Good evening everyone. I will call our Bloomington City Council listening session to order. Tonight is Monday, September 8th, 2025. Thanks to everybody who is here. So, we've had three people call ahead to register. Uh, Gunnar Olsen. Look at that. We go over one already, but then Michael, >> Michael, and then Jeff. Very good. So, uh, well, why don't we get started? Uh, Michael, you can come on up. I'll I'll give you the ground rules here. Uh we we allow each speaker five minutes and um uh don't be surprised if you get back and forth from questions from the council. You can sign in after you're done and if I could ask you as you start make sure you just state your name clearly so we've got it for the record and then speak into the microphone. We have we we have bad acoustics in here. So So welcome. Good evening. >> Good evening. My name is Michael Carl. I've lived in Bloomington for 33 years. Um, my question is for the mayor. Regardless of origin, whether it be federal, state, or potentially local, what firearms regulations are needed in Bloomington to keep us safe? You're referring to the press conference that I was part of last week. >> Yes, sir. >> Yes. What uh what we outlined as as a group of mayors, kind of what we're aiming for is uh a prohibition of the sales on uh assault weapons and as defined assault weapons uh high-capacity magazines, any of the accutrin that could make a regular weapon an assault weapon, whether it's uh uh you know, bump stock or or the the the dual triggers or whatever they're called. Uh, and um, and I think those were those were the I'm trying to remember what the third one. Basically, that that's what we that's what we were asking about. That's what we were talking about to uh to prohibit the sale of those. Uh, how that all works, how it all comes about. Um, right now we have to get past state regulation, state law before we could even start to consider some of those things. >> Correct. Um, what about uh possession and use of this term assault weapons, whatever that's going to be defined as? What about use and possession of those for those who already have them in the city? >> And and again, we realize and understand that that's an issue because there are thousands of those things across the state of Minnesota and across the country. And so, nobody's taking guns away. Uh, I would think the way that uh St. Paul is proposing it. It would be public possession of one of those things. So you're you can't go wielding one of those things in public or if you're going to get your Starbucks uh just as a way of approaching it as well. So again, details to be worked out. The specifics uh haven't been have been been nailed down, but I would think we do have there there are plenty of uh states with uh with assault weapon bans. And I'm guessing we'd probably rather than reinventing the wheel look to model what is already on the books. Mhm. Yeah. And I I just think it uh I just want to be safe in the city and um you know the efficacy of prohibiting firearms of certain types. Uh I would just ask that uh if it comes to the point where the city cities are granted authority to you know to pass their own uh laws regulating that that uh we consider um the success of some of those uh you know because if uh prohibiting the sale within the city that's one thing but if the city's already flooded with these things what good is that going to do? So, and I'm not I'm not asking for an answer today. I'm just saying that that would be something that uh you know I think would be of interest to debate and and that of course happens at the state level and the federal level and all that kind of stuff. It just you know just prohibiting the sale without prohibiting possession uh is kind of uh I don't know how successful that would be in reducing crime or keeping us safe. appreciate that and and as you know, Michael, I mean, we are miles away from that. As you said, we would have to get through the state. We'd have to change state law. We'd have to come to a consensus as a council and and come to a consensus that reflects the the city of Bloomington if we wanted to do that kind of thing. This is certainly much better at a state or a federal level, but we've seen for decades now uh in action at the state and federal level. And so I think the idea behind the mayors getting together and having that press conference was saying if you're not going to do anything and literally they have not done anything, we will give us the authority and and we'll see what we can do at the city level because it's it's been proven in the past on issues and the example I used was uh indoor smoking bans that started at the city level that started here in Bloomington and it's now statewide and nationwide policy. So if that needs to happen on on the issue of guns, we're happy to take the leadership on that. >> Okay. And I know we're running short on time. Just one quick followup. Uh if it got to that point where the cities were granted uh authority to pass local legislation or local uh rules on that, do you see that decision as something that uh would be put to the Bloomington voters or something that would be enacted kind of directly by the council? >> A good question, Michael. again miles from even considering that right now just because it uh it it will take about four or five steps or five or 10 steps before we would even get to that. I have no idea, Michael. I really don't. >> Okay. Thank you. That addresses my question. Thanks. And I'll sign in here. >> You may. >> Thank you. >> Is this on? Oh, it is on. Okay. Um >> I have a question. >> So, can I um So, I guess I would just be interested to hear what your position is as a resident. what you think if that came down to it, like what you would want the council to do. And then I was only going to add that um whether it's a vote on somebody's ballot or um extensive community engagement, public hearings, things like that. I mean, we would have to go through a robust community engagement process if we ever got to that point. >> Um but I would be curious just to know what your position is. Well, and I'm only one vote in the city, so I don't know what that means, but personally, I think if I mean, if we if if we just take the step of prohibiting the sale or transfer or whatever of these certain things, now let's talk about assault rifle. You know, the the things to convert them into automatic weapons and stuff. I mean, that's a no-brainer. We we don't need that. the the assault weapons thing or so-called assault weapons, however that's defined, um I I I don't think that prohibiting the sale or transfer of them in the city, given that the you know, as we've all acknowledged, there are thousands of these in the city being used lawfully. Um, I'm not sure that just by prohibiting the sale of them, uh, is going to do much to to prevent the situations that we've seen because they're already out there, you know. Um, I I'm not convinced that would be as would achieve what we are trying to achieve relative to these types of weapons. So, um, yeah, I I don't I don't I mean, I don't know. In Bloomington, do we even have any stores that sell these? I don't know. But it just seems like a kind of a baby step. But the root cause, which is these firearms being used for things, is still present because they are still in people's homes. They can get stolen if people are not being responsible, which is a bad thing. Um, so that's kind of my opinion is just preventing the sale or transfer within the city limits or even, you know, in the seven wherever in in local jurisdictions around here. I'm not sure that gets to the heart of it because um, you know, these are out there and criminals break into homes and stores and steal these things and uh, so and they're out there. You know, there's thousands of them out there right now, and it just takes some unbalanced individual to snap and do something awful. >> Michael, we're over time now. So, and I appreciate your your comments. Um, and and I'll just go back to my comment that if no one is going to do anything, doing something is at least the start. So, but thanks for being here tonight. Wasn't there a federal assault weapons ban for 10 years? >> There was. >> Yes, there was. >> Couldn't it be reenacted? It >> sure could. >> It sure could. Mr. Johnson, if you could make sure you speak into the microphone so we can pick you up. We've got bad acoustics in here. My name is Jeff Johnson and I own a house in East Bloomington, not far from uh the Mall of America and uh MSP airport. I'm here to talk about aircraft noise in East Bloomington, which I consider to be a problem. I'm sure there are probably many people that just consider aircraft noise annoying, but I say it's more than that. And it can actually be disrupting. And I can give a couple examples of that. If I'm in my home, I can hear the aircraft noise. If an aircraft ve if a very loud aircraft flies directly over my home, it can be pretty loud indoors. So, one example is what if I'm listening to music and a very loud aircraft flies right over my house? It's going to interrupt my enjoyment of listening to the music. So, to me, in that case, the aircraft noise is disruptive. It's not simply annoying, it's disruptive. Another example would be If I'm on the telephone having a telephone conversation, a very large loud aircraft flies directly over my house. Uh it it could interrupt the telephone conversation. That's another example of how aircraft noise can be disruptive. So, uh, what is the aircraft noise situation in East Bloomington? And it all depends on the wind direction. Uh and I can tell you that uh when aircraft are landing and taking off uh there's a standard procedure that they've take off into the wind and land into the wind. However, because of the configuration and such of the runways, this is not not always entirely possible. they just try to get the alignment, you know, as close as they can. Um, so as far as the wind direction goes, if the wind is coming from the north or northwest or northeast uh on the north south runway, which is the one that affects Bloomington and it goes right into east Bloomington uh on what they call runway 35. Uh if the wind is from the north or northwest or northeast, aircraft will be landing onto runway 35. Now, when that's the case, I can tell you that most of the homes west of Highway 77 aren't aren't going to be able to hear that aircraft noise. They don't they don't get it. And that is because when the aircraft pass over the Mississippi River or the uh Minnesota River Valley, um they by the time they get to the runway, they are completely east of Highway 77. So only the homes that are close to Highway 77, I think, are going to get that aircraft noise. All those homes in East Bloomington that are west of Highway 77, the majority of them are not going to get that aircraft noise. >> Jeeoff, can I can I ask you just a minute here? Where where do you live? Are you east or west of 77? >> West. >> West of 77. So you're on the west side, >> but not far enough west. >> Not far enough west. Um obvious I I'm sure you know other than our vocal advocacy, we really don't have a whole lot of power over what the the routing in and out of Twin Cities International. Now we do have the uh the noise oversight committee which is is called the knock. That is a subset of them uh the Metropolitan Airports Commission. Their next meeting is September 17th and they were put together specifically to hear from people like you to to get testimony from people like you to get to to hear the concerns from people like you and then they they do what they can. They offer possibilities or strategies >> 17th. Okay. >> Uh September 17th. Yep. >> Where do they meet? >> 1:30 p.m. >> Where do they meet? In this building? >> No. over >> uh the MAC General Office building which is at 6040 28th Avenue South. >> If I may, >> council member, >> uh the reason that the noise is coming to the west right now, especially they fly over my house also is because two of the runways are being under construction. So, it's not necessarily the north to south uh runway that causes all the noise in the on the west on the east side of Bloomington. It's the one that runs the last one they built to 2DS that runs from the north west towards the souththeast uh southeast. Yeah, the one that hits 77 on a parallel to 77. And that's why the noise is very um uh damning right now. I mean every at this time of the day if I sit outside usually I'm cooking in the grill it's about 25 planes one every minute or two minutes taking off >> we don't see the ones that are landing but it it's due to the construction that is taking place at the airport right at the moment so it's temporary ideally they're planning on getting all the work done by mid October which at the at that point the noise should >> Oh yeah be eliminated they're they're working on uh runway. Uh I think it's 12 >> 12 >> R. Is it >> 12 R and 12? >> 12 R. Yeah, it'll be done September. They say September 26th. >> Okay, >> Jeeoff, I don't want I I hate to interrupt you. We're well over time right now. And um >> Well, I'm just getting I have much more I have more to say. >> And you know what? Bring all of that to the knock to the noise oversight committee because those are the folks who actually can actually >> just give me a couple more. I'll I'll wind it up. Give me a couple more minutes. Okay. So, there's another If the planes are landing on one of one of the parallel runways from northwest to southeast, uh um planes will be taking off to the south from one runway 17. But the air traffic controllers use a takeoff procedure. It's called the turbo runway runway 17 turbo jet departure procedure. And what they do is they instruct the pilots to fly straight out from the runway to the Minnesota River Valley before they make a turn. Now, in that situation, all those homes west of Highway 77 do not hear that aircraft noise. Okay, now this is when we do get aircraft noise is if planes are landing on one of the two parallel runways uh that go to the northwest 30 L or 30R. Now what happens is the aircraft the the air traffic controllers use a different takeoff procedure and they instruct all the pilots for all of the aircraft to make a right turn immediately upon leaving the runway. All those aircraft fly over East Bloomington, fly over my neighborhood, fly over my house. Now, why don't the air air traffic controllers use that runway 17 turbo jet departure procedure all the time for every aircraft? If they did, there would be much less aircraft noise in East Bloomington. >> Thank you, Jeeoff. I'm going to stop you there. >> That would be solution to the problem. >> Thank you. And I'm going to re recommend you take those comments to to the noise oversight committee on September September 17th at 1:30. >> Where can I get information on that? Where is it? >> So, mayor, um, >> there we go, >> Mayor. The only thing I would say >> So, I pretty much said what I wanted to say. >> Thank you. Thank you. We got to get downstairs for a meeting. >> You know, the >> the Metropolitan Air Ports reports Commission needs to be >> convinced that this is the right thing to do >> to to adopt this, >> not have the air traffic controllers use two different takeoff procedures, but one takeoff procedure. >> Thank you, Jeeoff. Appreciate it. Council, it looks like our first speaker, Gunner, is not here. And unless our officer would like to speak on an issue this evening, I think we're we've gone through our folks tonight. Uh, with that in mind, I will look for a motion to adjurnn. >> I'll make that motion. >> Second. >> Motion and a second to adjourn our listening session. No further discussion. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. Opposed? Motion carries 70. And we will get down to our regular city council meeting. Thank you.