Good evening everyone. It is 5:45. We'll get our Bloomington City Council listening session underway here. I'll call it to order. Thank you everybody for being here tonight. We've had 1 2 3 4 5 people call ahead and uh register to speak. I just want to make sure everybody's here. Sally, I saw you as I walked in. Uh Cherish Amara? Good evening. Ryan Hoffman? And Brian? Amber? There's Amber. And Tony? Tony Hellman? Very good. What we're going to do what we usually do based on the number of speakers we kind of parse out the time based on what we have. And so everybody we we've got to be out of here by 5:15 or 6:15 to get down to the council meeting. So we've got to get everybody in and out. So we'll give you 5 or 6 minutes to speak. Don't be surprised if there's council questions back and forth. And what I'd ask you to do as you come up uh speak into the mic so everybody can hear you. We do get complaints about that that folks at home can't hear it. So do speak into the mic and then after you finish up if you could take the clipboard and kind of step to the side and then sign in. And so what then we can call up the next speaker. So everybody good on that? Why don't we get started? Sally Ness, you are first on the list. >> Um at the last listening session when I asked the city if the city could opt out of the shared agreement, the mayor said, "Quote, so the city manager did indeed respond to you." Unquote. He did not. He replied to my email, but that but he did not answer my question. If he had answered my question, he would have answered my question at the listening session and he did not. After the listening session, I sent the city an email on June 4th asking three questions and again the city did not reply. First question, can the city opt out as the city chose to do for the 2015 agreement that was amended in 2024? It cannot. The mayor said the city chose to opt out of the agreement to share the field specifically because quote, the field will need significant capital improvements in the very near future, unquote. For information, data does not support the statement. The city will not be able to opt out of the new agreement. If the parking lot needed significant capital improvements as it recently opted out of the previous agreement. The mayor said the city chose to opt out because of needed capital improvements and I'm asking if the city would like to use the Smith Park parking lot for winter hockey, can the city opt out? It cannot. The first term ends May 31st, 2046. Can the city choose to opt out of the agreement as it opted out this year? It cannot. The agreement does not allow the city to give Al Jazari notice of its intent to terminate. The agreement requires the city to find Al Jazari in breach and remove the conditional use permit requirements that protect Smith Park neighborhood. And it is not because the city determined they were not needed. At the last listening session, council member D'Alessandro comments confirm that the city can't opt out. She stated, "Opting out was just a one-sided function. That does not mean that it can't either be dismissed or executed differently or modified or amended or any other of many things that we could do." But it does mean the city can't opt out and that is the answer to my question that the mayor and city manager should have stated. Council member D'Alessandro is also incorrect when she states there are many things the city can do. The city can't dismiss it, the city can't execute it differently, modify it or amend it. The city can ask Al Jazari but the power to change the agreement is solely with Al-Jazari. She then states, "It's just that we can't unilaterally say the letter F and then yourself." Is that what the city did when it opted out of the shared agreement for the field? Did the city say the letter F and then the word yourself? "It costs too much to maintain and we do not want to invest in capital improvements." No. Councilmember D'Alessandro confirms again the city can't opt out when she adds, "That's what it means and I don't think that's okay. I think that's why we're fine with it because we wouldn't want to do that anyway." That is not what it means. It means the city can choose not to continue the agreement for a set determined time as it did with the fields. The city can't opt out of the agreement and that should not happen. I ask the council to address this concern so that it does not happen again. Thank you. >> Thank you, Sally, and I do want to clarify. I don't think the word opt out appears anywhere. The word is terminate and we we can terminate that agreement. There are three reasons why we can terminate the agreement and that's what Mr. Walker responded to you in an email on at least one if not two occasions. You know the three Is it three or four? Uh there are three legitimate reasons that the the agreement can be terminated and those have been explained. >> You used the word opt out when you responded to me saying that the city chose or you chose to opt out of the agreement for the fields. That option is not permitted in the new agreement. That is the understanding of opt out. You used it when you responded to me at that one point. That is what I'm referring to. >> And and then and I can't. The city can't opt out. I said to myself there are three reasons there are three ways that we can terminate that agreement and you know those three reasons. Mr. Walker has explained those to you in an in an email. >> Um, he sent me the the um >> The language of the the language of the shared shared agreement. >> And it can be terminated, but it has to be in breach. >> There there are three reasons, three ways that that parties can be terminated. >> and repeat them cuz >> So Uh, we're we're we're at time now. I'm going to We've got a lot of speakers tonight, so I'm going to move on. Thank you. Cherish. Good evening. Welcome. >> Thank you. Um, my name is Cherish Amaro and I'm a Bloomington resident living at the corner of 106th Street and Thomas Avenue South. I am here to talk about traffic and resident safety on 106th Street from Xerxes to 35W. Two weeks ago, there's a an extremely devastating accident that occurred at the intersection of 106th and Sheridan. My husband and I heard the accident and ran over immediately to see if there was anything that we could do. That crash resulted in two fatalities and it underscores the ongoing safety concerns and fear that we have experienced in our over 8 years living at 106th and Thomas. I've reached out to the city before requesting that tangible action be taken to improve the safety of my family and neighbors along 106th Street. In the 8 years I've lived on 106th Street, I can count five accidents where a vehicle or vehicles have ended up in one of my neighbors' yards. This particular is particularly concerning to me as it demonstrates the severity of these accidents and they are not just putting drivers at risk, but also my family could simply be playing in the yard or on our driveway and we could be struck. These These are the dates of those accidents I am referencing. June 24th, 2022, 106 and Thomas. August 16th, 2023, 106 and Sheridan. December 31st, 2023, 106 and Thomas. May 14th, 2026, 106 and Thomas. And then lastly, May 29th, 100 2026, 106 and Sheridan. These are my three main concerns regarding the traffic on 106th Street. First, general speeding. Cars consistently drive way too fast on 106th Street. Second, reckless use of the turn lane. Impatient drivers are frequently using the center lane as a passing lane to bypass traffic at high speeds. And third, lack of traffic control. Because both Thomas and Sheridan Avenues provide direct connection to Old Chicopee Road, they are heavily used as cut-through routes. I frequently observe northbound drivers growing frustrated while waiting for a safe gap in traffic to cross a on 106th Street. Out of impatience, they often force their way across the intersection, creating a severe collision hazard for themselves, other motorists, and nearby residents. I urge the city to take swift, measurable action to prevent further accidents on 106th 106th Street, and to pri- prioritize resident and driver safety in this area. Thank you. >> Thank you very much and and thanks for bringing this forward. You're not the first person we've heard from about 106th Street, so we we do appreciate this. I'm I'm typically a a big advocate of not just enforcement, but there's got to be education, there's got to be ways that we can change the environment and so on. I'm leaning toward heavily enforcing. I mean, I I want to see our our police out there making sure that if we've heard stories of school bus drivers actually passing in the in the the center lane and and speeding that's going on and that kind of thing. That's just absolutely unacceptable. And I think to to to bring to bear the the the consequences of their actions I think would be the way to do this. We can also look at environmental changes whether it's stop signs traffic control of some kind and we certainly look for the input from the folks on 106 who might be able to help out. So >> Thank you. Yeah, I emphasize that last point around those just with Thomas and Sheridan being those cut through routes to Sheridan. I do think that our two intersections are at greater risk than other intersections on 106. >> And that's a good point. So thank you Council any questions anything to add here? >> Hello. Okay, hi. Thanks for the bringing it up. You're definitely not the first person in the I will say that last traffic accident that happened actually happened because of a medical emergency with the drivers. It wasn't speed related potentially. It's not to diminish your point at all but to just make sure that we know what causes accidents. Could that medical issue have been prevented by something? I don't think so in this particular case but What I if you were since you stand since you're there Thomas and Sheridan we could put I mean I think they're already stop signs on the corners correct? >> No. >> Of Thomas and 106 or Sheridan 106? >> Not four-way stop signs. >> Not four-way stop signs. Okay. So you're thinking about stop having having traffic stop on 106 at Sheridan and or at Thomas. Okay. Thanks for the clarification. >> Any questions Council? All right. Well thank you much for being here tonight. Thank you. Right. They are. Yep. >> Brian, good evening. >> Good evening, Mayor and Council. Uh nice to be back. Uh it's been a little bit over a year. Um at that time I came to talk about probably the one of the most important things about a city government and community was for the city to provide responsive, quality service. And that wasn't always the what, but the how. And um that still goes still very important. Um tonight I wanted to expand on that a little bit though and talk about potentially unintended consequences of project creep, as well as transparency. Um both very important. So, a few years ago, I think a great idea the city came up with was to do the Nine Mile Creek Quarter project. I think most people were understanding that, you know, it's time for the pavilion in the park to be upgraded. The stairs have been crumbling for 30 years, and I actually started walking down here in 1965 and with my parents and been a resident in uh the current house for 30 years. And it's a daily walk for us. And so, it's been very it was very hard over the years to get any maintenance, minimum maintenance, done on the trail. And we had safety issues. And I talked to Council Member Loman repeatedly about that. So, this made some sense, and I think it did to a lot of people. And I'm glad there was some reaching out into the community. Um but there was concern when all of a sudden talk about a bike path came up. And then it was just like, well, to make bike path work, you have to go wide corridor, where you have to remove all the trees. And people said, "Why do we want to remove trees?" And so, there were meetings down at Moy Park. There was the um uh the green shirt gang, which has a mailing uh of almost a thousand people mailing list. And the comments that came in and that I heard people say at these sessions was, "We want to preserve this gem as a place that's wooded where you go and you feel like you're not in the city. You don't see houses, you don't hear the cars. It's quieter, it's cool in the summer when the sun's out. Don't take any trees out. And that was the message from hundreds of people. And so when the project started it was like, okay, great. We're not going to put a bike path down there. We're going to keep as many trees as possible. First stage of the project occurs. The clearing along the lower part of the creek. The communications group, you know, talked about, well, there's going to be 70 or 80 trees removed. A lot more than 70 or 80 trees. After the the large area down in the the bottom land was cleared to allow for the the wetland. And people lay down there in tears just looking at what it's like. Okay, tree loss like that it means something to people. Now, I could always explain that. I say, well, I've been done storm water analysis for city in my career. I understand the need to do detention of of storm water, which is what the creek turns into as an urban creek. It makes sense. You want to preserve the down stream infrastructure and prevent the wash outs. I can get that. I can get the embankment. I Every part of the project so far, you know, I can sort of explain even though sometimes people are going, well, why do we have to do all this? Then it said all the tree removal would be done by April 15th. Was the message that came out. And now all of a sudden, recently, I've learned um that there's an RFP that I think was now extended until the 17th of June that calls for clearing the trees in the upper portion. I read the 35 36 page on it out of that 88 page document. It calls clear cut from Lawyer Park down to 106 Street and other areas all the way from our properties lines on the west side all the way up to the the the creek valley wall. Huge clear cut and massive operation except for oak trees. And once I started realizing this I started asking questions, why are we doing this? And it's like, well, we're going the little oak savanna. Well, it's actually prairie with oak trees on and I realized the magnitude of this and it's just like, how come nobody has said anything about this? The extremeness of this is getting people really upset that found out about it and there's very few people who I think know even that this is going to happen. I think there's going to be a huge public outcry if these trees just start coming down. Um there's no reason to do this. I think you can explain all the other parts of the project, this this becomes a science project. Hundreds of people said we use the community who live there that value of the park is the deep woodland. Now, I get if we've got some oak trees that are old, love the idea of saving it. If you've talked to my forester, I knew he'd say, "Well, just trim the trees around the oak trees to give them some room to breathe. You don't have to tear out the whole forest." Then I also hear that this project ran a bit over budget. And uh it's always nice when council members do stand up at a meeting and say, "Hey, why are we doing this?" Um so, having done project management before uh in cities, I've watched what happens when a group gets together. It might be the city staff or somebody from the community and they talk with the designer and you say, "Here's what we want you to design." Maybe it's a building and architect designer comes back and says, "Hey, look what I got." Well, hey, we asked for a giraffe and you just gave me a design for an elephant. And I've heard designers say, "But this is what you [clears throat] want. This is what we great. It's a little more expensive, but we'll you'll love it." >> Brian >> And suddenly it just >> Brian, we're we're getting close to time here. If you could wrap this up so we can >> it gets going until until somebody says, "Time out. Pause." This idea just continues to snowball. So, solution real quickly that I'm asking council and I think you'll be hearing it from more people going forward is pause this project. The RFP for the tree clearing. Go back and examine exactly what the community asked for and why this is being done. Uh there's nothing that went out to the mailing of nearly a thousand people about why would we do this. So, that's what I wanted to offer and thank you very much for your time. >> Thank you, Brian. Amber. >> [clears throat] >> Good evening. Welcome. >> Good evening, Bloomington electeds. My name is Amber Mathwig and I've lived in Bloomington since 2020, born in Minnesota. I thought tonight would be me complaining about how Bloomington Police Department was failing to answer a data request that I placed on March 5th, 2026. But, and I am generous enough to presume coincidence, approximately 29 hours after I notified City Council secretary that my comments here tonight would be about the failure of BPD to respond to this data request in a timely manner, I received a response to two of my three requests, 99 days later. Or more appropriately, a non-response, telling me that I needed to be more specific. At which time my brain started activating memories from this time period and I knew, confirmed by a partial screenshot of the record request that I had submitted, that I had indeed been very specific in a third request. And yet I didn't have an email to confirm this very specific third data request that I submitted that same day. I was stressing out a little because state law allows for body camera footage to be deleted after 90 days. And you may recall that my request wasn't even acknowledged until 99 days after it had been submitted. And so today, I contacted the data records office and they were also not able to find this request. But within 17 minutes, we had worked through my request, the data was identified, and what was able to be released to me as the non-subject or complainant of the data was received within an hour. And the dash camera footage and call for service form confirmed what I already knew. That on February 9th, BPD received a phone call from federal agents at 16:21 and intentionally engaged in locating friends of our community, pulling them over under the auspices of their headlights not being on at 17:31, even though sunset was 17:33 that day and Minnesota statute 169.48 vehicle lighting only mandates that lights be on from sunset to sunrise. They attempted to bait them by suggesting they were trying to hide something by following best practices for the subject of a police stop by keeping their hands on the wheel and then proceeded to threaten them with stalking charges because they were observed using the Signal app, which to my knowledge is not yet a crime in the state of Minnesota or the United States of America. What the dash cam audio also offers is that BPD officers may be capable of identifying people and vehicles and engaging conversations about their behavior, but this seems to only apply to community members as they were more than happy to ignore the erratic and highly dangerous driving throughout all of our neighborhoods to include school zones and highly violent arrests throughout the um Operation Metro Surge. All while meeting up with DHS officers in parking lots for long periods of chit-chat time. Additionally, I would like to remind our elected officials that it is well known DHS violently detained and destroyed the lives of multiple people and their families throughout Minnesota to include citizens of Bloomington who were residing lawfully within the United States. So, if BPD is out enforcing laws, which laws are they getting to pick and choose from? It should not Also, it should not take an entire season for city employees to respond to data requests. But again, I am generous and aware that they have received a significantly higher number of data requests in the past several months. And since asking BPD to do less sketchy that necessitates the public being more interested in what they are doing is probably not a viable practice, it may be long past time for you to hire some more data compliance officials. And with my remaining time, shout out to the Human Rights Commission for initiating Bloomington Pride a few years ago and the continuing work under the Bloomington Pride Committee. One point of concern that falls on the city is that the beautiful grassy knoll hosting the performances becomes less enjoyable due to the lack of shade during afternoon festivals. Perhaps the city could consider using the money that is currently going towards a homophobic Christian evangelist who was hired to make men with guns and absolute power over other people's lives feel better about themselves and take that money and put it towards a combination sunshade and solar panel for the outdoor area instead. And then a plus one to what Cher shared already. And noting that police law enforcement is not a long-term viable strategy, whereas speed bumps, a forced weave with barriers, or roundabouts are proven factors to slow down traffic. >> Thank you, Amber. Council, any questions? Please. Uh Amber, hold on 1 second. >> Uh city manager, I think in our last conversation, uh city manager, you had mentioned data requests and the fact that we were behind on them. So, I do think that there's a plan to to to add more resources and or funding or however to to do that. So, on that one point, I just wanted to make sure that you knew that council was talking having these conversations. >> Tony. >> Well, Mayor, City Council, good evening. Thank you for the opportunity. My name is Tony Helman. I'm here tonight with my partner Amy Mollen who's probably pretending not to know me. Uh we live at the house at 10357 Morgan and for those of you familiar with the Moir Park neighborhood uh this house is a bit of an oddity. Some call it an eyesore, others call it interesting, while some consider it an outright crime against architecture. I'll get back to that in a minute. Uh this may be a little non-linear, so please bear with me. I agreed to do this on Friday only after a couple of beers and kind of forgot about it until a couple of hours ago. Uh I was born and raised in Bloomington and we've been coming to this park for the last 30 years uh back when it was patrolled on the horseback. In fact, my mom thought that I drowned in Nine Mile Creek twice and Bush Lake once. Good times, not a lot of oversight. Uh Amy of mine Amy and I have been coming with our dogs for more than 30 years and when we decided to get out of Minneapolis 18 months ago, we told our realtor that Moir Park was the epicenter of the search, anything out anything in walking distance. We found ourselves in what she tried to talk us out of as one of Bloomington's more notorious properties, the silo house. If you've uh yeah, okay. Please. Okay. You've never seen a realtor try harder not to make a sale. What she didn't understand is the value and the allure of the park, the rarity of it. Three times a week for 30 years we'd make the 30-mi round trip from Minneapolis just to spend an hour or two surrounded by the sounds of nature and the absence of man-made structure. So when the opportunity arose not just to live near Moir Park, but surrounded by it, we jumped at it. It didn't matter how ugly it was, it didn't matter how much work it needed, it didn't matter that we had to sign an insurance waiver just to tour the house. What mattered was proximity to the park. In the first week of moving in our our yard was visited by deer, coyote, fox, raccoon, squirrels, possums, chipmunks, and rabbits. Also, one snake, two lizards, and a toad that we know of. Also, owls, huge woodpeckers, huge hawks, ducks, cranes, egrets, bats, and eagles. The most surprising was by far the fox. Haven't seen those in Bloomington since the 1970s. That brings me to the woods right behind our property. We had been coming to this park for decades and never even experienced the upper trails. We didn't even know that they were there for 25 years. And to get up there and to see all of the life that exists, all the deer. You always wondered, "Where are the deer? We've been coming here for 30 years and we never see deer." The second we got off of there, we were seeing 10 or 12 of them bedding down on a bluff, just, you know, 10 12 ft from people walking past them. Unbelievable. Uh Let me get back up to it. Uh The reason that I mentioned this exhaustive list is that the track of land that you're looking to reimagine is already perfect. It is already healthier and more diverse than anything you can possibly hope to achieve and that is stronger than any ecosystem in the Twin Cities. It is that way because those those who came before you knew when to leave well enough alone. They had the wisdom and forethought to leave a little bit of nature untouched. That's what we're asking for. The trees you're looking to clear out, both standing and lying down, both dead and alive, are the habitat for massive amounts of life, big and small. And once it's gone, it'll never be back, not in our lifetime. We've talked to a lot of neighbors and not one has voice voice support for what you're considering, especially with the impending tree removal along the upper trails, the oak savanna and the controlled burn so close to the houses. Along with being habitat for countless life forms, these trees also clean the air and dampen the sound of the freeway, the 163 bridge, the old Shakopee Road, and even muffle the sound from the flight path flight path directly overhead. If you think you can make this better with what you're proposing, I suggest that you walk these trails at sunrise and listen to everything coming to life, the fog, the frost, the the dew, the mist, the moss, the birds, the insects. Take a close look at what it is you're about to destroy because once it's gone, it's gone forever and that will be your legacy. We and many of our neighbors are We're pleased and appreciative that you chose to keep bikes out of the corridor. As someone who loves biking, it's clear that it would have been too far too busy and crowded. With the abundance of great bike trails in this area, a sincere thanks for sparing this park and preserving the slow pace and thought. Thank you for listening to the voice of the people. The city of Edina recently had the wisdom to reverse course recently on a $20 million pedestrian bridge that no one wanted. They listened to the people, they paused the project, they're studying it, and they did the right thing. This feels a little bit like the East Wing of the White House being crammed down our throat without anyone taking time to get everyone's opinion. Um one side doesn't like it when the other side does it. And when you're kind of in the middle, you feel like you're getting screwed on both sides. So, it would just be nice if there was a little bit of a pause to consider what's what's happening up there. Cuz this is I mean, we've got we've got trees that are 200 years old that have been on the ground for 60 years, and they've been housing habitat every one of those years. And once that moss is gone, it doesn't come back. It takes forever for these things to return. Um we don't mind our taxpayers tax dollars going into the parks. It's what made Bloomington by far the most livable suburb. We have the best parks anywhere. That's why I love growing up here and why I couldn't wait to get back. We don't object to the money, just how it's being spent. Take this money, spend it somewhere else. It isn't needed here. It isn't wanted here. Think of the improvements you could make to other Bloomington parks with the same dollars reallocated. Please hear the voice of the people and represent the residents and the local interest. What you were prepared to do cannot be undone. Thanks for your time and the opportunity to speak. >> Thank you. And and I I appreciate you coming forward, and I appreciate Brian coming forward, also, and and the emails that we've received and the concern that people have. And I and I know there is concern uh around this. Uh I think I'd I'd like the opportunity I'm I'm going to ask our staff to reconvene the meetings that we've been doing had had been doing as we did during the um uh the question about the bike paths and to be able to explain it to talk back and forth and to get some understanding on all this. >> We came in after so many of the decisions had already been made. >> Yep. >> We still would have made the same choice, but it took a park that special to get us to buy literally the ugliest house in the Twin >> Understood. >> the Twin Cities. So, we will we will hope to make that a little less of an eyesore for the neighborhood. >> And and and I mean I will I will point out I mean the group of Brian mentioned the green t-shirt wearing group. I mean the name of that group is restore the nine. It's not maintain. It's restore. There there is restoration that needs to be done down there. There it it is is nice and wooded, but not necessarily the best or most the healthiest ecosystem in the world. So, I'm going to ask staff that we continue those conversations that I know what we're very helpful as we were talking original design and as we were talking bike paths and all that and see if we can't bring in the folks who the the experts who were recommending this in the first place and and see if we can't understand both sides a little bit better. >> faith in you. I grew I grew up in Bloomington. This is the best park department I've ever encountered. I photograph golf courses for municipalities, photograph parks and trails all over the Twin Cities. This is where we wanted to live and it is that park, it's Bush Lake, Highland, it's all what you guys do. So, it's appreciated. >> Great. And we appreciate the fact that you chose Bloomington you live here. >> Thank you. Thank you so very much. >> Thank you. >> Councilor, we are at 6:15. We've got to get downstairs for our meeting. I would entertain a motion to adjourn. A motion in a second to adjourn. Uh so, we've got a motion in a second. All in favor? I we are adjourned. I do want to talk to mention to folks, I don't know if anybody here is about the Adora project. Uh that is not it's on the it's on the agenda tonight, but there's not a public input portion of that. Uh so we'll have an opportunity I'm sure in the future. We are very early in this process. We are brand new in this process. So there's going to be plenty of opportunities for for you to have a voice in this and and we'll definitely work with you and and listen to the folks who are concerned about this. So But thanks everybody for coming tonight. We appreciate it.