Welcome to the regular meeting of the public health safety and equity committee for August 5th, 2026. I am Jason Chavez, the chair of this committee. Before we begin the meeting, I want to offer a friendly reminder to all members, staff, and the public that these meetings are broadcast live to enable greater public participation. These broadcasts include real-time captioning as a further method to increase accessibility of our proceedings to the community. Therefore, all speakers need to be mindful of the rate of their speech so that our captioners can fully capture and transcribe all comments for the broadcast. We ask all speakers to moderate the speed and clarity of their comments. At this time, I'll ask the clerk to call the role so we can verify a quorum for this meeting. >> Council member Payne, >> present. >> Winsley is absent. Rainville is absent. Vita >> present. >> Whiting >> present. >> Vice Chair Stevenson >> present. >> And Chair Chavez >> present. >> That is five members present. >> Let the record reflect that we have a quorum. I'll remind my colleagues that we'll be using speaker management today. So, please make sure you're signed in. Today, we'll begin first with our consent agenda. On our consent agenda is item number one and item number two, authorizing contract amendments with the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension for Human Trafficking Investigators Task Force, Crime Analysts, and Investigators. Items three authorizes a contract amendment with Canopy Roots for behavior crisis response services. Item four accepts the public health emergency preparedness grant to support emergency preparedness activities. Item five accepts the public health response sustainability grant to support emergency responses. Item six accepts the Minnesota Department of Public Safety grant for bomb disposal equipment and training and authorizes an agreement for the grants. Items 7 8 9 are all gift acceptances for staff conference attendance. Item 10 sets a public hearing for August 19 to consider ordinances related to noise regulations. Item 11 sets a public hearing for August 19th to consider an ordinance related to pet ownership restriction reform. And I'd like to take up item 12 at this time postponing the law enforcement concealment of identity ordinance to the September 23rd meeting. This item is under postponement heading. Colleagues, is there any discussion or are there any items that anyone would like to pull for further discussion? With that, I will move all consent items for approval, including setting a public hearing for number 10 and number 11. And I will move to postpone item 12, the law enforcement concealment of identity ordinance to the September 23rd meeting. All those in favor say I. I. Those opposed say nay. Any abstensions? And that carries. Seeing no um see the next item actually will be a receive and file part of the agenda starting with item number 13 a presentation related to the city's tree program on by Sydney the city's trees manager to begin that presentation. Welcome. All right. Good afternoon. My name is Sydney Chaff and I am the city trees manager in the health department. I'm here today to present an annual report on the city trees program. So the plan for today is to give an overview of the program and the team, provide a status update with how our planting numbers have been going so far in 2026 and then share some miscellaneous program updates. So there are lots of amazing reasons that we do this work and why we plant more trees. One of the biggest ones that we think about are the ways that trees help cool our cities and help mitigate the effects of climate change. The larger the tree is, the more of these benefits that it provides. And so we try to promote large shade trees through our program as much as possible. And here is a beautiful team photo from uh at the U of M St. Paul campus from a forestry event last year. So we have Kari and Barat are our project coordinators. Kabir is our outreach coordinator, Shaheen is our community forester, and then we have Jim for our 2026 Conservation Corps member, and we have two amazing step-up interns this summer, Lisa and Amaly. So, the City Trees program started in 2006. It's our 20th birthday this year, and in the last 20 years, we've distributed over 25,000 trees. The City Trees program is exclusively for private property. The Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board is responsible for public trees. So that includes the Boulevard trees on the streets as well as the park trees and we know that the largest opportunity to increase tree canopy in Minneapolis is on private property. And so the trees that are offered through our program are containerized trees. They're pretty substantial. They're 4 to 8t tall. And we do a wide variety of different types of species of trees. Our main two planting programs are the residential city trees sale. So these are lowcost trees provided to residents at just $30 each, which is a pretty significant discount. These trees would typically cost closer to $1500 to $200 if purchased from a nursery. And we provide the ordering in advance and then we give residents all the information they need to feel confident picking up the tree and planting it. And they pick up their trees at a drive-through pickup weekend. And we typically do the city tree sale in the spring and the fall. And then we also have our full service planting program. And this program is really in an effort to reduce as many barriers as possible because we know there are disparities in the tree canopy in the city. And so this program is has an emphasis on the green zones and environmental justice areas. And it's also open to nonprofits and businesses. So, uh, for participation in that program, it includes a one-on-one site visit with city trees staff or we also contract with tree trust to do a lot of this work and we meet with the resident or the property owner and talk through what types of trees they might be interested in, how many they have room for, make sure we're selecting trees that fit what they're looking for and are going to be successful being planted on the site. And then we come back and provide a full service planting so the residents just have to worry about watering and maintenance for the tree. And there's a lot of different types of properties and sites that have taken advantage of this program. We've done community gardens. This past spring we did a pretty large planting at Crystal Lake Cemetery and Henipin schools as well. So this is looking at our numbers for 2026. So at the beginning of the year, the targeted number of trees through our program was 2915. And this is between the city tree sales, the full service plantings, replacements after diseased and hazard tree removal, and then uh 400 small trees at a mini forest. I'll talk a little bit more about later. And we have had a ton of interest so far, and we are looking at passing our goal and we're on track to plant just over 3,200 trees this year. So we have two main planting seasons in Minnesota. Spring planting season is April, May into early June. And then fall planting season is coming up September, October, maybe into November. And so this is just showing what we've already completed so far in the spring and then what we have planned for the rest of the year. So we contract with Metro Blooms to do some of that replacement tree planting after diseased and hazard trees are removed. They've planted 70 trees so far and are going to plan to do the remaining this fall. Our spring city tree sale, we sold just over,00 trees. And our fall sale is actually open right now. It opened on Saturday on August 1st. There's 800 trees available. As of yesterday, we had sold 437 in the first four days. So, there's been a lot of interest in that program. And then the full service plantings in the spring, our team planted 150 trees. tree trust planted about 250 and this year we've seen an unprecedented number of requests. So in addition to the over 700 that we're going to be planting, we have 600 more that we have a wait list now and we're working to get a plan for to get people those trees. So that's been very exciting. So the mini forest is a concept that we learned about at a state forestry conference last year. It provides all of the same benefits to trees or the benefits that trees provide that we talked about earlier and captures a lot of carbon. It's a decades old planting method from Japan called the Miaaki method where you plant a lot of native trees and vegetation very close together. And it's so densely planted that you can fit 350 trees in an area as small as six parking spaces. And so because the plants are competing for sunlight and nutrients, it forces them to grow a lot more quickly and you get a fully mature pocket forest uh in 20 to 30 years whereas a typical forest would take a lot longer to reach full maturity. So we finished the site prep in July and we're very excited to get that planted in November and then looking forward to seeing how we can offer that to other sites around the city that are interested in hosting a mini forest. So, the City Trees team always does a lot of engagement and education. One of the things that we've been recently working on is providing some educational graphics for some common misconceptions or common questions that we get. One of those is sometimes people are concerned about the cost of watering their tree when they get something new planted. And the cost of watering annually is only about $3. So, that is not a huge barrier for a lot of people luckily. And then we also hear a lot of times, you know, in Minneapolis, we have smaller lots and people are concerned that they don't have room in their yard for a big shade tree. Um, but shade trees tend to grow taller and so the part that's in the yard taking up the most space is on the trunk. If you think of the large shade trees on the boulevard, the boulevard grassy area is not that big of an area and we can fit some shade trees there. Whereas sometimes the ornamental trees tend to be bushier and take up more space. So, those are just some examples of some of the educational pieces that we've been working on. Um, our forester, Shaheen Khalil, has also been working on forestry career exploration with some interns at Little Earth Community, including a tree felling workshop. And we're also continuing the contracting with Metro Blooms to do black ash basket weaving workshops at Little Earth. Poetry was a really fun event that uh Kabir Muhammed, our outreach coordinator, led in June, a way for our team to connect with community members. And so this was an effort to connect technical information about trees and education around trees and tree ID with nature inspired art and there was a poetry writing workshop, puppet making tree ID and our community partners were there sharing various resources. Another exciting thing that we've been working on is Barat Balon has been the lead for a tree ambassador pilot. So this is a new initiative uh designed to increase diverse and firsttime participation in our program to increase more equity in the tree canopy and trying to reach people that haven't heard about our program before. So we were looking for community members to become tree ambassadors. They don't have to be an expert on trees. We just want people that are that know their neighbors and know how to reach people. We had applications open in February and we received over 75 applications which was very surprising and great news. We selected 15 tree ambassadors and they each get a stipend to identify planting locations for 50 trees in their neighborhood. So this program is modeled after Root Nashville who does something really similar. And so the tree ambassadors have flexibility to promote the program depending on their strength. So, some are really savvy on social media, some might like to attend large events. And they just started midappril and we've already had 250 trees, more than that, but at least 250 trees requested through the tree ambassadors so far. We are still working on our private property tree preservation ordinance with the idea to preserve trees that are lost during construction. We've been working with CPED to ensure that this ordinance is going to align with the city's goals of increased density and not adding unnecessary barriers to pulling permits and construction. So, I just wanted to share an update on the public engagement part of the process that we did earlier this year. We had two surveys that we designed as an in an effort to get more feedback from people beyond just meetings. So there was a community member survey where you didn't need any technical expertise and then a professional survey for builders and developers and arborists and we received a couple hundred responses through that from a lot of the community members. We heard examples of mature trees that they were sad to have lost in their neighborhood due to construction. And sometimes these trees don't die during active construction, but it can be one to three years after the fact because the uh the stress that the construction put on the critical root zones with the excavation and the soil compaction. And then we also heard a sentiment from builders and developers that generally they like trees and they try to preserve them. At times if they're building a home for someone, they know that the person buying the home wants a mature tree as well, but they just want to make sure that this tree preservation ordinance isn't adding unnecessary barriers and permitting. We also attended several relevant advisory body meetings and then hosted public engagement meetings with some affordable housing representatives, uh, one for developers and builders, and then we've also been in contact with neighbors for more neighbors to get their insight. So working towards making this a thoughtful and practical ordinance that we have the capacity to enforce and expecting to bring that forward early next year. This is just a quick update. Previously regulatory services housing inspectors were responding to private property hazard tree complaints. That has been transferred over to the health department. Our environmental inspectors and arborist have been doing those. and the park board is still responsible for disease and infested tree complaints on private property. So bringing that over to health gives us an opportunity to promote the condemned tree assistance program. And the condemned tree assistance program is a federally funded program that is through a grant to the forest service. We were awarded this a couple years ago and we pursued it because of advocacy from community members who elevated a need for financial assistance for diseased and infested and hazard tree removals. These tree removals can cost thousands of dollars and it is an income qualified program and if the tree qualifies and if the resident is eligible we cover the full cost of the tree removal, grinding the stump that's left behind and replacement tree planting. And we began accepting applications on July 1st of 2024. So we just hit our second or two years of the program. And in those two years, we've enrolled over 500 addresses and removed over 600 trees. And the average cost of that tree removal is $5,440. So Karu Monzour is our project coordinator that manages that program. and when she talks to residents, she just hears a lot of how grateful they are and how they don't know what they would have done without this program because that can be a pretty significant cost for residents. So, in conclusion, I just want to say thank you so much to my amazing team back there. They are amazing and they are why we have made um this work happen. And so, that concludes my presentation and I'm happy to respond to any questions you may have. >> Thank you so much, Sydney. I see if any of my colleagues have any questions or comments. or else. Okay, Vice Chair Stevenson, >> thank you. I'll keep this quick. Um, how do you go about deciding the species of the trees? >> So, one of the main priorities that we have for deciding species is to diversify the canopy as much as possible. So, um, one example is we don't typically offer that many maples because maples, even though they're very beautiful, there's a lot of maples already planted in Minneapolis. And when things like emerald ashbor or Dutch elm disease come through and we used to plant streets and streets and streets of the same tree and then something comes through that can decimate that canopy. So um we try to offer a wide variety so what when the next pest or disease comes through that we might not even know what it is yet it doesn't have such disastrous consequences. Um, is there thought to whether the trees are native or whether the trees might be native in 50 years given our our changing climate? Is there thought to those things? >> Yes, absolutely. Um, so we look at um, yeah, climate adaptation, native, and then what residents are requesting. So, we do get some requests for fruit trees. So, we've offered apples, plums, peaches, but also taking into account what is successful in private property in an urban environment and um the climate adaptation piece as well. And I think around 90% of our trees that we offer are native. We have a couple that are a little bit more on the boundary in an effort to look into that climate adaptation piece. >> Okay. Um, and do you have any relation to uh like the the street sweeping or the cleaning that might come after for certain types of trees that may be a little more messy? >> We do not. That's a good question, but no, we do not. >> Okay. Uh, thank you. That's all. >> Next up, we have Council Member Whiting. >> Thank you, Chair Chavez. Uh, thank you so much for the presentation. I found this quite helpful. Um, this might not be the the correct [laughter] department or division. Um, so we're we're looking at a specific boulevard in our ward that we want to beautify here in the next couple of of weeks for a specific project. Should I go through y'all's department or is there something else that we can kind of look to for specific plants or otherwise that can be um planted in that uh boulevard? >> Sure. Um, Chair Chavez, Council Member Wade, thank you. I think that we can definitely talk about it. it. Usually the park board would be responsible for the boulevard trees, but if you're looking at some other plants or something like that, we can definitely talk and see what we can >> make happen because there is the new edible boulevard ordinance as well. So that opens up some more possibilities of what we can plant. >> Great. We'll reach out. Thank you, >> Council Member. >> Thank you, Chair Chavez. I don't have questions. I just wanted to say thank you to you and your fantastic team for all the hard work that you've put into um not only the tree planting program, but also the tree removal program. Council member Ellison and I worked really hard to make sure we got funding because uh the diseased trees were hitting the north side hard, not just financially, but so many of them. I I love that you made the point that we plant varieties so we don't have the same issues that whoever planted these trees 50 years ago certainly didn't think about emerald ashbor or like disease and I I remember being on the park board and the diseased trees were on the south side and I'm like they're heading north then I get on the council and they're north and it's a huge financial impact to folks who just one day had a beautiful tree they brought they bought bought their house because there was a beautiful tree there that suddenly became diseased and it's $5,000 $10,000 to remove it. So, I love to see the numbers um around the tree removal and also to see that you're still making sure people get trees to fill to to actually fill those holes. They get them removed, they want another tree there. We have this tree program for folks to then get a very discounted um really good tree. I have a few myself, so I know they're really good trees. And I I know what it feels like to pay $30 versus 300 at a Bachman's or somewhere. And that's a financial strain, too, when you want to buy a tree. So, I really just wanted to say thank you all so much for the work you've done and you continue to do to make sure um that the North Side in particular is a part of this work and uh I also wanted to say thanks for what you're doing with the young people. I I've seen them out and they're really educated about trees and I appreciate that. We need that to continue this work. We need our young people to be invested and informed on on how this is done and they inspire us. So, thank you so much for all you've done. >> Yes. Thanks, Councelor Vita. >> And then I'm going to put myself on Q. Uh, thanks Sydney to you and staff for this presentation. Really helpful. Really excited to see it. Like Council Vita, very thankful for the work done on the tree assistant contemplation program. It is an issue that really has impacted so many residents and uh that price tag really can displace many of our community members and who've struggled to even pay that bill. So very proud of that work that staff has really done to make sure that we can help families stay in their neighborhood while and also having um a healthy neighborhood. So thankful for that. Also wanted to ask one question about the tree preservation ordinance. I think you said there's been engagement with a few folks. I guess one of my questions would be one excited about that work and also excited the lens that staff based on the presentation I'm hearing that also making sure that we can preserve trees but also not like hinder development. I think we can do both. So I guess my question would be what are some of the comments or what are folks saying in that engagement? >> Yes, thank you Cher Chavez. So I think you know it was interesting having the survey split between community members and then the professionals. definitely uh varied a lot. I think from a lot of community members, what they're wanting to see is pretty strict protections. Um very strict requirements to try to limit tree removal as much as possible and then really emphasize if preserving trees is not possible to be sure that we're having strict requirements of replacement tree planting. And then what we're hearing from the other kind of like the other side, the developers and the builders, I know that CED has been making a lot of efforts to reduce barriers in the permitting process and not wanting to make things unnecessarily complicated. And we are able we are in a fortunate place in a lot of ways that we're able to we've done a lot of research as well as what other cities are doing for their tree preservation ordinances. We've had conversations with several metro area cities, but also um Boston and Atlanta and Portland um who has a really great one. So, kind of learning about some of those compromises that they've learned along the way, how to make things making sure that the ordinance is clear and simple and that it doesn't always require a phone call to someone to a city office to answer the questions and that people are able to be a little bit more self-sufficient in applying for the permit, understanding what needs to be done, and that there's some flexibility in what types of trees are protected. You know, we don't need to be protecting invasive trees or trees that aren't in good shape. So, I think that was most of the common sentiments that we heard. >> Perfect. Thank you. Well, thanks for the presentation and thanks to staff for all the work. >> Thank you, Chair Travis. Thank you all. >> All right, colleague. No one else is on queue, so see no further discussion, I'll ask the clerk to receive and file that report. Our next item is receiving a presentation about the Minneapolis Tree Advisory Commission. I'll ask folks to come present that. Oh, welcome. Let me just get this adjusted. >> Thanks for being here. Good afternoon and thank you for having me. My name is Jeppi Marari. I'm one of the co-chairs of the Minneapolis Tree Advisory Commission. Uh sitting next to me is co-chair Tim Keane. So, we're here to present the annual report that we presented to the city to the um Minneapolis Park Board and we'll present it to you guys and we'll take questions at the end. So, >> thank you. >> A little bit about the Minneapolis Tree Advisory Commission. We were created >> If you can get closer to Mike, that would be great. Thank you. >> Perfect. Uh we were created in 2004 between the city of Minneapolis and the park board to enhance the urban forest and to be part of making sure that the urban forest is preserved as well as expanded. A little bit about the agenda. So we'll talk about why trees matter, some of the accomplishments from the park board side, some of the challenges, threats that we have recognized as well as some of our recommendations. Um why trees matter. I think Sydney did a fantastic job talking about why trees matter, so I won't delve into this too much. They mitigate the effects of climate change. They deliver socioeconomic benefits and they also contribute to public health in terms of how we fight climate change. Trees are a big part of it. They cool the city, not through shade, not just through shade, but through evapot transanspiration. Um, I don't know if anybody here really likes sitting in the direct sunlight, but I think people feel a little bit cooler when they're sitting under a shade tree. They improve air quality and they also mitigate the water runoff that we have in the city in an urban environment with a lot of concrete. They deliver socioeconomic benefits. It beautifies the city. It gets people to want to be in the city of Minneapolis. I don't know if you've ever flown into major cities, but it's very apparent that the city of Minneapolis is very green in the growing season compared to flying into some other cities. Uh the canopy improves property value, makes people feel better about being in the city, and it also perfect uh protects infrastructure. Shade, protects from UV exposure as well as just heat damage provided from the sun. They also contribute to public health. I think everyone here has a vested interest in improving public health. Um, trees are associated with reducing blood pressure. I know that most people like sitting under a shade tree, as I mentioned before. They provide a calming effect and I think a lot of our constituents like sitting in a park that is shaded versus a bright, sunny, cooked lawn. Maybe I'm biased, but we also recognize that the urban canopy is not the only part of the the urban canopy that the park board manages is not the major part of the canopy. Um, I think Sydney is doing a great job. Sydney and the city trees program is managing the other 70% of the urban canopy by reaching out to uh the public and making sure that the trees in their purview are taken care of. So what are some of the accomplishments? The park board and the city trees program has been growing the canopy. We have a new director of forestry that's been doing a fantastic job and we're seeing a lot more engagement with the city trees program. I promise I'm I'm I'm going to be gushing over the city trees program. They did not prepare me beforehand. I was going to gush over them even without them being here. [snorts] So, uh, co-chair Stevenson a little bit more to kind of answer your question about diversity in the species of trees. The park board also recognizes that monoculture is dangerous when it comes to pests or disease. And so the park board's done a fantastic job adding diversity of trees to mitigate the effects of those pests and even climate change. So planting futurep proof trees is a big part of the plan from the park board. Um 8,000 trees have been planted by the park board in 2026. And like I said, diversity has been a major part of it. And we also generated $100,000 via the carbon credit offset program. Again, gushing over the city trees program. Sydney already told you about what they did. We think it's fantastic and we want to see that work continue. So, I won't dwell on that, but City Trees is doing a great job. MPB also selected a new director of forestry. Um, Chris McMaster has been doing a fantastic job. We're happy with his level of engagement and we want to see that continue. Um, city trees engagement. Again, I was not I'm not gushing over this because I'm coached into gushing over the city's trees program, but we really like what the tree ambassador program has been doing. We have been part of the tree preservation ordinance comments. Um, and the community level engagement and the workshops that we've seen going on have been fantastic. Um, again, we're very happy with city trees challenges and threats. This is the stuff that no one wants to talk about, but we'll just bring it up anyways. Um, the funding has not been the most reliable for planting trees in the boulevards. The canopy is under constant threat. And not only is the parkboard canopy under threat, but the citizen canopy is under threat. We recognize that and we want to talk about it. So, the park board itself, one of the goals of the park board is to plant two trees per every tree removed. And that is still a goal. That requires about a million dollars in annual budget to plant around 10,000 trees a year. The park board has the staffing, the infrastructure, and the equipment to do that, but they still need the million dollars a year to plant those around 10,000 trees. Funding is not permanent. And so what the park board and what the forestry department is forced to do is find funding on their own. And so what they do is they spend time finding funding instead of time spent taking care of the trees and making sure that the investment in the trees and the cost of planting the trees is not their main focus. So we're almost losing money having to search for money to plant the trees instead of taking care of the trees. The managed canopy is under threat. So the urban environment is a tough environment. Trees get beat up because they exist and they exist among people and we recognize that. Trees also as as been has been discussed in the city trees presentation, development is a part of a city. We recognize that we support it. We want to mention that development and trees can coexist and it's a big part of what we're trying to push for. And so we don't want to see development come in through a city and clear-cut trees instead of actually taking into account the design with trees included. current staffing struggles to manage the invasive species in natural areas. And we also recognize climate change is a big deal that we need to um work I guess against climate change and make sure that trees are planted that recognize the future climate that we have in the city of Minneapolis. The private urban forest is challenged as as Sydney and the city trees staff has mentioned. Um pests, invasive species, climate change, these are all challenges that the public faces. Um the education portion and understanding the benefits of trees versus the cost of a tree. It is always going to be a challenge. people are not going to be focusing on trees in their yard when they're focused on making sure that they can make ends meet. And so it is up to the park board and the city trees program and the city to educate the public on the benefits of trees and to help them enjoy those benefits. So what are our recommendations? We try to keep it pretty simple. We want to see the urban canopy be funded. We want to see protection for the urban canopy and we also want to expand the urban canopy with the help of private citizens. What does that mean? We want to see permanent funding for the 2:1 replacement tree goal that the park board has. We want to make sure any additional funding is aligned with the park board's goals. And if that can't be done, one of the recommendations we have for the park board is to establish a grant writer for the park board to work in the division of environmental stewardship. We also want to see better protections for the urban forest. We want to have better collaboration with any organizations that are going to be developing in the city. take into consideration the trees that we have and and work towards a solution that includes significant trees while building urban infrastructure. We want to also define MPB's role in supporting healthy ecosystems in natural areas. And we do pres we do support the tree preservation ordinance. And again, I can't say it enough, the city trees program, we want to see continued engagement and continued growth through the city trees program. Um, we want to see continued engagement with the public and educating them and making sure they understand what's happening to the trees on their boulevard as well as the trees in their yard. and we want to see continued uh pursuit of resources for disease tree removal and replacement on private property. And before I get to the next slide, which I think is for questions, I do want to yield the floor to co-chair Keane as he has a few comments as well. >> Welcome. >> Thank you, Jeppi. Uh Tim Keane. I am a uh lifelong resident of the city. I grew up in Word 10. I live in W 11 and it is my honor to serve on the Minneapolis Tree Advisory Commission. Uh we have always had and currently a very robust environmental and climate change policies uh that guide our decisions. Uh but but we cannot meet these policy objectives without very close attention to our urban tree canopy. Both the preservation and rebuilding it on a continuous basis. We know that a a shadier, cooler forested urban space is healthier, safer, better for us all. Uh but I have two requests of this body. uh as uh we continue the work uh both with city urban forestry and the tree commission on behalf of the park board uh is to put those funding priorities in alignment with our environmental and climate change priorities. We need to make investments in the urban uh forestry continuously. uh this is not a uh uh a single project effort. It's a way of thinking. It's a way of implementing our way of life. Number two, uh, [clears throat] as you consider public projects, public taxpayer supported projects that come through your committee for approval, whether it's the Met Council, Henipin County, Minot, Park Board, school district, ask the questions, what are we doing to preserve our urban tree canopy? How is this project going to further our uh our urban forestry? Lean in. Please lean in. Uh uh make the policy makers, the people that are spending these priorities uh uh have them cash in alignment with our environmental and uh climate change objectives. So, thank you very much uh and uh appreciate your attention to our urban tree canopy. >> Yeah, thank you both for joining us in this presentation. I'll first pass it to Vice Chair Stevenson. >> Thank you. Great presentation. I hear so often about our street tree canopy and people love it. People want it to improve. So, I appreciate you and your team for taking on that effort and and really advocating for street trees. Um just for so that I can tell constituents when they're like they came and planted a tree and then and then it died. >> Uh what is the survival rate of the trees that you plant? >> I can tell you that the average lifespan of a tree on a boulevard is 20 years or less. >> Okay. >> So it's a very very tough environment for trees and the first one to five years is probably the critical time for trees to establish themselves. Mhm. >> I can also tell you that it takes up to 2 to 3 years for a stressed tree to show evidence of that stress. So, if we have a drought year and you don't water that tree that first year, it could take up to three years for that tree to die. And we'll have a drought year and then two wet years, tree still dies and people wonder what happened. It's been wet. So, one to five years is probably going to be the most critical. And then after that, trimming a tree and pruning the tree to make sure that its weight is appropriate for the amount of growth and the amount of dirt it's in is very critical. So trees need maintenance, especially for their first 10 years. >> And if you don't prune that tree properly by year 10, then at year 15 you're going to lose a tree in a windstorm and wonder what happened. It's because it was too heavy for the can. it was had too heavy of a canopy and its structure was not appropriate for the location. And so there's a lot of considerations that have to be taken into account when planting a tree, selecting the location, and maintaining that tree for that environment. >> Mhm. Okay. Um, thank you. That's really helpful. That's way more detailed than than I was expecting. So, I really appreciate that. Yeah. >> I have some constituents reaching out about ginko trees. Sure. Um, what's the rationale behind planting ginko trees? uh diversity is the primary rationale and I correct me if I'm someone will have to correct me but there are two um genders to the trees a male and a female and I believe the female will be the one that has the fruit bearing that has a certain notp pleasant uh after effect I'll say ginkkos will sometimes change gender and so the male trees is the they will be primarily planted in that methodology and they can change and so unfortunately it's a it's a side effect of ginkos in of themselves. So the rationale is diversity and we understand that people get frustrated if those trees start dropping fruit. >> Okay. Um yeah did in your program do you also have um like specific thoughts or policy around the species native versus climate adapted? I think Sydney pretty much took the words right out of my mouth. We we we plant for the urban environment, which is for all intents and purposes, the urban environment is not native, right? And so you have to consider where the trees are. You want to plant for native pollinators and the environment that you're in, of course, but you also have to recognize it's a tougher environment and climate change is real. And so we need to plant zone appropriate trees for the next 20 to 30 years and make sure that those trees can handle a warmer environment. >> Okay. Um so then when it comes to ginko trees, aren't they not native trees? >> They are not native to this environment. That is correct. They are a hardy species and they can survive tough urban environments, the salty >> soil that ends up happening on boulevards. So they are recognized as a good boulevard street tree, but they will not contribute to the nativeness of this environment. All right. >> Okay. That I'm I'm glad to hear you said that's what I've been telling people. I thought that was true. So I'm glad to hear that straight from you. >> Um great. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Uh thank you for being here. I appreciate it. I have a few questions. On the slide it talks about unreliable funding. Do you know how much money? And I can ask staff on a memo potentially is in the budget annually. >> I can't answer that with full authority, but I will say that the funding is probably 50 to 70% of what it needs to be each year. >> And so there's always a gap that the park board or the forestry department needs to fill through grants or through the carbon credit offset program. >> Okay. So maybe I'll just ask a followup seeing how much money is in the budget and if it's split between the park board and then some of it in the city because I know there's it depends. >> Yeah, I that's something I can't answer. Sorry. >> Yeah, we'll figure out. Yep. >> Um the other question I have is you put on your SL on the slide supporting the tree preservation ordinance. I welcome an opportunity for you to share some of your thoughts. >> Yeah. Uh the process has been very thorough. I think I'm an avid cyclist. I think trees need to be preserved, but I also recognize that bike lanes are necessary, too. But I will say that I like bike lanes that are under the shade. And so, I'd like to see development take into account significant trees that provide not only benefits to air quality and the ecosystem, but shade for the uh development process that is in place. Um, and I think the tree preservation ordinance is doing a good job recognizing kind of the need for urban development while preserving the trees. Um, I will say that cutting down a very large tree and replacing with with 10 smaller trees is still not going to be a great equivalence, but I know that that is sometimes the necessary solution to um removing a tree. >> Awesome. And if you have any other feedback from the advisory um committee commission um that would be helpful too as I the timeline looks like it's next year but that information is really helpful for us. >> Yeah it's yeah I really appreciate it. Uh the last thing I'll say is you talked about requiring collaboration with agencies that potential impact. Is that like in relation to putting that in an ordinance or just like when we thinking about projects in general like as a practice it should just be what we should be doing which makes sense but I just wanted to give you an opportunity to maybe add more details >> to add a very specific kind of yeah we we want to see if there's a certain we want to be able to comment on development projects in the beginning before they'd go down a path of well we've already approved everything so can you review this and be done with it. Um, we do recognize that there are some city sanctioned subgroups that do have more input and we'd like to be considered as part of that process since we are a commission that was sanctioned by not only the park board but the city of Minneapolis. >> Thank you and thanks for being here. Really helpful information. Uh, currently see no one else on quue and no further discussion. I'll ask the clerk to receive and file that report. Thanks for being here. >> Thank you. >> Our next item is receiving a presentation from the police department related to a report on after action reviews. I'll invite Commander Bryce Robinson to present. Welcome. Good afternoon. All right. Uh my name is Bryce Robinson. I'm the commander of the implementation unit. I'm going to present on the afteraction. Uh Mtorian Lucer, if you want to go straight to the dashboard. All right. So, our unit was tasked with um tracking uh the progress from uh the auditor uh the audit report. So, what we did was we broke it down. Um there was 37 findings from the report and from that uh the Minneapolis police we came up with 37 action items. Um that's reflected in one of the pie charts there. So you can see that with the yellow um we're currently in progress of working on 31 of those and we believe um based on what we've reported to the auditor uh that we've completed six. They do have to approve those. Um, from there, uh, we broke it down even more because a lot of those action items have multiple pieces to them. So, in in all reality, we have actually 89 action items. Uh, for the for the sake of just breaking it down even further, um, we broke it down into the two different reports that the Muri and the Lucer uh, audit. Next, the legislative directive. Um we were asked to provide compre uh comprehensive information and data on the relevant recommendations and lessons learned uh proposed changes uh proposed changes to training uh MPD staffing issues and 911 emergency dispatch policies and procedures and any other recommendations. So what we found is inventory audit there's a total of 15 recommendations. Three recommendations were associated with policies and procedures. Three were training protocol, four involved staffing, and two were associated with 911 emergency response and dispatch, and three were other issues. Uh the Lucier, it was 22 recommendations, uh five linked to policies, seven associated with training protocols, one staffing recommendation, three associated with 911 emergency response, and six six recommendations uh under the other category. So our unit uh we basically had to start at zero. We were given this uh the findings and the action items. So what we started doing is laying the foundation to all this. Um so we created a smart sheet. It's internal document um tracking all this. And so we're working through that. Um so we currently are working through those items and there some of them are pretty complicated, some are easier than others. Um, so some of the the departments we're working with are the city attorneys, the hen county attorney's office, um we're working with the domestic uh advocates, um the chief of investigations, um the training unit, and uh the city auditor. So now we have monthly standing meetings with the city auditor where we present uh what we're working on and also we have been presenting of uh what our plans are to get compliance. And so we throw the idea towards them and then they come back to us and say, "Yeah, that sounds like a good idea. Continue with that." Or uh they say, "No, we don't think that's going to work. Uh go back and figure something else out." [snorts] Uh so out of the action items total uh the mur we have four, Lucar, we have two in progress we have 11 and 20. Those all add up to 37. Um we've uh continue to broke those break those down into different categories. Um, some involve domestic violence. Um, some involved, uh, data and technology, uh, investigations just in general, patrol operations, uh, specialized units, training, uh, policy and development, and staffing, and, uh, community engagement. And do you have any questions? >> Uh, thanks for the presentation. First, I'll see if any of my colleagues have any questions or comments. Otherwise, I can go first. Oh, thanks for being here. I appreciate it. I can go first. U I guess some my questions would be Oh, and maybe if we go on the case status number page number six, the categories I'm trying to read this a little bit better. The categories are some of the topics that were identified in the afteraction review and there's different goals that need to be met in those particular categories. um the ones that were completed, is there a way to know which ones they are? And then the ones that are in progress, which ones are those, I guess. >> So, my idea going further, uh chair, is to uh eventually on our next quarterly report out, get a little bit more thorough and and report out. Um I can go over now some of the items that we believe that we completed if you'd like. >> That would be helpful. Yes. >> Yeah. So, um, so one of the items that was set up was the neighborhood mediation program, getting neighbors to resolve, uh, their issues and sending people out there to to mediate. Another one of the uh items that we believe that we uh completed, um, it's a little more thorough here, but I'll I'll kind of just give you a brief statement here. Um we are having our inspectors report on um like calls for service. So any kind of delay that we have in 911 um like if if uh like call response times. So if they they pull up the statistics and they see okay there's this call that stayed pending for an hour. What was the reason for that? And so they we have uh weekly meetings to where they have to go up in front of the command staff and the executive staff and explain why it took that officer or that call was pending for that long. So it holds people more accountable. And um according to the statistics, we're seeing that officers are getting out and responding quicker to uh calls. Um another one here would be uh we created a a violent criminal apprehension team. So that we used to have one uh years ago and we actually brought it back to go look and search for those violent offenders. Uh and again there's another action item here that uh the VCAT team um was a was an action item for and so that was another one that we checked off. And then uh another one we have here is uh we've assigned uh anytime there's a uh a history of domestic violence with any kind of uh death uh the lieutenant of homicide assigns a team to still look into that uh the cause of death and that's and those are the action items. >> Yeah. on if I would love to learn more specifically on one of the last things you mentioned about if someone the history of domestic violence and the protocol for MPD and like what particular changes were made to that. So that would be there's no need to answer this today. I think a followup with my office would be important because I'd love to learn more about that because that is really important and something that was um highlighted in the afteraction review in general and something that really matters to my constituents. I think for me uh thanks for bringing this presentation forward today. Uh for the next one, I think something that I would love to see is the category component broken down into some of the goals that need to be met, which particular ones are completed, which ones are in progress, need to be timed out until particular goals that days that need to be met because I think that would help the public track some of these goals and it would be really helpful. So that would be for the next one, not for today obviously, but just maybe sharing some thoughts of like how we can share and communicate to the public with some of these things. >> Thank you, chair. >> Uh I'll pass it to Vice Chair Stevenson. >> Thank you. Uh my comments are almost identical. It would be helpful in future presentations to see not just the number of action items, but what those action items are for both completed and um in progress. Just again to remind us and the public about what they are and then maybe underneath there a little description about like what are next steps on those action items. Um we're really interested in seeing these things get done. I know you are as well. So, um, we would just I think it would be helpful for I'll speak for myself. It would be helpful for me to see a what they are and then b like what your next steps are in terms of implementing them. >> Thank you. I I actually agree. >> Great. Okay. Uh, see no one else like you. Thanks so much for the presentation and thank you for being here. I will ask the clerk to receive and file that report. And our last item. Thank you. Yes. Our last item is a report from the legislative research and oversight um department regarding police responses to public uh gatherings. All by Nick. Oh, there we are. Hi Nick. And if as you set up I'm not sure if Council Whiting you want to say something before we begin. after. Great. All right, we're all set up here. Good afternoon, Chair Chavez and members of the committee. My name is Nick Barkley, and I'm here from LRO to present a report on the police response to public gatherings. Um, I'm going to highlight a few uh of the research points conducted in response to a staff directive to provide both this committee and the council with a better understanding of police practices related to crowd management. Police response to protests and other public demonstrations in pre-1970s America can be best described as an era of escalated force. Police departments were controlling crowds less through course of tactics such as police lines and barricades and more with indiscriminate and disproportionate uses of force such as fire hoses, canines, and batons. Between the 70s and early 90s, some law enforcement agencies shifted away from heavy-handed techniques to a negotiated management model, which involved communication and coordination with protesters to ensure freedoms of speech and expression could coexist with public safety interests. Despite police despite police using softer techniques of crowd control, the increasingly aggressive nature of events in the 90s led law enforcement agencies to return to the confrontational tactics used in the 1960s and before. Starting in the late 1990s and for the next 15 or so years, a new strategy of crowd management called command and control became prevalent. This model combined force with emerging technology. Leveraging cameras and cell phone data, law enforcement agencies would divide crowds into smaller, more manageable groups prior to the formation of a rioting mob, which many in the profession believed to be the inevitable. This era saw widespread adoption of less lethal weapons such as tear gas, rubber bullets, pepper spray, conducted energy weapons known as tasers, and impact projectiles known as 40mm rounds or bean bags. Unfortunately, the introduction of less lethal tactics created both physical and emotional space between officers in the community and shifted the tactics used by police at demonstrations towards a more militarized look and feel that did not make events safer. For decades, it was believed that crow that being in a crowd makes people lose their individual identity and become irrational, impulsive, and easy to manipulate. This classic lens led police agencies to approach crowd behavior as chaotic. meaningless or criminal. A newer theory called the elaborated social identity model refutes that idea. ESIM research, which is largely led by Dr. Clifford Scott at Keel University in England, argues that people in crowds do not lose their individual identity. They shift it based on a step-by-step progression, which is highlighted here. The foundation of research into how crowds behave and how police presence can alter an event began in 2005 in response to violence in and around soccer stadiums in Europe. Over the last 20 years, researchers have made several findings, but of particular note is the fact that the disproportionate and indiscriminate threat or use of force can activate psychological processes in individuals that could draw people into a conflict they would otherwise have tried to avoid. and two, police strategies and tactics focused on dialogue and the exercising of rights should be implemented proactively to minimize the need for escalated enforcement activities during public gatherings. Recently, research into the ESIM has been expanded and we better understand crowd why crowds turn violent. One key insight remains clear throughout the research and that is how police respond to public gatherings matters. If police treat a crowd as a threat and use or threaten to use heavy-handed tactics, people in the crowd may feel there are being they are being unfairly targeted as a group. Considering this research and in response to several large-scale protests, several police agencies across the country began employing tenants of the ESIM into their operations. Many of these agencies have experienced success similar and are and are all very similar. However, during research for this directive, there was one city, Columbus, Ohio, which not only stood out, but was also referenced by other cities as the national standard. Columbus's division of police responds to large public gatherings through their public order policing strategy known as POPS, which applies Dr. Sto's research. Following the mur murder of George Floyd and the various public events that followed in 2020, Columbus became subject to a federal injunction referred to as the Marbley order stemming from litigation over the department's protest response. The order barred indiscriminate force and kettling or encircling of crowds. It prohibited the using of force to disperse non-violent crowds and required to use required that any use of force or police action be tied to specific acts for which a person could be arrested. POPS functions today as a tiered response model which includes a dialogue team consisting of plain clothes or soft uniformed officers wearing bright blue vests. They build relationships, gather real-time intelligence, and deescalate when needed. The dialogue team is supported by an arrest and control team known as the ACT team, which has targeted arrest capability used for enforcement action. ACT is usually staged out of sight but can transition to a visible presence depending on the events dynamics and risk. The dialogue unit and the ACT team are also supported by bikes, drones, and other resources such as SWAT as needed for higher risk uh events. Prior to 2021, Columbus had historically responded to crowds through the classic lens mentioned earlier. these. Their new model instead applies a social identity approach based on the ESIM, which recognizes crowd behavior as a rational identity based response to social gatherings rather than spontaneous mob violence. Importantly, and arguably most differently from other cities analyzed for this report is that officers in Columbus are trained to work with inside the crowd rather than at them or around them. POPS officers are trained to engage with the identity and and identify individuals within a group. um who are informally sorted into three categories to help guide the department's response. Because B's and C's typically make up the most of any crowd, dialogue officers focus their engagement on this majority. And because officers are working within the crowd, they communicate in real time to the ACT team and other resources regarding trouble from potential agitators. So what does this look like in practice? In 2015, when Ohio State won the College Football National Championship, thousands of students and fans gathered on campus and in the streets of Columbus to celebrate their victory. Columbus PD responded uh using a command and control model uh which involved officers dressed in riot gear and the deployment of tear gas and other projectile munitions. This method of response was standard for the time and did not include elements of modern dialogue used today in pops. The crowd, which had convened around shared social interests related to their football team, shifted their identity and responded to police in the same way police had approached the crowd. An afteraction review provided by CPD reported that over 200 personnel were involved in responding to this incident. They reported 50 uses of force and the deployment of seven MK9 pepper spray canisters, eight blast balls, similar to flashbangs, and 24 gas grenades. CPD made only four arrests during this event and reported injuries to five students and one officer and responded to 89 fires. In 2025, Ohio State again won the College Football National Championship, but this time CPD's response was completely different. Having been working under the POPS model for over four years, CPD responded first with their dialogue team and had previously coordinated a plan with university staff and student leaders. The afteraction review for this celebration reported the in involvement of 58 police personnel, no injuries to officers, no use of force, no use of chemical irritants or projectile munitions, and zero arrests. There were seven fires and only three student injuries. However, those incidents were unrelated to CPD's response to the event. This is a very unique case study in that the events uh are very similar in nature on a variety of levels yet the social and fiscal impacts were noticeably different. A comparison of the media responses to the two events similar in social composition and identity revealed that in 2015 media outlets focused on police response but in 2025 those same outlets focused on student behavior. the fiscal impact. From a financial standpoint, the reduction in resources utilized, particularly the number of overtime hours, meant real cost savings to the department of over $70,000 in this event alone. Additionally, no arrests, no injuries, and no use of force greatly reduced the city's exposure to litigation that can come from events like this. POP's leaders attribute much of their success to the intrinsic desire of their officers to uphold the constitutional rights of protesters. The team's guiding motto, honest dialogue, requires honest intent, is prominently displayed on the web page uh and as the first uh slide in their training materials. POPS has operated for approximately six years and has been recognized as a knowledge lab site uh for public order and protest management by the National Institute of Policing. Since adoption, the CPD reports substantial reduc reductions in arrests, use of force, and officer injuries alongside no mobile field force or mass formation deployments since 2020. Of 394 events reported since the department began collecting data related to public gatherings, 317 were resolved with a dialogue only uh presence. Amongst the 17 events needed or among the 77 remaining events uh needing additional resources, only five arrests occurred over the course of those 77 events, one was custodial and four were citation. No violent acts against officers and no significant use of force had been reported. And according to additional department reporting, event volume has grown roughly 40% year-over-year, which uh CPD attributes partly to community's confidence that law that lawful demonstrations will be facilitated rather than suppressed. The first and possibly only peer-reviewed evaluation of a model like this was also conducted in Columbus. A longitudinal case study in which more than 60 events were observed between 2022 and 2024 has found that across nearly all events, outcomes involved little to no use of force. POP's officers built trust with their event leaders, as evidenced by a reduction in negative interactions with factions of the community who had historically been confrontational. Over the years, relationships between key community organizers and police have improved. Groups who were initially resistant to dialogue or other forms of collaboration with police now participate in early negotiations, provide access to their group's leadership, engage with police prior to events, and in most cases are communicating early and often at the onset of spontaneous gatherings. CPD's success in the development and deployment of POPS has led the creation uh led to the creation of a 5-day training program that has been der delivered to hundreds of officers from dozens of agencies around the country and positioned them as a as a professional leader in the police response to public gatherings. Oops. [snorts] Local changes here at home. Uh, prior to 2020, Minneapolis Police Department followed a MPD or a FEMA based command and control public order model. Under this model, departments responded to crowds by mobilizing large numbers of officers in riot gear to form perimeters or lines, sometimes kettling or encircling crowds for mass arrest. This model is rooted in the again mentioned classic theory suggests that a visible show of force will deter disorder. MPD staff described this approach as largely unchanged for decades and with the benefit of hindsight uh called it counterproductive. MPD's current approach is built around a scalable layered response rather than a single def default response. Sworn staff described several elements of their broad strategy referred to internally as a fluid response model. It includes intelligence and monitoring, uh, dialogue and deescalation, mounted patrol and bicycle team units, as well as strike teams, mobile field force, and the SWAT team in the event that other efforts have failed or an emergency occurs. While not a formalized unit within the department, this approach is modeled in part uh on dialogue policing work that has been learned from training with other agencies including Columbus. According to leadership, the key operating principle of the fluid response model is that strike teams deploy reactively to the commission of a crime rather than proactively under the expectation that a crime would be committed. And officers noted that this was a substantial contrast to the department's default response to public gatherings pre2020. Leadership described the current model as highly effective relative to past practice and provided examples of how both police and community have benefited from the adoption of modern policing of public gatherings. Noting specifically that a marked reduction in use of force incidents, lawsuits and complaints uh have been tied to public gatherings. A shift from mass arrest tactics to selective intentional enforcement action against specific individuals. a reduction in adversarial relationships with community organizers, event attendees, observers, and members of the media, as well as perceived legitimacy benefits amongst officers, which includes specialized training. And the fact that MPD is rarely directing officers to quote hold a line, has increased confidence and wellness in officers while also building trust in the internal reform efforts. While working with MPD for this report, leadership acknowledged limits and challenges they're currently facing, which include a lack of standardized departmentwide training and equipment infrastructure. Equipment resourcing remains a persistent struggle as public order resources such as vehicles are often shared with other MPD staff who also play an active role in the fluid response efforts. Protective equipment such as helmets and masks expire and need to be replaced. And while uh the efforts are internal, the formal dialogue team concept as highlighted in Columbus uh and other cities remains aspirational at this point, but experts in the department identified this as a top area um that they hope to see improved. Since 2020, the police department has made significant changes to their policies regarding crowd management and their overall response to public gatherings. Many of these changes reflect best practices and recommendations made by professional organizations and civil rights groups. However, the settlement agreement requires uh that an independent monitor review the and approve these policies and that is a process that has not yet occurred. Additionally, the consent decree which the city remains committed to requires additional changes to policies related to how crowd management and control techniques obtain complian to obtain obtain compliance. An equally important uh perspective on the challenges police uh the changes police have made to their response to gatherings is that of community organizers uh participants and observers. The relationship between the change in police response and positive outcomes at events is correlated but not causal alone. Community is also changing the way they organize, demonstrate and self-monitor. These changes include investments of time and resources into the training and identification of event marshals. Improvements in the way groups communicate their intended outcome of their event, extra efforts to collaborate with law enforcement to increase the likelihood of positive experiences for everyone, and the intentional deescalation used by leadership when encountering opposing groups. Organizers interviewed for this report provided firstirhand examples of when dialogue with local law enforcement agencies went well and when it went poorly. I would encourage the committee and others to read the report for their perspective. Community leaders recognize that there is no single stance amongst organizers when it comes to event uh planning with police. They describe it more as a spectrum of feelings towards department liaisoning. Some groups want to collaborate deeply. They want to give some want to give a quick heads up. Some want zero contact with law enforcement altogether. And there are very few but they do exist who are looking for confrontation. One challenge police have is determining where on the liaison spectrum a given group may fall. Having built chains of command and made commitments to developing internal discipline aimed at reducing escalating behaviors in their own ranks, organizers offered the following insights into what police can do to improve their dialogue uh and liaison efforts. Department liaison must have sufficient rank and authority to make real-time decisions and that rank and authority must be paired with the respect of their colleagues. Personnel assigned to the dialogue team or any strike team should have an intrinsic belief in first amendment rights beyond the technical compliance of permitting. Officers should be able to and empowered to negotiate. There should be a willingness from department officials to find solutions rather than defaulting to a no response. And department liaison and dialogue team members should have humility and the desire to treat event organizers as equally credible compared to other stakeholders. Taken as a whole, the department feature the departments featured in this department demonstrate a shift away from first force first crowd control is not a passing trend. It is a deliberate research-based response to decades of data that shows heavy-handed tactics do not make public safety gathering safer for anyone. Crowds respond to how they are treated and departments that invest in dialogue before, during, and after events see fewer arrests, fewer injuries, and fewer confrontational dynamics between the police and the public. This report encourages exploring options to secure or allocate funds to formalize dialogue team capabilities at MPD as well as identifying the potential cost savings and an effective that an effective and consistent multi-layered response model uh could provide compared to blanket callouts of strike teams. Even agencies that are furthest along in the development process of these models describe the work as ongoing. Uh Columbus stands out as an agency with academic research partners, data to back up their claims, policy to enforce their their rules and the research. However, it should be noted that such things take time uh often years to materialize. The report suggests considering a regular standardized reporting mechanism like Columbus's data collection and other reporting structures mentioned in the report as well as the exploration of partnerships with academic institutions insted in continuing the research associated to ESIM and other models. The community perspective offered in this report is a necessary balance to any conclusion that that only police uh can be credited for these reforms. Organizers describe their own professionalization, training, and willingness to communicate with law enforcement as equally responsible for these improved outcomes. When trust is broken, it does not repair quickly, and skepticism about whether softer uniforms and friendlier conversations reflect genuine change rather than better branding remains present in each of the cities evaluated. To foster trust and increase effective communication, this report considers conspicuously displaying contact information for police part personnel assigned to manage public gatherings on the department's website. Creating and publishing flyers in both physical and digital form with the same information for distribution. Connecting constituents who are interested in planning events to those police personnel who are responsible for managing them. and emphasizing communication and engagement between elected officials and police before, during, and after large-scale events. Each agency referenced in the report has moved away from the command and control models and relies on FEMA based models only as a last resort. It is notable that adoption of this approach has rarely been driven by research alone. changes in all of the cities I reviewed uh followed directly from litigation, federal consent decrees or similar reviews. This suggests that while the underlying research has been available for close to 20 years, it was legal exposure and mandated reform, not voluntary adoption of evidence-based practice that has been the primary drive for change in these agencies represented. However, it is equally notable that every law enforcement professional I interviewed for this report recognized the voluntary nature of the positions within their department, which could indicate indicate a culture shift and an intrinsic desire on the account of officers to be part of an effective change. In agencies where support is inconsistent or absent, leadership acknowledge that efforts remain ad hoc and aspirational rather than institutionalized as part of department culture. And with that, that is the conclusion of the presentation and I'm happy to answer any questions about the report. >> Thanks for the presentation, Nick. I'll first pass it to Council Member Whiting. >> Thank you, Council Member Chavez, and thank you, Nick. I just want to take a a brief moment uh to just deeply thank you, you and your office and LRO for for all of the work uh on this right here. I think you know for for those that can't see uh we have a over 30page document of of in-depth um research uh that gives a a a broad description of where policing is moving particularly in first amendment and more dialogue and and uh community event related uh policing and so uh cannot thank you enough for preparing uh this level of work. It it is something that I see why my council colleagues invested in filling out the LRO department and I deeply appreciate that as well as as uh as Nick has kind of taken this on uh and done this work. I kind of want to take a little moment here kind of discuss where this this sort of came from. uh and I've kind of was seeing it in stages over the last couple of years. Uh we as we have seen uh an increase of interaction between law enforcement and and members of the public. Uh and we have seen some of those go extremely well and we have seen some of those uh uh take a different avenue uh and end up in in more uh violent situations. And so as of late the last um goodness I actually came across this this kind of idea that popped into my head with a video on Facebook. There was a um this past summer at West Coast City, I'm forgetting which which one specifically. Uh there was an officer that was engaging uh a dialogue liaison officer uh that was engaging with a department of of homeland security um law enforcement, federal law enforcement officer, and that law enforcement officer was was trying to get through um where all these protesters were, was going to drive his car through that scenario. And uh the dialogue leavon the officer said if you do that if you go through there uh you're going to be arrested. Uh and so this was kind of the first time where I've seen an officer at least in a in a a more enviral setting um engage in community policing that was directly I think protective of community uh with another law enforcement officer. And so, uh, that kind of spiraled into other examples here in the city of Minneapolis, um, where we saw in in the summer, last summer, 2025, uh, the kind of federal law enforcement raid, uh, in our city and we saw kind of a, uh, whether not a a a collaboration uh, with MPD and in federal law enforcement, but kind of a a standing by. And so I think we had a lot of both residents of mine, constituents of mine kind of ask like, well, what are they doing there? They're not protecting our residents. Uh, and I think that's a fair concern and fair questions were raised around that. And then obviously moving to to more recent uh examples with Operation Metro Surge and having an unsatisfactory answer uh when constituents asked uh why isn't MPD doing more? Why isn't MPD doing enough to to to support uh our residents? Why aren't they arresting these individuals that we are seeing uh deeply uh violate our rights here? And and this is is is the response to that. And so, Nick, this is this is I think fantastic. What we are seeing is is hopefully both a a protection of uh property um life, but all things that are related to our our constitutional rights here as well. And so um I think the questions that I have particularly around um have when you're looking at these cities uh both in the kind of three parts here and so I apologize for the the long-winded questions. Um when you are looking at these departments specifically that work with uh dialogue leaison officers or protections uh or first amendment protection officers um are there policies in place um between uh internally within those departments that ensure that these officers while they are have full uh kind of arrest authority uh are they kind of able to step outside of that. Are there policies in place that ensure that they are not just doing the regular job of a of a law enforcement officer? I guess is the first question I have. [snorts] >> Sure. Uh through the chair, uh council member Whiting. Uh yes, those policies do exist. Um there are a couple of them noted in the report um that specifically outline uh that officers I believe it was in Seattle and in Columbus both together uh had in their policies that um the their specific dialogue duties come first and they but at the end of the day in the interest of transparency they we have to remember that they are law enforcement officers at the end of the day and their duty is to enforce the law. uh but the intent of the of the team and the program is to uh ensure that these constitutional rights are protected and that the event can continue. Um now there is an interesting calculus there as to what at what cost and I think that that is something that needs to be um I don't think it was reported to me that that is something that occurs on a case- by case basis. Um but that is codified in policy that if you're going to be part of POPS or if you're going to be um part of the poet team in Seattle that you need to be coming to this work um with the belief that the goal is not uh arresting people, it's making sure that the event can continue uh and that the balance between constitutional rights and public safety can exist. >> Great. Thank you. Um kind of second question here is particular to uh like within those those units um when when they have kind of that full arrest authority. I know you kind of talked about the the multi-layered or scalable uh departments and it seems like I think uh Columbus has a level of that scalable. It seems like Seattle is more kind of its own standalone uh unit. Uh when when departments are looking at like hey which one are we going to? It sounds like Minneapolis uh right MPD has a a more kind of layered scalable layered response. Um like how are we ensuring or has how are departments ensuring uh that those things are kind of like last resort uh and so that hopefully that the the dialogue liaison officers are kind of the ones that are doing the the vast majority uh of the response in these situations. >> Yes, thank you for the question through the chair. Um, council member, all all of the uh agencies that I interviewed do have some type of multi-layered response. What's particularly interesting about Seattle's is they're the only one who has full-time uh dedicated dialogue team. Um, so everyone else who I spoke to does it as a either a secondary assignment or in some cases it's not even a formal secondary assignment. It's just something that they're interested in, something they're good at or something the department has put on their plate um as something that they should be doing. Um to answer to answer your question, I think the goal from all of the departments is to en ensure the minimal amount of intrusion in any event. Um efforts to do that include hiding those resources out of sight, maybe having them on standby, but having them available um close by or you know within a reasonable response time. Um, one of the uh, consistent themes I heard was that as agencies are adopting this, part of the way they get buyin is ensuring is through that officers know that they're going to be protected in the event that something goes wrong. And so since the research shows that having visible access to an armored unit or a a tactical team that is um that is present uh increases people's um heightened awareness or anxiety about the potential for a confrontation. The first step of keeping them out of sight makes them also out of mind um which allows that group's identity to maintain itself and its intended purpose for as long as possible. >> Great. Thank you. And the last kind of question here is uh when you're kind of looking at these and and I don't really know how to formulate this question. It's kind of harder question to formulate uh but when you've been looking at these jurisdictions and these agencies [snorts] um how have you seen uh these departments kind of do the the proactive protecting of of like protecting of first amendment rights, protecting of of uh of the uh demonstrators in that purpose? like are they doing things that are kind of stepping out rather than just being like observers like more of like the you know the constitutional observers things but actually stepping in to be like hey uh you can't do that you have to let them uh protest you have to let them engage in these activities so long as it isn't um right violent or otherwise um just trying to figure out how how that kind of component has added in there as well or if you've seen it at all >> yes through the chair um I I didn't see much of that myself It was reported to me uh some examples um some anecdotal examples of how um a agencies are doing things like um when they learn the path of a march for example, they're proactively helping with traffic control or in the event that the path spontaneously changes, they're in real-time communication with event leaders to figure out, okay, plan plan A has gone out the window, what's plan B? Um and de developing a a path on the fly. um and getting bike teams, getting horse teams, getting cars in places that that will prevent people from being injured. I think one of to answer your question a little bit better, um one of the examples that's in the report uh that was provided by a community member involved um the No Kings rally that was scheduled um for the same day that the of the Hortman murder. um and the the level of really deep negotiation and intentional thought and planning that went into accommodating both the law enforcement community's beliefs and the community organizers beliefs and needs and that middle ground um was really anam a good example I felt of of law enforcement agencies intentionally negotiating to find a solution and and the outcome of that was essentially we're going to the community uh said, "We're going to shorten our speaker programming, meaning people have less time to talk, and we're going to eliminate some of the speakers uh from the roster, and then uh from a law enforcement perspective, we're going to have more resources visibly present to deter what at that time was really an unknown uh threat with uh a potential uh mur potential, but a murderer on the run. >> Yeah. >> Um and not knowing where they were. >> Thank you. I have additional questions that I will I will save to to give my colleagues some time here but uh particular kind of reach out particular how we might be able to actionably scale kind of a policy framework uh to implement here in the city of Minneapolis. So thank you Nick. >> All right I put myself next on Q. Uh well thanks Nick for the presentation. I think one of the reasons I supported this staff direction was authored by Councilman Whiting was because of the city of Minneapolis and MPD and the findings by the Department of Justice that found MPD violating the first amendment rights of people in many different ways. First, that officers retaliate against protesters. Second, that officers retaliate against journalists and unlawfully restrict their actions during protests. Third, the officers penalize people who challenge or question them during stops and calls. And fourth, the officers unlawfully interfere with individual rights to observe and record police activity. I think one just just mentioning that because I think it's important for context of like some of the things that I really want to dive deep into as we explore this topic. I was going through the reports and the presentation and it talked about consider a regular standardized public reporting mechanism like Columbus data collection and other reporting structures mentioned in the report. Can you go into a little bit more details about what that looked like or what that entailed? >> Sure, Chair Travis. Thank you for the question. Um, most of the agencies that I spoke to had some type of formalized reporting structure to not only their department but also their communities and or their governing bodies, whether it be a committee or a council. Um, one particular noted in the report was the city of Madison has a has a um ordinance on the books that requires uh the Madison Police Department to present an afteraction review to council anytime uh certain things happen at an event such as uh the deployment of of gas or projectile munitions. And so that would be one of the considerations that I would offer to this body. >> Yes. Thank you. And that's part of the reason I'm asking because I think that's something that at least I would like to highlight in the report. I think about how this would been helpful at the height of operation metro surge and at least getting this information. So just want to thank you for this report. I wanted to at least highlight to the public one of the reasons that I supported this because I wanted to dive deep into this component of the well Trump didn't want it but the federal what was supposed to be our federal consent decree which I still think we need to address in general but I think there's ways and roles that us as a body that we have and really appreciate the presentation you gave us. Um colleagues, anybody else? [snorts] Okay, we'll chat offline. All right, colleagues. Uh Nick, thanks for the presentation. I appreciate it. Uh seeing no further discussion and no one on Q, I'll ask the clerk to receive and file that report. And see no further business before us, I will declare this meeting adjourned.