Hey. Hey. Good evening everyone and welcome. I will call this Bloomington City Council meeting to order. Tonight is Monday, February 9th, 2026. Uh this is officially a study session. So no official votes or or decisions on anything. It's basically staff presentations and giving them policy direction on a couple of items. Uh we do have uh an agenda in front of us. And to approve the agenda, we have uh three items under organizational business. Actually four items, excuse me. Item 5.1 is a presentation regarding uh the animal shelter and what's some possible uh moves forward on that. Uh item 5.2 two, uh, study information on railroad quiet zones. Item 5.3, we'll get an update regarding the operation metro surge. And item 5.4, our city council policy and issue update. That is what we have for our agenda. And if lists are any changes, I will move approval of that agenda. Motion and a second by council member Dalisandro to approve tonight's agenda as stated. No further council discussion on this. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. >> Opposed. Motion carries. 70. We will go on. Item 5.1, a presentation regarding the animal shelter. Our deputy chief, Aman Bitney, is going to give us uh the rundown on the animal shelter. >> No, we don't during study meetings, we don't do the pledge of allegiance. Y >> I'm not Is it on the agenda? Okay. We we typically don't do a pledge of allegiance during the uh the study sessions, but if we've got it on the agenda, I don't see it on mine, but if you would all rise and join me in the pledge of allegiance. >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you for that clarification. I'm glad we got that straight and we we did it correctly. We will move on then. Item 5.1, our animal shelter presentation. Deputy Chief Damon Bitney is joining us this evening. Welcome. >> Thank you. Uh I appreciate [clears throat] the opportunity to uh uh speak tonight. Uh mayor, city manager, city council. Uh for some of you, some of this stuff is going to be repeat. I know we've been uh talking about this on and off for uh some time. uh it's just the first time in my current role that I'm bringing this forward to kind of get some direction to say hey where are we where should we be going with that and one of the main driving forces of that is right now the building is uh scheduled to be demolitioned in 2028 so we need to have some decisions on uh the shelter facility that is it's in the CIP plan and all that kind of stuff so as we move forward to get some direction for where this council would like this program to go uh so I'm going to provide a little bit of context I know like I said some of you have already heard this, but Council Member Robertson's may be fairly new to you. Uh, so I just want to get you up to speed and maybe there's some things that weren't covered in the previous uh presentations that I can hopefully cover today. Um, so currently the the main issue that we're dealing with is the facility. Uh, it's long outlived its uh life cycle. Um, and thanks to uh Superintendent Tim Barrett and his staff, they've kept it up and running uh for us. They continue to do things for us to make sure that it's operational. Um, but it is truly just past its life and it doesn't suit the needs that we have uh currently. Um, some things that I just want to kind of let people know that you may not have heard in the past. Um, our current program is kind of in two separate things, right? So, we have individuals that work for the police department that go out and respond to animal calls, right? We get about just under 2,000 of those a year. Um, of those that comes into roughly about 500 impounded animals a year. Um, and so it's a constant demand that we have throughout my tenure here, uh, within the organization is that there's a lot of animal calls and then there's ones that are going into an animal shelter. Uh, so the reason that we're here today is to get some direction obviously from council. We've had some things throughout the years that people have talked about. U, we have a recommendation that we're going to propose, which is basically we keep our current structure in place as far as the response and then what should we do with the facility, right? That's kind of the big thing that everybody has been talking about. We have some ideas that we think would be very uh beneficial to keep within our uh city and I'll try to explain that a little bit. But the main thing is to try to figure out where would you like us to go because in the past we've come back with studies and this kind of stuff brought it forth and then we just kind of have sat on it. So this is kind of to re uh renew those uh focus. So uh like it says here and I won't read everything to you but some things I just kind of want to highlight. Um, so right now the city of Bloomington is covering 100% of the facility costs, uh, and about 93% of the staffing costs for it, so like the hours that it costs for the individuals to work in that shelter. Um, and we obviously, uh, generate the majority of the usage. Um, but we do partner with other agencies and like it says there, those agencies, uh, account for about 32% but only cover about 12% of the revenue. And so over the time we have increased uh certain fees and things, but it doesn't really cover the staffing costs uh or the facility costs to actually maintain and that kind of stuff. And so that's kind of where we're trying to go with um uh some of the suggestions here. And that's why we need your direction to help us with that. [clears throat] So like I said, um this is kind of a an an outline of what we do at the shelter. uh the we have both our animal control coordinator and then our cadetses that used to be our ser our community service officers that actually uh deal with the impounds and day uh the day-to-day care of the facility. Um but we also at times if they're off due to the timing of the day. We either have uh our our reserve officers that are volunteer people or we have officers that respond to kind of take care of stuff but not as actually like dealing with the ins and outs. That's mainly the staff or the coordinator and the cadetses. Um, and then one of the things that we currently already do because some people have asked, "Well, what type of partnerships you have?" Uh, we do already currently have partnerships as far as like when we take an animal in and we can't find someone to uh take it for us, adopt it, whatever. We do work with a number of different agencies. Our coordinator, John Carlson, does an amazing job with that. Um and he we don't technically have it classified this but so the state statute as I understand it it's about five days that we can hold an animal and then we can dispose of it however that may mean whether you get you send it out or you can put it down. We don't operate that. We do a 7-day and that's to give people more time like if they were out of town or those types of stuff. And to be honest quite frankly John does an amazing job of extending that the best way he can to make sure that those animals can get back to their owners or to find a new home. And so that's kind of the stuff that we're dealing with and that's where that nokill shelter kind of thing comes in is we don't do that obviously in house but our goal is to ultimately find that animal to get to someone else's home. For those [clears throat] that haven't been to the uh facility um we have just been kind of making do. some of the things that are in here that are kind of the keys that I want people to understand um is when it comes to things like ventilation um the capacity uh the fact that if there was an animal that was sick we very limited on what we can do to keep those things separated like I said John does an an amazing job trying to reach out to other entities that can try to help but those are the main things that we kind of deal with on a day-to-day basis so like I mentioned before the goal would be is if we if the the council decides to keep the [snorts] shelter, the goal would be to have one that's a little that's more humane that is a forward thinking that has different capabilities than we currently have now. So, for those that haven't been over there, we were able to have like this little outside area where the dogs can come out. We didn't have that before. uh depending on which way things go. We'd like to have a nice area where people can come and be reunited with their their animals as opposed to trying to do a makeshift thing in a parking lot or an area that they go outside to go to the bathroom, those types of things. And then there's other possibilities. So, when we talk about canine and those types of stuff, and this isn't a huge component of it, but right now when we uh we have for our canine handlers, if they go out of town, we board those animals. We bring them somewhere else to get boarded. We don't have a facility that currently can house those dogs. Um, and so we haven't reached out a ton uh to other agencies, but we know other agencies do similar things. This may be a regional asset that we can try to find some of those types of stuff depending on how this thing uh plays forward going uh with your direction. Um, and then we do currently like like you'll see here in a second, we currently do partner with a handful of agencies, but there might be some other things that we can build upon that we're not currently doing now depending on the direction of the council. [snorts] So, like I was saying, the the the main thing that we're dealing with right now is the costs uh for the facility. Now, the CIP plan, we already have money set aside for a new facility. Um, depending on where this goes, it could be more than enough, might not be enough for those types of stuff. But the the the bigger thing comes down to is to day-to-day operation of the shelter to try to make sure that we have an equal comparison or as close as we can based on usage with the current agencies that we have. And then depending on we have because some other agencies, they go to private businesses and some of those this might be a better facility for them depending on how this all shakes out. >> [clears throat] >> So currently the this is kind of the options that we're trying to deal with, you know, uh keep doing what we're doing, which is kind of just uh like I said uh with uh Superintendent Barrett and his staff just trying to keep that thing afloat and then our people doing the best they can to operate it. Another option is to not only continue the service but try to figure out a regional facility that would be cost sharing um that uh would be a little bit more modernized than what we have now or the council could say hey let's reduce the services that we currently have and find another option depending on which direction you want us to look. So when we talk about revenue, uh currently we have contract fees when people uh uh pick up their animals. There's there are some fees that we collect with that. Uh some type stuff with adoption and licensing. Um you're going to hear later um from uh some other staff, not necessarily tonight, but about there's charitable gambling opportunities that could potentially uh participate in this. Um, and one of the things that we've found prior research and current research that is huge uh for that, we've even had people uh come up and speak to me personally about wanting to volunteer uh in this type of facility that'd be happy to help out to cut down on costs and do those types of things. So, those are some of the things that uh we would like to explore in addition to the potential of some of those other programs that we talked about with canines and whatnot. So the like what I was the goal for this is to try to figure out where what direction you would like us to go. Um what service demands you want what with the based on our facility that is has limitations based on the space quarantines all those types of stuff. And then the risk of just keep doing what we've been doing which is honestly uh to quote uh council member Lman sometimes is kicking the can down the road. And I think we're getting to that point we can't kick it any further especially if the building's going to go away. Uh and so that's why we wanted to come forth and say, "Hey, what direction would you like us to have?" Uh so our recommendation just to kind of repeat is that to continue the services that we have to get a modern facility uh to reduce the cost that the city currently has by uh subsidizing or excuse me by using some of the the services that we already have with those other entities to reach out to them and say, "Hey, here's some things we'd like you to do um to for those because they they understand that we have to front the big the majority of that cost." and then [cough and clears throat] um using volunteers, grants, different partnerships, different services that we can potentially bring to this depending on how this thing goes. Those are the types of things. And again, uh like the mayor said in the beginning, this isn't something that we're looking for like a vote or resolution. We're just looking for some guidance and some suggestions that you would like us to take so that we can bring back uh at a future date to say here's what you've asked us to do and here's where we're at. [snorts] And that's kind of what I just said right there. Any questions? >> Thank you, Deputy Chief. I appreciate that. Uh, and I appreciate you framing it up in the way that you did and and looking at the u the different paths forward. I'm sure everybody a lot of lot of questions. I'm sure one that I would have just right away. You've mentioned a couple of times is the regional partners, the other cities that use this. Who are we talking about here? >> Uh, airport, Richfield, uh, and Eden Prairie. Uh, they currently partner with us. Um, and then and I can kind of show you here in this so you can kind of see a little bit. Whoops, I'm going the wrong way. Oh, there we go. You can kind of see the different uh spread of kind of what their percentage of what they pay and what they use. And so like the airport very very minimal, but they do use us our facility uh if they have an animal uh from time to time, but like I said, it's usually like 1% of the actual usage. >> Okay. And [snorts] so if there I know the this uh is a limited service across the south metro just in general. Where do the other where where does the dinina go? Where do where do other city where are the cities south of the river? Where do they go? >> So a lot of them still have the same service that we do similar like they have uh an individual or multiple people that respond to calls. A lot of them partner with uh different organizations and so like you know some might do with the uh animal humane society, some might do a private business, some might do um uh those well those are the basically the the main two. Uh so when we've reached out in the past um and some of the stuff that we've done now and we haven't got like all the responses back from some of the people we've reached out to inside the city um our issue that we've dealt with is the capa the amount. So, as an example, um there might be some that could say, "Yeah, we can potentially take 500 animals a year, but that's going to be up in Golden Valley or Hopkins or something like that." And so, the concern at the time was, do we want Bloomington residents driving up there dealing with those types of stuff? And then some people like if they don't have their own vehicle, how do they get up there? Can they take those types of stuff? Um the ones that we've reached to, and again, like I said, just full transparency, we haven't heard back from everybody. there still might be a private entity within the city um that we just haven't heard from yet that can take that capacity. But of the ones that we've reached out to that got back to us, some of the concerns in addition to limitations was is well, we need to know what the what vaccines the dogs have had. We need to know these types of things because if they're going to come into our boarding facility, the people that are paying for this, we only have a certain place for quarantine or unknown. And a number of those we just don't know. And so those are the things that we've run into in the past. Um, but you know, that stuff could still be out there, but that's usually what we're seeing. >> Thank you, council. Uh, any questions or comments or your ideas on recommendations of what direction we should go on this? You going to roll them all into one big comment that you're making? Council member Nelson. >> Yeah. Thank you, Mayor. Um, [clears throat] can you help me understand kind of the difference between different parts of taking care of an animal? So, you've got uh animal control. Somebody calls you 2,000 calls a year where my dog's lost or I think there's probably other calls of, you know, uh, animals that maybe they don't want in their yard. Um, as well. And then you've got the sort of the shortterm holding of those animals hopefully to reunite with their family that's that's missing them. And then you've got maybe a longer term sheltering like the animal animal humane society that is trying to get them adopted and get them into another home. And then you've got uh up to you know sort of the the daycare situation or longer term stays. Can you help me understand sort of those different tiers >> [snorts] >> uh that and where we play in and where maybe the private marketplace might be a partner on different things? >> Yeah. So, [clears throat] uh council member uh Nelson, I the the quick answer that I can sum up and by my by no means am I an expert. I would say if of the four that you suggested, we're at like one or two, right? So like the higher end, so like as an example, uh we don't have people in there 24 hours a day. We don't have people that are specifically playing with every dog for hours or doing the, you know, like the private sessions or whatever. We have people that are going in making sure that they're fed, that that they're water, they get water, uh that they get get outside, get to play a little bit, those types of things. Um, but unfortunately it's not the same environment as a daycare facility like you would that most of us would want to say, "Hey, if I'm going to go board a dog, um, this wouldn't be your first option in the current environment that that facility is in." >> Council member Lman, >> thank you, Mayor. I'm just going to go ahead and uh give some my comments and I appreciate what you said earlier about kicking the can down the road. number of council members up here have brought forward and I had the opportunity to to to really walk through that and wow that is uh I mean those pictures look much better than what that what [clears throat] it is. They they made it look nice on those pictures but really walking through that's horrible. Um so I know we'll give have the opportunity mayor to have more conversation and discussion on this. So I want to just keep it brief here so we can move on to other items. >> Keep it brief and I and I would say if you've got an opinion on what direction to go >> Yep. I think that's >> do that just kind of quick and easy. Where where we want to have the police go with this? >> Yeah. So, I think my my concern is that the the longer term tales on this. Uh and so I'd really like to see a option where we're really able to reduce that that 32 and 12% uh uh input and I'd like to see if there's a way to expand our customer base so that they can take on more of that burden. And so what I would look at is, you know, maybe one that's not even on here, but I think the options two and option three make a lot of sense to me because I really would like to see some regionalization here. We've got, you know, [snorts] examples of where we've got the pool and other things that I'm just concerned about what what the impact is to have on our uh on our budget long term and as we commit to this. don't want to do option one, but option two and three are moving in the direction which I'm interested in. But I'd like to see a fourth option that's more entrepreneurial and maybe working with private uh business, some of the charitable gambling and that type of thing uh out there to figure out a way to kind of reduce that that overall um impact to our our levy in the future years. >> Good. Council member Carter >> and Council Member Dallas. >> Um so thank you for this is very very helpful. Um I have similar feelings. Uh definitely not just the service reduction. Don't want to go down that path. Um if we were to go down just the service reduction, it sounds like based on what you said um local providers, nonprofits, more I think that's probably the majority of the organizations that um are kind of in this area. I mean it it wouldn't seem like they could absorb 500 animals. Not in our area. I think it'd be very difficult because I think if they did, and again, I'm not an expert on it, but I think other agencies would be using them uh and have that kind of stuff. And I just think our capacity is the thing that we ran into in the past, and I think it's going to continue to be the issue we go up against. >> Yep. Okay. Um and is the idea then that if we built a kind of a better a newer bigger better facility that we might have contracts with additional cities like Edina or Mandota or others in the region so that we could have more revenue coming into the facility. >> Absolutely. >> Okay. Um so yeah I I am in support of moving forward. I mean again I know we're going to have a lot more conversations about this. I really like the idea of um the charitable gambling potentially benefiting this um organization or this um infrastructure that we're going to have. And then the other is leveraging volunteers. I know I've heard a lot from community members on this and people wanting to be able to help in the shelter. Um my understanding is in the past maybe there were some legal concerns around liability and things like that, but I kind of feel like if nonprofit organizations can overcome those challenges of having volunteers help with the animals, it feels like we should be able to too. So, um, so yeah, I I think this is an exciting path forward. Um, assuming others agree. I'm going to guess nobody's going to want to do the just completely stop the service reduction, but um, yeah, thank you for this. >> Thank you, >> Council Member Delisandro. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, thank you, DC, for the presentation. And I would um so I'd say the the way that I've always thought about this and um why I've advocated for even the small improvements that were made a couple years ago and everything is because um I think there's a real ethos in our city that I have seen um through all the conversations I've had around um you know that these animals need a higher level of care than what we can give them right now. Not because anybody doesn't want to but because of the circumstances. And so um what I'd be very interested in is understanding a kind of more a bit of a comprehensive approach. And what I mean by that is when an animal is when and and we haven't talked about like wild animals and like the difference uh in animal control for wild animals or you know non-domemesticated animals. So I want to put a pin in that because we probably need to consider that in this debate in this conversation. Um simply because that's something that sometimes we do and sometimes we don't do. It's a little iffy on the way that we handle that. And so I think some direction and consistency will be useful there. But let's say let's say for for the case of the conversation I'm having with you that the that the um the process is all the domestic animals like lost pets, pets that get out, whatever. Um you know, there's this like 0 to 5 day plan, there's this 5 to 10 day plan, and then there's this post 10day plan, if you will. And from my perspective, it feels like it feels like not all of that should fall under like the purview of animal control and the police. So, I actually would love it if we thought about this a little bit more broadly because, you know, it it's almost a becomes a community function uh and and um the public safety portion of it after day 10 kind of gets taken care of. What I mean by that is the animals are sheltered. They're sheltered. maybe in day five to 10 or six to 10 there's a a vet visit and a vaccination and everything. So now you have potentially an adoptable animal at the end of 10 days. Um and that doesn't that doesn't in my opinion that ceases to be a public safety problem that cease that becomes another kind of problem for which we have an enormous amount of of experience as a community at large. Um especially with the animal humane society and the millions of dollars that they get every year and stuff like that. So I'm thinking like, hey, do we have animal control? The purview of animal control is X and Y. And then when it goes to Z, we have a partner doing that, right? A partner, a nonprofit partner, something like that. Now, if we if we decided to build the facility to house that and they paid rent to be there and whatever, there's revenue opportunity and all kinds of other things like that. But um you know the the biggest challenge I think we have to getting volunteers into this is they the the that moment of time when the animal is unknown to us in terms of its vaccination status and all those other things. And so missing from the conversation if we're not careful is how they go from being an animal control problem to being an adoptable animal. And so I'd like to just make sure we we address that. And I think there's partners for that. And I certainly would want us to to not take that burden on ourselves completely in terms of trying to fund that. Um so for for absolutely elevating the level of of of service we offer, getting that paid for as much as we can by uh you know whether that's grants or nonprofit partners or whatever and using volunteers. But I think we have we have to be concerted in the the thought process of that that time span and the services we offer in each of those cases. So I hope that's helpful. It is. Thank you. >> Thank you, council member. Council member Rivas, [snorts] >> thanks for the presentation. I just have a quick comment. Um, and it goes along the lines with um of the comments that uh council member de Alexander made. Um um I'm all for this. Um, even considering the expense, I think it's overdo in the city of Bloomington as as a large city not to have the facilities for animals that that require the care. Uh, my question is the possibility of partnering with somebody to provide the veterinary services to the animals because that is a um a real thing. If it's an animal stays there for a certain period of time and it's not owners are not claiming it or you know it doesn't have any owners um that animal cannot be adopted in any way if it doesn't have proof of chs and sometimes even have to be spayed or you know fixed in any way. So [snorts] what I would like to see is if we try to partner with somebody to provide veterinary services that need surgery, not just to chs, but you know having to to uh spay an animal. Uh that way we don't put an animal that's could reproduce out there and doesn't have enough, you know, create a bunch of animals just running around the streets, which I've seen sometimes in in other places. Um so that's my question. the possibility of partnering to provide just the veterinary services. Um I don't know if we can afford to have that on on a facility at the city level. It would be quite expensive to have that service, but I will be one of the first volunteers to work in there. >> Yeah, I'm all willing to do that. That's all I got. >> Thank you, Council Member. >> Everybody said what they needed to say. Thank you, >> Council Member Robertson. And then Council Member Nelson. >> Thank [clears throat] you, Mayor. Um uh thank you so much for the presentation. And I'm really um maybe not excited is the right word, but I'm looking forward to learning more about this project. Um and just to be very clear, I certainly do um support option two as well. Right. When I hear that a facility has long outlived its useful life, that sounds like a liability concern to me. And it sounds like the animals are not um in the best possible place they could be. And I really appreciate that you all are considering that. Um, and just to echo um what council member um Dellesandro and council council member Rivas um have said, I'm really interested in learning more about volunteers. I think there's a lot of folks in the city um who if given the proper training and all those things um certainly would like to help. Um and then yes, partnering partnering, excuse me, with a a nonprofit or an already existing um veterinary uh office um I think would be a really cool thing and I I really looking I'm looking forward to hearing more. So, thanks. >> Thank you. Thank you, Council Member. Council member Nelson. >> Yeah. Uh, quick question, then a couple comments. Um, does the city have capacity currently if someone experiences a situation where they can no longer take care of their animal that they can d drop it off with the city of Bloomington or is that not an option right now? So [clears throat] the the quick answer is we'll find a way and that's because of the individual that runs it which is John Carlson. Now that we've said it publicly we there's a capacity right at some point but he has done everything in his power to make sure that if someone comes and needs something he's going to do whatever he can to take care of it. So uh we've had issues like that in the past. I mean, so far so just to to put it in perspective, he's made phone calls to people in Texas that have driven up to help take care of animals because the only other option was to put them down. So, he does not I mean, he goes to all efforts to make sure it happens. But does our facility have the capacity? Not necessarily all the time. >> Maybe we need to expand that capacity, but appreciate John's efforts because I know that's a real problem for a lot of people. they run into situations and then that leads to some of those animals out on the street because they have no other option. >> Correct. >> And uh so um and [clears throat] then my comments are absolutely charitable gambling, absolutely volunteering, absolutely donations. You know, I've been here a while. I always talk about other revenue sources that are not tax generated. Whatever you guys can do there, 100% support that. Um, I I support creating a place that is accommodating and um, obviously an upgrade from what's there. I did the tour there and it's it's uh, not pleasant and not pleasant for the animals, but I also want to respect it's not pleasant for the staff. Um, you know, I walked in and, you know, one of the dogs was scared and had, [snorts] you know, gone to the bathroom and it it didn't smell great and it had been there for a bit and maybe you guys planted that there for our tour. [laughter] So, you know, just made it made it worse. But no, I mean, it's it's it's both sides of that. You know, we got to take care of these animals, right? Get them reunited with their family or get them to a new family, uh, if that's a possibility. Um, I also think that the partnerships on the nonprofit, on the veterinary side, all of that make a ton of sense. Um, expanding this to a potential regional facility makes a lot of sense, but I think we need to have all those things in place before we move forward with it. And my big big fear is that we drive headlong into that and then partners drop off and then we're stuck holding the bag on the back side of it as opposed to us keeping like you said you I'd gone through four things. You said we're kind of focused in one and two. Let's make sure our focus stays in one and two. Let's improve that and let's look for opportunities bring partners in for three and four for the expansion of those services. I mean, I I could see a facility where we could do that. Um, but we need to make sure we have those private places and that at some point if for whatever reason someone backs out, the city's not left holding the financial bag on services beyond the animal control portion of it. Um, I don't mean to be callous. I just want to be realistic about that. >> Nope, we agree. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, council member. I think you've heard the direction from the council. Uh I I think there's pretty good consensus here. The only thing that I might add is uh uh a really to really encourage in to be creative in your thinking. I mean we're talking you've mentioned a new facility. Is there is there a reuse that could be done somewhere that could do the same kind of thing to keep costs down? So got plenty of room here in the city of Bloomington, but uh I think you've heard the council's thoughts on this and look forward to this moving forward. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Deputy. Item 5.2. two on our agenda council is a discussion on railroad quiet zones. We've got Kirk Roberts and Jeremy Melquist up front with us today. Good evening. >> Good evening, Mr. Mayor, council members. I'm Jeremy Melquist with engineering here to discuss railroad quiet zones. Just waiting on the PowerPoint here. There it is. Uh so we currently have two uh railroad companies that operate in Bloomington, CPKC and Progressive Railroad. The map on the right hand side of the screen there shows the two railroad companies. CP CPKC operates on the west side uh in red there and then Progressive operates in the blue area. Uh so in total there's 26 grade crossings. So where the railroad crosses a roadway, we have 26 locations in the city and that's where trains are required to sound their horn before they cross the roadways. On the west side of Bloomington, CPKC, uh since 2024, trains have been operating overnight on a more frequent basis. Um, we haven't heard of any any recent complaints over the over the winter, but uh, the city has no control over the train operations or the hours of the trains. Uh, the only option the city has to mitigate noise is uh, to establish a quiet zone that meets federal railroad administration requirements. So, background about quiet zones, they were established in 2005. Eliminating the train horn is considered a reduction in safety. So, additional safety improvements are needed at each crossing to counteract the uh removal of the train horn. Uh train horns are considered a quality of life issue, not a safety issue. So, uh with that, there's limited funding from uh the state or federal government. So, local agencies are required to pay for most of these changes. And to upgrade each crossing to uh meet quiet zone eligibility is typically in the range of 50 to 400,000 per crossing. Here's some of the example crossing improvements that may be required to upgrade each of of the crossings to become quiet quiet zone eligible. Uh so the top top ones are basically just to prevent cars from driving around the gates. Um there's also options to to close the roadway um and only allow railroad crossings. I don't foresee that being an option um in Bloomington, but it is an option. So the first step towards uh creating a quiet zone is to prepare a railroad crossing safety study. And we need to hire a consultant to do that work. They would evaluate all the 26 crossings in Bloomington and figure out what the cost would be to upgrade each one of those to become quiet zone eligible. The cost for that study would be 60 to 85,000 and would take six months to complete. And then once each of the crossing improvements are identified, the future funding opportunities are limited for those. They're listed, the three are listed on the bottom of the slide there. So there's the railroad crossing elimination program where that there's federal allocation primarily for replacement of the signal the railroad signal equipment but local funds would be required for road improvements. There's regional solicitation which is competitive and unlikely to score well. And then there is a bonding request option which there there has been a few cities that have been successful with that. Um, Shockp has applied for 3 million recently, but that outcome is currently unknown. What are some other nearby cities doing that have the CPKC line running through their city? So, Adina's currently has a quiet zone study underway. St. Louis Park has just completed their quiet zone study and that had recommended 12 million of crossing improvements. And then Golden Golden Valley has just advertised an RFP for their quiet zone study. So the three cities north of Bloomington uh that have the CPKC line running through them have uh either started a study or completed it or are going to complete it. And with that, I'll pass it over to Kirk. >> Council members, just a couple things to consider uh as we're looking forward on what to do on this particular issue for 2026. We've got two major studies that we have to do. The safe streets for all is we reached an agreement with the federal government. That's federal funding. That needs to move ahead um to utilize that funding. So I don't see any changes here. The other funding, the study that we have budget for is 84 Street. This one's a little bit unique. It's expected to be repaved next year. Um and see 84 Street. A number of things converge here. Uh you've all probably heard from residents on Stanley Avenue over the years about the amount of traffic they get through. So a lot of things are converging right here. We've got the 494 construction underway that's expected to take a lot of volume off of this street. 84 Street between Normandale and France is a four-lane undivided roadway. Uh there's an elementary school there. Um there's a couple stop controlled intersections. It's long been the subject of study by the city and uh numerous complaints. With all those things coming together, the 494 work taking place which offers relief from traffic, with the pavement work coming up, it's time to develop a long-term plan for that roadway. Some things that will make the roadway safer, make the area around the elementary school safer for the kids getting to school, reduce the amount of cut through traffic that we see in those neighborhoods. So, we would really like to keep that study on track for this year to finally bring some relief. Um, and that's been a topic for long before I was at the city, too. So, um, would like to keep that study on track. Next year, the plan is to study 102nd Street. There is no pavement work imminent on that. So, that's one that we could push back. No one likes the way it's working, but it's been that way for about 40 years. It'll it'll continue to operate if we push that study back. If the council wants to advance on a railroad crossing study now, um we'd just seek additional budget to do that because that wasn't in our work plan for the next couple of years. So that's what we'd be seeking from the council. So we could move forward with that, but would we would seek budget to do so and happy to answer questions. >> Thank you both. Appreciate it. Thanks for being here tonight. Questions from the council. Council member Carter. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, so I appreciate seeing this back in front of us. I know we had a study or listening session a couple months ago where there were quite a few neighbors who came and um were expressing concern. So appreciate the work has that has been done up to this point. Um, this kind of feels like a stupid question, but what exactly would be the outcomes of a study? Like what ex what information will we get from that study? Will it tell us like exactly which crossings it would be beneficial to do to make quiet crossings and exactly how to do that? Yes, council member Council member Carter. >> Um, >> yeah, it would tell us the um the areas that would be, I guess, most cost effective to implement a quiet zone. Uh, it it would give us different options on on that as well as what each crossing upgrade would take in terms of cost. than um the example is shown whether it be upgraded to like a four quadrant or adding just adding medians. Um so yeah it would tell us all those things >> um and it would be for just the CPC line or would it be for all the railroad stops for all the railroad crossings? >> All the 26 in the city. Yep. >> Okay. And then once we would get the study results, if we said if there were like six crossings that were identified as um candidates, would they then also need further study or would we have all of the information we need at that point to start finding funding to make those improvements? >> This study should give us all the information we need to then implement th or put those into our our CIP and and try to get uh funding for those. >> Okay. And it will help us prioritize like that there are certain neighborhoods that are maybe more significantly impacted than others. >> It should there is an option to do uh a noise analysis with the study to determine uh which which areas are impacted the most. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. >> Yep. And and uh Council Member Carter brings up a good question. So is is are railro quiet zones are they an all or nothing kind of thing? Is there a benefit to only doing some? Because I've got to imagine if you quiet a crossing, uh, you know, a quarter mile down the road where there's a second crossing and it's not quiet, it's probably not all that much of noise. Uh, noise isn't mitigated all that much. Am I correct in that or, >> Mr. Mayor? There the requirements are it has to at least be a half mile in length. So if there are multiple crossings within that half mile, um it would be beneficial to remove uh the train noise from either just one or um whatever the study tells us that Okay, >> that would be >> okay. Council member Dallasro. >> Thanks, Mr. Mayor. Can I get the um the map back? >> Uh not that one. Sorry, the one with the two trail rail lines on it. Sorry, I should have said, can you go to the front there? That's it. Thank you very much. Okay. So, so I I distinguish these two lines very much in terms of the impact that we're seeing right now in the city. the the CPKC line is the one that's causing most of the challenges for the residents that I hear from. Um I'm sure Council Member Nelson hears from them, too, but you can imagine that runs right through my my district. So, I hear about it a lot and rightfully so. Um my So, so as I look at this, I'm looking at four or five crossings versus 26. And I'm wondering why we can't do this study on the four or five that are most impacting residents right now. Because it would cost less. it would be faster and we could have the information that we need to make decisions. But I don't that wasn't presented to you by you guys tonight, so I'm not quite sure why. But if I'm if I'm looking at both the impacted residents and also the noise that's happening, it's happening on that line. And so from my perspective, expediting the decision-m on that line makes way more sense. And it should be a lot less expensive because it's only four if I'm if the dots equal crossing the that's only four. It's only four crossings. So, I mean, I feel like we could get that expedited or at least have not that you guys could do the work, but you're hiring a consultant, right? So, the consultant is doing the work. We could get at least that part of this thing done. It feels like so we have the information and we maybe it doesn't take six months to do it. I don't know. I throwing that out there as a way to compromise to try to expedite us getting some information here, but I don't know what the burden is on you all as staff. I mean, I would think if the consultant is there, you have less burden, but you know, help me out and help me understand. Yeah, >> Mr. Mayor, council member Dolesandro, it's a good question. So, up until recently, most of our noise complaints, and we get a few a year, come from the segment that's under the progressive, the blue line, the line that runs along Old Shakby Road, and we get a couple complaints a year. That's all we ever heard. We never got complaints on the on the north south route until recently when the CPKC decided to start running at night. Um and so then we got this raft of complaints that kicked off this whole discussion. Since that time, CPKC is now not running at night again. And so there u we haven't had the train noise at night. And I I do live sort of along the corridor near Old Shaki Road. And so I have been woken by those same train horns and it's it's lovely at 4 in the morning. Um and yeah, so you could just do the north south running section and yes, you would save time and save and save money as well. You just eliminate the possibility that that maybe the there are other issues along this other segment that the city would like to be addressed. So yeah, it is certainly an option. >> I appreciate the opportunity to think about that. uh you know um the other piece of this that I would like to know and I don't know that we have it but there's certainly a population density and and and impact study that we also not study so much but we would know how many households are impacted on each of these lines and and everything else. Um uh good good point that you know I don't hear about the progressive line as much. I don't know if the other folks that are here um want to talk about that. Um, to me, the ones that run through the industrial kind of more industrial areas of our city kind of make sense that they they are what they are. Um, but I certainly would understand if there are residents along some of the progressive railroad areas that need to be considered. Um, I also feel like we could do it in parts if we needed to. Um, because ultimately we're not going to we're not going to make a decision. We can iterate our way is my point if we have smaller take smaller bites at the apple, if you will. So, I throw that out there as an alternative proposal to just doing a six-month, 26 study, but maybe we don't get any more. We don't get a lot of benefit out of doing it smaller. I don't know. >> Thanks. >> Thank you, Council Member Lman. >> Uh yeah, I I'll just pick up where I left off there. I've certainly heard over the years uh several complaints uh from 102nd and Penn Avenue. In fact, I've been woken up in the middle of the night uh from that. And I I've tried to tell residents, you know, you know, let's hold off on this because, you know, we just weren't at that point where we're ready to do it. But I've got I had a list of people who were really upset about that and I've kind of held them back. But now this is coming forward. Um I would really, you know, appreciate that second and pen and I've also heard, you know, kind of all the way um down into into your district, Sean. I've heard other other uh people complain as you as you kind of move south. I don't have any um uh purview on the northern part other than I grew up in that area and and and understand even from my house which is ways where I could hear it from there. But you know, that's some of some of the fun of being in the city of Bloomington. You know, lots of diversity. Um the question I I really want to ask though that kind of concerns me um and then I've got one last point and I'll be done. mayor um is when we talk about a reduction in safety and understand the quality of life component of it. I just want to understand you know really what that means. So if we're if we you know make this reduction in safety is that fully and completely mitigated you know given some of these corridors go through schools and churches and places where a lot of our young people play. I would hate to you know fix a noise problem and then kill somebody. understand what I'm asking there. [snorts] >> Yeah. Yeah. Council member Lman. Um, so the Federal Railroad uh association does have requirements for when you remove a train horn, what what exactly is required to offset the removing the train horn. So, um, in terms of improvements, it's basically trying to, uh, make make sure that cars can't drive around it. In terms of uh pedestrians on sidewalks, uh there's no there's no defined um improvement that for for those um for sidewalks, but that that would be defined during the actual uh field diagnostic meeting at each of the crossings. But there are there are improvements that are required um that would offset removing the train horn at these cross. So there's a chance that we have a reduction in safety is basically what you're telling me. >> We we'd have to the Federal Railroad Administration would require a certain threshold to be met and that's they would go over that in the study um once that's completed. So >> thank you. We we'll talk about this later on. The last point that I wanted to make is that if I do my math right, if we were to look at all 26 and it was all at the high end, we're talking about 10 $10.4 million with if you add on the study. So that that's kind of sobering. Uh and of course on the bottom end, it could be a lot less than that. But uh but I just, you know, I just as we we kind of think about what we've got coming up, uh mayor, I'm just very concerned. You know, we just talked about what we're going to do with the animal shelter. We got two pools. We got the fire stations coming on on board and there's a number of other things. So I just you know you know bit by bit we're we're kind of you know making for a really large uh price tag and I'm just concerned as we kind of move forward. Now granted I get a quality of life uh you know pieces and and certainly the folks that you know lived in my district want to see these changes but I'm just concerned about that that price tag. It scares me a little bit. Uh and certainly if we wait it could cost more. Uh but uh I just want to keep that in mind as we kind of move our way forward on this. >> Other thoughts? Council member Nelson? >> Yeah, thank you, Mayor. Uh quick question. Um and I think you already probably alluded to it, but we have no regulatory authority over this. So, uh even with noise ordinances or anything like that. And I mean the analogy in my head is I can't go drive down Old Shakape and blare my horn as I drive through every intersection. At some point I think one of our esteemed police members will maybe stop me and ask, "What are you doing, man?" [laughter] So, but they can we have no we we have to treat those differently. Is that accurate? >> Correct. Council member Nelson. Uh the city has no authority on the hours that the trains operate or or their schedules, the number of trains that are that are on the tracks. We have the that's up to the federal railroad administration. >> Okay. Thank you. Um is it possible to get a copy of the Adina and St. Louis Park studies just so we can review what they said and what they did? Um is that public? Can I just go to their website and get it? probably >> if it's not available, we'll request we'll request those studies for the council. >> Okay. Thank you. I appreciate that. Um I appreciate the um uh that the that that we may need a consultant. Is it possible to do this with staff if obviously if we probably don't do it in this year, but if we look at the outyear um is it possible to do this with staff or do we not have the specific technical expertise? >> Yeah, Mr. Mayor, Council Member Nelson, this is probably outside the purview of traffic staff. We um don't do this enough and wouldn't be um yeah, doing this consistently enough to be proficient at it. Um and a lot of the work is bringing forward the state and the railroad and they're actually the ones that set the the standards for what happens happens at each crossing and so um they're the ones that kind of make those decisions and it's bringing them together as the bulk of the work of the study. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, and then your just to clarify, your recommendation is to do this in 2027 after those other items have been completed. And was part of that based on the fact that funding wouldn't be available likely for uh 3 to four years anyways? Like if we did this next year and we submitted to get funding, it it wouldn't happen anyways. So, is that did I read that correctly in the packet or did I misunderstand? And I think I I mixed up the terms between the the budget and the funding to actually build the crossings. I have a certain amount of funding to do these studies and funding I have I'd like to use for 84 Street. I still think that's the priority. So if the council wants to make funding available, we can do the study and then we'd have to talk about how to pay for the actual projects to get built that come out of that study. And yeah, that would be a much longer conversation. Council member Nelson. >> Okay. Um, and then you know, um, can you update me? I'm sorry for so many questions. Can you update? So, you said the what I'm going to call the Russian one because of all the CP stuff is, you know, is that one they're not doing overnight anymore? >> Yeah. [laughter] Versus, and is Progressive doing overnight? >> Mr. Mayor, Council Member Nelson, I don't understand the spirits that move railroads and how they do their delivery schedules. All I can tell you is that obviously, you know, you live close to the tracks. They have not been running at 2 and 3 and 4 in the morning. Lately, they've switched more to early morning or um the morning hours or daytime deliveries. As far as I understand it, um there and we don't I can't make any predictions about how they're going to do that in the future, if they're going to switch back to late night deliveries. We just they give us no insight uh into that. So, >> okay. Um I have heard from people on the progressive railroad line. I live about as far away from one of these crossings as as Mr. Roberts lives from a different crossing. Um and I sleep well, you know, I sleep very soundly. I understand that some people don't like my the rest of my family and in particular my dogs. Um, and so I, you know, I've heard from people that live close to these. You know, there are a lot of residential areas along both of these lines. There's some industrial areas along the progressive line in particular, but a little bit along the uh, we'll just call it the other one. Um and uh so I you know I I candidly I'm a little bit ambivalent on this you know because it it is an issue but it's been an issue for a long time and it's a it's a known thing and if we do this study if we actually want to fix it it's going to cost us to council member Lman's point you know millions and millions of dollars which is unlikely to be provided by anyone other than us. And so I mean I think the big question in my mind is it a is it an issue of enough import to you know before we make the $60,000 decision are we willing to make the 510 million decision and that's the part that I struggle with um that you know honestly unless there was a better funding path for all of those items I struggle to say that that it makes sense. Um, you know, the railroad line has been there for a long time and it's a known thing and, you know, it it it could be better certainly, but it's not unknown to people when they they move into the area or they buy it. I mean, there are certainly some people that have lived there potentially long enough that usage patterns have changed, obviously. So that's that's the concern I have is, you know, are we really willing to go all the way? If we aren't, why do the study? >> Thank you, council member. Council member, >> uh, is is it quick and >> quick clarifying? Go ahead. >> Thanks. Do you mind? Uh, do we know any patterns of railroad traffic historically that we could look at to understand Council Member Nelson's point? like um you know over the past 25 years or so has it ebbed and flowed in terms of nighttime traffic and other things like that? Could we get that information? >> And I think to Mr. Roberts point earlier um in my history with railroads they do whatever they want. >> That's why I'm asking for historically what they've already >> and Mr. Mayor Council Member Dalisandro one of the the issues you raised is really valid that that we don't have a lot of data and council member Nelson you made this point too. don't have a lot of data um around this and how we make decisions about this. It's an area where we don't have a lot of any regulatory authority yet we all receive the complaints. And so one idea regardless of what the the decision here is is that we'll set up you we've got the Let's Talk Bloomington platform is is we'll set up I've reached out to communication staff is is some sort of a reporting form at least so we can start collecting those data whether it's just hey that darn train woke me up at 4 in the morning although my dogs were the the real culprit. Um you know just to sort of start tracking some of these complaints. We're looking into what information that we can either collect or get from the railroad too because it's it's tough. I understand I'm I'm very data driven. I don't have a lot of data. The council doesn't have a lot of data and we're coming forward asking you to make this decision. So, I I do understand the frustration. >> Council member Rebas, >> I just have a quick comment. Thank you for the presentation. I I'm I have learned some of the times that the trains run while I am with the best Bloomington's best and they tell me, "Oh, this train comes in at 900 p.m. at this crossing." It It's kind of funny. I have not heard any complaints in my area. And sometimes I hear the train when I walk when I take my dogs out in the middle of the night. I take him to the backyard and you know, I hear the train, but otherwise I don't hear it at all. But you know when I have been uh riding with uh with PD uh BPD uh they kind of know the times better than any of us I would say because they tell me oh yeah this is not a good idea to be in this at this intersection at this time because the train happened to be crossing there and we were waiting for you know about 10 minutes for it to move. Uh I would in my opinion I think if they keep changing the schedule it doesn't make any sense to be to make the expense. Um you know like you mentioned Mr. Roberts that that uh you haven't heard them any complaints for the last few months in the CP CP uh KC line. Um and that's the one that prompted all this thing. I remember the lady coming over to our listening station. Right. I got involved because I thought that we could get a grant from the federal government, but it wasn't for the mitigation of noise. It was for safety issues. >> Um so, um in my humble opinion, if we don't need to do it, why even bother with it? Because the expense is great. And if they keep changing the schedule and then they'll move it to the late afternoon, early evening and we don't need to mitigate the noise anymore, why make the expense, right? That's just a comment. Thank you. >> Thank you, council member. >> Thanks for the feedback. Uh I I guess my my thought to your point, Council Member Dalisandro, about par parsing this out and maybe doing this peace meal or bit by bit. I would be very hesitant to do that. If we're doing a study and ultimately work, I would hate to pick the winners and the losers one side over another. uh if we're going to do it and and I would assume we'd get there's economies of scale I would think to do it all at once as opposed to break it out but I don't know that for certain so that's what I would think and what I would think what I think most of all for the 10 or 15 million price tag that this would take uh that we simp we we find 10 or $15 million and we buy the progressive railroad and turn it into a trail from one end of the city to the next I would do with $15 million as opposed to trying to quiet down a problem that, as Council Member Nelson has said, has been there for a long time and uh and is inconsistent and and is not not in any way something we can control. Those are my thoughts. So, uh Council Member Robertson, you want to in on this or >> Uh yes, thank you, Mayor. I just um to echo almost exactly what you had just said. Um I just given that the city has virtually no authority over the space. I am a little hesitant to um want to go ahead and spend a ton of money if we may not be able to control the outcome. Um anyways, uh I'm I'll be real honest with you. I'm still really on the fence and I'm learning a lot. Uh but I really loved what the mayor just said about something, right? right? If we're going to invest10 to 15 million, I wonder if this is the best place to spend it. To say nothing of your work, which I'm sure is fantastic. Um, but yeah, that's where I'm that's where I'm at with it right now. So, thank you very much. >> U, so at at the risk of kicking the can down the road, I I've heard a couple of people say they're ambivalent or quite not quite sure. I've heard the request for more information. Maybe we could ask for to see the studies done by St. Louis Park and Edina and maybe use that as a bit of a data point. Maybe bring this back one other time once we have that. Again, hate to to keep saying let's think about it some more, but I think just a bit more data might help people and clarify their thoughts a little bit about what it might take uh or or what might be the the the correct path forward. Does that make sense, Council? Council [clears throat] member Carter. >> Uh thank you, Mayor. Um I'm wondering if we could do the Let's Talk Bloomington page and even just ask some questions of the community about how, you know, whether they think this is a priority or not. I mean, obviously there will be plenty of people who don't live close to railroads who don't think it's going to be a priority, but um even if we ask them in Let's Talk Bloomington kind of where they are um in location um to the railway, you know, I would just love to have some community input on it, too. >> Yeah. All right. >> Excellent. I think we've got a plan. Thank you. >> Very good. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thanks much. Item 5.3 on our agenda this evening is an update on Operation Metro Surge. And we're going to hear a couple of different folks. We'll hear from Chief Hodgeges here is going to kick us off and then we're going to turn it over to our city manager to hear a few more details. Chief Hodgeges, good evening. >> Good evening, Mayor, City Council. Um, I'll keep my remarks brief and then take some questions. Uh first and foremost, um before I put on this uniform, I was a community activist a long time ago. And one thing I've learned is that when people are directly affected by something, I deal with them, not others who may be well-intentioned. Uh but I've spent I've probably talked to over 300 people that are directly affected by uh this operation here. Um there are people who I know who are married to um someone who, you know, did everything they're supposed to do and now magically with a snap of a finger, they're no longer illegal here and they're driving with their spouse under blankets um in their vehicle so no one sees them uh when they're driving. I know people here who are hiding in their houses. Um and it's sad, right? At the end of the day, it's sad, but I'd be remissed if I didn't convey what has been universally said to me and members of our department. ICE can leave today. If the law doesn't change, these people are still going to be hiding in their house. They're still going to be driving with their spouse covered up in a blanket in the front seat trying to drive them to work. So, I'm going to implore everybody, again, I don't do politics in my role, but there is a law enforcement argument for um advocating for a law change because this law is so convoluted and people um it's really hard for people to to enforce. Um and that's a significant problem right now with Operation Surge. Now, I'm going to say this, and I'm not trying to be mean, but we've made plenty of videos, and if people choose to believe it or not, that's completely on them. But my answer does not change. Um, I am in charge of this police department. We do not cooperate with ICE. We do not enforce federal immigration laws. I don't care what video is out there that someone makes up. I don't care what website someone has out there, someone's created a fake uh Bloomington police website, we don't do it. So, if you see us out there with the presence of uh HSI, we are not enforcing immigration law. I don't care what video says or who calls, it's not happening. And so I'm going to talk about an incident that took place on 88th in uh Irving. Uh this was uh involving the airport police department and they were working with the Department of Homeland Security who uh does other things other than immigration. This was not an immigration law enforcement action. It wasn't. Um if we go out there, you see this patch and this badge, I don't care who tells you anything, we do not enforce federal immigration law. And I'm sorry that I'm frustrated about this, but the best thing that people can do is tell people the truth because what we're seeing now is, and again, I've talked to so many of these people that they're not wanting to call the police because they're hearing from others that we're cooperating with ICE. So on tomorrow we'll do a press conference on a u a prostitution sting, sex worker st human trafficking um operation that we did because what's happening is people are now really going more underground with these types of activities because no one wants to call the police. Domestic violence is really occurring in communities and people aren't calling the police, right? So again, I don't know how many videos we can make. We don't cooperate with ICE, period. We're not authorized to enforce federal immigration law. Um, and I don't know how many times I can say it. People believe what they want to believe, but we we don't we don't do it. Um, and then lastly, I will say this because this is the other question that we get asked a lot. What is the federal government's role in this? Um, the federal government obviously is in charge of enforcing immigration law. And again, I'm saying law. Law that was passed, law that was signed into into legis by the president of the United States. And that's what they're here to do. The way they're going about doing it is completely ridiculous in my opinion. And why is it ridiculous? Because a lot of the tactics that they're using, we stopped using 20 something years ago, right? And again, I'm not trying to offend anybody, but when you send people up here who haven't um been able to do a job and then you send them up here and they haven't been trained and this is what you get, right? And that's what we're dealing with now. Um now, people have seen and it's been publicly stated there has been a drawback, but I'm going to reiterate a drawback is fine and we want people we want to get back to some degree of normaly, but they leave today. I don't think we're getting back to normaly uh for a lot of these families that are still hiding in their house. A lot of these families that are still driving with their spouse in their vehicle, we're not getting back to normaly. Um and I'll just close on this and you can ask me questions on behalf of our police department. I want people just to have the facts and the truth. We do not enforce federal immigration law. This is taxing our police officers. As the head of this organization, I'm conveying that to everybody here, right? For last year, and we'll talk about it in March, uh, crime was down 10% in Bloomington. That's probably the lowest it's been in decades. These cops are going out here and doing their job that we've asked them to do, right? And this is just this is worse than George Floyd for our profession. I'm just telling you that right now. Um, and yeah, so with that, I'll take any questions you may have that I may be able to answer. >> Well, first of all, thank you, Chief. Thanks for coming tonight. Thank you for your honesty. Thank you for your obvious passion. Uh, I'm sorry for your frustration. I really am. And I I'm sorry that uh your officers and the members of of your department are are feeling the pressure that I I know that this city calls on them every day and at the same time questions them more often than they should. And so uh share with your officers our support for them, my support for them that uh continue to do the work and the outstanding work of crime is down 10%. That's that's outstanding work. So thank you very much. Council comments, questions, council member Lman. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, I I won't ask the question you already answered. Uh, but let me let me go at it this way. Um, it's my understanding that the uh practice of our police department is to uh to work based on the things that they're trained uh to handle. Is that a assumed assumption? Okay. And then um are officers trained to enforce immigration law at the US level? >> Absolutely not. >> I mean just so the public is clear, we don't have access to the systems, right? So say for example, and this has not happened. I want to be crystal clear. This is just an example because I don't want someone to take this and spin it like it happened. Um, if our officers, if federal law enforcement officers were involved with someone and they're screaming and saying they're being kidnapped, we don't have the way to verify if that person is a US citizen or not. We don't have access to that database. We don't. And that's something I think most people don't understand is is local police departments again not enforcing immigration law. We don't have the ability to determine if someone is a US citizen or not. And finally, uh, my understanding, this may not be a question necessarily for you, chief, but maybe this is for our city manager and mayor. My understanding is that we we're not getting funded by the federal government to, uh, enforce, uh, immigration law at all. No, we're not. Um, and it's been public in the paper, uh, where they've offered like $2,500 a night for a bed, right, for jails, which if we took would be $8 million a year, but we're not doing it. U, but that's the price that they've put in the paper, and obviously we're not going to do that. But no, we do not receive money to enforce immigration law. >> Well, and that distinction that that you raised earlier is, you know, difficult for folks to understand. uh you know that that there may be other things that are being done that are out there that are not related uh to uh to immigration law. So uh I can understand where why some residents may look at that and misunderstand that. Uh so that's all I'll say. Mayor >> Council Member Reebas, >> first of all, I want to thank you for the effort. Um I have no idea what you're going through, but I can only imagine. Um uh the one thing that I want to clarify that you you know this um but I want to make sure also that the public hears this is that the moment that our police department arrests somebody and the name goes onto the computer the feds at that exact time are finding out also about it. And if that person doesn't have documentation legal documentation they can show up trying to pick it up right here if he's in our jail. A lot of people I have quite a few emails right now asking and accusing your department. I would say that freely because that's what they're doing >> that you're cooperating because of that. But no, they can actually show up 10 15 minutes after somebody gets arrested to our jail to try to pick somebody up that is not that is undocumented. And I want the public to hear this because it's a false accusation to claim that our police department is cooperating with them. They can find out immediately. It pops up in their computers. They have face recognition in their vehicles. Uh they can pin our phones. They have a lot of stuff in their vehicles that our police department doesn't have. So, you know, it is ridiculous for people to be accusing our police department of doing things that really they're not. And and I get a lot of heat for saying what I'm saying, but I I this really doesn't matter. It's the truth. Um um another thing is uh when the police department has participated in trying to control crowds that is not helping the the ICE agents is helping us to maintain our safety and and to keep the peace. Um, again, there's five emails right now that are accusing the police department for participating in crowd control of being friendly and participating and assisting the ICE and that's not the case. So, thank you so much for your >> I'll address two of those things. One, locally, we do not maintain fingerprint database. That's the federal government. So, you know, if you go get drivers or you get a passport or you get arrested, those fingerprints go to the federal government and then they're notified because again, we don't have access to that database. And yes, our officers do go out there um to to keep the peace, right? And a lot of this too is we want to protect our citizens in Bloomington. You know, we see what's going on. I don't want our people going out here, citizens, getting federal charges and facial wrecked just for showing up someplace and causing a disturbance. So, if we can be there in the middle to prevent that or take some of that heat, now a a lot of our officers of color have been racially berated in this on this stuff, right? Like out here and being with these people supposedly caring about immigrants, right? But they berate our officers of color. But it's like they we're willing to take that if that prevents somebody in the crowd. uh one of our sentences for getting facial wrecked and the whole nine yards with that. >> Thank you, Chief. Thank you, Mayor. >> Council member Carter. >> Thank you, Mayor. Uh so, first I want to thank you and the whole um department, police department. I know that you guys are under a lot of pressure and there's just so much going on behind the scenes that we don't, not even on council, we don't have insight to. Um so, our residents, you know, they also they definitely don't have insight to those things. Um, and you know, obviously there's a lot more going on when when officers are out on the road than than we see. Uh, so I do want to just say because you know, you brought up the 88th and Irving incident. In my experience, uh, you know, almost actually all of the residents who have reached out to me, sending videos, asking questions, they really have been asking questions. And actually some of the several of the emails that I have gotten, people have said explicitly, I appreciate the Bloomington Police Department. I love the Bloomington Police Department. And so, um, I feel like what I'm hearing from residents, but then the experience obviously that you guys are having is just so different, right? Um, and so I I guess I want you to know too that there are residents out there and whenever I'm calling you or texting you or emailing you and asking questions, it's not because I think BPD did something wrong. It's because I just need to answer questions for people, right? So in the 88th and Irving incident, um, you know, I got sent videos that showed BPD and HSI, right? And once I was able to say, oh, this is that's it might be within Homeland Security, but it's not ICE. it's a different thing. And I was able to give people that information. They were like, "Oh, okay. Thanks." You know, and so I think I feel like I feel like I've just said a lot um for the last couple of weeks that we have to just be communicating. And I know it's really frustrating when you're like, I don't know how many ways I can say it. Um I just think that there's just, you know, people are at heightened levels of stress. There are some people reliving trauma. There are some people engaging at different times so they hear things in different ways. How many times have we sat up here and we're like, "Oh my gosh, like how can we get this communication out even better, right? We do bloom, we do briefings, we do let's talk Bloomington, we do all we mail, we do all these things and yet people will be like, I never heard of that." And so I know it's frustrating for you guys. Um it's frustrating for us, too. Um, but I guess my my only ask is that you know we continue to have really good communication and please know that at least for me myself when I am asking questions or um giving you a call it's really just to get answers to questions so that I can communicate to the community so that they do have the facts. Um, again, I don't know what your experience is like on the ground at protests and um, but >> yeah, people are appreciative of us being there and I just want to be clear sometimes we can't like the third 88th in Iran. That's not our case. We had nothing to do with it. We went out there because a crowd had gathered. Obviously, there was a helicopter flying around for hours uh, that day, but I'm not going to get into their case. It had nothing to do with immigration, but it was a significant federal and airport case. >> Yeah. >> And we came out there when a crowd came. >> So they they we you have to let law enforcement work, right? >> And and when we tell people that, most of them understand. I just think that right now in the situation we have here in the Twin Cities, I mean people are going to assume immediately like and it doesn't matter what we say, >> doesn't matter, you know, and once we can verify and just say, "Hey, nope, that's they're here for this reason." >> At least in my experience, people have said, "Oh, okay. Well, thank you." And I think they understand Bloomington police has to show up for crowd control. They have to show up during protests. They have to show up if protesters go to hotels. Um, I think the majority of Bloomington residents are are very reasonable and understand that and I think appreciate the Bloomington police. So, I thank you again and I guess that's what I want to say. I also want to say I totally agree with you that immigration laws have to change and if this city council could address those that would be fantastic because maybe we could actually get something done. But, >> but no, that's not the case. So, >> thank you council member council member Robertson. >> Thank you, mayor. Um to almost again completely echo um what council members Carter had said. Um first of all truly thank you. I can't begin to pretend to know what the people in your department go through. This must be so terrifying to try and have to get in not in the middle right but try and keep our residents safe while dealing with so many unknowns has to be absolutely unreal. So thank you to everyone in your department for what they do. Um and also I've also gotten emails. Um certainly some folks are using different language than others. Um but I've definitely got some um like I'm looking at one right now. someone uh you know they they want to they they said I know Bloomington PD wants to maintain good community relations. I know that they want to help um I wholeheartedly support BPD in their work combating crime in our city, right? And so I want to make sure that you guys are hearing that as well that we are having folks reach out and thank you for what you're doing. Um but it is scary and and as we know social media goes like wildfire. people hear one tidbit of one thing, they see one clip of one video that for all we know is AI and isn't even real and then it becomes um even more unsafe, right, when we're already dealing with so many bad variables. Um so yeah, I just I I think that you all are doing a great job. I I do think and I know that Chief Hodes, you're already doing videos all the time, as much communication as we possibly can get. Um, you know, I had this person reaching out saying, "I understand that the helicopter was for a different reason, but we were all scared and we were at my kids's bus stop." Um, and certainly I don't expect to be given information that could cause, you know, security concerns for anyone. But the more we can communicate to folks and say, "Hey, you emailed me about this issue and I can tell you that the chief told me specifically it's because they were doing a different enforcement, you know, not immigration." Um, so yeah, I I think I can't imagine what you all are going through. this has to be beyond complicated and and just to echo again what Carter said. Um I wholeheartedly support a complete revamp of immigration law because it makes everyone's jobs more difficult, makes everyone unsafe. So, thank you for what you're doing. Um we appreciate it. Our residents appreciate it and uh I look forward to all of us staying safe out there. So, thank you. >> Thank you, Council Member. Council member Nelson. >> Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Chief. Appreciate everything you're doing uh and everything the police department is doing. I'd appreciate hearing your cander and and uh the impact it's having on everyone. So, um let them know at least for me and it sounds like from the council we're we support you guys and um so I'm just going to be pragmatic and ask a question. So, we have this situation where we have a federal law enforcement surge within our community. It's causing obvious problems. You've addressed that. What recommendations do you have as we move forward um on things that we can do as a council, as a city? You know, we've taken a strategy of working and talking and trying to keep it as best we can outside of our community. Um, you know, is that strategy still the one you'd recommend? Would you recommend changes to be more or less aggressive or any specific items on there? Well, I want to knock on wood because I don't think we in Bloomington have been subjugated to some of the federal law enforcement that others have been subjugated to. So, let me just be clear on that. I mean, I'll leave that to you all to determine what you want to do. The only thing I would ask, and again, I'm sound like a broken record, tell people we do not, it's against our policy. We legally don't have the ability to enforce federal immigration law. We do not assist ICE with arresting people who are in this country illegally illegally. We do not have access to those databases. So, the more and more we can get that out there. And it's not just Bloomington, it's local law enforcement in general, because I'm going to go back to when you talk about the people who are affected. If we got people that are getting sex trafficked here and they can't call the police. If we got people having domestics and they're getting assaulted and they can't call the police, right? That's not I'm not worried about me and my family being able to call the police, right? And I'm sure more majority of you up here aren't worried about your families being able to call the police. We need to continue to get that message out there that local law enforcement is not in charge of enforcing federal immigration law. We don't share a database with them. We don't say, "Hey, you know, we've dealt with these people. Here you go." We don't do any of that. So, the more and more we can get the message out there about the true facts, the better I think we'll all be. And just so y'all know, that's my frustration, right? It's like my frustration is I get there's a political piece of this. People want to do whatever, but it's just we need to get the facts out there that we don't. So, if you see a Bloomington police officer out there with ICE agents or whatever, we're not enforcing immigration law. We we don't do that. >> I'm gonna go to council member Dallaso and we can double back for folks in council member Dallaso. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um I hope you know I'm a big fan and I will continue to be a big fan and I appreciate your willingness to come before council and share with us um not just your frustrations but also you know clarification on the message because I think when we have that clarity we can be a better partner to you guys. So much appreciated. Um, the one comment I I just want to I want to lay it out as a as a a framework just because I do want to be sure that we we aren't putting ourselves in a weird spot. So, I hear you say we don't enforce immigration. I absolutely agree with that. Believe you 100%. You want people to call the police if they're being trafficked, if they're being, you know, held against their will, if they're whatever. If if they happen to be vulnerable because of immigration status and they call you and they go to they they're part of a situation and to Council Member Rever's point, the feds have all that information now. How do you prevent them from being picked up by immigration in in five minutes, 10 minutes, a day later? and and go and and literally subjected to the thing they were afraid of. So out of the fire into the frying pan away, right? They're in a terrible situation of sex trafficking, drug addict, whatever that is. And yet at the other end, they are vulnerable or they put themselves in a position that the feds would come and do whatever the feds do. To your point, you're not helping them, right? >> Yeah. So, let me be clear on this. Uh a victim, the feds would not have access to victim information. We're talking about people who get arrested, right? So, like if someone calls the police and says they're being sex traffic, we're not going to arrest that person, right? Or someone says they're being a victim of domestic violence, we're not going to arrest that person. So, the feds do not have access to our local databases here. We don't have any sharing agreements with the federal government or anything like that. So, in your case, they can call all day and the feds wouldn't have access to that stuff. >> Um, okay. So, clarification on that. if if they are if they are um if it's sex trafficking but from your perspective or from the perspective of the enforcement action it looks like prostitution then they would be because you're going to charge them with prostitution before you know that they're actually in the sex trafficking like they're actually being trafficked right >> we very seldom just the posture that we take here we very seldomly arrest uh sex workers >> okay >> very seldom >> okay now don't come to Bloomington didn't think you're going to get away with it, but >> No, no, no. I get it. [laughter] >> Nobody's saying that. >> No, no. I appreciate that. I Those are the kinds of explicit like examples that really help people understand what the circumstances might be because for someone that could be like I'm damned if I do, damned if I don't kind of situation, right? And we want them to be clear that that's not a situation that's going to put them in jeopardy if they call the police. So, appreciate the clarification. Thanks, >> Council Member Carter and Council Member Evas. Did I see your hand up earlier? Yeah, just let's let's council member Carter and then we'll go with C. Council member Carter. >> Um yeah, this is be really quick. Um I just was reflecting on my comments and I wanted to just be really explicit and clear and just say that I know and believe strongly like believe 100% that BPD is not cooperating with ICE. And I will continue to tell residents that over and over again. And at the same time, we get lots of questions and so we're going to have to ask you questions, >> but I did just want to make that super super clear. Um because I know I trust you. I really do. And I trust our Bloomington Police Department. And so um I think we say lots and lots of words up here and then at some point it's like what what are we even saying? But I just wanted to be super clear that I know we're not I know the BPD is not cooperating with ICE and hasn't and nor will they. Um, and I will continue to tell residents that and I appreciate you being willing to answer all the questions that get thrown our way. >> Council member Revas, >> just a quick question for you. Um, I was just wondering, uh, we used to get text messages from you in the past whenever there was an incident and if we had any questions, we had the ability to answer. I'm just wondering, um, for the last few months, we haven't seen any of that. Uh I don't know if if you know what change or or what but it was very use uh useful whenever you send us information that you know you have arrested somebody and the questions came up you know we could answer right away from what we knew. >> Uh but I haven't seen any of our communication in the past. >> I think typically that not to throw city manager under the bus but I think typically that would come from him. [laughter] >> Yeah. So uh that that's my question. I think uh tomorrow we're meeting right. So yeah, >> and just so the public, sometimes it takes us like time to get the information. >> Like that helicopter was flying up there for hours and it took me a while to even figure out who to call to figure out what what it was doing up there >> because our dispatch center was getting calls, >> you know, and it's like if you I knew it was something because you can't fly a helicopter that low by the airport >> unless you're the government for hours. You can't do and it doesn't have a tail marker on it. Yeah, I figured it was something, but it took a while to figure that one out. >> All right, thank you, >> council. I'm going to move us on in this presentation because we do have a second half of the presentation. Uh, Mr. Walker is going to bring us through uh our listening session summary and what staff is kind of pulling together as possible next steps in all this. Chief, once again, thanks. >> Okay. Good evening, mayor, members of the council. Uh Zach Walker, as the mayor said, I'm just going to use this time to um update the council on what we heard uh from our listening session last week. Um you may recall this last Monday night, February 2nd, we had uh 75 minutes set aside uh for speakers to come in and address the council um about all manner of things related to Operation Metro Surge. Uh we had uh 22 speakers in total. Uh and I would say it's fair to characterize that 21 of them hit on some of the same key themes uh which were what are the impacts of this enforcement uh having on our community? Uh a lot of folks expressing fear, anger or concern for their neighbors. Um stories of neighbors helping neighbors, but for our purposes here tonight, uh a lot of requests that were made to the council um from the citizens that spoke. And that's what I wanted to use some of our time here this evening uh to really close the loop so the community understood not only um did we hear you um but let you know the status of some of the things that were referenced or or mentioned. I'd really probably put these in two buckets of categories that we heard. Uh one of those buckets I would label as community resources. So we heard a request to um outline mental health resources that are available. um this is impacting a lot of people in a lot of different ways and for those that need that side of um health care um itemizing those out uh we have done that uh if you go to the city of Bloomington's website you'll see at the top of the banner um click here for more information about um response to immigration enforcement uh and under community resources there are 12 different uh mental health services that we've added to that website we've also uh received that request last week uh very thoughtful request to provide translation services. And again, at the top of the website over in the right hand corner, uh you can click there and um have the website converted into one of six different languages besides English, which is the primary language that shows up on there. So, appreciated those suggestions and recommendations and happy to report both of those things have been taken care of. Uh civil rights awareness. So, we heard from the community um that it would be helpful to know uh what are your rights when engaging with um um federal immigration officials. Uh we've also done that same place on the website. Uh we've added a know your rights resources section on there. Um that also contains information from the immigrant law center of Minnesota. Answers a lot of the common or frequently asked questions. I would also uh share with the council and we've shared at your dis tonight some of the different documents that have been shared internally with our city staff. Uh so we have developed an internal FAQ for city employees to advise them on how to navigate any encounters with any federal law enforcement agents that may occur during the normal course of their business when they're either out in the community or um if there were um visits to um any of our city facilities. So, don't want to belabor that too much, but take time to look at those internal documents and and just know that those exist um for for our employees. Uh reporting human rights violations. Um there was a request to or a suggestion to um establish some kind of method for reporting and collecting human rights violations. Uh our thought on that was rather than create um uh unintended chaos by having multiple places to go um direct people to the statewide repository for this which does exist and that is through the uh Minnesota attorney general's uh website. So on that website you can find a federal action reporting form. Uh the AGO's office uh very clearly says on the website that they want to uh collect um any of these reports. Um obviously there's the ongoing uh litigation that involves the state and um Minneapolis and St. Paul that is referenced in there that any of those stories um they want to follow up on as the AGO's U group. Uh and again just trying to not create too much chaos but put everything into one bucket uh so that they can be properly followed up on. So not that we don't take that suggestion seriously but we think there's a better mechanism to do it. Uh and you can find that through your um uh AGO's website. Okay. Eviction moratorum. Uh there was a suggestion that the council adopt a resolution uh requesting that the governor institute an eviction moratorum. So we had some conversation about this as staff. Um, and as best we can tell, um, in order to get to that point of, uh, issuing an eviction moratorum, that would need to be, um, initiated through at first a declaration of a state of emergency. Um just to be very blunt, um something we've been cognizant of staff in trying to be thoughtful to negotiate or to navigate is this idea of the uh federal administration uh invoking the insurrection act and if there are words out there like state of emergency that may give more political um expediency to invoking that act. So we think that this could have some challenge for for the governor's office. Also just lived experience with uh co 19 uh and the eviction moratoriums that were utilized during that period of time. A lot of good came from that but there were a lot of unintended consequences too. Um undoing some of the um folks who um I would say took advantage of goodwill uh and it became very difficult um to deal with those tenants. uh in in that period of time. So given those challenges, we're a little concerned to staff about the viability and the expediency of this option. Uh but also trying to think through, okay, people in our community who may really be struggling, what are some possible alternatives? One we just want to throw out um is potentially considering a city ordinance that would extend the pre-eviction notice requirement from 14 days to 30 days. So, a little bit longer lead time uh give people more um opportunity to address uh whatever issues. I do want to note that um some other cities have already taken this action. Uh we specifically noted St. Louis Park in Minneapolis, but I do want to be clear that didn't happen in response to the current federal immigration enforcement. Those event those uh actions by those cities did uh predate that. But if that's something the council's interested in, um that is certainly something as staff we could work on um and at least create a little bit more um protections for uh tenants who may be struggling in our community. Uh utility bill payment assistance. It was suggested that um again people who are suffering economic hardship may have difficulty paying their utility bill um here in Bloomington. Uh through this process uh as a relatively new manager, I learned that Bloomington stopped terminating utility service for non-payment back in 2010. Uh so since uh we aren't doing those utility shut offs, uh we have not allocated funding for bill uh payment assistance. But one thing that I think we'd be remiss if we didn't take an opportunity to reiterate here is there is a number on your bill. Uh if you are struggling with making payment, the very best thing you can do is call that number and connect with our utility billing accountants to make payment arrangements. Um very I would say accommodating and flexible on that. Uh so please um don't let yourself fall further and further behind. Reach out to our accountants um and and let's establish some kind of payment plan that works for you. I also want to follow up that while we're not yet aware of any specific entities that are providing financial assistance for utility um for the other um utilities like uh your gas bill, uh electric bill, etc. Um as we identify those, we'll continue to add those to the community resources section of that immigration page. Um updating that all the time and we're on the lookout for this. So if anyone is aware of entities or agencies that are doing that, please let our office know so we can get that word out to our community. Okay. So the other bucket besides community resources would be policy and legislative actions that were suggested uh parking prohibitions. Uh this was a common theme that we heard last night um encouraging the council to adopt an ordinance to prohibit the use of city-owned property for uh civil federal immigration enforcement. Like a lot of you as city staff, we like to um adopt policies and ordinances uh that have um enforcability. And in the cities that we've have spoken to uh over the course of the last seven days, uh what we have found uh is that it is um difficult to enforce these uh either because you've got to require staff to be monitoring uh these city facilities or city lots or you're basically putting your police department in the position of writing the federal government uh citation. Uh so as you would guess, compliance is very uneven um uh in the the cities that we've spoken to. So not that we don't think this is a thoughtful idea, but again looking for things that are enforcable and would have a meaningful impact. Um, this isn't one that we are prepared to bring action on, but again, if the council deems that this is advisable and wants uh to give direction, certainly that's our responsibility as staff, but wanted to let you at least know what our recommendation was there. Uh, liquor license suspension and revocation. So, it was suggested that the council should suspend or revoke a liquor license uh for lodging establishments that are hosting uh federal immigration personnel. If you look at our city code, it is very clear there are three actions for uh what the city has grounds to uh suspend or revoke a license. Um hosting federal immigration enforcement uh frankly hosting anybody is not grounds for revoking a liquor license. So we would be creating some very serious legal liability for the city here and so because of that staff doesn't recommend pursuing this suggestion. Uh contract cancellations. Uh the idea was that uh the city should cancel any of its contracts or agreements with uh entities that are also doing business with um federal agencies involved in the immigration enforcement. So again um we as the city have our own very strict procurement guidelines. We also follow Minnesota state statutes on procurement policy and again selective adherence to those policies uh put the city in some serious legal liability. Uh and so for that reason once again we're not recommending pursuing this suggestion. Um to selectively choose when we do and don't follow our own policies or state statutes really creates some issues for for the city. Release of personal information. Um, it was asked that the city clarify policies regarding the release of personal information to federal authorities. So, I want to use this opportunity here tonight to share that the data that the city does classify as private under state or local law is not shared with federal government uh unless there's a legal requirement to do so. Um, the access to private data typically requires a valid court order, a warrant, a subpoena, or other legal authority. and those requests are reviewed by the city attorney's office before any information is released. So, I'm just really want to make clear for the community since it was requested to have a better understanding last week. This is how the city approaches that in our our um process that we follow. Then there were a number of um suggestions about um prohibiting certain aspects of federal immigration enforcement. uh things like preventing officers from wearing masks, uh protecting sensitive locations, requiring coordination with local law enforcement um agencies. Um here's what I'm going to share two things with you just upfront. Federal agents follow federal rules, not local policies. However, uh and I know I shared this with the council by email uh yesterday, there has been a letter written by uh leadership in the um United States House uh and Senate to uh their colleagues uh the speaker and the majority leader in the Senate respectively uh that was prepared on February 4th calling for the very reforms that we heard from the community last night. So this would cong be Congress acting on the things that are directly in their jurisdiction to control. And I want to quickly review the 10 items that were specifically mentioned in this letter uh by leadership um to their peers in the House and Senate. So it was um noted that targeted enforcement needs to end. So the practice of um stopping anybody um indiscriminate arrests um warrant procedures etc. Uh all of that needs to be reformed uh and clearly followed and adhere to. Uh the letter specifically mentioned prohibiting officers from wearing face coverings, requiring officers to display their agency name, their unique ID number, and their last name like what you would see on a Bloomington police officer's uniform. We heard requests for um going back to um previous um federal policy about protecting sensitive locations, things like schools, churches, daycarees, uh etc. Uh that letter specifically mentioned prohibiting funds from being used to conduct enforcement near sensitive locations. Uh ending racial profiling, so not stopping somebody or um questioning them based on the location they're in. the job type of work they do, their race or ethnicity or the way, you know, either the language they speak or the the accent that they carry when they speak. There was a request in the letter to uphold use of force standards. So enacting a reasonable use of force policy, utilizing better training and certification for officers and pulling officers um off of uh the front lines, so off of off the streets who are involved in a use of force incident until an investigation into that incident has been completed. Uh ensuring local and state oversight and coordination. Um, you know, we did hear this last week about allowing local agencies to investigate or andor prosecute potential crimes and use of force uh incidents that uh is specifically mentioned in this letter. Building safeguards into the system. Uh, this specifically was around detention centers and making sure they meet minimum standards and requirements for housing detainees. uh body cameras requiring the use of bodywn cameras went on to say in the letter specifically for monitoring the work done by agents um not to you know use for facial recognition of people engaging in first amendment rights and not creating databases or target lists around that and then coming up with standardized uniform types and equipment consistent with other federal um enforcement agencies. So there's a no pun intended uniform uniform uh that's worn. So that is the response to the listening session, but there's a lot that has happened uh since this operation began. And I think it's just a good chance for us to quickly reset uh both for us as staff, you as a council, and our community of where have we been, what have we done, um kind of where are we going? Uh so around messaging uh you all recall the council unanimously supported a statement uh that was released to the public uh the day that Alex Prey was killed. Uh the mayor issued uh his own statement. I know members of the council through your social media channels have also made your own posts on um um reflecting on the current environment. The city has made social media posts sharing information, different video communications, and several of the council minutes uh done by the mayor have shared updates uh to explain Bloomington Police Department role um share more about the city's ongoing efforts. Really just continuing to press uh the message there. I've mentioned this website several times tonight. Please go to uh city of Bloomington's website, look at the top banner, click on it. There is a ton of information there. Um, but uh to say there's everything there. As you saw tonight, we we heard good feedback last week and modified. So, we're always looking for more ideas. And then multiple uh media contacts and appearances, the chief, the mayor, others um have been uh reached out to, sought after uh to share Bloomington's position and perspective uh on Operation Metro Surge. So once again, Bloomington um being prominently featured in our perspective being shared. So surge briefings uh this is an internal work group um uh that I have pulled together um involving personnel from multiple uh city departments. We have a couple of key focus areas. Uh legal and policy, we're monitoring things like the the amicus brief that the city has signed on to. other federal actions that might be taken and their impact they would have on the city. Uh really just trying to understand the current environment um so that the city of Bloomington is at the front edge of responding uh and not reacting uh as best we can to these issues. Our finance department is monitoring the fiscal impacts of these operations. As you would probably guess, uh this has required a tremendous amount of time from our police department, which means our overtime budget has increased exponentially. But on the revenue side, uh what is this going to do to our lodging tax if tax exempt entities are not paying the lodging tax? Uh what does this do to things like building permits uh or other service industry if workers are afraid to go to work and work slows down? Number of cities reporting they're seeing dramatic declines in that area. So we are looking to see what this is doing to our budget both in terms of unplanned expenses uh and revenue declines uh so that we can um continue to navigate that water communications. Uh we are collecting distributing information both internally to our staff and externally to our community. Uh we have a separate community task force of internal uh operations that are looking to coordinate city services um and city resources with nonprofit and private sector groups um so that we can again provide the assistance our community needs. And then as you heard from the chief uh both he and our fire department are continuously monitoring and coordinating um and making sure the city is in a position to respond as needed if needed. Uh on the community or external facing side um the cities for safe safe and stable communities which was approved by the council last week uh this is a multi- city uh entity started off as Henipin County cities uh but as the mayor said at a meeting today they are now looking to expand that tent to bring others into the group uh strengthen numbers of cities who can uh speak with one voice if you will on this issue. uh each Friday uh city managers are now doing a a call same thing coordinating what's impacts on your cities what are best practices how are you handling this situation or that situation uh so we're making sure there's as much alignment and consistency among cities as possible um there is not a meeting you can go to where this is not being discussed whether it was today's regional council of mayors meeting um the league of Minnesota cities U metro cities um all manner of groups at all levels are are talking about this issue and looking to coordinate efforts on this. Uh council approved at your last meeting uh the travel request. the mayor was in Washington uh which we appreciate um the end of January with other mayors from Minnesota meeting in Congress with members of the Minnesota delegation so that they could um stop talk straight to members of Congress about how this is impacting um their communities and the assistance we need. We of course had the special listening session uh last week. There is a group of us uh from the city uh several on the council and a few staff who will be going to the National League of Cities Congressional Cities conference in March. Uh and if this issue is still um directly impacting us, then you can pretty well guess what we're going to be using our time for when we're meeting with members of Congress. And then the council of course had the wisdom to approve emergency rental assistance up to $350,000 uh earlier this month. We've developed those staff FAQs. Those are at your place. Those are intended again to help our staff know what to do when they're working in the field or if um there is any kind of encounter in any of our city facilities. So, wanting to make sure our our staff is as prepared as possible if they find themselves in those environments, but also supporting our our staff safety and and well-being. um creating spaces um both for conversation but also physical spaces uh for reflection um respit uh reset whatever you might want to call that um just some some ways that we're trying to be thoughtful and supportive of our staff and then I just want to end uh because I had to follow puppies trains and the police um I would like to [snorts] end with something positive um we've heard from the community um some feedback back about uh interacting with the Bloomington Police Department in the course of all of this. And these are two notes that specifically came from folks who were involved at the uh protest at the airport uh a couple of weeks ago. Um and what you can see in in this statement right here, I won't read all of that to you, but th this individual reached out to thank the Bloomington Police Department uh for their professionalism. um and you know enforcing laws when appropriate um making sure that we are protecting the community. Uh and then this same speaker um mentioned the same thing that um you know they have never been more proud of the women and men of the city of Bloomington police department. The way they were treated in that interaction uh when they were at the demonstration um even went out of their way to shake the hands of three officers. somebody being arrested. Um, I mean, that's that's pretty remarkable. So, very proud of our department and the way they've comported themselves in in these challenging spaces. Um, proud of our staff for the thoughtfulness. Um, trying to be as proactive in a very fluid and dynamic environment and grateful for the community that showed up at the listening session last week. um gave us a chance to reflect on where we're at, put some of these things into practice, um help us better understand what our recommendations were as staff on some of those other items. So, with that, mayor, that kind of concludes that and happy to turn it back over. >> Thank you, Mr. Walker. uh and thanks for the comprehensive overview and the uh the staff's time that uh looking at the the suggestions and the the desires of the community and and taking a pragmatic pragmatic look at it uh I think is the way to to do it and to really kind of evaluate based on on logic and and good steps forward as opposed to the emotion that we're all feeling uh and understandably so in this situation. Council, any comments or or quick questions or thoughts on this? Council member Robertson. >> Uh thank you, Mayor. Um yes, I just wanted to thank um uh all everyone at the city, all city staff um for all the things you all are doing. Um but especially for the website and that banner at the top. I think that's really helpful and I was really pleased to see that that was so accessible for residents. So thank you all because I know this is um as I said to Chief Hodgeges as well, this has to be stressful in a way that I can't quite understand. Um so thank you. >> Sure. Thank you, >> Council Member Carter. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, yeah, thank you for the thorough followup. Um, I know the community appreciates it and I greatly appreciate it as I keep talking about communication, so thank you. Right. >> Um, I did also just, you know, you talked a little bit about the eviction moratorum and the unintended consequences and I do recall, um, having some conversations with some of the big affordable housing providers in Minnesota and they've also spoken to how that created a big challenge for them financially that they haven't recovered from. um and they are providing affordable housing to thousands and thousands of people across the state. So, it is um I actually did have some of those concerns uh when that was brought up. Um so, I'm glad that there are other options being explored. And on that same note, for utilities, uh I think the state has an energy assistance program that people can apply for. And then we do have our local CAP agencies. I think it's community action partnership. Um, unfortunately I did just look on their website and they're now processing applications received 60 days ago. Wow. >> So I think they're very backed up with requests. So um, but a couple of resources at least that I know of off the top of my head and hopefully there are more. So thank you >> indeed. >> Thank you, Council Member. >> Anything else? Council Council Member Nelson. >> Yeah, thanks. Appreciate the thorough overview of things and the recommendations. Um, just one quick thing that someone had emailed me just prior to the meeting was regarding um, zoning that would allow uh, a federal detention facility within Bloomington. Um, my guess is that the time frame of doing that, buying it, building it out is probably lengthy enough that it it would be difficult, but just they were wondering, I don't need an answer right now if that's possible in Bloomington. um and if there's anything in our zoning code that might be done so we didn't have a facility like this here or at least we had uh rules and restrictions on it and things like that. So >> that that's a good question, council member, and I know uh actually I've talked with the mayor of Woodbury about this because something similar happened or was proposed in Woodbury and um ultimately the the proposed seller of the facility received such public backlash that uh that they they turned down the offer from the federal government. And I've got to imagine there would be something similar, but I think it's at least worth a look to figure out what those requirements, what the zoning requirements would be and uh where we'd stand here in Bloomington. >> Yeah, I agree. I agree. >> Uh it it does warrant at least a review of our code. I will say um the common things I have seen are either large industrial spaces that are currently vacant or green space that's not yet built out upon. Um, but I do think it's meritorious to give our our code a review and see what kind of use that would fall under and if there's any modifications. >> All right. Well, thank you, Mr. Walker. >> Thank you. >> All right. >> Our last uh agenda item of the evening, council, is item 5.4, city council policy and issue update. And I have nothing this evening. Uh, Mr. Walker, do you have anything to add? >> I nothing tonight. Mayor Council, anything to add under item 5.4 tonight? Council member Lman, >> I'll uh I'll be very brief. I had the opportunity to uh attend with a number of staff uh members. Um uh the Ellers's uh public finance uh uh conference. Uh again, great um you know, focus on public finance. Uh you know, something that's uh you know, we talk about in Bloomington as being our our number one uh you know, priority uh in the city. Um and and also uh want to just kind of uh hold up our staff. Uh we had a presentation about our um our uh our uh hatch program and uh just a you know phenomenal people kind of swarming around you know staff trying to understand kind of from other cities how does that work? How do you pay for it and how do we kind of do that? So, um, uh, just know that, uh, our staff did us well, uh, with respect to that, uh, that program and really just represented, um, and really were the experts, uh, in the room on a number of, um, uh, number of topics. >> Thank you, Council Member. It doesn't surprise me at all. Council member Rivas, >> I just want to make a comment on the class that we attended also. Um, >> um, and I'm wondering, I think I brought this up last year or the year before. Uh we prepare for any natural [snorts] disaster like you know the city of Biji was there and uh uh I believe somebody down south I don't recall the name of the city I wait to college college town down alpha 169 to go manu yeah because of the floods they had last year you know um so I it makes me wonder we I know that we have a lot of preparations with the police and fire department we went to some meeting before Right. But it was it had nothing to do with natural disasters. So I was just wondering if we're kind of prepared for anything like that. Um >> what what I might do is is ask Mr. Walker [clears throat and cough] to um especially have Julie Seal who is our uh emergency response guy in in the city of Bloomington. Maybe prepare a little something for the the um the weekly newsletter. Um because it's not just you're you're right. It's not just the the emergency response. It's the financial response. It's the long-term uh is the long-term uh recovery to something like that. So, uh yes, and I do know they have a natural disaster plan of some kind. I can't tell you exactly >> how how extensive it is, but uh I think I know Julie could help out with that there. >> Yeah, it was pretty interesting. Um a lot of good information came out out of it. So, >> absolutely. >> Thank you, Ma. >> Anything else, council? If not, we have completed our business tonight. Council, I would look for a motion to adjurnn tonight. >> So moved. Second. >> Motion. Uh, council member Lman, second by council member Rivas to adjurnn this evening. No further council discussion on this. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion carries 70. Thanks much for the conversation. Thank you to staff for the great information tonight. Uh, it really was a a learning session. I do appreciate it. Thanks everybody who tuned in and joined us this evening. Everybody have a great rest of your week. >> [music]