As Metro Transit General Manager, there isn't a topic I am asked about more from people in the public, our riders, our own employees than public safety on transit. A top priority of ours.

It's my understanding that they don't include other agencies' numbers of police activity... So if our police officers had to intervene in a situation that would not get counted in those numbers, is that accurate? ... My daughter lives in South Minneapolis... She won't ride light rail. She's had too many negative experiences on there and frankly until security is really seriously addressed, I don't know how we get people back riding and feeling safe about that.

Metro Micro Zone, what we're aiming at is to deliver a same-day app-enabled... similar to Uber, Lyft. You go to book your ride on your app. Our goal is that that vehicle would be able to pick you up within 20 minutes of your booking.

There's being safe and I'm glad to hear crime numbers are coming down and then there's feeling and the feeling safe I think is is exponentially more.

Cable Television is the only thing that's regulated at the local level. For all practical purposes, you decide who gets a franchise and who gets into your rights of way.

When you grant you're not just giving a company the right to provide plain old cable television service. It is much more than that. It's very valuable asset that you're giving because it is the right to use your streets put in their facilities and then deliver these services.

If you pull the waters of Bloomington about Comcast, you'll get more waters that will vote against Comcast than they'll vote in your elections. I guarantee you. We are so mad at Comcast the way the service that they provide and I wish we had another alternative.

I just appreciated the the the work that staff has done to try to improve the revenues that are coming into the city. It's always a pertinent question that that's on our minds and I appreciate the hard work that was done to get us to where we're at today.

The why of why we're here is really that co-living or SROs offer cities a regulatory pathway to allow for the development of affordable housing that doesn't necessitate as much deep subsidy as some of the other forms of development.

One of the easiest things that cities can do to make housing more available and more affordable to people is just to or remove some of these occupancy restrictions that exist within dwellings.

If we did make it higher [parking requirement], that would still provide the opportunity for a developer to come and say, 'Hey, I can't meet that. That's not going to work for me.' They they could do that. But if we make it lower because a permitted use, we'd then have no discretion about what they did.

I'm comfortable with half stall per unit and I would request that... a year after we've had something developed or repurposed... that we do some kind of evaluation and and figure out, you know, what are we hearing from developers? Is it is it still too much?