Good afternoon and welcome to the regular meeting of the committee of the whole for July 14th, 2026. My name is Orin Chowry and I am the chair of this committee. I will call this regular meeting to order and ask the clerk to call the role to verify the presence of a quorum. >> Council member Payne >> present. >> Wsley >> present. >> Rainville >> present. >> Vita >> present. >> Warren >> present. >> Osman is absent. Schaefer >> present. >> Stevenson >> present. >> Chavez >> present. >> Whiting >> present. >> Palmo >> present. Vice Chair Chai is absent and Chair Chowry >> present. >> There are 11 members present. >> Thank you, Clerk. Let the record reflect that we do have a quorum. Before we begin the meeting, let me offer a friendly reminder to everyone that these meetings are broadcast live to enable greater public participation. The broadcasts include real-time captioning to increase accessibility for the entire community. So, it's important that all speakers be mindful of the rate of their speech so that our captioners can fully capture and transcribe all items for the broadcast. We ask all speakers to please moderate the speed and clarity of their comments. Colleagues, our agenda is in front of us. Um, I'll ask members to get into queue if there are any amendments. Chair Chowry, if I could interrupt briefly. It seems speaker management is not working currently, so we're going to use red ticks today. >> Okay. Members, please identify where your red tags are. Um, I will just start by making a motion to amend the agenda and add two walk-on items to our agenda. Before you, there should be uh a copy of the request for committee action um related to Heritage Park. One is the response to the legislative directive and another is a budget reallocation request. Uh committee members, you received these RCAs from me um late in the evening. Um this has taken uh high highly irregular process. Um it was submitted late um because of exigent circumstances and have been in communication with council member Warren about this but wanted to ensure that you had a chance to look over this really big item before it came to our committee. So, that's the item that I'll move and then I'll call on council member Schaefer to make an amendment to the agenda and we can take those to all all the amendments together. >> Sure. Yeah, this is just a a lastm minute uh commercial block event application for amplified sound for the aquatenial. >> Great. Are there any questions on this? Um I'm just before we before we take the vote on it uh I'll just share what the order of the agenda is going to be in case anyone has any questions about the order of agenda. So we will take up the committee reports then we'll take consent and we will add the aquatenial sound permit item in consent and then we will go to um the walk-on items for Heritage Park in discussion and then we will pass this meeting over to council member Whiting for the settlement agreement consent decree subcommittees. Is there any questions from committee members? Not seeing any red tags up. May I have a motion to adopt the agenda as revised? >> So moved. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Those opposed say nay. The motion passes. We have our agenda. Okay. Now we will start by taking our standing committee reports starting with the enterprise labor relations committee chaired by council member Palmisano. >> Thank you madam chair. Ther committee has four items to bring forward on Thursday. The first is resolution for the first quarter of 2026 quarterly donations. The second is a resolution for gift acceptance for council member Stevenson to attend a summit event in Duth. Item number three is a collective bargaining agreement for the firefighters local 20 local 82. Item four is a legal settlement workers comp claim. And I'm happy to answer any questions. Members, is there any discussion or questions? Not seeing any of the red tags up. So, next we will go to the budget committee report given by its vice chair, council member Schaefer. Thank you, uh, Madame President. The budget committee is bringing forward one item. Item number one accepts the burn discretionary community project funding grants program for evaluation of problem nature codes and approves appropriation of funds to the office of community safety. Any questions? I'll move to approve that item. Great. Um, council members, is there anything? Not seeing any. Next, we'll go to the business, housing, and zoning committee given to me as vice chair. Um, so the business housing and zoning committee will be bringing forward 17 items to Thursday's council meeting. Item one approves a liquor with limited entertainment license for Bill's bait shop. Item two, approved an expansion of premises and street cafe license for Bryant Lake bowl. Item number three, approved a wine and strong beer with no entertainment license for Antihos. Item four, approve the financing for the grain exchange conversion project. Item number five is a variance for the property at 4710 Humbult North. This was sent forward without recommendation. Um, I'll just note for committee members, this is a quasi judicial item and uh there was a motion made for uh granting the variance with conditions, but that will just require working with the city attorney's office um to solidify findings. Item number six, uh approve six liquor license. Item number seven, approve 24 liquor license renewals. Item number eight, approved two gambling licenses. Item number nine, approved amended business license operating conditions for Breakfast Bar of Minnesota. Item number 10, accepted a bid for snow removal at the convention center. Item number 11, authorize a restricted loan for Jig Business Center. Item number 12, authorize financial agreements for the Minneapolis homes rehab project. Item number 13, authorized revisions to the alternative financing program. Item number 14, approved land disposition and financial assistance from Henipin County. Item number 15, authorize a loan contract with Metro Consortium of Community Developers. Item number 16, approve two street vacations north of Franklin Avenue West. And lastly, item number 17 is a historic landmark designation for the Lakeshore Arms Apartments. This was sent forward without recommendation. With that, I will stand for any questions that my colleagues may have. I see Clerk Amber in Q. >> Yes, I would like to announce that speaker management is now working, so we can get in queue as well. >> Excellent. I highly recommend the members log in to speaker management for this committee of the whole. Is there anyone that would like to comment or have any questions on the business housing zoning committee report? Seeing none, we will move to the climate and infrastructure committee and that report will be given by its chair, council member Wsley. >> Thank you uh vice chair Chowy. It actually sorry chair Chowy this will actually be given by council member Saen Stevenson. Excellent. Council member Stevenson. >> Thank you. Um, the CNI committee has nine items to bring forward. Consider one, considering the Lindale Avenue Reconstruction Project. Two, the resolution for the gift acceptance from Equivolve. Three, resolution for a gift acceptance from Brookings Transportation Initiative. Four, resolution for a gift acceptance from Minneapolis Foundation. Five, resolution of the support for the Minnesota Department of Transportation Highway 280 project. Six, resolution for the land sale of Wedge Point Park to Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board. Seven, authorizing grant applications to Minnesota Department of Transportation for 2026 Federal Highway Safety Improvement Program Funds. Eight, accepting the low bid for West River Road phase 2 project. Nine, approving a legislative directive proposed closure of the Henipin Energy Recovery Center. I'll stand for questions. >> Great members. Are there any questions? Not seeing anyone in queue. Lastly, we have the report from the public health the health safety and equity committee given by its chair, council member Chavez. >> Thank you, Chair Chadri. Uh the public health safety and equity committee will be bringing forward three items. Item number one grants consent to the mayor's nomination of Kayla McCanna to the appointed position of civil rights department director. Item number two considers a contract with Skyo, Inc. for a drone as first responder pilot program. Item number three accepts a donation from the University of Chicago for police inspector Molly Fischer to attend the policing leadership academy. I'll stand for any questions. >> Council member Chavez, I have a question. Did you say that the Skyo contract was moved for approval or was it without recommendation? >> I didn't say it, but it was sent forward without recommendation. >> Without recommendation. Thank you. Just appreciate that clarity. Members, are there any other questions? Okay. Seeing none, we will turn to the consent agenda. Uh first is a resolution expressing support for target field workers authored by council member Wansley. And as a reminder, the second item is a bundle that approves a block event and sound permit for the aquatenial festival. Do my colleagues have any discussion or questions on this item? I will go to council member Wanssley. >> Thank you, Chair Chowdery. I just wanted to speak to the resolution related to support for Target uh field workers. Uh over 500 workers um are stationed at Target Field and are specifically employed by the Delaware North Company and are represented by Unite here local 17 which I'm grateful to see many members in the chambers here today. Thank you for joining us. Um, these workers serve the food and beverages that are integral to the fan experience and economic success of the twins and target field. And workers are currently in contract negotiations seeking a contract that includes living wages and affordable health care. Unfortunately, Delaware North has not reached a fair contract that grants workers the wages and benefits that they do deserve. And workers were forced to even strike earlier this summer. Um, and I felt very honored to be able to join them on the picking lines and showing solidarity, active solidarity with them, um, as they're pushing for a fair contract. Um, Target Field is a publiclyowned stadium which is overseen by the Minnesota Ballpark Authority. Um, it's also home to the Minnesota Twins and is nationally recognized as a cornerstone of the athletic and cultural landscape in Minneapolis. And the city of Minneapolis has adopted positions supporting living wages, affordable health care, union representation, dignified workplaces, and collective bargaining for all workers. Um we are a union friendly city um and town. And we've also in alignment with these um positions have adopted as a body similar resolutions supporting workers uh be it at Delta Airlines, Minneapolis public schools, Minneapolis Parks and Recreation as well as the University of Minnesota. Um and I think that indicates the collective obligation that we have as council members um and that city leaders to advance those values um in our own backyard specifically in this case related to target fields. So, in light of that, um, I authored this resolution before you that establishes a position, a formal position of the city of Minneapolis to support, um, and extends solidarity to, uh, Target Field concession workers. And specifically, the resolution urges Delaware North um the twins and the target field to negotiate in good faith for a fair contract that upholds Minneapolis values and the city's formal positions um in support of living wages and dignified uh working conditions. So with that, um I will move this item forward for approval and then ask for a second. >> Second. >> Great. Next we have in Q, Council Member Chavez. Thank Thank you, Chair Chery. Just want to thank Council Member Wanley for bringing forward this resolution. I'm proud to support it. This resolution, as Councilman Wii said, expresses solidarity and support for char target field workers and urges Delaware North company to bargain in good faith and to agree to a fair contract. I think this is something that is really important. Uh, Minneapolis is a union town and this should be something uh that needs to get addressed as soon as possible. So, thank you, Council Member Wansy for bringing this forward. >> Thank you. Next, I'll go to Council Member Rainville. >> Thank you. I want to uh speak to the members of Local 17 here. I I was a member for 23 years. I was a shop steward, picket line captain. I hear you. I see you. I'm with you. Thank you. Thank you. I put myself in Q. Thank you, Council Member Wanley, um for really captaining the work of of this and forming a solid uh position for the city of Minneapolis to be in solidarity with all of the workers that unite here at um Target Field. Really appreciate you taking time out of your day to come to the stadium. And I al or not to the stadium. Whoops. We're not going to the stadium. Not crossing that picket line. >> [laughter] >> in an inadvertent dad joke. >> That's what I'm known for over here. Thank you for coming to our chambers. We will not be going to the stadium until they bargain in good faith. Uh just lots of solidarity and really appreciate you being here and representing the other workers that can come today. So, I know you have moved that for approval. Um it seems like this will remain to be a consent item and so uh we're going to move all the consent items for approval. So that is inclusive of the aquatenial item as well. So could I I have moved that for approval. Could I get a second on that? >> Second. >> Excellent. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Those opposed say nay. The eyes have it and the motion is carried. All right. Council members, next on the agenda, we have um you'll see it as item number three, but we're just going to take it up really quick. It's the postponement item before we move to discussion. I'll move to postpone item number three um to our meeting on September 15th. This is because staff needs more time to issue a response to the legislative directive. And I think I just want to highlight for the public that is tracking this item regarding information on Minneapolis Police Department spending in 2025. This was initially presented in May. There was um not enough answers to the questions and an extension was requested uh for this meeting and unfortunately um that was not uh completed. Um the Minneapolis Police Department representatives shared with us an agenda setting. That's largely due to the leadership change up and needing to hire uh I think staff for financial support to actually get us the information. Um this is the last extension in consultation with uh council member Chugtai's office that uh I'll be willing to grant for a committee. Um and the representative um from uh the the Minneapolis Police Department said that this would be enough time to issue the adequate response. So looking forward to that. Um I will recognize Council Member Chavez. >> Thank you, Chair Chery. I just want to add more context to this item. If I'm looking at Lambs, it said that the report was due May 19th, 2026. Now it is July 14, 2026, almost two months later. We have in many instances gone through this in the public health safety and equity committee where the administration fails to report on time uh for our legislative directives. One particular item that I am thinking about is an item that was authored by council member Wanley and she then had to submit two follow-up requests because the administration has failed to respond to it. So that's a total of one legislative directive asking for information, two follow-up requests to the administration, and yet nothing has been reported to the public health safety and equity committee. I'm using this time to talk about how administration is having this pattern of failing to report back on legislative directive, which pursuant to city charter section 7.1H2, the Minneapolis City Council has the authority to get this information. And I am flagging this for concerns because I hope this is the last time that the administration fails to report to the city council on information that is duly meant to get into our hands so we can be good policy makers and use our dual authority to do oversight over anything that the administration does and that the city the city has authority over. So I hope this is the last time. But I will say that I am frustrated that this continues to happen. When the city council requests information, we should be getting that information. >> Next, we'll go to Council Member Vita. >> Thank you, Chair. I as a um co-author on this legislative directive with uh council member Chuck Tai um I just want to say that I personally have been in communication with the administration on the delays in this uh legislative directive. I really do appreciate the the passion that my colleagues have for this. But I I just want to be clear that folks have been communicating with us about the delays. uh we there's been a major transition in this department and the person who was responsible and who council member Chuck Tai and I had asked to present this information um is no longer with the city of Minneapolis and that is not the only uh transition that's happened in the city of Minneapolis in this particular department. So, I I just wanted to um you know, make sure that it goes on the record that I don't believe there's any funny business or anybody trying to like uh stall something. There's just a lot of transitions going on behind the scenes. And um I'm confident that we're going to get the information. I I certainly have said publicly this is information I've been trying to get for a long time. So, I'm looking forward to it, but I just it feels the conversation feels like uh something is being withheld, and that's not how I feel about it. I think there's just uh been a lot of transition and um an expectation that specific people present this information to us. And I think that's what's happening. And I'm looking forward to the September timeline uh that has been put in place for us to get the information. And and I hope then in that committee that colleagues do ask questions because council member Chuck Tai and I were the only ones who really um were asking questions about this legislative directive. And so I'm looking forward to a really robust discussion in September when this information is presented to us. >> Next we'll go to Council Member Wanley. >> Thank you uh Chair Chowry. Um, just wanted to follow up to some of the things that uh, Council Member Chavez raised in terms of um, not seeing legislative directives being and being complied with by the administration. um it's seen that be played out of multitude of different legislative directives as you noted that allows this body to receive information so that we can make informed policy or budgetary decisions especially when we're um discussing um our current budget landscape where we're uh in the $30 million estimated or projected deficit and we know that 23 million or so of that is coming from MPD. So, we need to be having these conversations of how we got there and also what we're going to do this budget cycle to um mitigate um further financial strain that's being um advanced by um mismanagement within this department. Um so, I think many of us really want to receive this information while I understand that there has been significant transition um in the police department also under the current interim leadership. um some of this information especially with the office of community leadership as well as budget from my understanding should be able to readily provide some of these reports that uh we actually get around overtime. So just trying to figure out why that isn't being coordinated or adhere to but the point that uh council member Chavez made in terms of what we can do to try to address this. I also brought forward and I believe you um supported this as a co-author as well uh the charter um compliance and enforcement legislative directive that I think largely the city attorney is taking up so that we can understand what authority we have to better approach the administration around getting these legislative directives fulfilled um so that we can do our jobs to the best of our ability and with the information that we need. Um, from my understanding, the city attorneys is planning to come forward with that legislative directive, um, or the staff in general on August 3rd, uh, will follow up to make sure that that also is presented on because that's one in itself that was delayed as well. So, I at least wanted to know that um hopefully that will happen in a presentation to this body and that this body as a council can have more options on how we can um hold the administration accountable to provide the information that we request and approve uh together. So, just wanted to give some followup on that. >> There is no one else in Q. So without objection, I will move to postpone this item. All those in favor say I. I. >> Those opposed say nay. The motion carries and it is postponed to the September 15th meeting of the committee of the whole. All right, we're going to wait to just have the chamber clear. >> Madame Chair. >> Yes, >> Madam Chair. Sorry there. I can't get in queue right now, but I did want to mention I forgot it wasn't written on the sheet, but we did do the appointment. >> Oh, your mic just went off. Sorry. Go ahead. >> We did at ELR committee this cycle do the public hearing for the reappoint of Rebecca Malmquist as our city assessor. And I did intend to say that during uh the committee report. It wasn't on the committee report, so I didn't read that. But I also plan to be bringing that forward for approval on Thursday. It came through committee with recommendation I think. Yeah. >> Thank you, Council Member Palmisano. Okay. Now, we will be receiving a response to the legislative directive regarding Heritage Park. And additionally, there is an action item discussed that allocates 2.5 million from the affordable housing trust fund to this project. I just want to make a note to the public I think there'll be a lot that unfolds in this conversation. I think there's a lot of exigent and adverse circumstances that's leading to a walk-on item um for $2.5 million. It's highly irregular. Um and I think we'll get into that discussion. I also just want to uh give a thank you to Council Member Warren um for her work and communication on this. And with that, I will have Eric Hansen, the director of CPED, uh, start the presentation on this item. >> Welcome, director. >> Thank you, Chair Chadri, members of the committee. My name is Eric Hansen. I am the director of community planning and economic development. And I want to start first by um acknowledging what you said, Chair Chowry. is very unusual for CPED to bring something of this magnitude uh in front of the committee of the whole. Um and um I'm hopeful that the uh presentation you'll see will explain um why we are bringing this in such an atypical uh fashion. I'm here to present the response to the Heritage Park legislative directive and request $2.5 million in emergency funding for life safety repairs and relocation supports at Heritage Park. I'm joined in the chambers today by leaders from the health department, regulatory services, and public works department who are on hand to answer questions for the presented information. I would ask that you allow me for to complete the presentation on both the items and then we will be able to respond to the questions from the subject matter experts um the proper subject matter experts. We have a growing pro property condition problem at Heritage Park that is impacting 685 people in 212 households. The city has been working intensely over the past six months with the court over court ordered receiver, public housing authority and funders to identify ways to re rehabilitate heritage park. It is a complex problem that we are solving. It comes from years of underinvestment into the rental component of the planned neighborhood. This underinvestment has left the buildings in a state of disrepair to the point where the city has come to the conclusion to provide direct assistance for those currently living at Heritage Park to find new stable and safe places to live. In my presentation, I will I will provide some background on Heritage Park, respond to the direct questions of the legislative directive, and discuss the requested emergency funding to support the people at Heritage Park. Before I begin, I want to recognize Council Member Warren for her steadfast advocacy for the people in these units and her invaluable partnership with CPED and the staff team, the mayor's office as we and and the mayor's office as we develop this plan and engage residents at Heritage Park. Thank you, Council Member. Heritage Park is a 440 unit mix income rental community in Ward 5. It was developed in four phases and you'll see that on the map. Currently, only 212 of those units are occupied with an estimated population of 685 people living in those units. The development of Heritage Park is a court ordered is a result of a court-ordered consent decree from the Holman versus Cisneros class action lawsuit from the 1990s which alleged that public housing and section 8 programs in the city perpetual perpetual perpetuated racial and lowincome segregation and allowed households to live in substandard housing conditions. Heritage Park has both rental and ownership units in the master plan site. The map shows the four rental housing components that are owned by separate subsidiaries of McCormack Baron Baron Salazar or MBS on a long-term ground lease with the Minneapolis Public Housing Authority or I will use MPHA or PHA. MBA MBS built these housing units between 2002 and 2006. As one of the defendant parties to the consent decree, the city participated in the planning, site readiness, and funding activities for the redevelopment of Heritage Park. The city initially invest invested $4.3 million in deferred funds and added housing tax credits into the development. Other funders to the original development include Minnesota Housing, Henipin County Family Housing Fund, and the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, or HUD. MPHA provides Texas tenant-based section 8 vouchers and funding from an annual contributions contract or ACC contract to fund operations and ongoing capital needs within the within the development. 200 of the of the 440 units are public housing and several others have section 8 vouchers. Heritage Park right now is in a court-ordered receiverhip to the owner's failure to pay the first mortgage. Certis Financial LLC or Certis serves as that receiver and would receive any grants for re rehabilitation and execute required repairs. They act as the owner at this point in time. Certis continues to complete due diligence to determine repair needs at Heritage Park. staff is working closely with Certis and the MPHA through this process and it has has engaged Henipin County and other funders in the development on the rehabilitation and relocation planning. The city's primary role right now after the conclusion of the consent decree, which is about 15 years old, are to support and monitor the existing subsidy funding, provide land use guidance and future development phases, operate and maintain public infrastructure, and additionally, the city enforces rental licensing and property maintenance regulation. We responded to we we we responded to the seven we will respond to the seven questions you see on the screen. You asked staff to respond to the to the committee a whole by July 28th. The body urged staff a qu for a quicker response if possible when the full council approved this this directive in June. responding to that request and giving the seriousness of the conditions that we need to support. We are presenting this information ahead of the deadline. Our responses to the question pose reflect the best data staff has available um and possess right now during a very fluid situation. In some cases, responses rely on data from external partners. We did our best to retrieve that information and provide a response. Staff has been working daily with Certis to best understand the repair and rehabilitation needs at Heritage Park. It is a complex puzzle balancing repairs of the units, assessing the integrity of the overall building envelope and structure, and defining the needs for replacement and repair of the grounds, storm water treatment facilities, and fixtures like lighting and playgrounds. We seem to learn more every day about the conditions at Heritage Park. First and foremost, we center our attention on the 685 people who live at Heritage Park, ensuring they have safe, stable housing. It is not if it's if that's not at Heritage Park, then we need to help them find it somewhere else. The emergency funding action I will discuss later in the presentation addresses their needs first needs first as we continue to determine a strategy to complete repair the repair puzzle which we continue to take which will continue to take weeks to complete months to designate funding to meet the repair needs and years to complete the repairs. 76. There are 76 residential buildings currently and they currently maintain active re rental licenses. Prior to 2025, um the city inspection activities were primarily complaint driven, meaning inspectors responded to concerns reported by residents. As conditions at the pro that the property became more concerning, regulatory services shifted to a proactive approach being beginning in October 2025, the city conducted a comprehensive propertywide inspection and inspected every occupied unit where residents provided consent to allow for entry. Those inspections identified significant maintenance and housing code issues. Since October, inspectors have opened 93 enforcement cases, documenting 975 code violations. To date, 111 violations have been corrected and closed. 84 cases remain open, representing 863 violations that continue to be monitored and forced by regulatory services. One encouraging indicator uh is that the service requests have declined since the proactive inspections began, suggesting that more issues are being identified and addressed through the city's systematic inspection process rather than waiting for individual complaints. Our work continues in the continues until the property is brought brought into compliance and have safe, healthy housing. The city's response um involved much more than inspection. Throughout this process, housing liaison have worked alongside regulatory services inspectors, meeting directly with residents, answering questions, connecting families with available resources, and helping residents navigate what has been a difficult and uncertain situation. Last fall, the city participated in a community meeting along with former residents for along with former resident advocate organization USI and the residents to explain inspection activities and answer questions. As reinspections continue, housing leaison are brought in whenever appropriate to reduce the number of city staff entering the units while ensuring residents continue receiving support. Our dep our departments re remain in close communications so that residents can quickly assess assisted access assistance when needed when additional interventions is appropriate. Housing liaison work collaboratively with the residents and the property management to help resolve the issues. More recently, city staff have joined council member Warren in three community meetings um about the conditions at Heritage Park and will continue to engage the community members as we work through the process of relocation. Since the court appointed a pro point Since the court appointed a receiver, city staff has worked closely with both the cert with Certis and the new property management team. Together, we have established an inspection schedule, prioritized repairs, and developed timelines for correcting violations identified during inspections. Another major pursuit priority is returning vacant units into service. Many vacant apartments require extensive rehabilit rehabilitation before they can safely house residents. Addressing these units require both immediate repairs and long-term financing strategies that support comprehensive rehabilitation rather than temporary fixes. This coordinated effort among the receiver, MA, the city and HUD and other partners is essential to stabilizing the long-term health of Heritage Bark. The city has made financial commitments um in the recent past in addition to the $4.3 million in deferred financing at the beginning of the construction of this project. We have put in um hundreds of thousands of dollars each year to help with lighting improvements, security upgrades, parking lot repairs, rehabilit rehabilitation of vacant units or unit turns, furnace replacement, weatherization improvements, and other other investments focused on health and safety. We also have contributions from Minnesota housing with $5.125 million um in in estate funding for repairs and $3 million earmark through um the department of HUD for ongoing um for repairs as well as ongoing operating and capital expenses support from MPHA. There is no single funding source that will solve the challenges for Heritage Park and success will depend on a thoughtful coordinated investment strategy with multiple sector partners and Heritage Park entered a court order receiverhip in December of 2025 when Ciris Financial was appointed to uh to help stabilize the pro the property. The receiver is working closely with all of the parties involved to develop a comprehensive to do a property analysis of uh property needs assessment of the property, figure out a funding financing plan and uh and and produce a comprehensive stabilization strategy. We will continue to work with Certis and the MA on that process as we talk about relocation. Unfortunately, this is an evolving situation about needs. Um, we are evaluating uh a threshold question of are the repairs needed exceeding the cost of just rebuilding the building. At this moment in time, we can't answer that threshold question, but is something that will be at the center of our discussions with Certis and PHA and the staff team that is working on this developing therefore developing and implementing a stabilization plan will require some additional time and uh it will require uh buyin by the district court, the receiver, lenders, public funders, MPHA today and all other stakeholders. Once we would get funding in place, we would have to make sure that there's a we before we could get funding in place, we have to figure out what the budget would be and what the repairs we would be given we have answered that threshold question that the buildings are worth being saved. And then we would go through contracting, bidding, and redevelopment and rehab until the project is completed. Throughout this process, CPAD's role is to help coordinate with our partners, monitor progress, and help identify funding solutions that preserve affordable housing while improve improving living living conditions for the residents. Our goal is not to address today's issues, but the position for Heritage Park's long-term success, and that will take time. Number six, another important piece of this effort involves understanding the public infrastructure public the public the property's infrastructure. Public works maintains records related to the public infrastructure but does not possess the comprehensive engineering assessment for the entire site of Heritage Park. We are working as staff to identify those documents from um the property owner including engineering reports and technical assessments that were that were um conducted over years um uh before the development and over the years of the development. Uh those would not have been into the city's hands by the end of July. Uh we will be uh collecting those and um those that are public we will share with the council. the receiver who has been working very diligently and transparently with the city staff has indicated a willingness to authorize the release of all the reports allowing for everybody to take a look at what's going on at Heritage Park. So, we appreciate that. Um, it's also important for us to distinguish between private property issues. um we've discussed and the responsibility of the public infrastructure. Public works continues to maintain streets, sidewalks, bike facilities, storm water infrastructure, lighting, fire hydrants that surround Heritage Park. Recent work includes ADA pedestrianization improvements on Van White Boulevard, plan roadway um resurfacing, which I believe is happening right as we speak, storm water maintenance, LED lighting upgrades, and routine inspections for all fire hydrants. These public assets will remain in good operating condition and will continue to be maintained independently of work occurring on the residential property. One of the most common concerns identified during inspection involves moisture intrusion and the conditions can that can contribute to mold. Regulatory services addresses the underlying housing code violations that created these conditions, including water intrusion, damaged building materials, deteriorating building components, and other habitability concerns. Inspectors continue issuing correction orders and verify repairs. Current enforcement activities remains publicly available through the city's rental property violations dashboards to provide trans further transparency throughout this process. The health department is working alongside regulatory services to support residents while long-term building repairs move forward. Current efforts include providing educational resources, connecting families with asthma control supplies such as HEPA vacuums, dehumidifiers, air filters, matric covers, and coordinated weatherization assistance where appropriate. The health department has also been working directly with the receiver and the property management company regarding moisture management. More comprehensive building envelope recommendations will occur after s after after Curtis completes its mold assessment and develops a remediation strategy. [snorts] That brings us to the emergency funding request. The conditions at Heritage Park are to a point where we need to decouple the people who are living there and the property conditions that are happening within uh the development. The development, as you heard, is going the redevelopment of the property, which we answered in the um attempted to answer in the responses to the legislative directive, are going to take time. That's time that people in Heritage Park do not have. We are in front of you today asking for us to redirect $2.5 million of affordable housing trust funds into a um uh towards Heritage Park. And we would want to use those for two eligible uses. And I'm going to primarily focus on what is likely to be used for, which is relocation assistance. We know that uh 212 residential households will take time and money for them to find new safe places to live. It is a process that the city will have to stand up almost akin to an emergency response that we had to the annunciation shooting or the operation metro surge response. We are working collaboratively with the emergency management department to develop that plan and we need resources to help the people at Heritage Park. The other um source of funding that or the other um use of the funding to authorize u that would be authorized with this action would be to help with emergency repairs. We would have a focus on emergency repairs that are only in event of us needing to do those repairs while we're trying to relocate people. um we are not trying to um in invest into Heritage Park if we don't know the threshold question of if this building is worth saving. Um that is a conversation that we need to have calmly and collectively with the multiple funders, the owner, the court about what's happening and we need to make sure that we're taking care of the people at Heritage Park first. The authority that we're seeking today also grants me the um delegates the authority to me to make some decisions around the final scope of work for the use of these funds so that we can move as quickly as possible. We will be working under the direction of the mayor's office, emergency management and um the other funders. We have asked the Minneapolis Public Housing Authority uh to help us uh with the relocation planning and to be a lead agency in uh finding new places for people to live. Uh this is a way for us as a as a staff to move as quickly as we can. The idea here is to have in the next number of days to week uh a plan and then to start administering uh relocations assistance as soon as we have uh a plan to to execute. Um and uh with that I am uh I have a heavy heart being in front of you today about what we're asking for because it is not the city's sepeds or the city's uh it is not our typical course of work to have to rescue a project uh like Heritage Park and um I think it is important for from a staff perspective to communicate to you about how focused we are for the people that are at Heritage Park and how this is uh a very unique situation. It will have a consequence on the affordable housing trust fund. Uh but it is more important for us to meet the needs of the people that are in these conditions now than it is for us to um discuss uh affordable housing production later this year. Um, and with that, along with the staff that are in the room, I'm open to answer any questions you may have. >> Thank you, Director Hansen. And then members will go into discussion. So, if you'd like to speak, please get in Q. First, we have in Q, Council Member Rainbow. >> Thank you, Chair. Uh, I'm I have some questions about slide seven. If you want to call that up, please. So, it looks like uh as a city we've invested uh 2.5 or excuse me uh $4.3 million in the last four years in this private sector project. >> Yep. >> And now uh with this additional 2.5 would be 6.8 almost $7 million. Does this stop the bleeding? Are we going to continue that? That's about $2 million a year we're giving this project. And I'm not saying it's not needed. Don't don't get me wrong. >> Yeah. Chair Chowry, uh, Council Member Rainville, um, uh, it's the chart the table might be a little confusing. $4.3 million was the initial investment of the city back in the early 2000s. So that's in deferred that's in a deferred loan. The articulation of um of investments in 22 to 26, uh, those are individual yearly contributions. It is not uncommon for a affordable housing a mixed income affordable housing development to need um to go back to public agencies for additional resources. Uh we were hoping that this was a way to effectively um address the problem the getting units turned. We were noticing that more and more of the units were vacant because they weren't habitable. And so we're trying to get them back in because if you can help uh get a occupied unit one, you have an occupied housing unit in an era in a a time when people need safe housing and you get revenue to help with the stability of this development. Um so that's the rationale between behind the investments we made in 22, 23, and 25. The $2.5 million does not stop the bleeding. the $2.5 million gives us resources where we might where we're gonna potentially we'll have to ask Henipin County MPHA and others if they can help fund it as well. Those those convers it's a very fluid situation so I'm not able to to um talk about uh whether or not we're successful with that yet. But the $2.5 million is to address the living conditions of the people that are there after which there is a full conversation about what should happen at Heritage Park. And that's a full recapapitalization of Heritage Park. And that's that'll be in the tens of millions of dollars. And in that there's there's potential requests from public entities for funding. The $5.125 million that comes from from Minnesota housing is contemplated as one of those sources for the major rehab of um of Heritage Park. But at this point in time, we're just trying to settle what the where the people are and how the people are living and then have those conversations because it'll be very complicated. like to talk talk about Heritage Park right now seems to be like constructing a three-dimensional puzzle and we need to make sure that we're doing that thoughtfully and you know being mindful of the public investment and what's the appropriate public investment if any when it comes to Heritage Park but we can't do that on the backs of the people that are living there now. >> Well, and thank you for saying that the people come first because of course that's I'm sure all of us share that concern. Uh, another question I have for finances. How much does the Minneapolis Public Housing Authority, you say they have operating and capital repair support ongoing, what what do they put into this housing project? Like a yearly figure or total in the last four years. >> Chair Chowry, uh, Council Member Rainville, we did not have that specific number to put into the response. We will follow up with you in an administrative response with that number. >> Okay. Well, well, thank you and uh I'll be voting for this today. >> Thank you. Next, we have in Q is Council Member Warren. >> Thank you, Chair. I greatly appreciate um appreciate. Thank you um Director Hansen for the um um attempt at the delivery of the legislative directive that um I submitted earlier um asking about the current status of the housing inspections and other regulatory activity at Heritage Park. um past, current, and future resident outreach efforts. Uh summary and coordination efforts between the city MPHA receiver and um the current property manager online maintenance. I wanted to go back to where um we are talking about the rental licensing with um Heritage Park. How was a rental license issued in 2025 and what was the reason for removal of that license in 2019? Just so that this information here goes on the record. Can I get somebody to answer that question publicly for me please? >> Chair Chowry, uh, Council Member Warren, thank you for the question. I'm going to defer to Director Velasquez about that. >> Thank you kindly, sir. Good afternoon, Chair Shri, council members. I'm Enrique Velasquez, the director of regulatory services. >> Can you bring your mic down just a little bit? >> Yes, ma'am. >> Yes, thank you. >> I am a little bit shorter than the director Hansen. Um, so the question, how is the rental license issued in 2025 and what led up to the removal of the rental license that was previously in place? So for all intents and purposes, the land itself is owned by Minneapolis Public Housing Authority. So when our rental licensing inspectors conduct our analysis and we look for rental licensing and look to see whether property requires rental licensing, it appears like Minneapolis public housing authority even though it's McCor McCormick Baron that owns the buildings, the structures on top of public housing authority land. So, we had been working for quite some time with the public housing authority to gain rental licensing for all of their portfolio and hadn't reached that point until the state legislature made a change in 2024 requiring all property owners that engage in rental of housing dwelling units to hold a valid rental license within the jurisdiction in which they operate. That's what led and the effective data on that was January of 2025. That's what led us to license that entire portfolio in 2025. And when the public housing authority provided us with their entire roster of their properties and locations, this location was absent from their roles. That's when we saw that there was a gap and went back to McCorm Baron and uh licensed them. >> Okay. Thank you for that. Um and what were the conditions um based on the inspection report summary that was provided and also presented at the community member meetings that I held at Summit Academy OIC. there is an inspection report that um goes along with how rental licenses are issued based on property inspections. So being that we know and understand what the current conditions are and the the drastic measures and means that we have to now take and embark upon as a city that these things did not occur overnight. that it took years for the decay. It took years for the mold to be as prevalent as it is. I am definitely trying to understand why did it take little old measly me to come here and sit on this council and be elected for individuals to pay attention to the needs of the residents at Heritage Park. So, how was that license issued and instrumented? Help me understand. Thank you. Certainly, Chair Chowry, Council Member Warren, as as we thought this was public housing authority, the agreement with public housing authority in response to a prior uh lawsuit that was settled was that the city would handle complaints. So, we would receive complaints through 311. We were not conducting proactive rental license inspections at that time. So as we received these complaints, we would go and inspect them and pass the information to the public housing authority as well as to Mor McMarin. >> So help me understand that and and please forgive me um colleagues cuz I I need to hear this very clear. You said you went and and conducted an inspection and then passed that information on to Minneapolis public housing authority. Sir, are you explaining to me that the city of Minneapolis had no jurisdictional oversight over ensuring that those buildings were par and not subpar? Like you you're doing an inspection on a property and you see that it is in deplorable condition and you pass that information on to somebody else, there's no action that happens [clears throat] at that time. Is that what we're saying here? When we conduct the complaint inspection, we evaluate the validity of the complaint to verify that yes, it's founded or no, it's not. If it's founded, we pass that information over to the public housing authority for resolution. As we believe that they were the property owner and the responsible party just as we would for market rate or any other um property, we would pass it on to the management for resolution. and it was their action since they also have their own inspections protocol to follow through to resolution but we did not have any sort of authority to go in and verify that the issue was resolved. >> So here in the city of Minneapolis we have a rental tiering system. So knowing that there were a number of complaints that came in prior to when the license was removed and then reinstated and what have you the cases. So, what tiering was this property issued a license at at the time that a a tiered license was issued? And how many of those units in 2025 up until current has Minneapolis walked into? [snorts] How many inspections actually have been performed? Uh, council member, I don't have that information readily available, but we can certainly respond to that question. >> Okay. So, this is an incomplete delivery of my legislative directive request. And I'm just going to say that the whole intent and purpose of me putting this legislative directive out here as I was beginning to dig deep into the issues that were unfolding at Heritage Park was so that there was a track record of understanding and that people in our city departments and everywhere else was being held accountable to their positions of authority as it pertained to what was happening at Heritage park. So, um I believe my colleagues talked about incomplete delivery or delayed delivery. I understand the means of where we are now. I also understand that we can't go backwards. But in us going forward, right, and us implementing direct change and accountability for every public dollar that holds an assignment here in the city of Minneapolis that comes from every taxpayer. I want to ensure that there is thorough inspections that are done on every property that is out here in existing before rental licensing is issued and that individuals and residents are not overlooked in these circumstances. That the relationship between CPED and regulatory services is as tight as a frog's bottom because right now I don't see that existing. And that is why this right here is not just upsetting for me, but it is damaging to my community. That we are revisiting these harms again. That the pain and perpetuation of of marginalization and distrust and damage to families continues to cycle itself over and over and over again while we play a game of plausible deniability. I apologize to the residents of my ward because now as I'm sitting in this seat, it makes me feel like I'm opposing everything that I ran for because I'm having to backtrack behind people and go do subsequent inspections myself because I can't trust MPA and I can't trust the city of Minneapolis and regulatory services that I have to show up on the site while they're cutting open buildings so I can make sure that the truth is being told to the residents of the city of Minneapolis and the constituents of my ward that I have to walk through buildings and climb stairwells where there's no heat because that's what my constituents have to go through on a day-to-day basis and and that they've been going through. And I sit at a community meeting with about 80 or so of my residents last night and listen to them tell stories about how they're the only people living in a in a 8-unit building by themselves and their homes are riddled with rats and they're being held hostage in their bedrooms by rats and they're coming out of their stoves and their ceilings are hanging. and they have called and they've reached out a number of times, not just since I've been here, but way before a long time ago. Then I hear people sit and say how they've lost their housing voucher and been retaliated against for complaining about the living conditions, for complaining about the safety and the sanctity of a place that they should call home. a door that they should be able to close to shut out the ills of the world and feel safe. That they are endangered and entrapped WITH THEIR SHOULDERS PENT UP AGAINST THE wall with nowhere else to go because they're low income, moderate or no income. that they are punished and reproved for not having the means and feel like this is what they're deserving of. This is sickening. This hurts me extremely bad and I know it hurts the constituents of this ward. It should hurt every taxpayer here in the city of Minneapolis to know that there have been people right here where we say we stand up for our neighbors. I had three different translators there last night. mother sitting there saying about how they have gone back and forth and back and forth and back and forth to the hospital and telling people at the management company and telling Minneapolis public housing authority and calling 311 with the city for years, people with cancer now cancer diagnosis, people who are in there currently on oxygen machines, people who are signing ROIs with me and if I can walk in there and see this. I'm trying to understand. Is it just Pearl's VISION OR IS EVERYBODY ELSE got the same one I got? Because this is disrespect. It's inhumane. I'm fighting for the 2.5 million because you know what? The relocation of the 686 residents at Heritage Park needs to be treated with the most delicate care ever known to man. I've walked in those units and gone in to see a lot of those residents and I know no one else has been there but me and ain't nobody else coming. I know that I want people treated with dignity and respect before they're counted on a sheet of paper like a number. I want you to hear and examine each and every one of their cries and answered questions and give them the same respect that you'd give your own child, parent, or whoever it is that's valuable in your life. You better treat him the exact same way or better or I promise it'll be hell to tell the captain I'm north side and I'm gonna be there. This is just the worst of the worst in my ward. Just the tip of the iceberg. But I suggest somebody clean it up quick or you gonna get sick and tired of me. The end. Thank you, Council Member Warren. Next is Council Member Wanley. >> Thank you, uh, Chair Chowgerie. Um, again, I just want to echo Council Member Warren's leadership on this, um, issue and some of the things that you raised. I'm also struggling to comprehend based off of uh the presentation that we just received from staff and also I know Mayor Fry released a press statement affirming what we also heard today that um the city only became aware of the deplorable conditions at Heritage Park um starting last year. And as you highlighted, Council Member Warren, this didn't happen overnight. Um there are numerous 311 reports that residents have submitted over the years documenting and trying to bring attention to the horrible um and just unacceptable conditions that they've been living in. And I'm also trying to get some understanding um and this leads to my first question of and I had to go back and look at our at our actual existing housing code. So, can someone if it's CPAD or regulatory services affirm to me that are we saying that nothing in our housing code I'm looking specifically around director's determination of non-compliance um and it lists in this section um the different options that the director themselves can take um or even give to council when a rental or building or dwelling unit fails to meet our licensing standards. Um, and in no way, shape, or form should most of these units have met that licensing standards. And that's a sub next question that I'm I'm going to get to. But I'm I'm trying to get a a sense of are we saying or based off of you all's feedback that nothing in our housing code could be enforced prior to 2025 when it came to Heritage Park. And while you're mulling that over, I'm just going to highlight too, for instance, there is one piece here where the director of regulatory services uh when they find um a rental dwelling uh that does not meet the standards set forth in section 244.1920 um that essentially the license holder or applicant can be given 60 days to correct the defects. I think we're long past 60 days. And then also the director could have the ability to proceed immediately for denial, non-renewal, re revocation or suspension of that license based of on this section. And I'm not seeing an exemption in our code anywhere for public housing. But I at least just want to get a sense of basically was this not able to be applied prior to 2025. >> Chair Chowry, Council Member Wanssley. Um, essentially that's correct. Since the public housing authority held no rental license, we could not move forward with many of those different elements that you speak of of the director's determination of non-compliance because they were not um required to hold a rental license with the city and were outside of our jurisdiction. >> So there's nothing that we could So that meant there was no inspections being carried out by the city though we were receiving 311 reports. We were completing complaint-based inspections when we received them through 311. >> Uhhuh. >> And then passed the information over based off of our inspection of those complaints. Those were passed over to the public housing authority and then public housing authority held the responsibility to remedy those different situations and conduct their own inspections. So, as the oversight body of MPHA, um I know they report directly to HUD, but in that instance, were there no corrective measures outside of submitting complaints over to MA that you all could take up when we saw or when you learned that corrective actions were not being um made as it pertains to up improving the conditions of those units. Uh, Chair Chowry, Council Member Winsley, uh, essentially that's correct. We could pass the complaints over. It was their responsibility to take action. As we received further complaints, it became a the cycle. With that, I am going to note a staff memo followup on this because I do recall we actually were sued. Uh I I recall a lawsuit where we were su were sued because of the city's lack of inspections on public housing units and was found that we should have been inspecting them. Um and this was way prior to 2025. So if there's already a legal precedence that was determined that we should have been doing this way prior to 2025. I want to understand there what's the discrepancy here. So, I don't know if the city attorney has any understanding right off the bat that you could refer to or if you can give this as a staff follow-up memo, which regardless I will note, >> but I'll give a point to the CEO unless are you director Velasquez aware of this law. >> I would I would love to get that in writing though. So, we should get that in a memo. >> Yeah. Yes. I'm aware of the Mirabella case which >> the outcome of that was that we would do the complaint inspections for Minneapolis public housing authority because prior to that point we did not conduct any inspections on MA properties >> and what year was dated for that? >> The lawsuit was 2021 and I believe the settlement was late 21 to 22. So we do have a legal settlement that potentially in 2021, so ahead of 2025, that gave us the ability to inspect MPHA's units. So it sounds like again some followup on that of then what why were what was the issue then? Still, >> we were authorized to do complaint-based inspections, not the proactive inspections, not to fold them into our rental licensing structure, only complaint based through 311. >> So complaint, so meaning then you will only do you still receive a complaint and then you just relay that complaint to MPHA, I'm assuming. Then under that >> we would receive the complaint through 311 inspectors. or complaint based inspectors would go on site and evaluate whether the issue was founded or not, report the issue to the Minneapolis Public Housing Authority uh with an order to correct and then the issue was passed to the public housing authority to follow through and resolve the issue. Do you know between 2021, again you already have the figures for 2025, but between 2021 when that settlement was finalized in 2025, how many complaints were filed? >> Anecdotally, I can say that it was very few complaints were received >> through specifically through 311. Uh that's something that I wanted to take a look at further because there were no dollars invested into outreach and engagement efforts to try and u make sure people were aware that they had the system and that was available to them. >> And our staff I'm just want to make sure tenants aren't the only ones that can make complaints. Correct. >> Correct. Community members could also make complaints. >> The reason why again like knowing that this isn't just something that happened overnight. We actually have a staff member that sits on the board of the Minneapolis Public Housing Authority where I'm assuming that could have been an opportunity either for our staff who was also made aware of these conditions at Heritage Park also the MPHA commissioners themselves. Were there no complaints made by those staff members or commissioners related to Heritage Park? >> I'm not able to answer that question. There are no feathers are >> I can't answer >> or director port I know you have been the member or director it seems like Hansen >> chair Chowry uh council member Wansley um one of the challenges we had as a city staff team was getting information out of the owner about property conditions um and so we had been working you know while uh regulatory services was able to start inspecting in 2025. We were not got we were not given the information that we needed to understand the property conditions in order to make a a a cogent assessment of what was going on at at Heritage Park. We have learned more in the last six months with the receiver than the collective six years prior to that. And that's the that's the challenge that we had over the years um is trying to figure out what's going on. So now that we know what's happening, we need to act. So, you all didn't receive any anecdotal information even prior to as staff? >> Um, council member or chair chowry, council member Wanssley, we we have we were receiving we were receiving um information about the conditions in Heritage Park to the extent of how bad it was. We did not have that technical data until we started insight. But again, I think where why I'm asking for the representation on MPHA because within that we're saying it's kicking the can down to MPHA and saying that they should have resolved these matters. We have staff and we have a board that this council appoints on MPHA the commissioners. No one raised complaints formally to staff especially in known inspections. >> Uh um council member Chadri, council member Wanley. Uh so the way I would would say that is if we if we talk to MHA, MHA has affordable housing units and MPHA units within Heritage Park, but they do not own Heritage Park that is owned by McCormack Baron Sal Baron Salazar. So we were getting, as director Velasquez said, we're getting complaints. They were res responding to those complaints, but we did not know the totality of the conditions of the property until we were able to get inspections and then get information from from service as we've been working over the last number of months. >> This is just again a a complete oversight that I not getting at the core from my understanding. I'm asking for a complaint uh MPA commissioner or the staff could have made a complaint using the existing tool that we had given by that legal presidents in 2022. why that wasn't enough for staff to also go in and say, "Oh," or commission themselves to do the essentially what council member Warren did and to use a simple phone camera and say, "Oh, this is really crappy." >> Yep. >> So, I'm assuming that did not happen. That's the question. Moving forward to 2025, then getting to the tearing piece. Um, looking on the city's website, I saw nearly every rental license in Heritage Park had a tier one rental license, meaning the best, except for 20 units that were tier 2 and six units that were tier three. But again, the other 200 units there received a top tier license from the city. Someone please walk me through how you all came to designate these as tier one. Chair Chowry, uh, Council Member Bonsley, I'm April Bogart. I'm the director of inspection services. uh when we the tiering system uses a two-year look back at at a history of violations in order to determine the tier and I believe that the majority of the properties at Heritage Park were given a 1D tiering which is a our default when we don't have enough information to assign any other tier. In some cases we had conducted enough complaint inspections that we had enough of a history. That's why you see a two in some cases, but I believe most of them are a 1D, meaning default. >> So, with your tearing process, does that not automatically entail a inspection? So, you can verify yourself? >> It does not. The the taring process involves a two-year look back. And in this case, we did not have a 2-year history of inspection. But knowing that this case you didn't even get the chance to quote unquote inspect the properties um in 2025 knowing the unique conditions that you will only have one year to look back. You did not do automatic inspections. >> We did not. >> Okay. And that said, I will name as someone who has been vocal about the city's tearing process and how it allowed slum landlords to just scape through and get rental licenses and allow tenants to live in deplorable conditions. Hearing that makes me question further, you know, how we're approaching other units that we've deemed tier one and just our overall tearing system. Um, next my other major concern around this is can someone speak to why are we giving the receiver who has also fumbled in the handling of this property? Why are we giving them $2.5 million um in go or in host of a stabilization plan as opposed to using the city's tenant relocation assistance program, which for my newer colleagues, that program allows in conditions like this that we're seeing for the city to front money to relocate stabilized housing conditions for um tenants living in properties that have been condemned by the city and are not meeting up to our housing code and then we then go after the landlord to recoup the cost. >> We are now giving this money over to the receiver directly who have been able to do this proactively and have failed to do so. So now we're having to come in. Why are we not using our own program? >> Chair Chowry, uh Council Member Wans, good question. One of the things I failed to mention during the presentation, um it was um a miss on my hand. There are two eligible users of the funding. There is um there is certis financial as a receiver for repairs and rehabilit rehabilitation costs for um uh Heritage Park and those would be related to something that's an emergency situation that we're looking at. We will be using funding for a relocation service provider to your point that for the relocation services we are going to be working out that plan with emergency management and the city apparatus Henipin County and others. We do not believe that there is funding there's revenues to reclaim funding. We're being very honest with you right now. Um, uh, Heritage Park operates at a like a deficit of $200,000 a month. So, reclaiming that funding is probably less likely. We will use the tools we have if we can um to recapture that. But the the idea is Certis would not do the relocation and I did not make that clear >> and we couldn't because I also know under the tenant relocation program it allows us ability to also sue and litigate for recouping of cost. So we couldn't sue the original property owners of McCormack to recoup that cost. Then >> uh Chair Chowry, Council Member Wanley, that is a legal question that I do not feel comfortable to answer. >> Okay. So with that, I will name some of the outstanding cuz I realize we have a number of people in Q. Of course, I'm more than happy to support us taking action to get um relocation of the the 200 plus residents who have never had should have never had to suffer under the conditions that they're living under in the first place. And it's a fumble on the city side, the MPHA, everyone involved who allowed this to go forward for many years. Just a massive fumbling. Um so, of course, I support the action. I'll be working with council member Warren and also following up and um definitely harassing staff to figure out two pieces. I would love to see the city on the piece of the re tendant relocation assistance program and to see us use that as a tool as opposed to giving it to literally the player that is putting us in this predicament in the first place. And secondly, I would also like to note maybe this is a staff followup. I don't understand why we can't use contingency funding also as a source for the first half of this year. We constantly heard about um all the impacts that would be made to the affordable housing trust as we kept making cuts to it to respond to operation metro surge. So I don't understand why we're not using contingency funding which this falls under a credible and eligible um proposal of an emergency expense that we did not foresee as a city. So I would love to also be able to work with council member Warren on exploring that ahead of Thursday. So I just want to note that for the public record. I I can't even say thank you, Council Member Warren. Again, just echoing your leadership also for blowing the whistle on this. Um, you did what many staff who got paid tons of money to do failed to do. And you also demonstrated the power of council using our oversight authority, be it with a phone, with going and doing door knocks, with connecting with our residents and seeing how they're living repeatedly, repeatedly, and bringing attention to it. And while it might be uncom unc uncomfortable, many of us have faced push back, pressures to silence ourselves when we've done these things. This is just a testament to your leadership and your commitment to your constituents and specifically black folks who shouldn't be given the worst and deserve quality, affordable, and dignified housing. And I hope in the midst of all of what we're doing, that is what we're going to get to. Not only just for Heritage Park, but for every single resident. So, I just again want to echo kudos to you. Thank you, Council Member Wanley. I'm Nexon Q. Um, I just wanted to start off by saying that I can't express how angry I am right now. Um, and that pales in comparison to the grief, the anger, the frustration that I've seen my council colleague go through and pales in comparison to the pain of the constituents in there. I think it's really important to share with the public the things that are going on in Heritage Park and what that's looked like. There's there's mold everywhere. It's on the walls. Council member Warren shared a lot of those details with me and my team. There's broken plumbing. There's there's clothing matted to the floor. There's people sitting by themselves in a one-unit building. There's people worried about their health due to the mold. There's holes in the ceiling. And the list just goes on and on and on. I think the video that Council Member Warren posted on her official side, Facebook, does a really good job of illustrating just in part how deplorable and undignified those conditions are. And there's no way there's no way that that could happen in just a single year. >> This is a compounding issue for sure. Um, I have a lot of a lot of frustration with how we're proceeding. Um, I am supportive of getting the help that needs to be given to the Heritage Park residents, but I am concerned in the way that we are moving about how human- centered this will be in caring for the residents that are there. Um, we're having a discussion about a $2.5 million allocation on the fly essentially because this was brought to us last minute highly irregular. But I I and I say that not to blame anybody, but to say that like that puts this council in a difficult position by the administration. It is extremely difficult position to be in. Um, one thing that I'll just note right up at the top, there needs to be better communication between all of us here in the city, city council, mayor's office, and our departments. And I'm not seeing that happen currently. And the place that I can point to is it's extremely frustrating that we have this last minute item coming before us and there's a press release sent out by the mayor's office. We haven't even had a briefing or a chance to go through the legislative directive. And quote, in that press release, it says, "The 20-year-old complex fell into disrepair last year." That's just not true. And it gives me pause on the information that we are sending out to constituents before we get to have a conversation together, before council members who have to vote on $2.5 million to help residents. our ability to stand up and say that we actually did our job to do our due diligence on this matter. So, a couple questions that I have kind of going into this. Director Hansen, you said that there are 286 residents that will need to be re relocated. Is that accurate? >> Chair Chery, the best of our information, 686 residents in 212 households. >> 212 households. holds 686 residents according to uh the receiver. >> How many of those units are in disrepair? Chair Chowry. Um, I can't give you the the spec precise data of what the levels of conditions are, but we're to the point where in order for us to really make an assessment of what repairs need to happen, we have to make sure that the the people there have place to be and then we can continue that work. Um, that's going to take some time. Um, we've had um mold inspectors out last week. We're giving a second opinion. Uh this week we had anrustruct the certis brought out an instructional um engineer last on yesterday and today we had our building official out there uh shadowing and then officials from development services shadowing that work. Uh regulatory services has been shadowing the um the mold inspections. We're continuing to learn more about the conditions. We're trying to answer that threshold question of is it worth saving the buildings or not? We have not answered that question and until we have that question we don't know what the strategy would be for Heritage Park and the buildings and so we want to decouple the people from the buildings. >> So since we are relocating individuals does that mean we are revoking the rental license? >> Chair Chowry we are not to the point where we have made that decision. Um everything's on the table. I've been focused on standing up the response for relocation and then these those other things would come after that. We're focused uh my conversations have been with director Ser about how to structure what a response would look like as you can imagine for 212 individual households all with their unique needs. Um we will need to have a force of of staff that would work on it in a coordinated way with our colleagues at the Minups Public Housing Authority in Henipin County um to see what we can do to make sure that they're getting there and then those things would come later. As I said, this is a very fluid situation, so not everything is answered at this point in time. >> I really recommend we find a way where we can both decouple the people from this and help them and revoke that license or at least not give them a 1D tiering status. >> Understood. How um do you know of the of the units that are there at their status of being condemned or condemnable? >> Chair Chadry, we're trying to get that data now. >> Is there any preliminary information? >> Um I'm a lay person. It's bad. >> It's bad. Um, and so that's why we're we're engaging with regulatory services, but also the building official about the conditions of the building. Um, the technical reports, the um structural engineering reports that will be coming out this week uh to get an assessment of of of whether or not we're at that decision point. Do you know how many of the individuals that live here and will be relocated are um residents that have section 8 vouchers? >> Chair Chry, I don't have this precise number of section 8 voucher holders. I know there's 200 um there are 200 public housing authority units within the within it and I'm just going to see about 160 with additional with about a additional 160 units with section 8 right >> okay I'll I'll ask for a followup too just for the precise number because I think it's important for us to understand the number of participants that should have gotten the care everyone should have gotten the from the Minneapolis Public Housing Authority, the city of Minneapolis, Certis, and the Property Management Company. Um, did you ask MHA to come here today to be here to answer questions to this body? >> Uh, Chair Chowry, we did ask for their presence in the meeting and they declined to come. >> Did they give a reason for why they declined to come? >> What was the reason? >> No, they did not. They did not. I do not have the reason. They did not give a reason for why. >> I do not have the reason. >> I think that's deeply concerning that Minneapolis Public Housing Authority is not here to answer questions about what's going on at Heritage Park since there are tenants that use Section 8 vouchers. And this is on Minneapolis Public Housing Authority land. and all of the complaint-based inspections, as we learned, were getting passed off to Minneapolis Public Housing Authority. I'll also share, I think there's a lot of time between 2025 and 2026 where we are where I think a complaint-based inspection could have indicated if you went into that building that there was something completely wrong going on. And I guess I have a very quick question if the council member of the ward will allow me to ask her. Certis is obviously not in the room, but you've had communications with all stakeholders. I'm really straining to understand what their role has been in this and I think we're h we're failing to fully understand their role in the dereliction of duty and the property. Is there any insight you could provide? >> At this time, um, Minneapolis Public Housing Authority is not interested in taking the lead on the relocation of individuals being being removed from there into additional housing. And um also Curtis also sent me a message and told me that they did not want to take the lead on any housing or relocation um at this time. And I think just being quite frank, I'm going to say this. You know, everybody has different interest in this project and in this role where my interest is in the constituents and the safety of the families in there. Um, you got to kind of look at this situation like this. A property is in receiverhip. If the if there's no longer anyone living there, then is there a need for somebody to receive anything? there's not a necessity. So, they have a different vested interest and they're saying, "Oh, yeah, it's bad, but it's not that bad." But it's bad. And I'm going to tell you from someone who has knocked on every door in Heritage Park more than once. >> Yeah. I'll just share with you director and just everyone here that's a part of this. I find it just deeply striking that Curtis did not reach out to the city of Minneapolis as things were falling apart for us to help in addressing this sooner. >> Uh Chair Chowri, I do want to clarify we we have been in almost daily conversations with Certis. They have reached out to us. Um we have been working with them since they took over. I want to say that it's been an absolute change in information sharing since Curtis has taken over from the former from the owner of MBS. Like I don't want to paint Curtis as being somebody that wasn't proactive. They've been very transparent. They've been very open to us. They've shared all the information. I I shared earlier about some of the technical reports that we're trying to uncover. They're going to, you know, sign off to make sure that those are public. Um, so we've had a very like constructive working relationship. They are in a challenging position. They are a receiver from the court. They have a duty, fiduciary duty to that role. Um, and what we're we're trying to do is work collaboratively to help them figure out how to solve this complicated process um, and project. But um, I would say that the the working relationship is strong with Curtis and the city of Minneapolis. Thank you. I appreciate that information. They took over earlier in >> December of 2025. Okay. >> Um so in this uh action we're delegating authority to you for future financial actions. Craig, who are we delegating it from? Um, Chair Chowry, in typical city council fashion, that would be something we would come back to you for allocation of funding for contracting and that sort of thing. Uh, the delegation of this authority would give it we would um do it through an administrative process. Uh, we'd still have um an approval process. It's called a director's report um as opposed to a request for council action. Uh this is similar to what the authority that you uh delegated to me during the uh resilience the resiliency fund uh earlier in the operation metro surge. Um we're asking for that delegation uh so that we can move quick. >> Okay. Thank you. The thing that gives me a little bit of pause on that is I think we lose a necessary touch point on public communication >> and place for for us to discuss. Um, I just would like some contemplation on how we would go about that. And I'll also ask following this meeting, your department and the COO's office work on scheduling briefings with council members so we can continue to have a discussion of what's going on again like we got the information about these RCAs last night. So, we need to have further communication. >> Yeah. Chair Chowry, uh I will um acknowledge if you grant us this delegation, you will be responding to the full council on all the actions that we're doing. We're going to continue to work with council member Warren on the relocation plan. Um she is a very uh strong partner in this work uh trusted by the community. We we need to continue uh to maintain that working relationship um with her and her office. Uh and as far as communications much like the resiliency plan we communicating to you and then um I will you know apologize again this is not the situation that CPED likes to work under uh for the last you know even in the last week since agenda setting for this council for this committee meeting. um the conditions have changed up until, you know, through the weekend. And so we have been kind of working as best as we can with the information we know and it's not something that we hope to be a um a pattern for us, but we do appreciate that uh um that the council needs to know, but we've been working as hard as we can just to get to the point where we can assess what the problem is, >> identify some resources, and then get to planning to uh assist people at Heritage Park. >> Great. Will you commit to reaching out for briefings? >> Absolutely. >> Thank you. Um I'm almost done here and then I'm gonna pass it to Council Member Chavez. Uh I'll just start by saying that this is an entire system breakdown I over many years. And I think a piece of what needs to come to light is who is accountable for what for this to happen. uh because the public deserves to know, the residents here do deserves to know and there's a level of justice that needs to be brought and there hasn't been anyone that has taken fullthroatated accountability, but there needs to be because this has gone entirely wrong and we need to understand how this happened. Um the last thing that I will say is we should look into how we can recapture funding >> for relocation assistance. We need to we cannot in this type of budget situation as a city of Minneapolis dole out $2.5 million cannibalize the affordable housing trust fund that we use to make projects happen. And I think I'm interested in exploring what council member Wanley brought Wanley brought forward of the city attorney's ability to recapture funding through litigation if necessary. I think McCormack Baron has funds on assets that they that he owes to the taxpayers of the city of Minneapolis if we're about to dole something out. And I'll just say plant the seed that I am interested in us if we can make a recapture plan and just in general for looking into the contingency funds. Um because I'm not interested in cannibalizing the affordable housing trust fund because McCormick Baron created an entire dereliction of duty and now we're fronting the bill. Council member Chavez. >> Uh thank you, Chair Chery. Um yeah, I have a few questions as well. Uh, director, the mayor's press release said that the 20-year-old building complex fell into disrepair last year and a court appointed receiver took ownership of the property. Uh, do you agree that this just fell into disrepair last year? >> Yeah. >> Uh, Chair Chowry, Council Member Chavez, uh, the way I read that sentence was a little different. Is the 20-year-old project fell in disrepair last year. They there's a court appointed a receiver Um, maybe I read that wrong, but >> I'll read the mayor. >> But I would I do not agree that fell disrepair last year. >> I just wanted to make sure because I'm hearing that this has been go ongoing for many years and I want to make sure that our staff >> is aware that this isn't just an issue last year and I would be concerned if that was the opinion of staff. Okay. [snorts] Thank you. Um, the city of Minneapolis said inspectors conducted buildings building by building inspections of more than 400 units beginning in November 2025. Is that accurate? >> Is that true? Uh, Council Member [snorts] Shri, Council Member Chavez. Uh, that would be the inspections done by regulatory services >> through the chair. Uh, council member Chavez, that is true. We began inspections in October of 2025. >> Okay, thank you. So, October 2025, even earlier. Okay, great. So, I guess nine months, I thought it was eight months, but nine months later, we now have this presentation because my colleague, Council Warren, used her phone to blow the whistle. Why did it take this many months later to come before the council to let us know this issue was happening? >> Chair Chowry, Council Member Chavez, that's a great question to ask. So, the city had been working with the former owner, McCorm, and not very productively. I'll be honest with you. Um they had noticed they they notified the city that there was conditions um substandard conditions at Heritage Park and we were working on it and we needed verification. uh since the receiver took over in December, there's been a flood of information and so we had been working towards what you know this complex project of can you repair in place can you um [snorts] uh make improvements you know what's the what is first the the you know the uh extent of the improvements that need to be made knowing that there's substandard conditions in Heritage Park and then can you do that with folks in place or not. As as recently as two weeks ago, for example, council member, um we were looking at a one of the buildings that had six units that was fully vacant and that was being used potentially as a as a turn and then you'd move people into that building and and clear up some of the buildings. Um uh fix some of the other buildings, move them back and forth, kind of do some shuffling of of tenants. Um at that time when they started re looking at that building that's when they covered uh mold behind the walls. They found um water infiltrating the windows. They found failures in the windows. So at that point in time that stopped that condition. Uh the the path that we were taking with um with respect to the work with with Curtis was deploying the 5.125 million working on a short-term near-term um approach to it which would be like what's the emergency you know the building envelope the seal the the roofing the siding and um and unit turns. That was what we were working on until we discovered uh the mold infilt in infestation into um behind the the the um behind the the the walls. And so from that point in time kind of changed. So we were on our we were working towards, you know, [snorts] conversations and requests for for for funding for the major plan with um a discussion about near-term which would have been roofing, siding, and unit turns or roofing furnaces and unit turns uh until last week. And now we're to a point where we're just continuing to learn more. As we learn more, we know more and as we know more, we have to do more. >> A thank you. That's nearly five month nine months ago. Uh what structural changes are being made so this doesn't happen again. >> Uh Council Member Shadri and uh Council Member Chavez, that's another excellent question, too. We're in the crisis mode of this situation and we are thinking about the well-being of the residents of Heritage Park. We are collecting information. We're in the information collecting phase, but now we know we're to a point where we need to, you know, work on relocation. Um, and then we have to figure out what safeguards we need to put in place and do a real analysis of of where where this went south and um see what we can do to make improvements. That has to happen after we fig focus on the well-being of the residents. >> How many will be focused on? Yeah. >> How many complaints were made in 2025? Okay, >> Chair Chowry, Council Member Chavez. Uh, I've looked at Rick Services. They don't know how many complaints were made, but we can look into that. >> We can admit that follow. I think that's really important. >> Um, I just want to say that this case is not isolated. There are many of us have that have many concerns with how inspections happen across the city of Minneapolis. Is there any plan, and this is maybe for Director Velasquez, to increase rental license fees to help us hire more inspectors? Chair Chadri, uh, Council Member Chavez, I'm going to have to defer to Rick Services about the answer to that question through the chair. Uh, Council Member Chavez, Director of Alaska has had to step out. Uh, we are right now having conversations about our rental licensing fees. We did increase rental licensing fees across the board by 10% last year. Um, and those conversations are happening now. I think we need to increase it a lot more if we're going to be able to hire more inspectors across the city. Uh we know particular areas of our city are disproportionately impacted by how inspections are handled. Um does the city have a plan to adjust the city's current tiering system >> through the chair? Yes, we are um we have been embarking on a lengthy process to revise our taring system and that work continues >> and I would hope that this uh case that we're learning about today which is happening across our city in general as well uh is a reminder of how much quicker we have to be working on those steering systems. Uh I guess do we know how many households have been functioning without heat or water this year? there. >> I do not have that information at hand. >> Chair Chowry, Council Member Chavez, I don't believe that we had a water service issue, but I can look at the furnaces. Um, that was something that was on our repair list. >> So, I guess for heat, do we know or no? >> Uh, Chair Chowry, Council Member Chavez, we'll get that. We we'll look into that information. We'll have to ask that from >> I think that's really important if we can't figure out how many homes don't have, you know, basic necessities. That's a concern. Um I guess for staff, why did it take a video from my colleague rather than the city's own inspection process to f force a public conversation around this? >> Uh Chair Chadri, Council Member Chavez, uh members of the committee, that is an excellent point. Uh I was on that tour with the council [snorts] member where she um was able to take that um video. Uh we as a staff were working towards understanding what was going on there. But a picture tells a story of a thousand words. And um that was I think an important part of the story of Heritage Park to bring forward in full color what the conditions are at Heritage Park and whether we as a city decide if that's an acceptable place for people to live or not. And I'm hopeful that we as a city will agree that that is not acceptable conditions. And that is why we're here today answering your questions. >> Uh what is the administration's response to the NAACP's letter? >> Chair Chadri, uh Council Member Chavez, I do not have the official administrative response to the NAACP letter. >> It would be great if we can follow up. >> Um if the city, if we as a body are allocating the affordable housing trust fund, which I think we should be using contingency funding, but I want to be able to have this conversation. If we end up using [clears throat] affordable housing trust fund, is there a commitment from staff to not replenish it with the rental assistance funding that we have from those who were impacted by operation metro surge? >> Chair Chowry, Council Member Chavez, um I want to say to you easy the answer to that question is yes. Um I do want to just be transparent. Uh the way the council has um allocated that funding, $1.8 8 million had a requirement for a higher area median income cap. Uh that is not been accepted by the county. We started having conversations with council member Wanley and her office about that. So you're going to expect to see likely council action so that we can contract that $1.8 million. But there's no expectation for the city or CPED to use that money for backfilling. What will happen is that we will have 2.3 $2.5 million fewer for affordable housing production in 2026. >> Thank you. And that was my hope. I just wanted to ask publicly so we can hold those accountable if that plan changes. Uh I will say that I just want to thank my colleague Council Warren for being relentless in her advocacy for her constituents in W 5. I think it is important that we as a city uh use the tools that we have to support the residents in a heritage park. I think that what I have heard is just deeply concerning. It makes me concerned for what this means for rental units across the city of Minneapolis. There needs to be an audit about how we do inspections in general in the city of Minneapolis because I've had my own experience with some buildings where there's been inspections. Nothing is an issue, but the constituents tell me that there still is issues. And I think that means that there needs to be a complete overhaul on how we do this work. So I just wanted to mention that. Um so thank you Council Warren for bringing this issue to my attention and I'll be supporting this motion today as we head to full council. I hope that there is a better conversation about how what funding stream we could use. I think contingency funding is an adequate use of funding. It's an emergency. Um it's something that we should be using. That way it doesn't have impact on affordable housing stock. So that is a recommendation that I would at least put out there. >> Thank you, Council Member Chavez. Next we have Council Member VTO. >> Thank you, Chair. Um [clears throat] I first off, I just want to say thank you to Council Member Warren for uh this work. You know, I think you called me maybe an hour before you put the video out on social media and um we probably talked an hour. And so that day when you called, I said, "We got to get to a place of where we're talking about what we're going to do to help the people in Heritage Park." Like, it's cool to have the video and show it, but like what are we going to do? And so, as you know, I was I was a little nervous about the video because I didn't know what we could do as a city in that moment. And I knew how bad it was. So, I'm so happy to see uh right now before us like what we can do as a city and I completely support you. I appreciate how you've built this table of people um to figure out exactly what we all need to do, what what our part is. I I want to encourage you um to continue leading this work because I can hear and see some things happening that happen often when you're a north side council member. others tend to tell you how to do your stuff. And so I really do want you to hold firm to doing things the way that you know you and your constituents want to see them being done. Others have ideas. That's great. But you know better than all of us what those people at Heritage Park need and what they want to see done. You you know what justice looks like to them. They will tell you what kind of justice they want. And so I really am proud of you. I'm so proud that 6 months in, this is where you're at. Like, you're you've come here to work for your constituents. You've come here with a voice for them. That's what they send you here to do. They send you here to be the voice of them. If you fail, you have to face them, not anyone else up here. And so, I'm so proud of you for coming up here and representing your war and represent people at their absolute worst. This is absolutely terrible the way people are living there. And you and I have seen it. We know it. There's always been rumors circulating. There's always been this talk on the north side. Heritage Park is sinking. Buildings are leaning. Like all of these things that people have been talking about for years. You can drive down Olsson Highway and see the roof of some of these buildings. There was one that had a fire and was just kind of sitting for years. Like we live there, so we know and we we know what people have been talking about. And so I'm I am I'm just so proud of what you've done with um such a terrible thing and and trying to fix it. And I want to make sure that you remain the leader in fixing it and that you lead not only um this council but also the staff and the administration. I also don't want this to become a political fight because what we've heard today is 686 people need to re be relocated. I don't care what press release get got released today. I could care less about a press release or anything else. 686 people need to be relocated. That's what matters to me. Not what the mayor said, not what I said, not what anyone else said. This is 686 people who need somewhere to live, somewhere to lay their head. This is serious business. And guess what? They're not caring about a press release or what we're in this room talking about if it's not about solutions for them and what's going to happen. I think the one thing that we're not talking about, and I know Council Member Warren knows this and others, is there are people who are living there that are terrified and the way we're talking is even more terrifying. >> I've had people approach me that live there and say, "Yes, this has been like a spotlight on us." People are showing up to where we live with cameras and talking to us and scaring our kids and like we don't know what to do. We still live here. This is a community. This is a a really big place in North Minneapolis where a lot of people are. And it's not even just this place. There are other apartments around there. And the average person doesn't know the difference between Heritage Park, Cecil Newman, City View, like this entire area. So there's been an invasion on this area that we as leaders have to be cognizant of and respectful of that there are still people who are there. Even in Heritage Park, this is not the entire uh facility over there. The numbers of people that you're moving out, it's not everyone that lives there. They're homeowners there. There town homes there. There single family homes there that are all a part of Heritage Park. And there is a lot of fear in these people about the way we conduct ourselves as not only elected officials but a city enterprise. And so we got to be mindful of it. Like I'm supporting Council Member Warren. She's the leader on this and we need to listen to what she's saying here. She is over there every day all day talking to these people trying to ease what is happening. This is serious. someone. It's not easy to be a whistleblower. >> That's why it's a name for it. And she's the person brave enough to make the video, but there's people who told her to come and make a video. There are people who live there who had the foresight to say to her, "Hey, come over here. See what we're doing." Without knowing what could happen, without knowing if the next day they were going to be on the streets. because I can guarantee you we don't have 600 212 available apartments or housing options in North Minneapolis right now. And guess what's hard to say? You got to move somewhere else. You got to move out of your kids school district. >> You got to move away from your church. You got to move away from your auntie who babysits for you. >> And you walk to her house. Now you got to figure out transportation to get your kids from somewhere else cuz I don't think we're going to find find 212 households if that is the actual number >> to relocate people in that area. So I I really do we have to be mindful that these are humans. These are people who are looking to us to lead and leading is not fighting. Leading is not politicizing a real life tragedy that is happening to people right now. Leading is certainly not blaming. Leading is taking what has happened and making it better. Certainly, but blaming is going to get us nowhere. We need to fix this now and come back to blaming later if that's your thing. But we certainly have to get from up under this right now. We need to spend every single bit of energy, time, resources we have on fixing this right now for these 686 people. And that number feels very fluid to me. I feel like that number can change by the end of this day because I've been there and I know what's happening. >> And so I really don't want us to lose sight. I don't I you know I think we all probably feel angry towards somebody or feel like somebody like an individual or something is responsible. But that's not what I want to use my energy on. I really want us to focus as a city on how we do better. How we make this better right now and then we'll come back and figure out the system and all the other things. But we got to fix it. This is urgent. She called me a month ago now about that video. That means we are 30 days behind or how many ever days that was on making this better for people. And so I really do want us to focus on like how we're actually going to do this. And so director, what is the plan for um how we're going to relocate people? like what is the timeline? If we vote on this in on Thursday and the money is there, how do we do this? >> Chair Chowry, uh, Council Member Vita, we are standing up a team to develop um structure and it will be worked together with Department of Emergency Management. We're going to be working with the M Minneapolis Public Housing Authority that's going to be giving um uh um some planning assistance and hopefully financial resources and uh technical staff. Uh we're going to likely have to assign delegate some staff from other jobs to work on this. This is an enormous setup, but I think you can think about if you were up at the emergency operation center during response to annunciation or um uh uh operation metro surge, it'll be something to that level. It >> mean what's the timeline though? Have you already started working? >> So, we we've already started um scoping out the um the framework. We'll be um doing that over this week and then next week we'll be starting to set up the uh the planning and then hopefully we're we have more to report. I don't want to overpromise anything, but we're we're doing we're putting together the structure as we speak. >> And then where did the $2.5 million number come from? Like how what are we uh configuring for families? >> Chair Chowry, uh Council Member Vita, uh this is repurposed money when we first were talking to the receiver a few weeks ago before we were aware of the extent of the mold. Uh this was emergency. They they needed a grant for some emergency repairs. We were focused on furnaces, unit turns, and roofing. And that uh cost in was in the ballpark of three million. The city has already appropriated in the CPAD budget half a million dollars uh for Heritage Park for this year. And so that's where the $2.5 million comes. As we are working through um uh the budgeting uh as we're working through the the process for this RCA, we kept that number static. We've we're consulting with Henipin County about the the amount of um benefits that typically that people typically get with relocation and uh seems in line. We're looking for uh potentially some assistance from Henipin County and the Minneapolis Public Housing Authority. We've asked them also to um match the funding that we have. But the reloc so the relocation dollars though for these families isn't just like we found you an apartment the rent and the deposit is this amount we're going to pay to do that. This is like fees associated with having to move and >> uh um I think it's uh through the chair council member Vita it's it's more complicated and complex than than what you're saying to to your point. It's it's you have 212 unique households that have you know they're there different sizes of households. They have people with pets, people with health conditions, people who are transit dependent, people, you know, there there everybody has a unique situation and we need to make sure that we're taking the the utmost care of of um of what that situation is um in finding where they should be and um what we what expenses. So, we were going to be developing also what what all of those expenses would be. So, it's not just a simple, you know, first month's last month plus a damage deposit. It's it's what is what does it take for us to move forward and that's something we'll be working on. >> Thank you. So last night I know um there was a community meeting hosted by Council Member Warren and a lot of you came. I I guess I'm curious to know how you left it with folks yesterday. What did you tell them um was going to happen last night? Like what are next steps for for the community? >> Uh Chair Chowry, Council Member VTO. Um so Mayor Fry was in attendance. Uh, Mayor Fry made uh some opening remarks um explaining to the community members that were in attendance that this is his this is a priority for the administration and he has directed us to um prioritize and resource the relocation of households at Heritage Park. uh we were frank with them about we were we were coming to the council for funding today and uh we will be developing the plan and we're trying to move as quickly as we can to get that information and council member Warren who was the host of that meeting um communicated if I may to the community that we would probably have another community meeting next week and then that's when we so we're probably going to have um we're going to have to have a regular cadence of communications as we as things become available and we find out you know what what who what what are points of contact, what kind of resources we can offer, what are resource centers we could potentially stand up at uh Heritage Park so people can get their questions asked. We want to make sure that we are addressing people's concerns and fears about this. We know that there are people who have lived in Heritage Park since it opened. >> This is their home. >> This is where they live. This is their community. And this is really a shocking situation to be in. and we understand that it's traumatic and we need to make sure we're taking the care to make sure we meet their needs and we're hopeful that we meet those. >> Thank you. I appreciate that. And you did answer my question around I was I'm trying to understand if you've set up a mechanism separate so like people don't have to call 311 and like filter through that but can like a heritage park hotline is what I'm saying like something where people have um an opportunity to reach out about things specifically. Council member Shadri and and Council Member Vita. Um yes, we're we're figuring out that it's while 311 is the front door for communications with the city and everybody can use that. We are not expecting that to be the primary communication tool. This will have to be proactive communication. We're going to have to understand who's there and reach out to them as opposed to having them reach out to us. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you, Council Member. Next, we'll go to Council Member Whiting. >> Thank you, Chair Chowry, and thank you, Director. I only have only have one question for you, but I want to kind of start uh firstly, it is not, I think, lost on me. was after uh council member Warren uh brought this forward to us. I did some some research here on the history of of Heritage Park. Uh that Heritage Park was built through a courtmandated consent decree because of how bad the standards were for a historic north side section 8 and government funded housing. And so Heritage Park was brought about through a consent decree criticizing and holding to the to the fire a public housing program that talked about the city's perpetual uh uh living standards for just substandard housing conditions. And then we built a continuence of that same exact condition. And it just it is really really hard for me to wrap my head around the continuence of these substandards conditions based on a lawsuit that was supposed to uh avail the north side of these conditions. And so I think that that just the history of it I think is is helpful for uh the public to know that this isn't just some version of a of a a public housing authority that we wanted to by the goodness of of the heart of government to come through but this was actually mandated because of how bad these circumstances were before this. Uh and so just wanted to kind of start there. Uh, and the question for you, director, the only thing I have is do we have any level of and and I know you kind of spoke to it a little bit that this is a a massive investment or there will have to be a massive investment into the the repair uh and reallocation of funding into this to get this to a a a version of of livability. Uh, do you have any estimate of what that like total cost uh is going to look like to make the Heritage Park more or less livable? Uh, Chair Chowry, Council Member Whiting, um, thank you for doing your research. Um, we can share more information about the history of Heritage Park if you're interested. Uh, and the whole consent decree. >> Um, and to answer your question, you know, we have to hit that threshold question like is is the are the repairs that are required exceeding the cost of replacement? Mhm. >> Uh we are not at that we do not have that much information. So the way I think about it is in magnitudes as opposed to precision. And we're thinking tens of millions of dollars in repairs that are needed. But you also need then a recapitalization program or project structure >> so that um uh that you can you know finance the repairs and then stabilize the operations of um of Heritage Park and that you know exceeds the cost. So the the raw costs and then all of the things that you need to do to get to the repairs um will exceed that. So you're looking um you're looking at a lot of money. >> Okay. And then the really the only reason I ask is is right if if we are putting $2.5 million into a and I know it sounds like there's eligible uses of rehabilitation and relocation. Uh but if we're putting $2.5 million into a uh the repairs of a facility of a housing project that we don't even know if it's if if we are going to either take it all down or repair it. Uh I think that just is is the are the repairs uh because it's the livability kind of piece. Is that what it is? Kind of the emergency livability piece uh to that. And sorry I guess I asked more than the one question that I promised to do. >> Yeah. Council member Shadri, Council Member Wing, that's a good question. >> So what you're what you're providing in the action that we're asking is authority to put funding into renovations, emergency life signing renovations and repairs and relocation. Okay. It is our intent to focus primarily on relocation. The reason we are asking for that other repairs because to your point, we haven't made that threshold question. So, we don't want to invest money into something that we might say that is not salvageable, but we're not to that point yet. >> Um is is if there's something that we need to do because it has had immediate health risk or safety risk to somebody, then we want to have that latitude. But our focus is on the relocation component of this. And then we're going to uh once we have relocated then it then then it'll it'll be the structured conversation with funders and the owner and you know how that receiver process works through the district court about what is the threshold question that stuff that technical work will continue. It's not like it stops. We'll have the technical staff work on it but the focus of the administration the focus of CPED the focus of the city is going to be on the relocation efforts and setting that up and then we can you know work on that other stuff as as it comes up. Thank you, director. And then a last note, too. I I just want to again uh reiterate comments uh from my colleagues as well. You know, I think we've seen Council Member Warren uh do more work for this community than decades u of agreements, reports, regulatory frameworks uh in 6 months. And so just wanted to to to make sure that we we are all uh appreciative of of your leadership, Council Member Warren, and and please continue to to tap us in where you need us. >> Thank you, Council Member Whiting. Next, we have in Cune, Council Member Stevenson. >> Thank you, Chair. Um, I wanted to thank you, Council Member Warren, for um, being the first and slashor last line of defense for your constituents. You and I are learning in real time uh, that role. Um, and I appreciate you for bringing this up and for, uh, not giving up on your people. Um, I'm glad to see us responding to this urgently. Of course, I'll be supporting the the money to go and relocate uh, folks out of Heritage Park. um that the southside is with you. People on the south side have lived in in deplorable conditions and none of them have reached the the grandiosity of what your constituents are experiencing right now, but uh we're with you and we're going to work with you to make sure that the folks in Heritage Park are are taken care of and that there's justice for the entire neighborhood. Um yeah, I wanted to point out that um we the city are the ones left holding the bag here even though MPA owns the land and McCormack and Salazar and something else have been spent the last two decades making money off of these buildings. Um yeah, I I I I wanted to point out that there are only two groups of people who care at the end of the day about whether uh Heritage Park is livable and that's the people who live in Heritage Park and that's the city of Minneapolis. And I think we just need to recognize going forward that there really are only the those two groups of people or those two groups who will at the very end of the road which we're at now in terms of the livability of Heritage Park actually care about whether Heritage Park succeeds. So we need to act accordingly when we take our next steps. So to me that says that if we're putting public dollars in, the public needs control. Um e either that or the residents themselves need control over the over the the buildings, the conditions, the the finances. Um because the residents and the city of Minneapolis seem to be the only two groups who care about whether Heritage Park continues and continues successfully. Um last uh well, two more things. Uh this seems like a perfect opportunity for us to use contingency funds and not spike our ability to build affordable housing this year. Um this seems like an unexpected uh expenditure of for city services. Um and I would I would absolutely expect that we are going to be seeking this money back from McCormack Salazar and whoever else. um they are the ones who put this situation together and they're the ones who need to be paying this. It's they profited for the last two decades. They can find that money for us uh once we front the money for our constituents. Um and lastly, I'm glad to see that we're all agreeing that this type of living condition is unacceptable. Um, and I hope that as we look around the city and we find other folks living in these types of conditions that we can have a similarly powerful response to remedying their their terrible living conditions and putting in the type of policy and the type investment that we need for everybody across the city who's living under the conditions that slum lords have put them in um to get justice and to get a a living situation that's worthwhile for any human being. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member. Next is Council Member Warren. >> Thank you, Chair. Um, before I move this forward, um, with recommendations, can I get a second? Without recommendations, can I get a second? Sorry. >> A second. >> Um, um, I have just a a couple of more things that I want to say. Um, in the beginning of me first learning about the conditions of what was happening at Heritage Park, the very first thing that I asked for was a mold inspection and a mold inspection report. And I was told at the time that the city did not have the capacity or the funds or the financing and that was not something that the city of Minneapolis did and that maybe they could go to Home Depot and get some test strips and see if that was something that could happen. Second thing that I asked for was a structural engineers report with respect to the integrity of the buildings because there are 38 roofs with holes in them that have been in that condition for a number of years. which still leads me to really struggling to tap inside of my brain of how it is that my great city of Minneapolis issued a rental license to a property that is in that deplorable of a condition. that the oversight and the power for buildings and structures that within are within our city limits and jurisdiction have to meet a specific code compliance and we are responsible for that code compliance. That code compliance was not met is still not being met at Heritage Park. And I mean I to walk into a building and taste mold to smell the rot outside of a building to smell it. It smells like decaying flesh. It really does. Like I sent security to go, can you do a welfare check? Because something just does not smell right around here. The sad part was 168 HVAC units were replaced over the winter because people were there with no heat in December when the receiver arrived. He arrived the 4th of December. The HVAC units were replaced within that first two to three weeks. Like right over the time that people were celebrating good oldfashioned Christmas and everything else, there were children inside of these apartment units at Heritage Park that were freezing space heaters presenting fire risks at Heritage Park. A time when we could have came together as a city then. this was before I was elected and said, "Hey, here's a lifesaving measure. Let's get them out of there." And I understand, director Hansen, that you are saying, you know, this 2.5 million, the only problem that I have with this in this RCA is that I am really, you know, I appreciate service. They've been so helpful and responsive and all of those things. They've provided us with with a lot of transparency around a lot of things. good guys. Appreciate them. >> The extenuating health concerns right now to me is these 94 and 97 degree heat waves that we have had >> and the fact that there are seniors in those buildings with oxygen tanks that do not have any cool air flowing through there and they're sitting in mold, damp moisture, condensation, festering, having trouble breathing. We heard these stories last night. I didn't advertise my community meetings because they are not for advertisement because my constituents are not on display. They are not advertised. >> That is unhumanizing. And I don't want anybody picking them apart like pieces of old whatever. not interested in the media being in there. Get your story elsewhere. These are people's lives. So, I'm curious as to find out what situation do you think will be extinguating enough before we start moving people into hotels and getting them out of those situations on this one-way ticket, putting people's things into storage units and helping them start the path of recovery because that is what's needed right now. Every time it rains, I can't sleep. When it's hot like this, I am pissed off cuz I know what my residents and the children are going through in Heritage Park. I know cuz I'm over there. been taking Zertex D like tic tacs just so I can breathe and get through this. So, the fact that there is definitely a cooling condition over there >> had a 9-month pregnant mama stand on the third floor of a unit in building 8plex by herself. the only resident living in that building. Baby due in one week. She got bring her fresh new baby home to that environment. Would you want to bring your fresh new baby home there, Director Hansen? Chair Chowry, Council Member Warren. No. >> So, let's think about that. I want some justice for the constituents of my ward and I want them treated with dignity and respect. There's not anything right now that Certis needs from us in the immediiacy to put a band-aid on another bullet wound over in Heritage Park. the original numbers for my council colleagues that we were softly um fluffing up and around. I know there was a question earlier about what we thought the capital amounts were going to be. Um probably about a month or so ago they were talking about roughly a $35 million capital improvement project. But now with the things that we have learned with regards to these buildings pretty much being gutted down to the envelope to the studs, you know, and the amount of roof repair and the street paving, the foam um that they said that they're going to utilize underneath the steps and the concrete in order to lift it and raise it and balance it. You know what I mean? until they can figure out what the structural Yeah, we're looking at over a hundred million. And just so we keep in mind, the homeman consent decree was [snorts] $118 million. MA inputed 27.8 million. HUD denoted 16 million. Right. City of Minneapolis 4.3 million. Did McCormack Baron Salazar come to the table with any money? This was supposed to be a $225 million development. 900 homes in totality. 900 homes, as we saw in this presentation right here, were not developed. What bag did he come with? McCormick Baron Salazar was sued in 2018 in St. Louis, Missouri. Clinton versus Peabody. Check that out. Sue 2021 2023 in San Francisco East Plaza for again more of the same deplorable living conditions that we're experiencing here in the city of Minneapolis. And in 2022 in New Orleans, a Department of Justice c uh settlement for uh fair housing violations. What we see right here is a developer that has a habitual practice of bad business. What I don't want to see that's in my power here as a council member representative of the city of Minneapolis is developers who have habitual practice of bad business. I'm not interested in people who are not truly interested and invested in my community doing absolutely anything that has to do with building anything in my community. I'll have a large glass of no thank you with a side of please move around. So that's where I'm at. Um, I think that we do have some extremely extenduating circumstances there and Director Hansen um yourself and everyone who was present at the meeting last night heard firsthand um what those circumstances were. I'm going to let this be on record. Minneapolis Public Housing Authority, you need to return the section 8 vouchers of the residents who you retaliated against and remove their section 8 and housing vouchers back to them. We got people living in hotels that are displaced with their children that need their vouchers back. So, you need to give them back to them because you were wrong, not them. the end. >> Thank you, Council Member Warren. Colleagues, is there any further discussion? >> Just checking my queue. Um, we don't have any further discussion. The motion before us is to move this forward without recommendation. I'll make the point that I think to staff I think it would be valuable for you to be present at the council meeting and be inclusive of all departments. I think it would also be valuable to have emergency management looped into the conversation as well. I know that's something that we just didn't touch um because there's so much to cover here today. So with the motion from council member Warren to move this forward without recommendation. All those in favor say I. >> I. I. Those opposed say nay. That motion carries. Thank you, director. >> All right. Now, we'll be receiving a presentation that well, sorry, I'm a little out of script. Long presentation. Now, I'll return now. Okay, we're moving into the settlement agreement subcommittee. I will turn the meeting over to Council Member Whiting, the chair for the settlement agreement subcommittee. I'll also share that we have captioning until 5:30 p.m. >> Perfect. Uh thank [snorts] you, Chair Chowry. Uh as our chair mentioned, I'm the chair of the settlement uh agreement and consent decree subcommittee which resides within uh the committee of the whole and this has been our second uh meeting of this subcommittee. [clears throat] Uh members uh we will next be picking up item number two which we are receiving a presentation from uh effective law enforcement for all orifa. Uh is an independent uh nonprofit organization that serves as the official independent evaluator overseeing the Minneapolis's police department's compliance uh with the MDHR uh settlement agreement. Uh, ALIFA is comprised of experts in civil rights, policing, uh, policy, and its primary role is to objectively [snorts] monitor MPD's progress on mandated reforms and regularly report its finding to the public, uh, and the court. The purpose of this oversight is to measure the city's progress towards systemic reform and build community trust in policing. Uh the report uh that we will have today is Alifa's most recent semianual uh report which covers the period of October 1st, 2025 through March 31st, 2026. Uh and and just to note here, this is the first of of what we hope uh to be regularly scheduled uh presentations after each uh semianual report from Alifa. And so I will pass it over uh to our independent evaluator uh David Douglas uh and deliver this presentation. Also want to thank uh uh Mr. Douglas for uh the quick turnaround as we asked fairly quick and you you came and made it a point to to be here. So I appreciate you and thank you for uh uh the presentation. >> Chairing thank you for the invitation to appear for you here before you all today. Thank you. >> Mr. Douglas, I will just note if you're able to to have the mic right there. Perfect. Thank you. >> This takes me back to one of our early public meetings where I demonstrated my inability to stand in one place and talk uh without pacing. But uh thank you all for allowing me to appear today. We appreciate it. Um the work we do can't be done in isolation. Um we have to be part of an ecosystem that will drive transformation and sustain it after we leave. So uh uh I I and our team we really appreciate the interest uh that you've all shown and that and the support you've given us. Um I also note I came from Washington DC. I appreciate you arranging the high heat and humidity for my comfort but really you shouldn't have. Um so I do have a few uh slides here uh to walk us through. Okay. So, uh simply for our agenda, um very simple, I want to talk a little bit about our process, uh where we are over the uh uh first two years and then of course where we'll be going uh over the next two years. Uh this invitation comes at a good time because we are working on our revised evaluation plan for years three and four. So, this is a perfect time to update all of you. If I can just start with process. Uh as Chair Whiting explained, we're the independent evaluator. Um our role is uh our role um uh simply put is really to do three things. We monitor, we coach, and report. Uh I work with a team of about a dozen uh subject matter experts and they lend their their knowledge and guidance and insights to help the uh city and the police department achieve the requirements of the settlement agreement. If I can zoom out however for just a moment what we're really talking about is institutional change and transformation. So what you see on the screen here is a wheel. It there's there's been studies and there's thought about the elements that go into a successful transformation and we follow that model in our work. Uh it informs what we do. It guides what we do. We follow a path. And so just briefly those keys are you have to have a sense of urgency to have great transformation. And that of course is very true here in Minneapolis. You have to form a powerful coalition and you have that in Minneapolis as a big part of the reason that we were selected because of broad community support. There has to be a vision for change and that's captured specifically in the settlement agreement but more broadly in the demands for change um throughout the city. You have to communicate that vision which we try to do for our part through our public meetings and appearing here before you. We have to empower others to act on the vision. Uh we do that by empowering people in the department and in the community as well. Um got to create short-term wins and some of what I'll be talking about today falls into that category of short-term wins. But as you build those wins, then you consolidate those gains, you expand them and ultimately what you want is have culture change and you want to anchor the changes you've made in a new uh and sustainable culture. So in the big picture um that's what we're trying to do. It's why this takes so long because it's it's hard and there are a lot of moving pieces. But uh in the category of uh small wins but important wins, let me just highlight a few of them. There are many more listed in our most recent report. Um but some of the key achievements are uh the full use of force policy suite. Use of force is one of the foundational elements and one of the issues that brought us here. So that's a significant accomplishment. Uh we've also approved policies for non-discriminatory policing and misconduct. Um although in that one we're still working on a corrective action matrix, but in the main uh the bulk of those policies are complete. Similarly, stop, search, citation, and arrest policies uh are largely approved. I think there's the one we're working on is warrants. Um and a policy and resource hub has been launched that will make policies more accessible to officers. I'll talk more about that in just a minute. Uh then we are also working on the training with training needs assessment was completed. Uh the departmentwide use of force training has been delivered and that policy is now live. Um the uh crisis intervention training refresher and supervisor leadership training has been delivered uh as well as officer wellness and early intervention system training. On the operational side, the peer support team has uh grown. There's now 27 members. Uh it's really been uh provi it has responded to several critical incidents and has done a terrific job. The Cortico wellness app has launched. Um there are now six public facing dashboards. Uh the data systems plan has been submitted and is being implemented although that will be a long path. uh and we conducted uh community and officer surveys in June and we'll be reporting on those uh later this summer. I'm not where we are in terms of approved policies. I'm not going to go through this list. I just wanted to show you visually that in addition to those we uh that I uh summarized in the key achievements, we have approved a number of policies. There's work continuing. uh these policies are in the uh development process which is a collaborative process with us and MDHR as well as these. So there is a lot going on uh on the policy front. I just want to take a moment to give you one example and we've done this in our public meetings of some of the uh beneficial changes that these new policies um uh put in place. So the old escalation policy was much vagger about deescalation. It was much more discretionary to the officer. Um uh you know it sh they shall attempt to use it but it wasn't very specific. The new policy is much clearer. Sworn members have a clear affirmative duty to deescalate. Members shall not use tactics that unnecessarily escalate and encounter or create a need for force. Uh, and there was an expanded list of deescalation techniques and tactics tied to training concepts. And of course, policies only work if they're effectively trained. And we observe the use of force training. It was really um quite good. And there are many more examples I could give you, but um that's just a a sense of it. But these policies uh will make a difference. Uh this is a screenshot and a GIF I guess showing you there is a new policy hub and that's a significant achievement because one of the number one things we heard from the officers is that the policies were too long and too ac too too inaccessible. They were just in a long manual. So now this is an online uh platform any officer or for example or or for that matter any member of the public can go to if you need to know something about a policy. For example, here the duty to deescalate. You can click right on it within the policy itself. If you hover over a defined term, it pops up. Um, one of the questions we receive from officers, will these policies be more concise? Well, the truth is the policies are not more concise because it is hard to be concise and comprehensive and clear all at once. But the real question I think they're asking is about accessibility. are these policies going to be more accessible? And through the policy hub, the answer is absolutely yes. They'll be able to access this from their vehicles, through their phones, uh and the policies are clearer. So, we believe that um they will find this to be a meaningful improvement uh for the department, but also for the city as a whole. So, the path to compliance has three key elements. First, policies where we've been putting a lot of our attention. Then we'll move into training increasingly. Uh and then ultimately accountability which is the last and most important element because the policies and training really don't make a different difference if it doesn't translate to change on the street. And so that's where we're looking at accountability. We do that through audits and we'll be conducting regular audits. We'll start a use of force audit this year now that the training has been completed. But there are other forms of accountability. the internal affairs and misconduct investigation system uh is critical to that. I'll talk about that in a minute. And of course, close supervisor um close supervision is also critical to ensuring that officers understand what they are expected to do and help them do it and then hold them accountable uh when they do not. So there are challenges and there have been challenges over the first two years as documented in our report. Um first has been staffing shortages and turnover that's been most acute in the internal affairs unit. It's also been a factor in the officer health and wellness unit. Um but it has also been an issue uh over the last two years more generally as one would expect. There's always some turnover. >> [sighs and gasps] >> The big one has been the internal affairs backlog and the reviewed bottlenecks. As we said in our last report, there really has been uh virtually no meaningful progress on that and that was a significant failure um that we had observed previously but really came to a head in our most recent report. Uh we've talked about delays in the policy development process although I will say I feel much better about those. There have been a lot of lessons learned uh efficiencies achieved, improvements made and I feel it is now working much better. So I'm optimistic that over the next two years we will see policies uh developed and approved at a faster rate than in the first two years. Training quality and delivery delivery gaps um we've seen issues of turnover and lack of uh internal coordination or alignment. uh that's something we're really beginning to focus on now as we increasingly move from policies into training. So that will be a major uh area of focus for us uh over the next two years. the technology and data systems. Can't run a modern police department without robust technology and data systems. And that process has been much slower than we had hoped. But that will be key to uh implementing and sustaining uh any of the changes or almost all the changes under the settlement agreement. And finally, organizational culture and leadership. We've commented on the lack of understanding of officers, lack of communication from department leaders about what this process is, what it its importance, and what it will mean um for officers. And we'd we'd like to see that change. Um I should probably pause just a m to note that these challenges are from the first two years. Um and as we all know, there has been a leadership change in the department. Um we're encouraged by what we've seen. It's been very early, but I do want to make a distinction between the criticisms we've observed going back. We're not yet making observations about uh the current state. So, I'm sure many most if not all of you are aware of our criticisms of internal affairs. We had been uh reporting on that and expressed our concern about it in each of our reports. The backlog is a serious issue and as we've said, it's serious for the public, but it's serious for officers who have complaints hanging over them for not just months, but in many cases years. So, this slide simply um really captures what we had reported over time. But just to be candid, it was in the last several months that we sort of came to the point that whatever changes had been promised and changes that were being were really making no difference and in fact it did not even seem that they were really designed or intended to make a difference. It just seemed like churn quite frankly. And so that's when we uh became very pointed in our criticism um in in [clears throat] our most recent report. This slide just gives you an example of some of the timelines and delays we've seen in the uh case management system for internal affairs and OPCR. Um the root causes that we've seen are vendor staff attrition and slow followup on um configuration requests particularly in the first year or so the department was very slow in articulating what it needed from the system and that was a first step in that process. Um there was the project was under resourced. Um and it was dep prior the the current uh vendor the department leadership de deprioritized the project in favor of a defer preferred alternative vendor but there had been a lack of commitment from the department to driving these really critical um system [clears throat] changes. We also note here that the early intervention system uh phase 2 deployment has been paused uh due to staffing turnover uh and leadership changes. We hope that will be rectified soon and that that will get uh back on track. In our last report, we made a series of recommendations that we hope the department of the city will act on some they already have. In fact, this first one, reassess personnel capacity roles and responsibilities. Uh they've begun to do that. The uh department has asked our team for technical assistance on the staffing in its internal affairs unit. Uh and they are looking at other issues um to ensure that to uh hopefully ensure that they have the right people in the right alignment of roles and responsibilities. um [clears throat] communicate uh establishing clear supervisory authority and reporting as as you may know there's this odd constellation there's the MPD implementation unit there's the city attorney's implementation unit of course there are the department subject matter experts they need to talk to in developing policies and often there just was unclear uh what the roles are and the where the authority lay and that just led to uh uh delays and inefficiencies so we are hoping that that uh is clarified. Uh supplement communication and coordination channels. There are a lot of different small work streams here and there are big meetings with many groups but sometimes you just got to get a few people in the room talking to each other. This is all within MPD to get aligned on what they need to do to move things forward. And we found that that uh was not happening as it should and uh needs to be improve improved. There are a lot of people uh who have responsibility for uh implementation under the agreement but not all of them seem to have a clear understanding of what their role is, how it fits in. Many of them have responsibilities beyond implementation. So setting priorities and making sure they understand their roles and responsibilities and how it fits in uh has been lacking. and we hope that that will improve and we've recommended that the department take steps to do that. Uh standing meeting times again sometimes we observe delays just because people were busy and they could never get all the right people in the room. So we said we'll just set a standing meeting time and let everybody know Thursday at two um this is their time to address issues. We've done that. We have meetings with the parties on a weekly basis. We have standing policy meetings, standing data meetings so that people know we have an hour. This is the thing that we need to address next and we've encouraged the department to do more of that and then keep department personnel informed. We find that a lot of officers don't know very little about this agreement know very little about um its implementation and how it will affect them and you can imagine in that u vacuum uh it leads to morale issues and confusion and misinformation. So we would hope the department would establish better lines of communication uh with the rank and file uh about this important work. So where do we go in years three and four? So you see on this slide you we generally have had use this construct the foundation phase the evaluation phase and finally a compliance determination phase. first two years have mostly been foundational. Uh so now hopefully we will begin slowly to trans uh transition to uh the evaluation phase. Um but to be clear the foundational phase has gone slower than we thought. The majority of policy goals were not met for the reasons I discussed. So we're still in that process. But we are beginning to um uh transition to um the evaluation stage and what that means is we'll be doing audits. For example, we'll do a use of force audit now that there are new uh policies in place. Our view has been we knew that things were bad. That's what brought us here. So we didn't do audits just to tell us what we knew. We decide to wait until a new policy has been adopted, trained on, and implemented. We wait 3 to six months for officers to get used to it. And then we'll start auditing and we expect we would not be surprised if there are higher levels of non-compliance early on and then you focus on uh the education necessary for officer understand officers to understand what's expected. And so we'll do those off audits in a recurring basis uh as we move to um compliance. And then finally the settlement agreement uh specifies what constitutes compliance and that will be the final stage of this where we make our recommendations and ultimately judge Janice will decide um whether the city if the parties don't agree then judge Janice will decide ultimately whether the uh department has um met its uh responsibilities under the agreement. There's no numerical uh measure for that. Um the agreement specifically says we don't use percentages. That makes sense. Um so it's a much more qualitative performance-based assessment um that we'll be making. [sighs] So the specific things priorities for years three and four we have to complete the remaining policies standard operating procedures and training requirements. uh we have to ensure that supervisors implement and reinforce approved policies. Uh we'll be uh focusing on reducing these accountability backlogs. We hope that that will be that will happen in year three and not continue into year four. Uh we want to deploy the uh early intervention system and improve the wellness resources and workforce support systems. Uh we'll be expanding our audits and compliance reviews. uh strengthening data systems, dashboards and reporting and then ultimately uh or additionally we want to sustain community engagement uh and public transparency. You'll note here on this slide that only two parts policy and body worn and incar cameras appear likely to achieve uh compliance within the initial four-year term of the agreement. I should also note here that in the first two years we uh approved a facilities plan that called for a new training center. So I understand that hasn't been funded. So the city will to achieve compliance will have to come up with a plan that meets the agreements requirements and obviously that that's a call that we don't make. What I will say is that the current training facilities are just woefully inadequate for the needs of the department or or the needs of the community. Quite frankly, as you know, they're in an elementary school. They don't own it. It's leased. It's not in any way configurable to the needs of a a big city police department. And even if it were, it's a leased property. Um the health and wellness unit is not there. Uh the training plan called for uh a single source of training which would bring not only MPD but also fire and I believe EMS which is consistent with sort of the ultimate public safety ecosystem. um that you want to see uh in a city. Um and it also called for uh the health and wellness unit to be uh housed there with training which we believe is a very beneficial uh relationship. In fact, at our last public meeting, a woman stood up and very eloquently talked about the trauma that the officers in her neighborhood had experienced. and she talked about the importance of taking care of our officers uh mental health. Most impressively though to me, she made the link. She said because the officers who are traumatized inflict their trauma on us. So officer health and wellness is critical to public safety um and to protecting the public. So we don't look at this narrowly as something for officers. Training officers to do the things we demand of them to do requires a facility or configuration equal to that task. So that will be something that we will be expecting to see uh from the city uh in this next uh phase few next steps. So, as I mentioned earlier, we conducted uh community and officer surveys. We'll be releasing those later this summer. We'll probably do it in a virtual meeting so that the public and everyone uh will hear it. Um our year three and four evaluation plan will also be released this summer. And we do a lot with community engagement in addition to our regular public meetings which are very well attended. Um we meet with other groups, small groups, individuals. So, we try and spend a lot of time talking to folks here in Minneapolis to educate them about the process and to hear their questions. Um, I think that's really it. I would just like to say this. Um, it's been a tough slog, but I will say personally I am as optimistic about this process as I have been at any stage uh in it. I I am encouraged by what we're seeing in the new leadership and I'm really seeing in the public at large. They're beginning to understand this process and the engagement in our meetings is uh we get 60 to 80 people. The questions are good. They're constructive. Uh members of other city departments show up so it becomes a discussion of issues and that I think has taken us down the road to where we need to be which is create an ecosystem around the police department so that when we're gone um all of you are educated and able to engage effectively with the department and hold it accountable. And we're starting to see that happen. So, um I recognize this taken longer than people would have wanted and probably longer than people would have thought. Um but it is happening and um we're optimistic about it. I'm happy to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you. >> Yes. And and thank you uh Mr. Douglas and also want to thank you and your team for for the work uh as it relates to to these uh progress reports as well. I know it's helpful for myself and I know a large number of my colleagues as well. And so with that, council members, uh I know we have a few uh of my colleagues here that have questions and so we'll open it up to our colleagues here. And so uh first on our list is council member Shaveis. >> Thank you, Chair Whiting. I want to first start by expressing my frustration with MPD's lack of progress regarding the state settlement agreement and my concerns with AIFA and how often they report to the city council or how they withhold their opinions. It should not have taken the resignation of former chief O'Hara for Alifa to speak up. Residents are paying for accountability, not silence. And I hope that you take my word seriously today and saying that I hope Alifa is more proactive in reaching out to the city council and that it should not take a public debacle for you to speak up to address accountability and the concerns that my constituents in the ninth ward have. For those of you that do not know, here are some concerning highlights with this report and MPD's lack of progress. One, there are significant delays in the critical agreement requirements persist. There's no meaningful two, there's no meaningful progress uh when it comes to concerns about MPD's lack of progress to reduce its internal affairs case backlog. Three, progress toward implementing an early intervention system has also stalled due to management weakness and personnel turnover. Four, policy and training curricular development continues at an uneven pace. Five, the city has not achieved many of its goals it set up for the years one and two for the implementation process and progress. That's just a few things highlighted in this report. And I'm going to reread the last part I said out loud because I hope people hear it and how it it's frustrating. The city has not achieved many of the goals set up for years one and two for the implementation proess one and two. We're paying a lot of money to have some work on police accountability and reform and nothing is happening. The Minnesota Department of Human Rights also said the city of Minneapolis and MPD remained far from achieving the transformational change necessary to the root causes of racebased policing and pointed to MPD continuing to have flawed accountability systems still. And where's MPD? if they can come in this room please to answer some questions cuz these are not these are not going to be just directly directed at you. Victims of police violence and neighbors deserve a lot better. Wondering if MPD or the mayor's administration is here to answer some of my questions because I have a lot of questions and it's going to be directed at you, the mayor's administration and MPD and everybody because this is one of the first times we have you here in these chambers to address the concerns that I have. First, the report says there are observations that some individuals lack an appreciation of how their work relates to other implementation tasks or how others depend on their work to meet their implementation responsibilities. It also appears to us that some individuals and this is what the report said who have implementation responsibilities do not understand how their work relates to the agreement overall. What what is being done to address this? If you can answer this, what what oversight with the leaf are you doing? And MPD, if someone can please come in. I don't understand why MPD is not in this room today. Like this is the whole report. And and and just just know, council member Chavez, so we are working on the cadence because I think you're exactly right. And so we are hoping to uh get a a a consistent status report on the reform work from MPD themselves where they will come and report to this this body. And so we are working on the cadence of what that will look like. My hope uh is that it will be probably bimonthly and so we are looking at that exact point. Sorry about that. So >> So I'm trying to figure out how I'm going to phrase my questions because my questions were phrasing it towards MPD who are failing to address and meet our settlement agreements completely. >> Well, Chair White and Council Member Chavez, let me um let me start with this. So we have met with many of uh your colleagues met with you and in this process um we are always happy to meet with you and we we so uh it's an open invitation and anything we can do to facilitate um individual meetings or to appear here regularly we would like to do that a central part of our role is to get the word out and so uh if there's any perception that we've been reluctant to do that uh let me clarify it apologize for it but we are um not only happy to meet with you, we're eager to meet with you. We want people to know what's going on in the uh in this process. With respect to the the relationship between our report and the forced resignation of Chief O'Hara, to be clear, we gave this report to the city, the mayor and the chief, Chief O'Hara, prior to his renomination and prior to the scandals that led to his the misconduct, I should say, that led to his forced resignation. In fact, prior to giving them the report, I met with both the mayor and the chief to tell them what we would be reporting. So, to be clear, it was not his forced resignation that triggered uh this report that we have a cadence. We issue two reports a year and when we issued this one, we fully expected Chief O'Hara would be the chief. So there's nothing about his departure that altered the timing or the language um in our report. As to the deficiencies you've just decided recited, I I think my short answer at least initially is we agree that we've reported them um and we are working with the city. I can say that they from our perspective are making some changes, but I don't think I'm the right person to address everything that may have been done or or what their uh what their plans are. >> I want to be clear, I'm not saying that the debacle is what led to what was in the report. I'm saying that made comments publicly and did not brief counsel when they knew this information. there were comments you made to the media and there was not conversations with council members pertaining to what you were talking about publicly. So, I just want to at least mention that. Um, when did you give this information to the mayor? You just mentioned that. Um, we gave the mayor the report and the city I believe chair whining council member Chavez on May 11th and probably a couple of weeks to three weeks prior to that I had met with the chief and with the mayor. >> And so you had already talked to the mayor in a meeting that this was a problem. >> Yes. >> And he was still renominated. Okay. Thank you. Um, >> can I also I wanted to address um >> uh I'm glad you asked the question about public comments. So, generally I I don't talk to the media. Um and and I'm not authorized to talk to the media unless the parties give their consent. Um that's a little bit of a challenge because most people will only learn about our work through the media. So while we don't want to discuss or present our work through the media, there are times when the parties have allowed us to speak to the mayor and the resignation of Chief O'Hara was one of those times because it was such a matter of public concern and we could see the narrative about what did the monitor know and when did they know it and when were they going to tell us. I I will say the only real statement I made about um the chief uh I use the word not an ally. I will say and I I said it but just so that you understand the context. The question I was asked was moving forward will progress be made and I was saying that yes there are a lot of people working very hard to implement this agreement. It's what we said in our report. Uh and I said, but I acknowledge and in that Chief O'Hara was not always an ally. But it was only that later piece, as I recall, that was really uh quoted, which I think led many people to think I was making a broader statement than I had intended. To be clear, it is true. When you look at the criticisms in our report, those fall directly at the feet of the chief, but it would be unfair to say that he didn't contribute at all to the pro process. many of the changes that happened happened under his leadership and he made some changes um even before our arrival. So um it is fair to say he was not always an ally in the process. It would probably be too strong to say he was never an ally in the process. And to your broader the concern I think underlying your question, we generally speak through our reports and our public meetings. We don't uh do it through the media. So we don't make public statements to the media. Um [clears throat] you in the main will not learn of our work uh through that channel. >> Thank you. The report says there are observations that some individuals lack an appreciation of how their work relates to other implementation tasks or how others depend on their work to meet their expectation responsibil implementation responsibilities. It also appears to us, as I mentioned earlier, that some individuals who have implementation responsibilities do not understand how their work relates to the agreement overall. Do you know what is being done to address this concern that is outlined in your report? >> Uh, Chair White and Council Member Chavez, um, I have some sense that the city is and the department are working to tie uh more closely together the work done by the by the various people who have to contribute to the project. I I don't really know the details uh of that and I should say that our report is fairly recent so I think they're still they may still be working on that but but other than my own sense of the meetings we've had for example in getting ready for our evaluation plan um when we looked back at the plan for year one and two you're right many of the uh goals were not met but a big part of that reason was the goals were unrealistic I think the city didn't appreciate at the time. Most cities in this situation have never been through this. So, they didn't know how hard it would be to revise policies and how long the process would take and all of the other things that uh frustrate uh timets. So, in preparing for this plan, we sat down with them and we went through um their timetables and asked them about them and and uh they worked to make sure they were much more realistic. So it is our hope that the timelines for years three and four will prove to be more reliable than the timelines set forth in the initial plan. So to that extent I have a sense that they have taken steps to better align uh uh personnel with their responsibilities and to ensure that people uh know what they're supposed to do. But but I I don't have a very granular. >> The report shows that no meaningful progress has been made on the internal affairs backlog. MPD has been made aware of this for years. Do you know what has specifically changed in MPD's approach and why should we should as constituents as folks that we represent as constituents should expect a different result >> and um yeah I guess what is the change that's going to happen as a result because we know that a lack of progress in this is a lack of justice. >> Um I know some of the changes. So, first we have met with the new I hope we get it right, Lieutenant Shunover, I believe, who's now in charge of internal affairs. So far, I'm impressed by his uh assessment of the problems and the need for change and in fact to to restore some system some of the systems that were in place when he was in charge uh and that lapsed when he moved. So, that's an encouraging sign. As I mentioned earlier, I believe uh have asked us for technical assistance to look at their staffing. the internal affairs unit is uh underresourced. Um and so we're providing advice there and I've had some initial meetings. I know they're looking at ways to uh augment the personnel. MPD has writed a plan to eliminate the backlog by 2026 but set no deadlines. Do you know why that was the case? And has MPD committed to specific milestones as of today? Uh, Chair White and Council Member Travis, I do not uh uh I do not know why that was the case and I've not seen a new plan. >> The early inter >> I believe one may be in the works, but I've not seen it. >> The early intervention system in the is a settlement agreement requirement. Unfortunately, progress on the early intervention system has stalled due to management weakness and personnel turnover. Who is accountable for that stall and what is the current timeline to address these concerns? uh chair and council member Chavez, I believe the uh former chief was most directly accountable for it. Uh he made the personal assignments. He allowed the uh either made or allowed the transfers and things that the personal turnover. >> I will say that there is one boss of the chief um uneven progress on policy and training development has been flagged across multiple reports. Now, do you know what is causing this unevenness that is really frustrating to our constituents? uh >> if it's it's it's indicated in your report. >> Chair Whiting and Council Member Chavez. So, looking back over the two years in the first year, uh we worked hard with the city to sort of restructure and realign how the policy development process worked. The policy development process requires MPD to develop a policy that meets the settlement agreement's terms and then to uh work with or collaborate with us and with MDHR to uh ensure that that policy uh meets the agreement's requirements. That is a long hard process. Um but what we often found was the quality of in the ear first year particularly we found that the quality of uh draft policies that came to us were not where they should have been. Uh I think candidly in the meetings with the parties they were just inefficiencies. A lot of things went back and forth. Um you know we would get documents that had extensive you know 20 pages of just red lines that you're slogging through. Um there were hard times scheduling meetings. So, we've really worked hard to address those. I think we've made significant improvements to the to that process. I hope we will see the fruits of those labors in the uh coming two years. MJHR said the city remains far from transformational change needed to address root causes of racebased policing. What's the plan of action to address that? Chair White and Council Member Chavez, the settlement agreement is a means to an end. The MDHR, the agreement, the investigative findings are really designed to get to racebased policing. The way >> Can you repeat that again? I missed it. >> The the overall goal, I think, and intent of the settlement agreement is to eliminate racebased policing. How we do that is through policies, training, uh, supervision, and accountability. and you know the support of technology systems. Um so let me give you an example. If we're talking about race-based policing, what we first want to make sure is that there is um reasonable suspicion for a stop. We want to make sure the policy is followed so that when we audit and do every stop, we can look to make sure that every encounter follows the policies. Then there'll also be the much more challenging job of looking at disparities, which is one of the most complex areas in in policing. So the way we get get to that to the end of eliminating race-based policing is through the means of the right policies, the right training uh and the right accountability systems. The semiannual review again affirms that MDHR documented in its April 22 2022 investigative findings and I'll read specifically that the city and FPD have flawed accountability systems. the city and MPD systems are inconsistent, delayed or opaque. This is uh concerning. What is being done about it? >> Uh >> and again, that was years ago. >> I agree. I we we we were very pointed in our report. So, um that system was broken. It remains broken. Uh we're working to fix it, but I it it's there has been a lack of accountability. It's a lack of accountability in the culture in the department. It has to be fixed. >> And I think that's the honesty I'm I'm I've been waiting for to be very public about. I hope that Alifa is um working to rebuild trust with the community. I think the constituents that I represent are very frustrated with Alifa and how forthcoming they have been with information. Um how forthcoming they have been about the actual progress we have done as a city. It's very clear that we are failing to address and meet the settlement agreement with the state when we are failing to meet our goals for year one and year two and we're in 2026. That is a deep concern and I think whether MPD was invited to this meeting or not, the fact that we don't have a singer single person from MPD or the city administration in this room to hear the questions that we have as council members, to hear the concerns that we have as council members um is concerning. I represent the area where George Floyd was murdered. My constituents have many concerns that, you know, decades long of police violence that has been forced upon the people I represent proudly. And what we are seeing is a lack of, my opinion, compliance with the settlement agreement. When you're not meeting years one and two goals, that should be a priority for the city of Minneapolis. And it is disappointing that the administration or MPD is not willing to be in this or is not in this meeting to answer the questions that I have about how we are failing to meet our commitments for police accountability. So I wanted to express that today and I hope Alifa does the work that is needed to rebuild trust with at least I'll speak for my constituents. Thank you. >> Thank you Council Member Chavez. And I would note too and oh looks like we actually had a few drop off here as well. So, we only have uh about four speakers left. I would note we have I think captioning until 5:30 and so uh just uh having that mindful for colleagues. Uh Council Member Warren, thank you, Chair, and thank you for your presentation. Um my question um just a little bit similar to my colleagues I'm wondering about the internal affairs complaints but I did not see anything in the presentation with respect to what is being done in order to ensure that officers that are coming to work for our department do not have a number of infractions in their side shield when um being employed with um our police department here. Can you speak to that, >> Chair Wine and Council Member Warren? Actually, that's not an area uh I can speak to. It's not really within the scope of our work, but it's an important question and it's going to go to changes and accountability and but but the recruitment and hiring process is not within the scope of our work. So is that something that is in but that's in the is that in the purview of the settlement agreement or is that something that is being discussed? Is that something that's written into the plan where we're talking about because I think that here it is we have two things can be true. Some are training deficiencies and some are learned behavior and behavioral practices, right? And so if you have individuals who may have been removed or asked to leave from somewhere else, right? Um kind of what we've had in this situation here. Then does that officer have the ability to move forward be transferred to another department that then accepts him? Doesn't see what was in his side shield. Now we inherit a problem with someone who may not be, you know, um, a breast to the culture and the climate that we are diligently working so hard to develop and achieve here in the city of Minneapolis of integrable officers that now we we got somebody who a is not from here, doesn't know here, and is bringing a different level of lawlessness here that would then in turn add to the internal affairs complaints that we have. I want to kind of nip the I want to do an intervention right where we don't have those type of things being um indoctrinated into our our systems here. >> So, Chair White and Council Member Warren, uh yes, I agree. So, while it's not within our purview to look at the recruitment as a general matter, you're exactly right. department should not be hiring officers um that have had meaningful infractions in other departments and they should screen for those and not hire those people. on the narrow question of our role in that. It's it's not within our purview, but it is um it's an important point and and standing here before you today, I can't recall whether it was in the consent decree that um the mayor has committed to implementing, but we're not uh not yet working on. I I just uh so if it's there um it's not coming to my mind. But I also wanted to address you uh other important points you made about training and I want to talk a bit about culture. Um so we want to improve the culture. When you a good culture weeds out bad actors, a bad culture amplifies bad actors. So when you get the right culture, you will weed out those people. They'll be caught in training or they'll be caught in the field training officer piece of their training. And both of those are within our purview. One of the things that has been stalled is the field officer training uh so uh operating procedures. So that those institutional changes will at least in part address the issue of bad officers coming into the department. Mhm. And and um now we want to tread lightly on that cuz that's kind of a that's kind of a little murky water. We know Derek Shavein was a field training officer, right? Okay. Now come on now. That water's a little murky. >> That's why it has to clean. That's why it has to change, >> right? So um and ensuring that individuals who are elevated to um positions of direct instruction and leadership, right? um if there are a number of infractions that are that have not been investigated that are allegations as we are sitting with all of these over 300 plus internal affairs complaints that have not been effectively responded to which I'm hoping that we do obtain someone who is a very dedicated and committed internal affairs um investigator that has the privilege of staying with the department more than a few months. Um, I'm hoping that that will be the case here. Um, so that we can get to the bottom of some of these some of these issues because then that concerns me. If there are no um disciplinary actions for individuals who have carried out, you know, some some behaviors that have awarded complaints, then people think they've kind of skated by the system, right? And so what? No one saw me do it. I hid my hand. Let me try it again and again and again. You know, we don't want more of the same. We just really want better for people and I want to see people win and be great. But thank you for that. I really hope that we can write something in and ensure that officers that are coming to us from other places, you know, like 13 colonies and everywhere else that we are getting what we need and that they don't have a bunch of back burnered behavior. Just really want to make that clear. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> And thank you, Council Member Warren. And to your point, it's as uh director Douglas noted, the the recruitment and hiring piece is in the consent decree, not the settlement agreement. And so there is a specific few paragraphs in there about that. Uh council member Wanley, and I would note too, council members, if you do have to take off, if you let me know, I think we are on verge of of losing quorum here. >> So, >> yep. Thank you, uh, Chair Whiting. Um, a few of my colleagues have already highlighted some of the things that I wanted to comment on. One, it has been a frustration. I think a number of us have spoken at length, especially last term around Alifa's handling of lack of engagement with the public with the lack of engagement with this body. I know it was um a journey and fight um with try with working with Council President Payne last term to try to get a presentation scheduled for Alifa to come before this body because we had a number of concerns just based off of the progress reports and how things were handled. Um so I I'm happy that we're finally able to have a presentation in this chambers following the second progress report that you did um this year thus far. Um, but I do want to echo the sentiments that council member Chavez has raised and my uh staff even attended one of the most recent community meetings where those frustrations were loudly expressed as well and you made note of that. Um, I also want to echo um sentiment shared by my colleagues regarding internal affairs. Um, a dysfunctional internal affairs division signals to other officers, existing officers within the department, people who are looking to work here, that misconduct can be tolerated and there is no formal processes of accountability um to handle those things when they come up. and the fact that it's it leads to a place where people who do want to come forward and I want to know we have been sued when we've had officers come forward in the past um and they face retaliation um for doing so to hold their fellow officers accountable um having a dysfunctional IIA only entrenches a culture that led us to be in this predicament where we're in a consent decree for um violating the human rights of black and indigenous residents um human rights. So I I can't emphasize too of I don't I would love to know what the city shared as their rationale for why no corrective action was taken even after your your first report because this is something that has been detailed in multiple reports now. >> So would love to know um what was the city's rationale um for not taking more immediate corrective action on that? Uh, Chair W and Council Member Wley, first let me talk about the issue of appearing before the council. I I'm not sure what the source of that uh miscommunication or misperception. We've always been willing to meet. I maybe attribute to it. We're we're not from here not knowing how it works. Um maybe we were waiting for invitation. I I don't know. But we did appear we've appeared every time we've been asked when we issue reports. we do uh notify the council and we've always been willing and offered to come and appear and I'm glad we have this opportunity now. We've also offered to meet uh individually with council members. So whatever let me just be clear going forward we um are eager to be available to the council and to all of you and to and to the community. It's a core part of our work here in terms of the uh lack of progress in the uh internal affairs. When I spoke with Chief O'Hara about these issues, it was the explanations were attributed. There were three I think explanations. Some were he did bring in people in the hopes that they would improve the um situation. That didn't work out. And I don't think it's attributable to the individuals. I think it was the culture in the institution and maybe lack of direction from the chief. He expressed concerns about uh personnel um having the people to do this because he was very focused on crime fighting and reducing response times. Those are obviously very important, but they're a little bit apples and oranges in our view when it comes to the issue of the internal affairs investigation and officers on the street. Um, and in any event, you can't sacrifice one for the other. That's the challenge. That's the leadership and management challenge to get both of those um things done. and he expressed concerns about morale um and the impact of making these changes on morale which was not really defensible candidly. Um, so I think I I do think that some of this with the personnel changes when they happened, we thought great, this is the solution. Now things will get better. But then they didn't. And in my dealings with the chief where I came away, it was not a priority. >> Thank you. And I'm going to try to speed round through some of the rest of my questions because I know there's a few folks in queue and we're trying to make the deadline that we have when we for when we have closed uh captioners at 5:30. But just also next question because as you highlighted this body had extensive debate around the uh wellness community safety and wellness center and oftent times we've learned that Alifa and the settlement agreement was used as a place to say this was mandated and I just want to clarify the comments that you also or add for uh ask for additional clarification first anywhere in the settlement agreement requires us to purchase in this case the city was seeking a $40 million uh building, but anywhere in the settlement agreement says we have to do that purchase a whole new facility. >> Winsley, no, it's not it's not prescribed in the settlement agreement. >> Okay, thank you for that. That was not often communicated appropriately or accurately from the city. Also, in your recommendations on page eight, I believe, um where you said we should maintain this as a priority. Just for clarification to in the settlement agreement or from my understanding how we can relate to you, can the city also bring you a subsequent, let's say, or modify facility plan um that doesn't warrant a $40 million building that addresses the explicit training needs of its officers? Can they bring a modified proposal to you for consideration? Chair Whiting, Council Member Wanssley, from our perspective, the city's obligation is to meet the terms of the settlement agreement. So, yes, there may I'm not I wouldn't suggest that the training center is necessarily the only way, but to be candid, I'm not sure they're based on what we know that I have aware of other good options, but there may be out there. So um so yes if the city has an alternative that fulfills the requirements of the settlement agreement that's that's >> so we can bring our alternative because in the settlement agreement as you just confirmed it does not require us acquiring a new facility in itself. >> It does not but it does prescribe an assessment being done as to the best way to meet the requirement and that was the I recall the recommendation of the assessment. So the assessment that the city provided this the assessment that the city executed per the settlement agreement you just highlighted that settlement agreement requires that we do a facilities assessment correct that's it does not say you have to purchase we can then also do a assessment that says give us additional options because I don't know if you followed the community safety process what we heard was this is going to give officers massage rooms this is going to give officers um sim simulations and it did not connect explicitly to what are the hours that are required in our current consent decree what training things or provisions needed to be adhered to. So it was essentially a blanket canvas as opposed to actually outlining what was credibly needed. So, what I want to get at is, and you highlighted this, alternative proposals could be brought forward for consideration in order to meet the needs of our facilities improvements. >> Chair White and Council Member Wanley. Yes. >> Okay. Next piece to um Council Member Chavez highlighted this. Um I think what is very jarring about this report is initially the very first port report that we saw and that was like completely reiterated in multi multiple press releases and news articles was when you all shared that Minneapolis specifically is actually further ahead in its first year than any other city that we're aware of. That was Alifa's uh comments to now this most recent report saying the city of Minneapolis and the Minneapolis Police Department remain far from achieving the transformational change necessary to address the root causes of racebased policing. I think that signals also for a lot of the frustration that residents have been hearing to say within less than a year or a year and a half, how do we go from that to this? Um, and how did Alifa uh see these things kind of fall short? So, I I you mentioned qualitative metrics as being the determination of how to measure progress. Can you specify a little bit more of of what that means of the qualitative met uh metrics that you're employing? >> Uh, Chair Whiting, Council Member Wansley, it's not just qualitative measures, there are quantitative measures as well. Um the settlement agreement says however we can't measure compliance purely quantitative by a percentage and that makes a lot of sense. So it's it it's uh maybe less prescriptive but I wouldn't say it was entirely qualitative. The number of policies approved that's a number. >> Um certainly we'll look at when we do audits we we will look at percentages that may not drive the final compliance determination. Just to give you an example, um if you train 95% of officers in use of force, >> you say 95%'s pretty good. But if you have 5% of officer on the street who are never trained, that's not good enough. >> Um but at any given time, there's probably 5% that have been on vacation, left the department, are new. So you would look at the reasons for that five that that untrained percentage whatever it is and you would look to what corrective action is the city taking to make sure that ultimately all officers are appropriately trained >> in use of force. >> In a different area some like stop, search, and arrest officers. These legal concepts get a little vague. When you're stopping a car at 2 a.m. and you get many officers doing that, then you might might really be very hard to get 90% compliance on what a pat down versus uh uh u uh pat down versus an arrest search incident search incident to arrest. That's the thing we've seen. So, you give a little more grace because I'm not sure there's any department in the country that gets officers get that right uh 90% of the time. So that's that's what I was saying. We have to it has to be context specific. And let me just say uh briefly on the ark. Our job is to evaluate and share with you what we found. And it's true in the first year Minneapolis was off to a good fast start. They had a lot of people devoted. They were organized. They had a plan. As we reported over the subsequent reports, particularly in the issues of uh internal affairs, it deteriorated. And that that was the point of the slide that I presented that we were documenting this process uh all along the way. So it is not as if we said something in year one and then pivoted to something completely different in year two. We did report um the the path along the way. >> Yeah. I think it's the rapid deterioration of what was preceded of a really strong start to the leading to my next piece um that you highlight in the recommendations of um one of the hen hindrances you're seeing is that there hasn't been clear supervisory authority responsibilities and reporting established along with um standing meetings for all those who are responsible for this work. I think that was also jarring to see because I know on this body even when it pertains to health and wellness. We've devoted um staffing positions to this. Um we're we've been constantly told that there is a robust implementation unit that's in charge of this work. And also we know there's a chief, there's a office of safety commissioner, and then there's the ultimate boss, Mayor Jacob Fry, who oversees this. So I think also this too of as we're approaching year three, how do we get to a place where it doesn't seem to be there is no chain of command. Um and I don't think that's a question you could possibly answer that is leading to like what council member Chavez said. I think those are questions for staff themselves of what how are we absent of management structures as you cited. The last question that I do want to um raise in regards to IIA and misconduct is looking at what happened with former Chief O'Hara where the administration did not move to put them or put him on administrative leave as other jurisdictions have done when misconduct allegations have taken place. I want to know um are you all advising about any potential examples of policies to the FR administration on how they can make sure that's not repeated um to have a actual clear misconduct process um that outlines leave um requirements when misconduct allocations are being advanced um for MPD officers regardless if they're rank and file or in leadership. >> Chair white and council member WS leaders short answer is yes. That is something we're working on currently with the city. >> Okay. Thank you for that. Um I'll proceed to the next questions for colleagues. >> Yep. Thank you council member W. I know and for the expedited questions. I appreciate I know we have two more uh members left and we are again close to to losing quorum here. So I will pass it over to Council President Payne. >> Thank you Chair Whiting. Um, I want to share an appreciation for your optimism, uh, and also an appreciation for your attempts at remaining neutral and objective. Um, but I think those things are a little bit intention, right? Um, and as we go into year three and four, what we are looking out of, we're looking to you for is that independent and objective truthtelling about what's actually happening. And I think that that optimism can sometimes what we ultimately need from our independent monitor is credibility. And I think what council member Wansley was highlighting, you know, you know, most impressive department we've ever seen in a settlement agreement to failing to meet like the core foundational objectives. That that's a credibility risk, right? And as we get into year three and four, I'm really wanting to know how are we know it's not just that we have our policies in place on paper. It's not just that we've trained to those policies, but how are we knowing that it's actually translating to meaningful change on the ground and in the community on how officers are conducting themselves? And I think that I want to understand as we get into year three, what is that criteria that we're using for evaluation or audit? And I'd love to hear if you have a meaningful distinction between those two approaches to make sure that we have a credible source of truth because objectively our former chief interfered in an investigation that was sitting in IIA which you've highlighted has been a deteriorating functionality within the department which translates all the way through the chain of command to say that you don't need to take investigation seriously cuz the person at the top certainly doesn't. That's what that communicates and we appreciate the optimism about progress but I think what we need is credible truth about that progress and the credible truth is that we had a chief interfering in an investigation undermining any concept of accountability at a cultural level. Um and so if you could just speak to your three four audit and evaluation and how you're going to maintain credibility as it relates to some of those exercises. >> Chair whiting council president I I I appreciate the sentiment and the concern. Uh I don't know that optimism is inconsistent with objectivity and I think that if you think about it if you look at our reports I think they actually demonstrate our objectivity. In the first report, the city was pretty happy with what we said about them. You can imagine this report less. So sometimes one side will like what we say and another side might not. But our our job is to share what we see. And when I say optimism, I I I deeply I appreciate the trauma that the city has been through and the skepticism. As I think I've said publicly, many people think of us as the most recent promise waiting to be broken. And we take our responsibility to see this through um seriously, but it is also true and we say in part, we work every day with people in the department who are really working hard to get this done. Some who came to the department to get this done and and I don't want to be unfair to those people. That's why that's why in my answer in the media was well sometimes the chief was not always an ally, but it didn't mean the department is not cooperating. most people are. So, um I think there's a balance there. Um I think there's some limits on the way we report. We only write two reports a year, so we really only have those two opportunities to cover a lot of change. Um we do have three public meetings and when we meet with people, we tell them what's going on. Um so I I understand some of the constraints on the the process. Um but I think if you look at our findings, we stand by them and I I I don't think anyone could reasonably second guess them. To turn to your broader question um about um uh >> audits versus evaluation, >> audits. Uh um so yes, so when we do audits like any we we will look if we're doing um uh searches, let's look at searches. We'll look at was there articulable suspicion, was there um uh probable cause, was there procedural justice. We go through a very elaborate checklist of all of the elements that the settlement agreement addresses and then we'll take a sample of reports and we'll look at reports and body worn camera and we will review them for whether or not they meet those elements. That that would be a sort of on the performance piece when you're looking at what officers do on the street. Otherwise, we do audit by system. It's off. It's off. Can you Is it on now? >> There we go. >> Sorry, I must have bumped it. Um, so that's how we do those audits and we share that methodology and the results so you'll be able to see it. And then a followup is as it pertains to race-based policing, uh, have you figured out a methodology to sus that out and be able to bring some credibility around knowing that we are in compliance with some of those aspects of the settlement agreement. >> Chair White and Council President Payne, we have not yet. That is one of the thorniest issues in policing. We dealt with it in New Orleans. will be looking at it here, but I I I don't know that anyone has come up with a widely accepted way of looking at disparities, but it is something, you know, we we'd love to be the first. It it um there are different ways of looking at it. We'll be assessing all of those. >> And then my last question is uh we we have been pushing this administration time and time again to get to a finalized discipline matrix. What's the holdup? When can we expect one? I think I'm losing patience and I think we just need a hard timeline and if I like I'm at a loss at what to do. What tools do you have to get us to a definitive discipline matrix especially as it relates to having some way of accommodating the chief's role and when the chief needs discipline. >> Uh Chair White and Council President Payne, there are two pieces of that. the chief investigations, those are going to be done by the um uh office of uh community services um the commissioner there. So they're working on those policies and the chief has to be held to the same policies the department. Um so that's one piece on the corrective action matrix. Um the existing matrix was too had too few disciplinary levels and there was too much discretion. So we have worked with the city. We now have a framework. I think it's got seven levels which we think is appropriate. Now they're doing the work to then sort of fill each of those buckets with what kind of offenses, what kind of penalties and they'll come back to us. The work is undergoing. I don't have a date for when it will be completed. But we do have weekly meetings where we update um next step and we we march through a spreadsheet if you will for each task and and look at what was the last action, what's the date for the next action and then we see how we're tracking there. So, we're monitoring it closely and I think we're waiting for for the fill in for the the the exact u violations um for each level of the matrix to be provided to us. >> I'm going to end it there so that my other colleagues can get their questions in. >> Thank you as well, Council President Payne. Council member Stevenson, >> thank you. Oh, I clicked the wrong button. Thank you. Um I have a couple of questions for you and then a couple of comments um in general that I'll be looking at you but they won't be to you. Um first off in the presentation you said at one point that something was held up because IA had a preferred alternative vendor. Can you talk about that? Um just for the sake of time the way it was laid out made it sound like they wanted to give a contract to a preferred vendor which to me sounded like corruption. So, I just wanted to hear from you, >> uh, Chairman White and Council Member Stevenson. I did not mean corruption in any way. There was just in the early stages as they were sorting through which way to go. Different vendors offer different capabilities and packages and systems, and it it was just one of those, but it's not in any way. >> Okay. So, it it raised red flags for me around that, and you're saying that's not the case. >> No, thank you for allowing me to clarify that. That was not in any way uh my intent. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, and then I guess this isn't a question for you, but one of the one of the things that you highlighted is that they were not holding standing meetings. Uh, and I'm just I'm just really at a loss. Like we have standing meetings for everything. Everyone has standing meetings for everything. I mean, this is like this is before the baseline. So, I'm I'm frankly at a deep loss. Um yeah, there was there was a lot of very concerning things in this um and and um all of the all of the things in your presentation and in the report that you highlight that you know we are not on a path by 2028 to have complete policy, standard operating procedures, training requirements among many other things. That's just the one I could write down before the the slide flipped. Um, it it is really highlighting to me, and this isn't to you, sir. Uh, this is really highlighting to me who is not in this room right now. Um, Commissioner Barnett couldn't bother to be here. The mayor or someone from his office couldn't bother to be here. Uh, the chief of police, the interim chief of police couldn't bother to be here. There's a lot of a lot of folks on this body who who couldn't bother to stay or be here. And it's it's really highlighting for me the the importance that this has for other people. We heard a lot about uh the settlement agreement recently and how important it is and now the the absence of certain folks is screaming loudly. Um the frustration that you're sensing from me um is coming from my experience and the experience in my community. uh my personal experience of it being against sorry [clears throat] it being against policy for a Minneapolis police officer to shoot someone in the head with a rubber bullet and yet that happened to me while that policy was in place. Um and no discipline has ever been levied against this officer. Uh my community uh one of my constituents was murdered by ICE uh and my community really thought MPD was going to protect them from ICE and that did not happen. Um and yeah, so George Floyd I represent George much of George Floyd Square, not the actual spot where he was murdered, but the rest of it. Um, you know, my community and myself, we are we are just we're sitting here extremely frustrated uh with the lack of progress and then with the lack of attention. I mean, folks who are not in this room can't see that the seats are empty. Nobody is here. And not I'm not talking about community members. I'm talking about what if we had a question we wanted to ask MPD. I mean a single question that we wanted to ask and have answered and they are not here. The may the mayor's office other folks from the administration they were here for earlier items. This is this is the lowest hanging fruit to make to make progress the lowest hanging fruit aside from standing meetings to make progress on on the settlement agreement. And yet here we are. And so I uh I'm I'm flabbergasted. I'm I'm dismayed. I'm a lot of things. Um yeah, I I have some other things written down that maybe I'll have to skip, but I I guess I'm I'm just want to reiterate that the message that I am receiving by nobody being in this room to answer any questions is that this doesn't matter to them. And if that is not the case, then I encourage those folks to be in this room next time. Um, yeah. Yeah. Really, really disappointed. Thank you for the report. Um, thank you for answering our questions. >> Thank you, >> Council Member. >> Uh, thanks, Chair Whiting. As we end this conversation today, I just want to challenge the notion that the responsibility is just on the chief and that because the chief there was a change in leadership, the issues are resolved. That is just not true. That is how we will lead to more consent decrees in the future. That's an excuse and an excuse is not accountability. So, I just wanted to mention that I read through our code of ordinances, the chief of police under the d is under the direction of the mayor and I at least wanted to mention that. So I just want to be clear that to Leafa that just because and to my colleague just because there's a new chief does not mean issue is solved. So I just want to make that clear. There's also the role of the office of community safety. What is their role in this? And again I want to echo the concerns and maybe we should just delay this item a cycle so we can have folks from the administration answer our questions next week. So I will make a motion to delay this a cycle. That way admin answers the questions next week. Next >> second. [laughter] Do we have an I mean >> yeah I think you could do that >> and and I would just like to know too and just a piece on that uh right in the the hope for this presentation itself is specifically right we will have two opportunities uh baked into this committee uh particularly ask questions of our independent evaluator particularly on how they work through and come to the decisions that are in the reports and talk through any of the evaluative process uh to get to this point where we're seeing with MPD. I think uh I I share the same I think concerns as my colleagues here uh particularly about information and being able to have the opportunity to ask questions of MPD. We are working with MPD specifically uh that we internally they have a reform stat like uh community or sorry with internal meeting uh they do those I believe monthly. uh the hope uh for this body. We are working again on the cadence now but having those again baked into this committee and this body uh so that we do have the ability to ask those questions of MPD in a space that is outside of of the work particularly that AIFA does. I think there we are the hope for this committee is to do that work specifically with ALIFA have the opportunity of AIFA to ask within their role on independent evaluation and then ask about the actual progress and the day-to-day work uh that MPD does. And so that is why we've kind of uh uh delineated the two versions of that so that we have time and and and ample time uh uh the hope I think again is by monthly to ask any questions on reform work of MPD in a specific setting with MPD here and and the hope again is for the chief to to answer those questions and present that uh and then again ask for a a venue uh with Alifa to ask uh monitoring questions uh that are above of outside of the broader context. Uh and just that piece there I know kind of I I as we are wrapping up here uh specifically uh I guess I guess we have a motion before us right council member >> I guess what I'm trying to get at is >> obviously this is about Alifa but the city has a role here the administration MPD office of community safety no one is here in this room it is literally empty we have questions about the report >> how are we supposed to address accountability if we can ask questions about what we are seeing failing and what my opinion is failing to meet our settlement agreement goals year one and two. I want the administration to answer our questions and P to answer our questions. Is that going to be on the agenda next week? My reason for delaying this item is so we can ask those questions and get answers to our questions next cycle. >> Another way to address this is by putting it on the agenda, which I'm happy to submit an RCA. >> Yeah. >> Or, you know, walk on an LDFO council requesting them to come next week. >> Yeah. But like the easiest thing here because it's less work to do is just delay in this item cycle so MPD can answer our questions next cycle. That was my reason for delay. >> I mean if that's the the will of the body I think if it's helpful I think let's have a conversation as well outside of the the setting here to figure out what cadence is is helpful to have these conversations particularly for MPD because I think we're all on the same page here of of wanting uh MPD and specific members from the enterprise to to answer the questions about the proposition. I think if we have them next cycle, that would be great. And then you figure out the cadence after that. >> Sure. >> So, I'm happy to withdraw my motion if if it can get on the agenda next. >> I'm like, we are in conversation with with MPD leadership at the moment and so I think that's something that they would be open to. >> Council member Warren, did you have a question or was that just >> say we got five minutes? >> We sure do. Uh, we will we'll wrap up with that. Um, I think we will ask then the clerk's office and thank you uh uh uh Mr. Douglas for for the presentation. I appreciate your time being here uh to receive and file. >> Wait, I I I don't think we have clarity. I think the motion is still on the table. It has not been drawn. I I will say my opinion. >> Why do we want to work on an RCA if we don't have to? >> We just let's just forward it. Let's just take this to the next cycle and then our Alifa presenters, thank you so much for being here. And then you don't have to be here next time around. That can just be administration. I think we should just vote on the motion and save ourselves some work. >> Yeah. And council member, I think that the only word for me if if if we and this might be a question for the clerk's office, if we move forward with or sorry, delay this a cycle, does the topic only have to remain germanine to the alifa presentation? because I think the hope is that we could ask any version of questions for MPD and that's why I think if we remove it it can be outside of just uh the Alifa presentation because that that is my worry is that it would have to be specific to the Alifa presentation. >> I believe it would have to be specific to the title. I just want to make sure that next cycle, which is literally I think July 28th, >> there is a report or an item on the agenda that is going to allow us to ask for an update on the progress of the LEFA report that shows we're completely failing. >> That's it. >> Our office is more than happy to get it on the agenda. Yeah, our office is more than happy. >> Okay. So, that's going to that will be on the agenda. So, I mean, if anybody else has a different opinion, I'm happy. >> Can I just say this? I think it's also important that you know, whoever it is that you need to get those answers from that those individuals are who you're requesting to be here because you can ask the same questions over and over again, but if the people who have those answers aren't requested to be here, you're not going to get the answers you're looking for. >> Council member Stevenson. >> Yeah. Um I I think the report is expansive slashsp specific enough that we like I I would prefer that we just move this to next cycle and we can stick exclusively to the report slpresentation uh and then we can I mean the world's our oyster. We could just every single time have additional which I would prefer but um I I my my strong preference is that we stick with the original motion and just post postpone. >> Yep. If if that's the will of the body, I think it's it's >> Yeah. And if let's just say that we find out from the clerks after council that we have to submit an RCA, we'll just do that. So good. Let's just keep it. It sounds like do we have to then remove since it was withdrawn or >> it's a motion to continue one cycle? >> Yeah. Still on the table. >> Just do a voice vote then. >> Perfect. Thank you. Uh clerks, if we're able to do a voice vote, that would be wonderful. Uh all those in favor, please say I. >> I. That is passed. [laughter] Wonderful. And then I will pass it back to our chair. >> Without objection, we are adjourned.