[0:00] already it is 7:32 a.m. in the morning and this is the dinana Housing and [0:06] Redevelopment Authority meeting for the city V Dina uh as director benot mentioned uh we do these meetings [0:12] virtually and uh in um live fashion which is a hybrid for us and uh you'll [0:19] have uh if you're listening in an opportunity to call in with for Community comment there's are no public [0:24] hearings this morning so you'll have one opportunity to call in there's the phone number to call in too and uh a lot of [0:32] numbers on the screen there to kind of digest and deal with so uh if you want to call in it's going to come up fairly [0:39] quickly for Community comment uh in the agenda and uh having provided that [0:44] information uh second time here I will now call the meeting to order and ask our uh administrative support specialist [0:51] Liz Olsson to call the role commissioner Risser here commissioner Jackson here [0:56] commissioner Pierce here commissioner U here chair huband here uh next is the [1:01] Pledge of Allegiance pled of allegiance to the [1:07] flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one [1:13] nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for [1:23] all we uh this morning we were planning on having a I'd say the introductory [1:29] sort of meeting for the year here and do some housekeeping type items uh right off the bat and then go into um work [1:37] session uh upstairs but I think that when I looked at the agenda the two [1:43] agendas and talked to manager Neil uh and I think he talked to some of the other council members it seemed that it [1:49] was a better idea to just blend this and do it in open meeting form so uh when we [1:55] talk about approving the meeting agenda uh I'd like to entertain a motion from one of the Commissioners that we add the [2:02] work session material into the main meeting here uh and we will place that [2:07] on the agenda after um reports and recommendations before the executive [2:13] director's comments so is there someone who would care to make a motion to uh [2:18] amend the meeting agenda to include the uh discussion of the 2024 State Legislative agenda uh and affordable [2:25] housing financing into the main uh HRA agenda this morning so moved second [2:31] member U commissioner U moves commissioner Jackson second uh motion is stated uh all those in favor of adopting [2:38] the amended agenda say I I I opposed carried all right good um I think that's [2:45] a efficient way to handle it and I think having that conversation with in light of the um some of the challenges we've [2:53] had around process and uh and the issue itself uh it's a good thing to be handling this in an open meeting uh [2:59] where folks can uh listen more easily uh and it also be recorded for uh folks [3:04] that want to tune in in a different fashion or pick it up later on uh through one of our electronic means so [3:11] let's uh then go to the um Community comment portion of the agenda and we're back uh then let's put that number back [3:18] on the screen again so uh we can let people know that might want to call in [3:24] that they should get ready and then I'm going to turn first to the audience apologies [3:30] um we're in chair because by moving this item to the agenda we essentially remove [3:37] the opportunity uh that people could have to comment on the item we were going to work on in the work session we [3:43] also have um notified the public that that item will be discussed at 8:00 and [3:48] so I'm worried about two things and this came really quickly early in the morning I haven't had my coffee so I didn't raise an objection but um before we did [3:57] this maneuver people could have come forward and commented on what the work session was going to be about so I I [4:02] don't know how to I'm frustrated and I know that we did take that vote but again changing things last minute does [4:09] have consequences and I'm now really seeing what that did so I am wishing I [4:15] had had more coffee this morning all right Fair Point um manager Neil well I [4:22] would say normally we don't have participation uh public participation at work sessions um but we also that's not [4:30] the point that the the commissioner is making I think she's thinking that because it wasn't on the main agenda and [4:36] not scheduled for a future public hearing that people could have commented on this okay matter this morning and so [4:44] that's a it's a fair observation um so let's [4:51] um maybe we can deal with that here as we get to the item but that has no that [4:56] has no bearing on what we would have done right I mean I get the point but if [5:03] if that if we were trying to address that then this would have needed to been on the agenda a week ago so that people [5:11] would know and then they could come in and speak to it I agree people have been figuring it out online [5:19] though yeah so I does that make what I'm saying makes sense that we would have done it a week ago to address um [5:27] commissioner Richer's issue procedurally procedurally so that people would [5:32] know yeah so that provided more opportunity to comment on it but we can't do anything now to have people be [5:40] able to comment on it unless we push it we okay I I want to say that I am [5:45] upset that we did this that we moved this and essentially cut off any [5:50] opportunity people could have to come forward during public I can assure you that that was not the intention [5:57] commissioner it was the my intention was to make sure I think everybody else's was to have an open recorded discussion [6:04] about it the point you're raising is a good one but it's different than the reason that this was moved to the main [6:09] agenda well I I guess I'm just confused by the comment [6:14] because if we we could decide right now to leave it as is and have the the [6:22] discussion as we had plann to and nobody would be able to comment on it in that [6:27] way either so if I could ask some I think Clarity go ahead um I think the [6:33] point is that people have potentially come here this morning because they saw the agenda [6:38] online thinking that they could comment on it because it wasn't on the agenda or scheduled for a future public hearing [6:45] and so there might be people here already who now we are saying you can't speak to it um and so I think we could [6:50] either address it in line or we could just say you I don't know if we can make an [6:56] exception to the rules today just given the the SC the the last minute change to the schedule that might be an option [7:01] we've got that it's your procedure and so it's your it's our meeting we can decide how we want to manage that issue [7:07] but that's that's exactly the point I was making too is that because it didn't fit into one of those traditional categories where um you wouldn't be able [7:15] to comment on it folks that are familiar with process uh thought they could [7:21] comment on it this morning um okay and can I add just one more Point commissioner go ahead I and then the the [7:27] reason though cuz I think this is important um I think sometimes because [7:34] of the the procedural challenges that we've had of late things get [7:39] misconstrued the intent of this moving it the way we did was actually to make [7:44] it easier for people to see it and so that instead of just having comments recorded on audio in this form there's [7:53] video and there's audio and it's easier to catalog it and it's easier to find it [7:58] so that people can hear it it it wasn't it was the exact opposite of the reason [8:04] we were trying to do it is to make it provide more access not less we don't have calendars in front of [8:11] us when's our next HRA meeting January 25th January what 25th [8:19] 25th okay the legislative session doesn't start until February 11th I think um another [8:26] alternative would be to uh deal with the issue that member Pierce raised for folks in our community that wouldn't uh [8:34] uh understand the Nuance of process would be to hold this matter over for a discussion in part as part of our next [8:41] agenda if I could miss ol now what sorry one this room will not be available that day pardon me due to AV updates so we [8:48] will not be available to meet in this room for the next meeting if that makes any difference it could yeah of [8:56] course uh and then the first meeting in February is when [9:08] February 15th and this will be open by by then so [9:15] the the problem with that idea is that then it's on the agenda and then you really can't speak [9:20] to it because it's on the agenda if I me mean yes commissioner yes thank you Mr chair so I see two solutions one is to [9:27] wave the rules on community comment about items on the agenda the second is [9:33] to just continue to have a work session um afterwards where we have the discussion um but just do it in this [9:39] room um so either one of those I think uh solve the problem but I don't think there's any any harm done by waving the [9:46] rules on community comment about items on the agenda for a one-time thing okay [9:52] yeah no I don't think there's any issue on that either I'm just thinking about member commissioner Pierce's comment about folks that may have wanted to [9:59] parti ipate that can't it's it was never intended for a public hearing matter either so [10:05] um it ended up being a nuanced sort of issue here [10:11] um so why don't uh with for the folks that have uh thought they could comment [10:17] on this that have come this morning why don't we just let them comment on it I think that's uh then we've got a more [10:23] complete record and uh and then we can have them comment during Comm Community comment [10:30] that would be a really good solution thank you and then um then we can take it up in a due course at the end of the [10:37] agenda having absorbed all that uh information from our residents and they've been writing in of course to us [10:43] as well so was there another part of it that you were uh yeah it was just the timing CU [10:51] people were told it would be at 8 okay all right um well there they knew [10:57] the meeting started at 7:30 so don't think they'd wait until 8 to come but uh let's go ahead then and um move to [11:05] community comment and we have folks uh in the audience I think we'll just let if you want to comment on any issue [11:11] that's uh of concern to you uh please uh we welcome your comments so welcome good [11:19] morning um Andy Brown 5512 Parkplace in ad um I am extremely worried I guess I [11:25] can speak to this now but regarding 24 and 25 the request to our legislators to um [11:34] potentially have a deed tax and a um uh tear down tax I feel it extremely unfair [11:40] on our senior population as typically they need that Equity to go to a senior assisted living or other issues that [11:46] they may have after committing um a lifetime of um support for this [11:52] community so um uh I think there are many people in this community that have [11:57] lived long and um um supportive uh of this community and uh lives regarding [12:03] that and it's completely unfair to even think about those two things and they should be removed immediately so thank [12:08] you thank you Mr [12:16] Brown good morning good morning my name is Molly Cronin I live at 10 marilan and [12:22] I have lived in Ido for most of my life um I'm really disappointed um in this Council it seems like twice in 3 weeks [12:29] you have tried to sneak through a transfer tax and a demolition tax yet again this morning without allowing for [12:35] public comment um the first time it was written off as a clerical error that was right before Christmas and I'm not sure [12:42] what is going on today I try to pay attention but it's hard to keep up so um thank you for giving us the chance to [12:48] speak this morning um it seems as though this council is working as hard as they can to add more taxes to single family [12:55] homeowners in this town and why it's probably because were the easiest to bully it's hard for a family with kids [13:02] in schools to consider uprooting themselves to escape your ideological plans your strategy to build a $100 [13:09] million slush fund is to build buk the single family tax single family [13:14] homeowners in Edina you are again sneakily trying to add taxes that will hurt Edina residents and make Edina less [13:21] attractive for future residents it's unfortunate this that this seems to be [13:26] your focus you are admirably passionate about creating new low-income housing [13:31] while doing little to protect current residents two new police officers at southill are not going to solve this [13:38] problem on Monday night instead of watching the national championship 50 residents in my neighborhood were on a [13:44] zoom call and we were talking about how we can increase uh we're talking about the recent increase in crime affecting our [13:51] neighborhood in this town I love the Adina police they've been helpful to me many times but they are stretched too [13:57] thin as a neighborhood we are considering hiring off-duty police officers or other types of Private [14:03] Security in order to prevent the rising tide of crime in our area this will likely involve an expense of $3 to [14:10] $5,000 per household for 6 months this is in addition to the already heavy tax [14:15] burden that we bear for living in Edina the population of Edina has increased 15% over the last 7 years yet [14:23] you are Pat patting yourselves on the back in all your Publications for adding two police officers at South sale please [14:30] do your job please stop trying to sneak tax taxes that will buil the homeowners [14:35] and make he even more expensive for residents who have lived here for most of your their lives do your jobs and [14:42] protect and respect the residents who already live here with all due respect I submit these comments thank you [15:01] David Frankle 4510 Lake VI drivea uh the other day I received an email from a [15:07] local realtor representing the Minnesota Realtor Association I have nothing to do with the real estate industry but they [15:14] contacted me to send an email to the city council about this DED transfer tax [15:19] all I can say is you're taking on the Minnesota state Realtor Association on this issue it's going be a huge expense [15:26] and waste of time to do that cuz they're going go to the state legislature and Lobby heavy against this can have [15:32] nothing to do with it but you're taking on a large lobbying organization and you should be aware of that the other issue [15:39] is which is going to come up today not part of what what Chad Mill mner is [15:44] going to request but I was over at the pedestrian bridge over here in gra view yesterday I can tell you I don't know [15:51] any teenager that a chain piece of chain across a sidewalk or a bridge is going to stop them from going underneath it if [15:58] you go over today you can see the footprints in the snow people are using that bridge that is closed if you're [16:05] familiar with the Southwest Light Rail transit system when they closed the pedestrian bridge over Beltline Road [16:12] they put in a chain link fence that was locked to the bridge couldn't get around [16:17] it if you tried we need to do something similar to that bridge to keep people off of it a chain link piece of chain [16:25] link is not going to stop people and it is not currently stopping people there has to be a higher regard for safety in [16:31] the city of udina I can look at a chain link and say that's not going to stop me it's not going to stop a teenager we [16:38] need to do better we need to expect more out of City staff to make things safer because that [16:45] sidewalk on the east side leading to that bridge does not have a rail on the North side and it drops off from 5 to 10 [16:53] feet any and that right now it's not being shoveled so on top of having [16:58] access it's slippery and people can fall off of it do we need the liability of [17:03] that the whole section of that sidewalk should be closed with a chain link fence I'm not making this up go over the [17:10] Perkins site when that was under construction the whole construction site had a chain link fence safety chain link [17:15] fence around it it is the norm of a construction site to be fenced off and locked at night thank you thank you Mr [17:22] Frankle [17:29] anyone else do we have anybody that's uh called [17:35] in that wishes to speak to the council I have no callers all [17:44] right let's um hoping you folks will stick around for the conversation [17:49] because um I just want to ass sure anybody that's listening in or in the audience [17:55] that uh this Council and this H has not tried to sneak anything by anybody in [18:00] fact we've been pretty good about corresponding with people and telling us telling folks about the the process and [18:05] the the the notion under which some of these ideas came up from uh an outside [18:11] group that was working on future housing affordability issues um and that we knew [18:17] that it hadn't been vetted but I think staff thought when we were working on our legislative platform that we should [18:22] be talking about all issues that were gerain to a potential legislative platform and that's how it ended up in [18:28] the legis ative platform for discussion purposes only in a work session and it was jettison from the uh uh from the [18:36] legislative platform in the work session from the council standpoint and jettisoned from the legislative platform [18:43] the council adopted uh but we had to deal with it from an HRA standpoint too because we were two hats so nobody's [18:50] trying to sneak something by here uh or do something that buils homeowners uh [18:56] and uh I've corresponded with many many people in community over this issue and I'm will to keep corresponding with them [19:02] with respect to these issues that come in or these uh concerns that come in with regard to this issue it's [19:08] bothersome to us because we live here too we pay taxes uh [19:13] and we are trying to do the best that we can for the residents of our community being ever mindful of everything that [19:19] affects all of us so uh uh a little Grace uh a little Civic trust would be [19:26] uh appropriate I think so [19:35] um we're here in a representative capacity to serve you and we're we're we're doing [19:41] that um all right so let's move on then uh the executive director have any comments [19:49] uh no and we didn't have any comments at our last h meeting on December [19:55] 5th and the consent agenda um is there anyone that wishes remove an item from [20:00] the consent agenda um yes I would like to remove item a [20:07] this is just about process and doing things in a logical order and um that is [20:14] it oh also item D sorry D or b [20:21] d okay all right uh anybody else wish to remove anything from the consent [20:27] agenda items uh with respect to the consent agenda with the exception of items 6 A and D is there a motion to [20:34] adopt the other two items on the consent agenda so second uh we got a motion a [20:41] second to adopt the consent agenda with the exception of items A and D any further discussion all those in favor of [20:47] adopting a consent agenda uh with re with the exception of items A and D say I I I opposed [20:55] carried um [21:00] all right let's move then back to do you have a preference member rer them [21:06] sequentially okay uh appointment of the executive director of the HRA which is typically the uh in the world we operate [21:13] in uh the executive director is typically the city manager member Risser [21:19] what was your thought there um I'm again I really want 2024 to be about [21:24] transparency and process and doing things in a logical sequential order we did not um follow through the original [21:32] meeting on January 3rd to talk about the city manager's contract was cancelled [21:39] and we're doing it on the 16th so I would just respectfully request that we do this in a logical sequential order [21:45] and just table this until we have had that [21:50] dialogue commissioner U thank you so is your concern that if for example one of [21:58] the outcomes being that a contract wasn't renewed that we would be stuck in a situation [22:04] where uh the city manager we're still serving as uh our executive director um [22:11] that's part of it it just seems illogical that point but the other thing is we really need to do better about [22:17] being transparent and doing things in a sequential manner I think and so this [22:24] just really does seem kind of as if that I could see it being interpreted in [22:29] different ways and I just really think that we need to start doing things in a way that is [22:36] logical but you know so to your question yes it is that is part of it but it is [22:43] also about Community Trust and not creating the opportunity for a narrative [22:48] to get out there that is countering Community Trust just having everything [22:54] done in a way that makes sequential sense [23:00] commissioner um and so I know I don't really need to do this but I am just [23:07] going to to do this um so the sequence of this was actually [23:14] all set up to be just fine and when my father passed away in [23:20] November I let U manager Neil know that I couldn't be at that session and so [23:27] because of that we needed to adjust the schedule but had that not happened then [23:34] this would have flowed the way it was intended to we would have had the conversation we would have gone through [23:40] the debrief and then we would have um be at the point where we could make the [23:47] appointment to follow process and so in this case I don't disagree with what [23:52] you're raising at all but I do want to say I do appreciate um the fact that [23:58] that we could be flexible because I just couldn't be here for a couple of weeks [24:03] so I just wanted to give that context as to why this was um this was [24:11] done thank you our executive director uh let us uh [24:17] query you about um uh if we hold off on on this issue [24:23] until after we deal with um the evaluation [24:29] of your performance over the last year at our next meeting of the city council [24:35] is that the problem from a having somebody in place to be the executive director for the beginning of the year [24:41] it it is not um my contract is a contract that auto renews under the same [24:46] terms and conditions and including in in that contract is this reference to the [24:52] executive director of the HRA appointment as well so those positions carry over until they are materially [24:59] changed by the council all right um other thoughts from uh [25:04] Commissioners as to whether to hold this matter over until we uh discuss the city manager's potential contract renewal I [25:12] if if it doesn't cause any issue um I don't see any [25:17] reason not to wait I mean to me it's kind of six of one have does not the other [25:25] but um what was our next uh HRA date January 25th yes January 25th okay and [25:35] we're dealing with uh your evaluation I think on the 16th 16th yeah [25:42] okay all right is there a motion to uh move the potential appointment of the executive director of the HRA to the uh [25:50] meeting of the HRA on on the 25th of [25:55] January so moved second all right any further discussion all those in favor of [26:01] adoption of the motion stated say I I I opposed carried and then the uh draft minutes [26:09] commissioner Risser my concern is that our comments keep getting reduced to [26:15] provided asked questions and provided feedback or asked questions and made [26:21] comments and so the minutes do not capture the concerns of the [26:28] Commissioners and this also happens at City Council meetings where um we bring up issues and they're not even noted in [26:36] the minutes and I think that silences the voice of us and we are here representing the public so I think that [26:42] is a problem I think it also makes it easier for um things that come before us [26:48] that maybe we weren't really um sure of or felt like we needed more information [26:54] being interpreted with just that brief analysis of our feed back not even no analysis of our feedback it it makes it [27:01] seem as if we're completely on board with what was um captured in the text that describes the staff communication [27:08] so I we need to do better about capturing the concerns and um issues [27:15] that council is Raising during these HRA meetings thank you commissioner Jackson [27:21] yes thank you Mr chair um I will uh respectfully push back on that a little bit I think that our votes once they're [27:29] made show the outcome of the discussion and I understand your concern I I [27:35] totally do that we raise a lot of issues there's a lot of detail we go into and we it we need to capture that um but the [27:42] minutes are are a legal document and I think once a decision is made that's binding um regardless of the different [27:49] elements that went into it and I'm concerned that that will weaken the um strength of [27:57] our vote in the end because um because like I said the the vote is binding and [28:02] I don't know what the answer is to capture some of the um nuances of our discussion but I think the minutes um uh [28:10] are not probably I I'm reluctant to change that in a minute all right so let's talk a little bit more about uh [28:17] the purpose of these minutes director benat um this is not the first time the [28:24] council has had this sort of discussion about meeting minutes May maybe Scott will recall the exact year but when this [28:31] matter was last discussed the group at that time felt that the video was really [28:36] the official um um record of the meeting and that the meeting minutes paraphrase [28:43] that for the legal document if someone wants to see your exact comments they'll watch the video or listen to the [28:52] audio all right anybody else any other comments from commissioners [28:58] all right is having provided that information uh commissioner do you want to move the adoption of those draft minutes of the regular meeting of [29:05] November 30223 in a special meeting on December 5 [29:11] 2023 no you don't want to move that yeah commissioner um I guess I I [29:19] see these as two different things um if if there if we do need [29:25] to revisit um our methodology in terms of how we [29:32] take minutes um then I think that's kind of a separate thing that we should do with [29:38] staff I don't think that has bearing on uh voting on these minutes unless [29:46] there are issues within this document that are of question um but I think we [29:53] can commit to um having Manor J Neil staff combat do some assessment on what [30:00] we might be able to do to address the concern or at least provide um concise [30:07] data points so that we can at least assess it and then make a decision based on that so I kind of see these as two [30:13] separate things so I would say that these minutes are being kept uh in accordance with a [30:19] decision of a prior councel is what director benro was getting that so if our Council desires to [30:26] change uh the level of content that's expressed in those written minutes as opposed to using the uh video and the [30:34] audio as a more official sort of record um or more complete record uh we [30:41] could certainly have that discussion but purposes of potentially adopting these minutes that are in front of us this [30:48] morning they're they were done in uh in the manner in which it was uh directed [30:54] by a prior councel so is there someone who would care to make a mo to adopt the minutes of the regular meeting the draft [31:00] minutes of the regular meeting of November 30 2023 and the uh minutes of the special [31:05] meeting on December 5th 2023 of the H so moved commissioner Jackson moves second [31:12] commissioner Pierce seconds the adoption of the motion is stated the regular minutes on November 30 2023 and the [31:18] special meeting minutes on December 5 2023 any further discuss all those in [31:23] favor of adoption of those minutes as provided say I I I opposed [31:35] carried all right on to uh the reports and recommendations [31:40] portion of the agenda I'll turn now to Executive uh director Neil to talk about [31:46] some of the items on this portion of the agenda thank you Mr chair and members of the commission uh it is part of the [31:53] bylaws of the HRA that we appoint uh officers at the first organizational meeting of the H every [32:00] year current officers are uh mayor huband as the chair uh commissioner [32:06] Jackson as the vice chair and commissioner Pierce as the secretary all of those all of those positions are [32:13] eligible for reappointment or reselection and this is done by a majority vote of the council by the [32:19] excuse me by majority vote of the H all right thank you for that uh questions for the executive director on this [32:27] matter all right is there a motion to uh adopt the Slate of officers as uh as [32:34] recommended so moved commissioner Risser moves second [32:40] commissioner Jackson seconds the adoption of the uh slate of officers has [32:45] recommended uh any further discussion all those in favor of adoption of the motion stated say I I I opposed [32:52] carried and now we've got a couple of engineering related matters that we uh dealt with at the city council and [32:59] uh our director of engineering Chad Milner has more information on these [33:04] particular items for the h thank you chair Commissioners uh as the mayor mentioned as the chair mentioned this [33:10] was at your previous council meeting we had a discussion on the reasons for these change orders uh there was a [33:16] discussion that I didn't provide enough detail in those reports so provided the details that I spoke to at the last [33:21] council meeting so those details are in there it's related to soils uh utility Crossings the Aesthetics that was a [33:28] piece done after the original Award of this contract so we are again asking for approval of this both these items these [33:35] change orders one was with the contractor to do the extra items and the second one was with the engineer to [33:41] review them to make sure that the bridge and everything else is built safely into the state standards so I would request [33:47] approval of those two change orders to match what the council did last week stand for any questions questions for [33:54] director Miller on these two items okay [34:00] um all right stand by uh so we first we've got two motions one is the motion [34:06] to approve the request for purchase for change order number one and thanks for the greater detail appreciated that as [34:11] well uh for Grand View pedestrian bridge Engineering Services with kimley horn for $70,000 as director Milner mentioned [34:18] already approved by the by the council uh is there a motion uh from any commissioner to adopt that particular [34:24] motion as stated so moved commissioner Jackson moves commissioner U seconds the [34:32] adoption of the motion to uh approve the request for purchase for change order number one for the Grand View pedestrian [34:38] bridge Engineering Services with kimley horn for $70,000 any further discussion all those [34:44] in favor of adoption of the motion of stated say I I I opposed carried and then we've got change order number two [34:51] uh director Miller discussed that as well and that was some changes we had to make in in the bridge and he's provided [34:56] more detail around that uh that's a significant number for pem companies the work's already been done they've been [35:03] paid that's $269,450 120 is there a motion to [35:08] approve request for purchase number two change order number two so moved second commissioner Jackson moves commissioner [35:14] agu seconds the approval of change order number two for the Grand View pedestrian bridge with P companies for [35:22] $269,450 120 uh any further discussion all those in favor of adoption of the motion is [35:27] state say I I I opposed carried motion's [35:32] approved and uh now we will switch over to the item that we were going to take [35:38] up in work session uh which is something that we handled in work session for the city [35:44] council a few weeks ago and um and I think you wanted you wanted [35:51] executive director Neil did you want to provide any uh initial information because I'm going to turn to [35:56] commissioner Pierce to to talk a little bit about this the the only initial information um Mr chair and members of the commission I would provide is that [36:03] we We are continuing to refine our our discussions around the uh State [36:09] Legislative uh agenda package uh that item is going to be on your uh council [36:15] meeting agenda for next Tuesday um yes it's true that that the session uh does [36:21] not start till February 11th but really this is a very busy time uh to do advocacy and to work with legislators to [36:28] get things in the right positions so it's important that we uh make U make an [36:33] approval of of what we're going to be advocating for this year the the particular items that are in front of [36:39] you today are in front of you at your request right on December 19th we H held [36:44] a work session where we talked about some of the uh components of the uh of [36:49] the of of the affordable housing uh Finance section uh Council asked that [36:54] those items be removed from that discussion night and relocated to this uh discussion on January 11th so that's [37:02] where we are today all right good thank you um commissioner Pierce I'll let you lead [37:10] this discussion on this particular item that um we talked about at the city council level but have not discussed at [37:16] the H uh thank you uh Mr Mayor um so just um um a couple of of comments um so [37:25] we we started this uh work about a year ago and um uh what [37:33] we were trying to do is look at um how much progress we need to make from a [37:41] housing housing affordability perspective and seeing that um we had a [37:47] Gap a sizable Gap in funding um and we saw that um um we felt like we needed um [37:57] additional forms of housing affordability maybe I'd say it that way uh where our Focus um had primarily been [38:06] on rental um and we really wanted to focus on having more housing affordability [38:14] ownership uh we talked about town homes things like that um and so looking at [38:19] that the thought was you know maybe we should we should bring a group of [38:25] residents together um which is what we did um I was a part of that that team [38:32] that group that work group um and we hired a [38:39] consultant um and we did research across the US started looking at potential ways [38:46] to solve those two challenges um and coming out of that [38:53] work we had the work session that you've um alluded Ed to earlier uh where the [39:00] intent was to share that work product with the council um and review some of [39:07] those potential uh sources um so the idea was to try to come up with a fund [39:14] that was you know in the neighborhood of $4 to100 million so how do we do that um [39:21] it's a big challenge um we looked at data to help us understand [39:27] the uh gravity of the issue as we saw it um and so we did that work [39:35] um and that is what was reviewed on the 19th um coming out of that session um we [39:42] agreed to have a second session um and that actually would be what we're doing [39:50] today would be the second session uh we had intended to do that earlier uh but [39:55] that would be uh what we're doing um today um and so I wanted to I would [40:02] further just kind of reiterate and you've already said this uh mayor um [40:08] items 24 and 25 um are we made the request to remove [40:14] those from the legislative agenda the reason it is viewed the way it is online [40:21] I actually think goes back to a couple of points that commissioner Risser added [40:26] from process standpoint but we keep the continuity of what the topic was U so [40:34] that you can tie things together as they go through the process and so that's why the agenda item says [40:41] 2425 um but we had already made the request to remove that from the [40:47] legislative um agenda and I say that to just further make the point that doesn't [40:53] mean that the problem is solved um what this group came up with there were far [40:59] more than just two items in there that we thought we could use to to help generate um fun funding uh for housing [41:09] affordability um so um so [41:15] today uh manager hackinson is going to go through uh some of the data points [41:22] that we used um and share I I think originally we may have had in the [41:27] neighborhood of 10 to 13 different sources and then that group kind of Whittle that down and so you'll see what [41:35] we um we'll review what we did um back in December that subset of uh items that [41:42] we could use as sources uh but then the intent is to have the conversation after [41:48] seeing that and just talk about what kind of approach um we might want to use [41:55] moving forward to make progress um against this um and so I think [42:01] I that's all I have to to kind of Tee It Up um and then we can go through the [42:07] deck yeah I think um also my recollection from a from a sort of um [42:12] sequential or process standpoint was after you had finished doing this work for a year I'd say in isolation from any [42:21] knowledge that the rest of the council had you you came with your group and we had a work session one time you were [42:27] explaining some of the ideas that you'd come up with over that one year period of time and we kind of parked it and [42:33] then the next time we saw it was on uh the 19th when we were talking about the legislative agenda when it was [42:40] potentially part of the legislative planform right um and I think it is is fair to say that it was not this group's [42:49] intent to have these items actually be part of this legislative agenda um the [42:56] intent was to discuss these things and then as a council um decide which of them should [43:04] we move forward with trying to further develop um and things kind of got out of [43:11] sequence um and I you know I definitely appreciate that uh things got out of [43:16] sequence but I'm sure we've all been trying to answer questions and it's just [43:22] hard to put it back in the box like everybody I shouldn't say everybody [43:27] many people still think that we're voting on new taxes and like it's easy [43:35] for me I'll just speak for myself it's easy for me sitting here to point the [43:41] finger but I think a lot of this is because of some of the process that the way things [43:49] kind of occurred in sequence and um as I reflect on it there's there are things [43:54] that I could have done differently I don't know if the outcome would have been different but I certain there are [44:01] certainly things that I could have done different procedurally um given the the gravity of [44:07] the things that we're talking about um that perhaps could have eased some of this and so I I think there's there's [44:16] accountability on both sides on it and by both sides I mean uh Community [44:22] leaders uh residents as well as myself as a uh council member [44:28] right kind of to reinforce I think what you just said which was very helpful no council no HRA had made any [44:36] determination that we wanted this as part of a legislative platform in fact we didn't even know if we wanted to [44:42] consider it because we really hadn't had any discussion other than a presentation from your group about the things that [44:48] you were working on so this was a work in progress and U unfortunately ended up [44:53] on a legislative agenda because I think it was the intent of all of us to have more conversation around it and have [44:59] public input on it right uh all aspects of it before we got to any point in time [45:05] where we'd even think about pursuing any kind of U right uh pathway on potential [45:11] alternative sources of funding y so all right um M [45:17] hackinson so the issue of affordable housing has been discussed I and you [45:23] know long before I came around um I look back in old files and see that on [45:29] community surveys Etc there has always been there has for a long time been a call to address affordable housing so [45:36] The Advisory Group um we took it upon ourselves to or it was talked about for [45:43] about a year prior to the group forming about how there was a need for a sustainable affordable housing fund so [45:51] just some data points um because I want most of the time for you um as you can see from this this is a affordability [45:59] housing stock in Idina starting from 2014 to 2023 so fairly recent um swath [46:07] of time the top bar the dark green line are homes valued at under 500,000 [46:14] between 300 and $490,000 as you can see in recent years [46:19] there's been a major dip in quantity of Homes at that value the bottom dark line [46:25] are homes valued at under 300 and there used to be almost 18% of the housing [46:31] stock was valued at under $300,000 and now we think that possibly [46:36] by the end of 2023 there are none left um meanwhile on the yellow line shows [46:43] homes valued at greater than a million dollars and that um line has sharply [46:49] increased in recent years so this is uh based on median [46:54] housing values um from the assessing Department the median housing value today is [47:01] $659,000 9 UM $659,900 in 2020 roughly 2022 it was [47:11] $400,000 it is estimated that by in 10 years the median housing value will be [47:17] greater than a million dollars this is the median value another um way of looking at [47:24] housing costs in Idina is and this is a um they're they're not hard numbers this [47:31] is computer Consumer Price Index the top line is the cost of um rent and the [47:39] bottom line is um median household incomes and so the cost of rent has [47:45] increased three-fold over um incomes in the past since 1986 so it's not only [47:52] housing values but it's also rent costs have increased tremendously over time [47:59] so the comprehensive plan um that was approved that also includes land use um [48:07] component and was said that we had a forecast a need of um 1804 new [48:12] affordable housing units and this was also approved by a following resolution [48:17] later after the comprehensive plan was approved thus far we have completed um [48:23] and this is by 2030 thus far we have completed 18 .7% of the call whether or not we even [48:31] think we're going to achieve the 1804 we have um achieved 18% of that there was [48:38] also a housing strategy task force um that was created by the city council to [48:43] look at how to implement some of these housing goals that were stated in the comprehensive plan and look at others [48:50] and they also had goals and we are far short of those goals so with based on current funding [48:58] available for affordable housing we have $2.5 million available and as I said [49:04] we've accomplished about 177% of our goals the amount of money we have available for affordable housing will [49:10] allow for roughly eight single family homes or um a small percentage of one [49:18] multif family um rental and so the um [49:23] that is all we have money for and so the gap between the achieving even half of [49:30] our housing goals sta in the comp plan versus the money that we have available there's a huge [49:35] gap so this as was stated by um Council or commissioner Pierce um this Advisory [49:43] Group that was primarily made up of staff and our City attorney um came up [49:48] with uh five primary sources with the sixth being the investment income off of [49:55] those previous five so one of these was tabled um earlier [50:01] this year about the H Levy and the other two that were on that were the tear down fee and the single family transfer tax [50:08] that would only occur at the time of sale um and those made up the bulk of [50:13] this Gap so the current funding as I stated was 2.4 million that's all we have left [50:21] and based on the housing goals that um was I think we didn't even take it to the 18 1904 I think it came to 900 so [50:29] half of the goal was that we needed a million and so this is the breakdown so [50:36] that's all the presentation we needed 100 million I think you said 100 million [50:41] yeah yeah um Can can you go back to I'm [50:52] sorry can you go back to the um the slide [50:57] that shows the median home value right there and [51:04] so I I I wanted to just add a few points to this because I mean it is really [51:12] complicated and it is totally okay for [51:18] it us as a community to look at that and say well we're okay with that now where [51:25] where we are on this trajectory that's fine as Community we're okay with that [51:31] and we can take that view but I just want to reiterate what this [51:37] means is that the median home value right now is 659 or [51:43] 660 that means 50% of the houses are more expensive than that and 50% of the [51:50] houses are less expensive than that and so in 7 years it's going to be a little [51:56] over million and the same statement is true in 7 years 50% of the houses are going [52:03] to be more than a million 50% are going to be less than a million and so the way [52:09] I look at this is I take the I try to compare the two and so that's what um [52:17] manager hackinson is trying to articulate is what that means to the housing stock and it just simply means [52:24] that we're going to have fewer homes in the housing stock that are uh more moderately [52:32] priced um and I still say we just have to decide if there's anything that we [52:39] want to do about that and it could be that we don't want to do anything about it um or it could be yeah let's get [52:48] together and figure out what makes sense for us to do um and then the other thing I'll add um within that [52:58] context if I had a conversation with a um um a resident who felt like well the [53:06] house that they're living in is going to be worth a million they viewed this to [53:13] say the property value was increasing which is true and so I asked [53:19] them um that does that's a good thing for now but do you plan to retire [53:26] in that home and they said well no I don't want to retire in a home that's a [53:31] million plus dollars I want something more reasonably [53:36] priced and my response was I do too when I retire what we're looking at is the [53:43] trajectory is say suggesting that there's just just going to be fewer options across the life cycle if we [53:50] don't do something uh to increase or to ensure that we have housing afford [53:56] affordability across the housing life cycle and so that was the the entire [54:01] point of trying to do this work to figure out how we could have more [54:07] housing affordability across the entire life cycle which includes rental single [54:14] family home firsttime home buyers all the way through to retired [54:20] residents that was the intent uh behind it so I just wanted to to highlight that [54:27] just to to make sure we didn't just blow by uh the importance of that the other [54:33] aspect of that sort of educational session that we had that I remember when you were talking about this before [54:40] was uh maybe this was on a more personal level but it it's kind of that missing middle notion or the fact can our kids [54:47] live here yeah you know because we have a lot of families that stay here and the kids come back you were worried that as [54:54] as I recall you were worried about the of the house going up to the point where the if the kids can't afford to be here [55:00] but want to be here how do we how do we assist with that or should we Y no [55:05] that's true all right [55:11] um I think commissioner Jackson had some thoughts that she wanted to share I don't know about timing wise but I have [55:17] lots of thoughts okay um but I wanted we all do yeah I I just want to say some preliminary things first of all I want [55:24] to thank member Pierce for raising the issue and and doing all the hard work that you did we are there are really [55:32] good things behind public notice and open meetings law and data practices these are things that are very valuable [55:39] to our community but they're also constraints on work that we do as city council members and so we have limited [55:47] time to talk about these things and I think the purpose of this meeting today [55:52] is to begin not to complete but to begin a public conversation about where we [55:58] want to go with our housing stock in Nina and I want to make it abundantly clear that we will if as long as I have [56:05] any say in it we will have public input whether it's including better together [56:11] and a p at least one if not multiple public hearings or um Town Halls where we can hear from from the community [56:18] because this is a community problem and what member Pierce and his group did was some really deep hard Research into our [56:26] options and that was a lot of hard work and I I want to thank you for that the [56:32] transition from that deep intense research to a public dis discussion is [56:38] awkward and I want to acknowledge that because um this is a complex issue there [56:44] are lots of moving parts and we have rules that constrain how we can do [56:50] things um and so like I said those rules are very good we want to have public notice we want to have advanced notice [56:56] of meetings we want to have public um availability but it also makes it complicated um in what we're going to do [57:02] because we have other business to do as well with our limited time so we're making that transition to a public [57:08] discussion and that's what we're here for today and and thank you for the research um and I'm just going to set [57:14] the stage um I think I want to have a robust conversation with all of us talking but I just want to set the stage [57:20] with um both of you um Mr chair and commissioner Pierce uh talked about um [57:26] variety of Housing and the housing task force the message that I got from that was an overwhelming desire to have a [57:32] variety of housing options in our city to have um just a spectrum of Housing [57:39] and that to me um the life cycle of of housing uh is a value that I'm carrying [57:45] forward in this discussion that I think that's something that everybody and it was a really wide group that served on [57:52] the housing task force it was not one point of view it was every point of view and um and the one thing that they [57:58] agreed on very strongly was a variety of housing so I'm just going to set that as the stage and I'm really looking forward [58:03] to hearing people's comments thank you good commissioner rer um I think part of [58:10] the frustration that I'm feeling right now and that I'm hearing from residents is there's two different Pathways that [58:17] are being presented and um dialogue from the December meeting December 19th from [58:24] Council was we need more information we do not have adequate understanding of [58:30] what is being proposed and I believe the term that we used was we were going to [58:36] do a deep dive on all of these different forms of funding and we did not this is [58:42] not a deep dive today is not a deep dive when we look at the slides that we just saw in the presentation we didn't talk [58:48] specifically about these two forms of um Revenue generation and I think to put it [58:56] um completely on single family homes and not include commercial industrial all [59:01] the Tiff projects all of those are going to be exempt from this proposed Revenue [59:07] generation and what really makes me concerned is when I look at the January [59:12] 11th memo um from development housing development manager hackinson the last [59:20] sentences if the state legislature grants authorization to pursue these two funding sources then the city would [59:26] commence with the public process to gather public input prior to the fee and tax being implemented if so approved and [59:34] that's a very different narrative than oh we're going to have public hearings we're going to hear from the public I [59:39] would like to get the report from the housing task force I'm I have not seen a [59:45] full you know I have not seen data on it and and when I looked at the material in [59:51] the packet today and I ran through the slides these are slides we've seen before and I I would like to say we have [59:56] soared Way Beyond the number of market rate rentals that we're supposed to produce by 2030 we have already produced [1:00:05] 112% of that and there's and the other issue I have is I feel like we have [1:00:10] resources and we have um things we could be using now that we're underutilizing [1:00:16] and that you know we talked about the bridge going back and forth from the old public work site and how that doesn't [1:00:22] get you across to the grocery store that's important because the public work site is H property why are we not from [1:00:30] the beginning of talking about putting a bridge there really ensuring that people could go across the bridge with a cart [1:00:36] and go to the grocery store and come back safely so you know we just kind of [1:00:41] ignored that there's other there's other things we could be doing looking at our code um ensuring that the lot coverage [1:00:48] for lots that are 9,000 square feet or less Remains the Same as larger lots [1:00:53] that could encourage smaller homes that would also make it more likely that these smaller homes these older well- [1:01:00] constructed mid-century homes don't get overshadowed by a big large um new house [1:01:06] going up so I I realize I'm talking about a lot of things but I want to make very clear I don't I really think the [1:01:13] public input has to be before um putting this on the legislative agenda um thank [1:01:19] you yeah thanks member commissioner rer um commissioner agno [1:01:26] thank you thank you very much uh at the highest level I think introducing more [1:01:33] affordable housing in TW is important and I think that's why we're having this [1:01:39] conversation um when I look at some of those reports there was the one that talked about rent and income I think [1:01:47] it'd be interesting to see also the increase in housing value with required [1:01:54] annual salary to achieve that house because I think that's the the heart of [1:01:59] it right when you're talking about being in a house today that might be worth 650,000 and in 7 years it's going to be [1:02:06] a million Doll House that like convince me that's a bad thing right but there's [1:02:13] a bigger picture to it there's bigger bigger implications of that of if you're trying to sell it now the people that [1:02:20] can buy it is a much smaller population because I think that the the heart of it is salaries are not increasing at a pace [1:02:28] to keep up with the affordability of that $1 million house and so that's where I think you know when I think [1:02:35] about process and change management step number one is really making sure that [1:02:41] we're articulating the problem well and I I think that you know we know a lot about this issue I think that we have an [1:02:47] amazing um coordinator that has helped pull together this imagery and this this [1:02:52] story and so I think it's just about telling people why does this impact you [1:02:57] why is this important and I I mean uh commissioner Pierce I think you did a [1:03:04] really nice job of leading into that um and so then right if we have that [1:03:09] information and we agree that it's something that we want to tackle that's where we then start talking about what are the ways that we tackle it and I [1:03:16] know that we have our recommendations from the Met Council we're tracking that at a really good good level um and I [1:03:23] think commissioner uh Risser pointed out nicely that yeah we we're over um on [1:03:29] some of the targets especially for market rate housing and so when I think about my priorities very specifically [1:03:35] and I think that commissioner Pier said that he shared in this is how can we introduce more owner occupied [1:03:42] options and so then and I think there's I see some head noots I think that there's some agreement right that that's [1:03:47] where our priorities are as a council then it's like okay how do we do that right and there are a couple of [1:03:53] mechanisms that we've already been utilizing at the city level um I think [1:04:00] that we should be doing and this is probably worth another Deep dive and I know we don't have unlimited resources [1:04:06] but trying to evaluate what what the ROI is right so we know exactly how much [1:04:12] we're putting into um some of these programs um what is the impact of that [1:04:17] and I don't mean Roi from a purely what is the return to the city from a dollar perspective because a lot of it is going [1:04:24] to be uh what do you call it when it's not dollar value it's it's just [1:04:30] like intrinsic yeah what what are the intrinsic values that we're getting as as a part of our community and you can [1:04:37] tie that to the fact that we want to have more affordable housing um and so [1:04:42] then we we kind of go through this plan there are a lot of really great options that are in front of us but then again [1:04:49] right at a city level we're resource constrained both from the dollars that we have as well as staff capacity and so [1:04:56] I don't necessarily think that we need them to do a deep dive on the 10 to 13 different items we had the five that [1:05:01] were that were on the list and even as we think collectively about you know [1:05:07] whether it's a tear down fee whether it's the H Levy I think we had a really good starting point and so I think what [1:05:13] I would prefer as being a next step is should we have some type of I don't know [1:05:18] a community dialogue or um like a town [1:05:23] hall like some type of discussion where people can feel heard and and being a [1:05:29] part of the solution cuz I know that there are a lot of people in this community who want us to prioritize [1:05:36] affordability right you hear from people my kids can't afford to move back here um I don't know where I'm going to move [1:05:41] into and I don't want this 5,000 ft house right so there are people who are part of this community that want I think [1:05:48] be a part of this solution and so maybe that's the next step is to continue [1:05:53] engaging them because theyve definitely been engaged but engage them on a larger scale so that people feel bought into [1:06:00] the solution and then it doesn't feel like we're rolling a rock uphill right we're not facing there's always going to [1:06:06] be people who disagree with it but then we have more of that broader community support and we feel really good about [1:06:13] some of the decisions we make and I was I was speaking to a realitor yesterday one who lives in Indina and you know his [1:06:20] position was you know should we just do something that there's a tax increase for one which I think could be like the [1:06:26] hro levy is one of the examples that was more appealing to him as One Singular person than something that would impact [1:06:34] you know home sales it's like he wants to solve the same problem too um and so [1:06:40] it's just how do we bring in more people to the discussion make it feel like we are listening to everyone in in the [1:06:47] community and help that shape the the mechanisms that we choose from our list [1:06:52] of what to enact next yeah good thank you commissioner Pierce uh thank you I I just wanted to [1:06:59] to make just you made me think about this um so we have been working on on [1:07:08] this in some shape or form for a year um [1:07:13] and sometimes when you start at a point you you do kind of lose track of where [1:07:19] you are in the process but the original question I asked um manager Hawkinson is [1:07:27] what was our goal and what's the Gap and so right she well here's the goal here's [1:07:35] the Gap here's how much money we need to close that Gap and then the question was [1:07:40] just wow if that's what we think we need to close the gap can we even come up [1:07:47] with a way to raise enough funds to close the gap and that was kind of where we started um it was never the intent [1:07:56] for the work product from that group to be something that would come to council [1:08:02] we would vote on it and then we would go forth and make it happen the idea was to [1:08:07] bring back that context to say here's the burning platform here's how much we [1:08:15] think we need here's what the Gap is here are some things that other communities are doing and then come back [1:08:22] to the council to say all right does any of this make sense which of these things do you think makes sense for us to go [1:08:29] forward with to develop and part of that process would be Community engagement it [1:08:35] was never the intent to say we should do two three four and five and then go build a work plan to do it um but as I [1:08:43] sit here and listen to your your comments which I agree with um I do [1:08:51] think you kind of lose sight of I did lost sight of the process cuz we started [1:08:57] and we just kind of keep going but that was never the intent that we would have [1:09:03] a work plan right uh to present the council to move forward on it was to [1:09:09] have the conversation and then from that conversation there might be things that would go on a work plan that we would [1:09:15] then go forward to develop so we're at the preliminary stages of of of this [1:09:21] work although when you look at it it is quite dense material but it is the just [1:09:27] the start of it um commissioner rer go ahead um I really would thank you for what you just [1:09:35] noted um it would be super helpful for me and the public to see more of the [1:09:41] information that came out from this task force and I I feel as if somebody were [1:09:48] to come and ask me what the funds would be used for I couldn't adequately explain it and if somebody said we need [1:09:53] to have housing that is not rent I couldn't tell them what the vision was and I need to have that information and [1:10:00] hearing um what commissioner Pierce just said about it was never our intent that [1:10:06] does not um line up with the material for this meeting again the January 11th [1:10:12] memo says um there are two items number one seeking authorization to impose a [1:10:18] demolition Fee number two authorization to impose a single family transfer tax [1:10:24] that is on this memo that is before us today and so those are and and I feel [1:10:31] like this meeting is going to end up being summarized that Council heard all this information ask questions raise [1:10:38] concerns and it'll appear as if oh yeah we said go ahead put the demolition fee [1:10:45] and the transfer tax on the legislative agenda and for me I think that's really problematic particularly because we have [1:10:51] posted the legislative agenda on better together and those two items are not on it because we told um we asked that they [1:10:58] be removed so there's a a lot of Disconnect here and it's [1:11:05] really super super frustrating I think yeah I'd say uh be patient because we're [1:11:11] I think we're going to get there okay good yeah yeah so and that's some of the things I'm concerned about too is that I [1:11:17] think residents want to know I mean we've already we've already decided as a council those those two elements are not [1:11:23] going to be part of our legislative agenda and this is us sitting with our HRA hat on having that same conversation [1:11:30] so just to kind of well I think commission you raised a uh the point [1:11:35] I've been raising with people I've been corresponding with on on process choices there was the process choices you said [1:11:42] that member hackinson thought might be appropriate that's if if you guys are interested in this uh further go to the [1:11:49] legislature to find out if they'll even give you the authority to talk to people about it or my Preferred Choice along [1:11:55] with with I think I your Preferred Choice and probably everybody else's is what what are we trying to do here [1:12:01] first I mean we're we're at the threshold we're at the front end of [1:12:06] defining a problem that's Global in nature as it affects our town and I think there's a distinct difference [1:12:13] between the issue that you're hearing here about housing affordability and affordable housing and sometimes people [1:12:19] get mixed up about what we're talking about because if you're listening to this conversation you're hearing us talk about [1:12:25] folks that have lived in our community for a long time that want to sell and stay here but if they sell a 4,000 foot [1:12:32] house and they're going to move to a 1500 foot condo and it's the same price they haven't banked up any of their [1:12:38] Equity so that's that's one category remember Pierce talked about that the other is our kids you know can they [1:12:43] afford to live here uh there's the conversation around rental versus ownership and as we've if we've as we've [1:12:50] talked about this housing housing affordability issue I feel like over time I've started to Trend more towards [1:12:57] concentrating on ownership which is what member rnu mentioned because I think that what I hear the data from um our [1:13:06] former State demographer Hazel Reinhardt that we're birthing 10,000 fewer kids a year in the state of [1:13:12] Minnesota um and this doesn't include any conversation around immigration but [1:13:18] uh a lot of school districts are worried about the the future of their district [1:13:23] and the strength of the district because of the the lack of kids coming up through the system so uh where we know [1:13:29] the kids are are in Homes single family homes and um in some communities they're [1:13:35] also in town homes like out in Eden Prairie we're missing product here for from an [1:13:40] ownership standpoint uh and so as we as we kind of embark on this uh this conversation I [1:13:47] think it should be a CommunityWide conversation I've already met with one of the heads of one of the real estate companies I met yesterday with a [1:13:53] mortgage uh Banker uh you know what are the what are the issues that they're [1:13:58] seeing that face our community uh from an ownership standpoint uh but that does take me full [1:14:05] circle back from an HRA standpoint into this proposed tear down fee and uh and [1:14:11] uh single family transfer tax and of course that's that's what's precipitated uh so many of the emails that we've [1:14:18] gotten I think what what was it was it 2.4 and 2.5 on the legislative agenda [1:14:23] yeah uh and I think the member risser's point and I was going to get there this morning as well I think people in the [1:14:31] audience and people at home and people are going to pay attention to what we did here this morning are going to want to know uh not only whether we suggested [1:14:39] including that or taking out of a legislative agenda but whether we think those ideas have any Merit at all for [1:14:44] any further discussion and so uh I'd be interested in people's thoughts on the latter uh [1:14:51] I'm assuming that we're going to have a consistent sort of outlook on this legislative agenda that we if the [1:14:57] council doesn't think that it should be part of our legislative platform I I'm assuming the H doesn't think it should [1:15:02] be part of our legislative platform either so that's an assumption that I'm making but I I I hate to make an [1:15:08] assumption about whether this is something we want to consider in the future I've got my personal opinion but [1:15:14] I don't know if we want to address this issue today or not and and and put that issue to bed so I'm interested in [1:15:20] conversation around that as well from commissioners commissioner rard um I [1:15:27] really feel strongly that if you know as we move forward and we think about generating Revenue we need to have a [1:15:33] clearer picture of how we're going to use it um and I think it's we can't decouple that I also think putting a [1:15:41] transfer tax only on single family homes is not fair it has to be all property um [1:15:47] across the board and then it could be a smaller amount so I I feel very strongly [1:15:52] about those two things I haven't thought about the demolition um tax or fee that much I do think it [1:15:59] could get um rolled over and you know impact the seller and and the buyer [1:16:07] so I don't think it would really impact the Builder but I I again feeling like [1:16:13] I'm repeating myself I do not have the information I need in order to comment [1:16:18] on these things I I need to get more information from the task force I you [1:16:25] know so that's where I am all right I'm going to go to commissioner Pierce uh [1:16:31] thanks um Mr chair I um I from a as a business [1:16:40] leader I don't I don't solve problems in that sequence in that order [1:16:48] and so I get that um but I comment it from a different perspective um and so I would I would [1:16:58] say we don't have enough information to decide on any of those [1:17:05] things but I think they all have Merit and so would I support a uh [1:17:12] transfer tax I think I would at this stage um but if you just take that one [1:17:21] right you have to look at well then how would you even Institute that what would be the level that you might do it [1:17:30] there's just so much work that has to go into evaluating whether or not uh [1:17:35] something is the right thing to do or not and so the way I would do this is I [1:17:43] would I would I would not um take anything off the [1:17:48] table I would um and I've had this conversation with just last night with a [1:17:54] realtor um as well I would pull a group of [1:17:59] people together and I ask I asked the question last night of the [1:18:06] realtor um okay you don't think the tax the 2.4 and 2.5 are the right thing to [1:18:13] do all right well here's the problem we're trying to solve do you think you can get three [1:18:20] Realtors who will engage in this as a topic and help us figure out well what does [1:18:28] work what might work what could be a solution um so to me that's what I would [1:18:34] do is get a group of uh residents and I [1:18:39] don't know what the right label would be for that um to then help us figure [1:18:46] out what options we would take forward to further [1:18:51] develop this list was just that to say [1:18:56] well here are some things that other communities have done um we don't know [1:19:01] if these will work for our community or not but I don't just from the process of [1:19:08] problem solving I I wouldn't take a solution off the table unless I had data to support [1:19:16] this is not something that we want to do and and I would need more than than um I [1:19:22] I would need um really good evaluation to say yep that's not going [1:19:29] to work for us or we don't want to do it or this is the range we might think [1:19:34] about doing it in and we just aren't at that point and we were never intended to be at that point today so I wouldn't [1:19:41] take anything off just in that context but I would engage the community find [1:19:47] the right folks to help solve the problem which is probably you know a developer who does [1:19:53] single family homes I can see them being part of it as well to really help us [1:19:58] figure out what's the best thing to do thank you I'm going to go now to [1:20:04] commissioner agnu and then back to commissioner Jackson I I think the funding component is definitely maybe [1:20:10] half of the equation and then as commissioner Risser pointed out right the other half is what will we do with [1:20:17] it and I think that for me I don't [1:20:22] require the what will do with it in specificity before figuring out the [1:20:30] funding mechanisms I think that for me for us to say that we believe in owner [1:20:37] occupied kind of Investments we could put in a couple of examples of what does that mean but I'll use the example of [1:20:45] the the public work site right I don't know it's possible here like this is just me thinking off the cuff right but [1:20:50] if we said with that site um we would love to to invest in town homes owner [1:20:57] occupied affordable units on that site well that's something that like we [1:21:02] would need to decide and then have the funding for to go forward and decide if we said that's what we want to do now [1:21:08] let's go and think about instituting a tax and get that tax get that income and [1:21:15] then we can go ahead and invest in these programs like all of a sudden we may have lost our opportunity to do that [1:21:22] eight project maybe not that specific one right and so I think that's where we need to identify the top level goals and [1:21:31] a couple of examples of methods or mechanisms that we would use but not [1:21:37] necessarily to the level of this site this many units you know it's going to be somewhere in the middle when we think [1:21:43] about how it's going to come to fruition um cuz we might lose some [1:21:50] opportunity thanks for that uh commissioner Jackson yes thank you Mr Mr T so first of all I'm not in favor of [1:21:58] moving these two items to the legislative agenda I just want to make that really clear um but we we've had a [1:22:05] this is a great conversation um I'm so happy we're having this and to me we've [1:22:13] got this overarching desire to have a healthy Community what does that mean that includes some affordable housing [1:22:20] what does affordable housing mean and then we start getting really complicated um [1:22:25] two points I want to make one is that we take for granted that America [1:22:30] has a middle class and I want to make it perfectly clear that the middle class is something that's created it's not a [1:22:37] naturally occurring thing you know we had Lords and surfs right and then things were created for uh middle class [1:22:45] to thrive and so it's going to take some intervention to keep our middle class in [1:22:52] Edina and so we've got a couple of things coming that are going to precipitate a more intense conversation [1:22:58] we've got the public work site we have land for the new Fire Station 2 that is [1:23:03] going to sit idle until we decide what to do with it we're going to have the old public old Fire Station 2 that was [1:23:10] going to sit idle until we decide to do with it and we've got there's a fourth one I can't remember what it is but [1:23:15] anyway so we've got some public land coming on online and that's going to precipitate a really intense [1:23:20] conversation about what we do with that and you know the way to Max do we want [1:23:25] to maximize the money do we want to maximize the opportunities to have that life cycle housing in our city and so [1:23:33] we're going to have to get granular pretty quickly we're going to need both zoning laws and money to do that and so [1:23:41] we're going to have to have lots of public conversations my feeling is that I'm not [1:23:47] going to impose a tax until we have strong public support for the goals that we're getting there and uh you know tax [1:23:55] is a means to an end but it's also something that's imposed on everybody regardless of choice it's the law and [1:24:00] it's enforceable by law and so we' have to take this very very seriously um the [1:24:07] terms of what a transfer tax would look like if we wanted to implement that that we need to get information we need to [1:24:13] have lots of public Buy in on that um but I just want to to emphasize that I [1:24:20] support having economic diversity in our city I think it makes our city strong stronger I think the market left to its [1:24:26] own devices in our current system will um Wipe Out the middle class in our [1:24:31] community and um and I think that with tear downs and um tall apartment [1:24:37] buildings we're going towards a community that we don't we won't recognize um based on when I moved here [1:24:43] in 2000 it already looks very different and and I think people are kind of reeling from the pace of change so what [1:24:49] are we going to do to interrupt the market that's the conversation that I want to have I think like I said we've [1:24:55] got some public land that's going to come online that's going to precipitate oh the art center that's the the fourth [1:25:01] site um so it's going to prec precipitate a conversation and then as member agna pointed out we're going to [1:25:07] have these opportunities but we're not going to have the tools to address it so we've got to start building those tools [1:25:14] but um you know how we're going to raise the money how much we want to raise what the tools look like I'm not there yet um [1:25:21] and and we'll get to we've got some that that are existing um we've got State funding coming online we've got um [1:25:29] existing dollars and we can um start having the conversation but we'll see the need in in graphic terms I think [1:25:36] pretty rapidly if we want to have affordable whether it's a cooperatively owned small density apartment whether [1:25:43] it's Town Homes whatever it is that we're going to be talking about it's going to need money and we're going to need to raise that um and um so we've [1:25:51] got a lot of research good research done um for start uh but we're going to have [1:25:57] to have some pretty clear goals to to let the community know what it is that we're raising taxes to fund um and [1:26:03] that's that's the order I would take it in um and I hope that we can get some some more details on on what people are [1:26:11] going to be seeing in our community um before we start raising taxes but but we [1:26:16] are going to need more money to accomplish those goals thank you commissioner Pierce yeah thank you [1:26:24] um you did ask um a very specific question and I just want to make sure I [1:26:30] also specifically answer um just reiterating I do not um [1:26:38] believe 2.4 and 2.5 should be part of the legislative agenda right um I love [1:26:46] what commissioner Jackson said because I agree completely with it [1:26:53] so I'm going to go a step further I don't think 2.4 and 2.5 should be part of the legislative agenda and I don't [1:27:00] actually think we should go for with any of those action items [1:27:06] without having very uh structured feedback from [1:27:13] the community and how we do that I'm not sure we certainly are getting lots of [1:27:19] emails and so I use the ter the term structure right we see things coming out [1:27:25] of next door but I'm using the term structured because a lot of that [1:27:30] feedback isn't structured toward solving the problem a lot of it is just [1:27:36] specifically talking about one or two items and I think to solve that problem [1:27:42] which is funding and uses um we need that that input and so if we don't have [1:27:50] a construct to ensure that we get that kind of feedback um then I I don't think we should move [1:27:57] forward with any of them and so the intent was the frame the [1:28:02] conversation which is what we're having uh but I I do think in order for us to [1:28:08] do anything um and I say it that way and you mentioned this as well member [1:28:13] Jackson to even do um one of those [1:28:19] items requires policy Zone [1:28:25] changes right to even do one of them we have to look at within the city what [1:28:31] does that mean if we're going to as an example um divide a lot so that you can [1:28:38] put two town homes on it two separate addresses we can't do that easily today [1:28:44] and so even that which has nothing to do with taxes requires work for the city to [1:28:50] do and so I think even with that that's why I say I don't think we should move forward [1:28:55] with any of those things without Community Support um because there's [1:29:01] going to be a lot of work that has to happen at the ground level to even enable [1:29:10] them I think I feel comfortable representing to people here or in the audience virtually that uh from the h [1:29:18] standpoint 2.5 and 2.6 are not going to be part of our recommendation from this [1:29:24] HRA and I don't think we need to 2.4 2 2 five was it five and six or was it four [1:29:30] and five four and five okay you said 2.4 thank you we're going to be part of any [1:29:36] legislative agenda proposed um but it has this has uh been a galvanizing sort [1:29:44] of uh item around which to build this conversation uh that we need to have as [1:29:49] a community um and so as I've been talking [1:29:55] to um know the head of the real cwell banker and u a mortgage person yesterday [1:30:01] owns real mortgage company uh a conversation around what they what they think we are missing in [1:30:08] terms of product that they're seeing in other communities uh What uh are the [1:30:13] possibilities from a lending standpoint you know and then getting ourselves as a HRA or a [1:30:21] council more educated on what are the possibilities and then when [1:30:27] we're more educated we can have a more engaged and informed conversation with [1:30:32] the public but then I think a series of public meetings uh to make presentations [1:30:38] on these issues and as member Pierce says commissioner Pierce says maybe people think we don't have a issue at [1:30:45] all maybe just let the market Prevail and uh uh we just that's that's the [1:30:51] outcome of this whole thing but I think we need to be thinking about what we think is best for Edina what's best for [1:30:57] us as a community in terms of uh thinking about do we see do we perceive [1:31:03] this as a problem and if if it is then uh what is the problem and how do we go about uh working on it and then things [1:31:11] will flow from that I believe um this uh yeah so then even I think [1:31:19] with the mortgage lenders even the conversation about funding uh might flow from that funding [1:31:25] possibilities and I think until we know the land that landscape uh you know I'm [1:31:30] I'm reluctant to talk about any funding choices other than what we know we have now um or what we have available uh and [1:31:38] I also think that there's that more fundamental conversation about if we think there's an issue here uh do we [1:31:45] want to concentrate more on home ownership side or rental side or a combination of both I I I [1:31:52] don't know we really answered that question either you know we've done some [1:31:57] work around on the rental side but uh and we've got our din housing Foundation which is unusual for a community to have [1:32:04] a housing Foundation uh work on the uh on the ownership side but um uh you know [1:32:12] potentially enhancing that second mortgage program for firsttime home buyers or or our children that want to [1:32:19] come back to e Dina from other parts of the country you know how can we help them get get up and get going and maybe [1:32:25] they don't need any help but I think there's just a lot of conversation to be had here so we can decide as a community [1:32:31] which way we want toe uh with respect to this issue if we want to head any direction at all so um do we need you want a formal [1:32:40] motion on this elimination of 24 and 25 just to kind of I I think it might I think it might [1:32:48] be helpful for us as we articulate what the status of those issues are I think it provides the clarity we need [1:32:54] internally and also externally uh is there a motion to exclude uh items 2.4 [1:33:01] and 2.5 from the legislative agenda from the HRA perspective so moved second we [1:33:06] got a motion by commissioner AG second by commissioner Pierce to eliminate items 2.4 and 2.5 from the uh [1:33:13] legislative agenda from the HRA perspective any discussion all right all those in favor of adoption of the motion [1:33:18] of state to say I I I opposed carried um the motion's approved uh the [1:33:25] HRA um does not want to see those particular items in the legislative agenda yes commissioner Pierce thank you [1:33:32] and thanks again to on behalf of all of us for doing all this work for the past year and and thinking about this problem [1:33:38] thank you U uh Mr chair um the um I didn't want to blow by um the comment [1:33:45] that you made so we just voted on um 2.4 and [1:33:50] 2.5 it's not on a legislative agenda all right and so we did vote on that but [1:33:57] then the other thing that um I I think that you said or alluded to and I don't [1:34:04] want to blow by this we shouldn't just close in the meeting today and just keep going as we [1:34:13] are like we just had a great conversation and so we're not voting on [1:34:19] how we move forward but I do think it is incumbent on us to just make the [1:34:25] commitment um that we are going to move forward and you know and maybe that [1:34:32] looks like having a town hall or something like that to help answer those [1:34:37] questions um making sure people have Clarity around what the problem is and [1:34:43] really giving an opportunity to say yeah we think it's a problem that we actually want to address as a community so I [1:34:51] think we should have some kind of commitment around that [Applause] [1:34:56] um from today in my opinion yeah I think that's my sense of uh the conversation [1:35:03] today is that we need a lot more input we need a lot more education we need a lot more input from Community as uh and [1:35:10] and let leave it up to our staff to think about next steps we charge them with that okay commissioner yeah thank [1:35:16] you Mr chair so I want to go back to commissioner risser's comments at the beginning um about the minutes so I [1:35:22] think um given the fact that the way our system is set up we do have the recording and we were online um so [1:35:27] everybody could watch live can go back and watch again um in the thing but I'd like to have some sort of motion so that [1:35:34] the minutes also reflect that we are making a commitment to a public discussion about um housing um uh life [1:35:42] cycle housing and and affordability in our community um and I think that that to to honor your concerns um that we do [1:35:50] get that um memorialized both in our legal documents as well as in in the [1:35:55] broadcast of this meeting was that a motion yeah I don't do we need a motion to that effect or just I think if we [1:36:02] have Council consensus that or I mean h consensus that uh that should be in the [1:36:08] minutes certainly make sure it's in there so [1:36:13] Olson okay good all right thank you and why don't you send a draft to uh [1:36:18] commissioner Jackson but what you put together from a minute standpoint will make sure it reflects the intent of the [1:36:23] of hers and the H generally terrific she'll have a sense of that yeah thank [1:36:29] you um okay so yeah a broader conversation [1:36:35] to be had and uh we'll just move forward from here any [1:36:42] other thoughts on that issue members okay any any um updates or anything you [1:36:48] want to talk about uh Mr executive director uh no uh Mr commissioner not uh [1:36:53] today thank you okay uh H commissioner comments anything all [1:36:59] right um [1:37:04] okay I I was going to say I was in Washington on Monday and I'll I'll save [1:37:10] that for the council meeting talk about that um all right and [1:37:16] then is there a motion to adjourn so Mo second commissioner uh egna moves [1:37:21] commissioner Pier seconds the motion to adjourn uh any further discussion all those in favor of adjourning say I I I [1:37:28] opposed carried We Stand adjourn