adjustments
made,
and
I'm
not
okay
with
that,
and
I
I
I
guess
I
don't
have
a
problem
with
transparency,
but
I
don't
really
see
what
the
point
of
it
is
unless
you
take
this
next
step.
H
So
that's
that
issue
to
the
point
that
jocelyn
and
katrina
made.
I
wholeheartedly
agree.
However,
I
think
that's
a
slightly
separate
issue
from
what
we're
discussing
here,
whether
or
not
they
should
have
soccer
fields
or
tennis
courts.
H
There's
no
question
that
that
this
is
a
problem
not
just
for
the
park
board
would,
but
with
that
anything
where
you
have
physical
meetings
and
you
somehow
make
a
decision
that
democracy
has
been
been
been
satisfied
because
three
people
showed
up
and
and
stated
their
opinions
is
a
dangerous
thing
to
do
right,
because
there's
lots
of
reasons
why
lots
of
people
either
can't
or
don't
show
up,
but
with
respect
to
the
way
the
park
board
is
trying
to
meet
equity
requirements
in
how
they
assess
whether
or
not
to
make
improvements
in
a
park,
not
what
improvements
but
whether
or
not
to
make
improvements.
H
If
you
read
through
this
document,
there
is
nothing
about
this.
That's
qualitative!
There's
nothing
about
this!
That
requires
public
meetings,
it's
all
actually
highly
quantitative,
and
they
even
list
in
here
their
sources.
There's
no
debate
about
where
racially
concentrated
areas
of
poverty
are
defined
by
census,
information.
There's
no
debate
about
population
density,
there's
no
debate
about
the
the
age
of
of
playground,
equipment
right,
that's
those
are
all
just
facts
and
that's
true
of
all
seven
characteristics
that
we're
talking
about
here
that
they
use
to
make
the
equity
decisions
that
they
make.
H
C
I
had
I
have
initially
read
this
comment
as
well,
but
one
thing
that
living
next
to
pv
park,
which
is
in
a
lower
income
area
one
and
this
might
have
to
do
with
some
wording,
changes
that
might
be
needed,
but
the
neighborhood
and
a
non-profit
worked
on
raising
money
for
the
park
as
well.
So
we
probably
probably
thinking
deeper
about
this-
need
to
be
careful,
because
sometimes
low-income
areas
had
contributed
significant
money
to
their
parks
and
raised
that,
and
I
don't
want
them
to
be
penalized
for
doing
that.
Also
so.
B
B
B
Okay,
sorry,
all
right,
I
will
go
to
john
just
noting
john,
that
you
know
we
have
maybe
a
number
of
times
speaking
on
the
same
issue.
So
perhaps
this
can
be
concluding.
H
Yes,
thank
you
for
joining
me.
This
is
brief,
and
this
is,
I
don't
think
repetitive.
I
people
might
disagree
with
me
on
this
particular
point,
but
I
would
just
raise
the
question
about
whether
you're
dealing
with
a
non-profit
in
p
at
pv
park
or
wealthy
citizens
in
kenwood.
Do
you
really
what
underlies
this
to
me
is
the
idea
that,
if
a
private
entity
contributes
to
a
public
asset,
then
that
those
dollars
are
going
to
be
a
substitute
for
public
money
that
otherwise
would
have
been
spent
there?
N
So
to
jocelyn's
point-
and
you
know
it
was
kind
of
to
my
point,
but
I
didn't
explain
it
that
well.
Transparency
would
really
be
nice
because
it's
as
we
all
know,
it's
not
necessarily
what
it's
what
it
looks
like.
It's,
not
necessarily
what
it
says
on
the
books,
but
it's
what
the
community
thinks
and
what
it
really
looks
like
in
person,
so
transparent
transparency
can
help.
F
B
All
right,
so
we
spent
a
lot
of
time
debating
this
comment.
I
I
do
have
the
concerns
about
not
accepting
private
funds
that
offset
public
investments
and
perhaps
allow
for
greater
public
investments
throughout
the
city
that
I
don't
know
that
that
was
the
intent.
I'm
hearing
that
it
wasn't,
I'm
wondering
if
the
members
are
willing
to
you
know
rather
than
striking
today.
J
J
B
We
have
two
more
members
and
then
I
okay,
three
more
members-
and
I
think
we'll
have
to
call
this
for
today
we're
getting
close
to
our
adjournment
time
so
katrina,
william
and
john.
G
Thank
you
so
to
address.
Steve's
comment
is
aligned
with
the
disclosure
intent
of
this
comment,
as
as
I
authored
it,.
B
B
You
now
I'm
seeing
hand
raised
john
and
steve.
H
Yeah,
so
just
to
address
the
chair's
suggestion,
since
I'm
the
move
to
strike
this
again,
I'm
not
opposed
to
transparency.
I
just
don't
see
that
that
really
does
much
to
help
a
comment
that
I
would
be
extremely
supportive
of
would
be
a
comment
that
asks
the
park
board
to
take
a
more
proactive
role
in
helping
underserved
neighborhoods
seek
sources
of
outside
funding
to
enhance,
above
and
beyond
what
they're
already
receiving
from
the
park
board.
You
know,
as
you
know,
better
served.
Neighborhoods
are
able
to
do
for
a
variety
of
reasons.
A
M
A
D
A
A
George
montague,
that
also.
D
N
I
B
That
is
adopted
so
at
this
point
with
seven
and
a
half
minutes
remaining,
I'm
going
to
ask
the
members
to
focus
on
the
remaining
human
development
task
force
comments
for
the
next
meeting
for
discussion
and
as
well
as
introduction
of
new
click
general
comments.
B
I
will
make
a
point
that
I
will
give
notice
here
that
I
intend
to
introduce
a
city
city
facility,
reforestation,
comment
under
general.
B
B
There
was
a
executive
committee
meeting
where
there
was
unanimous
consent
of
four
members
present
to
have
a
meeting
on
june
9th
noon.
To
two
sorry,
I
know
that's
burdensome,
I'm
working,
I'm
a
working
person
as
well,
and
you
know
we
just
have
the
remaining
meetings
to
finish
our
work
and
we
have
a
great
deal
of
financial
recommendations
to
make.
B
I'm
gonna
ask
I'm
asking
vice
chair
willie
bridges
to
have
our
to
be
the
person
responsible
for
the
moment
of
silence,
but
I
will
recognize
there
were
a
couple
of
hands
up
under
final
comments.
I
thought
I
saw
eric
wan
eric
juan.
I
Chair,
I
have
a
question
regarding
the
the
the
rules
of
order
here.
Is
it
in
order
to
to
make
a
motion
to
revisit
the
the
proposed
comment
for
the
parks
and
and
ask
that
john
bernstein
and
and
bill
graves
and
luke,
mccormick
and
others
who
volunteered
to
work
out
some
compromise
language
to
allow
them
to
come
forward
at
the
next
meeting
with
compromise
language.
B
The
one
that
was
just
voted
on
with
12
votes
to
strike,
I
had
four
no's
and
I
had
eight
abstentions.
I
may
not
be
totally
accurate.
F
F
Yes,
then,
we
have
a
moment
of
silence
to
have
centered
the
first
year
anniversary
of
george.
F
B
Pm
members
with
that
we've
completed
all
items
on
the
agenda
and
for
this
meeting,
with
the
exception
that
we
will
carry
over
some
items
to
the
next
meeting.
L
Oh
yeah,
sorry
jeff.
If
there's
a
time
appropriate
for
staff
to
raise,
I
think
just
items
for
next
meeting.
B
Yes,
exactly
that's
I'm
just
getting
to
that
in
the
script.
So
so
I
will
ask
members
and
staff
if
there
are
other
items
to
come
before
this
meeting,
robert.
L
Yeah,
so,
as
members
will
note,
the
ranking
forms
are
due
either
today
or
tomorrow.
I'm
sorry,
I'm
blanking
on
the
date
that
we
actually
sent
out
tomorrow
noon
tomorrow.
Once
those
rankings
are
in
staff
are
going
to
compile
the
rankings
and
then
we
prepare
to
time
permitting
dive
into
the
the
preliminary
net
debt
bond
programming
at
next
week's
meeting.
I
know
there's
been
a
lot
of
questions
about
that,
so
we'll
be
looking
forward
to
starting
that
conversation.
B
D
B
B
B
If
not
without
objection.
I
will
declare
this
meeting
adjourned
at
the
conclusion
of
this
statement.
So
again,
our
next
meeting
is,
as
stated
thank
you.
Everyone
and
the
click
meeting
is
adjourned
informally.
If
anyone
is
interested
in
working
collaboratively
on
a
city,
reforestation,
climate
action,
general
comment,
please
reach
out
to
me.