[0:14] Good afternoon. My name is Jason Chavez [0:17] and I'm the chair of the committee of [0:18] the whole. I'm going to call to order [0:20] our regular committee meeting for [0:22] Tuesday, November 18th, 2025. Before we [0:25] begin the meeting, I want to offer a [0:27] friendly reminder to all members, staff, [0:28] and the public that these meetings are [0:30] broadcast live to enable greater public [0:33] participation. These broadcasts include [0:35] real-time captioning as a further method [0:37] to increase the accessibility of our [0:39] proceedings to the community. Therefore, [0:41] all speakers need to be mindful of the [0:43] rate of their speech so that our [0:44] captioners can fully capture and [0:46] transcribe all comments for the [0:47] broadcast. We ask all speakers to [0:49] moderate the speed and clarity of their [0:51] comments. At this time, I'll ask the [0:53] clerk to call the role to verify the [0:54] presence of a quorum. [0:56] >> Council member Payne, [0:57] >> present. [0:57] >> Wanssley, [0:58] >> present. [0:59] >> Rainville, [1:00] >> present. [1:00] >> Vita, [1:01] >> present. [1:02] >> Ellison is absent. Osman [1:04] >> present. [1:05] >> Cashman present. Jenkins is absent. [1:08] Chuktype is absent. Kosski [1:11] >> present. [1:12] >> Palmo [1:13] >> present. [1:14] >> Vice Chair Chowry [1:16] >> present. And Cher Chavez [1:17] >> present. [1:18] >> There are 10 members present. Let the [1:20] record reflect that we have a quorum. [1:22] Before we start with the consent agenda, [1:24] we will begin by with our standing [1:26] committee reports. We'll first begin [1:28] with the administration and enterprise [1:29] oversight committee chaired by council [1:31] member Wansley. [1:35] All right. Uh thank you, Mr. Chair. The [1:38] administration and enterprise oversight [1:41] committee is bringing forward 22 items. [1:45] The first is a gift acceptance from [1:47] city's today institute for lodging and [1:50] mill expenses. Two is a bid for public [1:53] sidewalk snow and ice removal. Three is [1:56] a bid for target center steam station [1:59] improvements. [2:01] Four is a bid for freely softening plant [2:04] lime system replacement. Five is a bid [2:08] for Lindell Avenue North traffic control [2:11] signal systems and storm sewer [2:13] pedestrian curb ramps improvements [2:16] project. Six is a master contract for [2:19] eligible providers of workforce [2:21] development services for 2026 through [2:24] 2028. [2:26] Seven is a contract with Kodc [2:28] architectural group for architecture and [2:30] engineering services for the carpenter [2:33] and mechanic shop on the freely water [2:35] treatment campus. Eight is contract [2:38] amendment with Hogan Adams PLLC for [2:41] afteraction reviews and reports. Nine is [2:45] contract amendment with Sheihi [2:47] Construction Company for lighting [2:48] replacement and target center escalator [2:51] lobby. 10 is contract amendment with [2:54] Tyizac Concrete, Inc. for the Phillips [2:57] traffic safety project. [2:59] 11 is contract amendment with Bolton and [3:02] Mink, Inc. for engineering and design [3:04] services for Bridge 9 improvements [3:07] project. 12 is a contract amendment with [3:10] Certified Languages International LLC [3:13] for remote interpreting services. [3:16] 13 is contract amendments with multiple [3:19] vendors for community trauma response [3:21] services. 14 is contract amendments with [3:24] various immigration legal services [3:26] providers. 15 is contract with various [3:30] organizations for partnership engagement [3:32] fund projects. [3:35] 16 is cooperative funding agreement with [3:38] the Minnesota Historical Society for the [3:40] St. Anthony Falls Heritage Board. 17 is [3:44] Minneapolis Advisory Committee on People [3:47] with Disabilities Appointments. 18 is [3:51] 2025 property tax special assessment of [3:54] delinquent utility charges. [3:58] 19 is a legal settlement workers [4:01] compensation claim of Jarrett Moore. 20 [4:04] is a legal settlement MDCR charge number [4:07] 2309198. [4:10] 21 is a legal settlement Marian Lewis v. [4:14] City of Minneapolis and 22 is a gift [4:17] acceptance from the public rights [4:20] project for conference travel lodging [4:22] and mill expenses. And with that, I will [4:24] stand for any questions. [4:26] >> Thank you. I'd like to acknowledge that [4:28] we've been joined by Council Vice [4:29] President Chuck Tai. Seeing no [4:31] questions, we'll move on to the budget [4:33] committee chaired by Council Vice [4:34] President Chuck Tai. [4:36] >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. The budget [4:38] committee is bringing forward one item [4:40] for the body's consideration on [4:42] Thursday, which is a passage of [4:43] resolution approving the adjusted [4:46] 20-year neighborhood park plan [4:48] guaranteed minimum annual amounts for 20 [4:51] 27 through 2031 due to inflation. I'll [4:56] stand for any questions. [4:58] >> Thank you. Seeing no one on queue, move [5:01] move on to the business, housing, and [5:02] zoning committee chaired by council [5:04] member Osman. [5:06] Thank you, Chair Chavez. Business, [5:08] housing, and zoning committee will be [5:10] bringing 22 items to Thursday council [5:12] meeting. Item one is approving an [5:15] ordinance related to the heritage [5:16] preservation regulation. Item two is [5:19] approving a liquor license and sidewalk [5:21] cafe license for Bobby Kajun. Item three [5:25] is approving an extended hour license [5:27] for U tobacco. Item four is approving an [5:30] extended hour license for Sip of Silk. [5:34] Item five is approving annual [5:38] levies for special assessment. Item six [5:40] is denying an appeal submitted by Marsha [5:44] Haginson for the property at 2821 [5:47] [snorts] Brookwood Terrace. Item seven [5:50] is considering an appeal from 1717 [5:53] developers demolish the John Cook House. [5:56] This item was sent forward without [5:58] recommendation. Item eight is approving [6:00] three liquor license. Item nine is [6:02] approving seven liquor license renewals. [6:05] Item 10 is approving 13 gambling license [6:08] renewals. Item 11 accepting a grant from [6:10] the state for dislocated workers. [6:15] Item 12 is approving a descertification [6:19] for three tiff districts. Item 13 is [6:22] approving comprehensive plan amendment [6:25] for river north development. Item 14 is [6:28] authorizing modification to the Noah [6:31] preservation fund. Item 15 is amending [6:34] the contract with KMA development for [6:38] the property at 1200 West Broadway. Item [6:42] 16 is approving a new street name for [6:45] Kirk Kirk Washington Jr. submitted by [6:48] council member Allison. Item 17 is also [6:51] approving a new street name for Chi [6:53] Xiang submitted by council member [6:56] Allison. Item 18 is approving [6:59] appropriation [7:00] for demolishing two properties of the [7:03] city. Item 19 is approving resated [7:07] land sale for homes for homies for the [7:11] emergency stabilization pilot program. [7:14] Item 20 is approving annual affordable [7:17] housing trust fund award recommendation. [7:20] Item 21 is approving restoration of 9% [7:24] lowincome housing tax credit. And [7:26] lastly, item 22 is approving as amended [7:30] an ordinance related to signage on [7:32] premises. This was [7:35] this was approved as amended during the [7:38] BIS committee meeting last Thursday. [7:40] With that, I will stand for any [7:42] questions. Thank you. [7:45] >> Thank you. Seeing no one on queue, we'll [7:47] move on to the climate and [7:48] infrastructure committee chaired by [7:50] council member Kashman. [7:52] >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. The climate [7:53] infrastructure committee has 10 items [7:56] this cycle. Item one is a resolution [7:58] honoring the staff and contractors that [8:00] worked on the Henipin Avenue South [8:02] reconstruction project. Item two is [8:04] related to the 1 Avenue South [8:06] reconstruction project from Franklin to [8:08] Grant and has resolutions ordering the [8:10] work to proceed adopting special [8:12] assessments and requesting the board of [8:14] estimate and taxation authorize issuance [8:16] and sale of assessment bonds and order [8:18] the abandonment and removal of areaways [8:20] in conflict with the project. [8:24] Item three is related to Cedar AV [8:26] reconstruction from 24th Street East to [8:28] Lake Street East and has resolutions [8:30] ordering the work to proceed, adopt [8:32] special assessments, request the board [8:34] of estimate and taxation to authorize [8:36] issuance and sale of assessment bonds [8:38] and order the abandonment and removal of [8:40] areaways in conflict with the project. [8:43] Item four is related to Lowry a [8:46] Northeast Street Reconstruction Project [8:48] Phase 2 from Marshall Street Northeast [8:50] to Washington Street Northeast and has [8:53] similar resolutions to the past two [8:55] items. Item five is authorizing a [8:58] subordinate funding agreement with the [9:00] Met Council for local work design and [9:02] administrative costs related to the blue [9:04] line extension. Item six is amending [9:08] 2025 capital improvement appropriation [9:10] to authorize closure and appropriation [9:13] adjustments for capital projects and [9:14] programs as well as reallocations and [9:16] redistributions of excess funds. Item [9:19] seven is authorizing a cooperative [9:21] agreement with Henipin County for Cedar [9:22] A reconstruction. Item [snorts] eight is [9:25] authorizing a utility easement with the [9:27] park board for storm sewer and storm [9:29] water basins within Columbia Golf Course [9:31] and the park. Item nine is authorizing a [9:34] joint powers agreement with the park [9:35] board for parkway paving repair and [9:37] reconstruction. [9:39] And finally, item 10 is a resolution [9:41] updating the price structure and rates [9:43] for electric vehicle charging [snorts] [9:45] in the public rightway as part of the EV [9:48] spot network pilot. I'll stand for [9:50] questions. [9:52] >> Thank you. Seeing no one on Q, we'll go [9:56] on to the Intergovernmental Relations [9:58] Committee chaired by Vice Chair Chowry. [10:05] Thank you, Council Member Chavez. Uh, [10:08] our IGR committee is just bringing um [10:12] forward for receive and file um is uh [10:16] item number one, 2026 legislative policy [10:19] priorities. And then item number two, a [10:22] presentation on 2025 federal legislative [10:25] updates. [10:28] >> Thank you. Seeing no one on Q, we'll [10:33] lastly go to the public health and [10:35] safety committee with the vice chair, [10:37] council member Wansy. [10:39] >> Thank you, Chair Chavez. The public [10:41] health and safety committee will be [10:43] bringing forward two items. The first is [10:46] a opioid overdoses and possess [10:49] possession of naloxon or other opiate [10:52] antagonists. Uh two is towards zero [10:56] death grant from the state of Minnesota [10:58] through the city of Crystal Police [10:59] Department to improve the safety of [11:01] Minneapolis roads. With that, I will [11:04] stand for questions. [11:07] >> Thank you. And there is no one on Q. So [11:10] we will now go on to the consent agenda. [11:13] There are three items in total on the [11:15] consent agenda. Item number one is [11:18] setting a public hearing for our next [11:19] meeting on December 9th to consider an [11:21] ordinance related to employee authority [11:23] in immigration matters. Item number two [11:26] is also setting a public hearing for [11:28] December 9th to consider the appointment [11:30] of Patrick Burns to the ethical [11:32] practices board. And lastly, item number [11:35] three is referring to staff and [11:36] ordinance related to city's government [11:38] structure implementation ordinance. With [11:41] that, are there any discussions from [11:42] committee members? [11:46] Seeing no one on queue and seeing no [11:48] further discussion, I'll move to set [11:50] items one and two for public hearings on [11:52] December 9th at 1:30 p.m. Committee of [11:55] the whole and refer item three to staff [11:58] on that motion. All those in favor say [12:00] I. I. Those oppose say nay. Any [12:03] abstensions? The eyes have it. And that [12:06] motion is carried. Now moving on to [12:09] discussion. We have one item which is a [12:11] resolution that adopts an enterprise [12:13] policy framework. City Clerk Casey Carl [12:15] is here to present more on this item for [12:17] us. Welcome. [12:19] >> Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. As [12:20] noted, my name is Casey Carl. I have the [12:22] privilege of serving as clerk for the [12:24] city of Minneapolis. May it please the [12:26] committee, as the chair indicated, I'm [12:28] here to present a new policy framework [12:30] for the city and to request your formal [12:33] approval of that framework as well as a [12:34] series of related actions. Um, to set [12:38] the stage, I'll remind members. I sent [12:40] out an email about this earlier about a [12:42] month ago, but in 2004, the council and [12:46] mayor at that time adopted a formal [12:48] policy on policies, which is set forward [12:50] in council action number 2004A 0966. [12:56] That action established a uniform [12:58] process to create city policies. It [13:00] authorized the formation of a policy [13:02] review group to be responsible for the [13:05] internal review and vetting processes of [13:07] new policies. and it authorized the [13:09] creation of a policy library. [13:12] Unfortunately, the implementation of [13:14] that vision for a uniform policy system [13:16] was fumbled from almost the beginning. [13:19] The PRG was reduced to an editorial role [13:21] that focused primarily on correct [13:23] grammar rather than substantive content. [13:26] The library was largely abandoned due to [13:28] lack of resources and the policy process [13:30] became more of an ad hoc choose your own [13:32] adventure approach rather than a [13:34] consistent standard practice across the [13:36] enterprise. As a consequence, it's [13:38] difficult to know what policies the city [13:40] has in place, the currency of those [13:42] policies, and whether they remain [13:44] legally effective or have potentially [13:45] been replaced. And in many cases, it's [13:47] challenging to locate our existing [13:49] policies. Furthermore, the city's basic [13:51] government structure was fundamentally [13:53] changed in 2021 when voters approved the [13:56] legislative council executive mayor [13:57] system, which separated powers between [14:00] council and mayor. And under that [14:02] system, the mayor as the chief executive [14:03] officer has control over the daily [14:05] operations of the city. that new [14:07] structure is not reflected in the city's [14:09] existing policies. Rather than address [14:12] policies on a one-off basis, staff [14:14] determined that an update to the [14:16] essential city policy framework was a [14:18] better approach so that we might update [14:20] and address all policies on a more [14:22] holistic go forward basis. Over much of [14:25] the past year, as we've tackled any [14:27] number of other proposals and [14:29] challenges, the offices of city clerk [14:31] and city attorney have reviewed, [14:32] revised, and updated that essential [14:34] policy framework. the result of which is [14:37] the guide to the city's policy framework [14:39] and a copy of that new guide was [14:41] included in your briefing materials. [14:43] This guide defines the various legal [14:45] authorities in order which constitute [14:48] the external policy framework within [14:50] which the city exists and operates. It [14:52] [snorts] then defines the internal [14:54] categories of policies and focuses on [14:57] regula which focus on regulating and [14:59] directing the operations of city [15:00] government. The guide also identifies [15:02] the roles and responsibilities of key [15:04] stakeholders who are involved in the [15:06] city's policy process. This presentation [15:09] summarizes the key elements of that [15:11] guide which we request be formally [15:13] adopted by city council. And to that [15:15] end, a resolution has been prepared and [15:18] included in your briefing materials. [15:21] So, you've heard me state before that [15:23] the city of Minneapolis is a municipal [15:25] corporation that exists within the state [15:27] of Minnesota. It's organized and [15:29] operates under the provisions of a home [15:31] rule charter. This slide attempts to [15:33] visualize that legal and policy [15:36] framework. So, as you can see on that [15:38] slide, the framework is derived from and [15:40] is determined by an interlocking system [15:43] of applicable laws. It dictates how [15:45] formal authority is defined, delineated, [15:48] and delegated across and within the city [15:50] government, how decisions are [15:52] operationalized, monitored, and [15:53] evaluated, and how government services [15:56] are delivered. These various legal [15:58] authorities are organized in a hierarchy [16:00] shown on this slide. At the highest and [16:02] outermost level of the framework are [16:04] federal and state laws that are [16:06] applicable to the city. Within that [16:08] outermost level is the city's charter. [16:10] As you've heard before, the city charter [16:12] is the city's constitution. It is the [16:14] primary legal authority under which the [16:16] city exists and operates. Subordinate to [16:19] the charter then is the city's code of [16:21] ordinances. where the city charter is [16:23] our constitution. The code of ordinances [16:25] is the codified body of municipal law [16:28] enacted by the city. And then within [16:31] that at the innermost level are the [16:32] official acts of the city defined by the [16:35] charter. These are classified into three [16:37] categories. First, ordinances which are [16:40] essentially municipal statutes. Second, [16:42] resolutions which are formal acts that [16:45] usually relate to municipal priorities, [16:47] policies and positions. And then third, [16:50] actions. actions encompass all of the [16:53] other kinds of official acts that the [16:55] city does which are not done by means of [16:57] an ordinance or resolution. So, as you [17:00] can see then on this slide, the various [17:02] levels of applicable laws work like a [17:04] set of nested bowls with the federal and [17:07] state laws at the outermost border and [17:09] level and the innermost policy level [17:11] being those official acts of the city. [17:14] If you're following along in the guide, [17:15] I've just covered pages one and two. Uh [17:18] this part of the framework largely [17:19] addresses the external facing policies [17:22] used by the city for community [17:24] governance. [17:26] This slide attempts to provide the same [17:28] view but through the lens of government [17:30] structure. So at the highest level you [17:32] can see we have enterprise policies [17:34] which are adopted by the city's [17:36] governing body. The governing body is [17:38] the council and the mayor working [17:40] together. The governing body is the [17:42] combination of the city's legislative [17:44] council and its executive mayor. By [17:46] state law, every city must have a [17:48] governing body and it is this governing [17:50] body which holds all the powers of a [17:52] municipal corporation that are delegated [17:54] by the state to be exercised at the [17:56] local level. So at that highest level [17:58] then again these enterprise policies are [18:00] actions taken by the council and the [18:02] mayor. Enterprise policies are binding [18:05] on the city enterprise and are [18:07] applicable to all departments unless [18:09] specifically provided otherwise. They [18:11] are the highest level of policy within [18:13] the enterprise. And just as the city may [18:15] not take action in conflict with higher [18:18] levels of legal authority, for example, [18:20] state and federal laws, um so too must [18:23] all lower levels of policy be within the [18:25] scope of enterprise policies adopted by [18:28] the council and mayor. Enterprise [18:30] policies are intended to establish [18:32] consistent standards for those matters [18:34] that have general enterprisewide [18:36] applicability within the general [18:38] policymaking authority of the city [18:40] council. So you could say enterprise [18:42] policies are not about operations or [18:44] management functions. An enterprise [18:46] policy is essentially a highlevel [18:48] statement of values derived from the [18:51] city's mission, vision, and purpose. [18:53] They are used to articulate overall [18:56] goals, priorities and objectives to be [18:58] pursued by the city enterprise, the [19:00] results or the outcomes to be achieved [19:03] and the standards that guide the [19:04] enterprise in pursuit of those goals, [19:06] priorities, results and outcomes. At a [19:09] macro level, enterprise policies usually [19:12] are focused on addressing questions that [19:14] address why, what, and for whom. [19:17] Enterprise policies are to be made by [19:19] resolution following the council's [19:21] standard legislative process. The [19:23] adopted enterprise policies are to be [19:25] codified in the city's policy library [19:27] for universal access. As noted in the [19:30] guide, the term universal access means [19:33] that the policy is filed with the office [19:35] of city clerk, is posted in the city's [19:37] digital policy library, is distributed [19:40] to all departments, and as public data [19:43] under the Minnesota government data [19:44] practices act, is available to the [19:46] public upon request. [19:49] That takes care of the blue enterprise [19:51] policies at the top. Below that level of [19:53] enterprise policies are administration [19:55] policies. These are shown in green on [19:58] the slide. Administration policies are [20:00] within the purview of the mayor and by [20:02] extension the mayor's cabinet of [20:03] executive officers. An administration [20:06] policy is a policy issued by the mayor [20:09] to establish policy or to provide [20:11] direction, clarity, or instruction to [20:13] the executive branch, the city's [20:15] administration under the mayor's [20:16] authority pursuant to city charter. An [20:19] administration policy may be applicable [20:22] to the entire administration or to [20:24] specific departments, divisions, and [20:26] units in the executive branch. [20:28] Administration policies could be used to [20:30] address administrative, management, and [20:32] operational issues and provide specific [20:35] guidance or instruction from the mayor. [20:37] Where enterprise policies focus on [20:39] questions of why, what, and for whom, [20:42] administration policies tend to focus on [20:44] questions about by whom, when, where, [20:48] how, how much, and other types of [20:50] management level issues. An [20:52] administration policy cannot conflict [20:54] with an enterprise policy but must [20:56] operate within the parameters that are [20:58] created by applicable laws and [21:00] enterprise policies. Administration [21:02] policies are promulgated by executive [21:04] order and as we have seen and [21:06] experienced over the past few years, [21:08] executive orders are made in writing by [21:11] the mayor and they become effective once [21:13] they're filed with the office of city [21:14] clerk. Administration policies are not [21:17] official acts of the governing body. So [21:19] they are not published in the city's [21:20] official newspaper like enterprise [21:22] policies are. However, they will be [21:25] codified in the city's policy library [21:27] for universal access. This assures both [21:30] transparency and accountability to the [21:32] public for executive orders and [21:34] administration policies. [21:37] Finally, at the lowest level, department [21:39] policies are adopted, implemented, and [21:42] enforced at the department operating [21:43] level. These policies reflect delegated [21:46] authority within enterprise and [21:49] administration policies. They are used [21:51] to amplify, clarify or to provide [21:54] specific direction within the department [21:56] about the implementation, administration [21:58] and enforcement of enterprise or [22:01] administration policies. They also can [22:04] be used to establish departmental work [22:06] rules and standards tied to performance [22:08] expectations or to implement the [22:10] authority that's been delegated to [22:12] departments to carry out their work. The [22:15] other uh piece you'll notice on this [22:17] slide is the policy review group or PRG. [22:20] This is a group that's been created to [22:22] function as the internal policy review [22:24] team. This group will be responsible for [22:27] reviewing, monitoring, making [22:29] recommendations for and assuring regular [22:32] reviews of all enterprise and [22:34] administration policies. It will manage [22:36] the internal vetting process for policy [22:39] proposals and assure regular reviews of [22:42] all existing policies. The work of the [22:44] PRG will be facil facilitated by the [22:47] city operations officer and its members [22:49] will include the city attorney and the [22:51] city clerk or their design. It will also [22:54] include other department representatives [22:56] to ensure an appropriate balance of [22:58] perspectives and cross-dep departmental [23:00] disciplines are engaged in the city's [23:02] internal policy development and review [23:04] processes. [23:06] So this is the structure anticipated by [23:08] the new enterprise policy framework uh [23:12] reflecting government structure. [23:15] On this slide, what I've done is add the [23:17] policies I just described as you can see [23:20] to the right on this slide. So you have [23:22] the primarily internal facing policy [23:24] categories in addition to that basic [23:26] legal framework that I described [23:28] earlier. The administration uh or the [23:31] enterprise administration and department [23:32] policies all nest together within the [23:35] city's official acts, but they're pulled [23:37] out here on this slide for easy [23:38] identification and classification [23:40] purposes. As I noted earlier, you could [23:43] separate this framework into the [23:44] primarily external facing policy [23:46] functions focused on community [23:48] governance. Those would be done on the [23:51] image to the left and those that are [23:53] primarily internal facing functions [23:55] focused on enterprise direction and [23:57] regulation which are those largely [23:59] focused uh or shown on the right of this [24:01] image. The internal facing policy [24:03] framework addresses the organization [24:05] planning direction and oversight of the [24:08] day-to-day operations of the city and [24:10] the delivery of the city's services and [24:12] programs. Together, these two parts of [24:14] the policy framework work in tandem to [24:16] provide both community governance and [24:19] enterprise regulation. [24:23] That summarizes the uh overview of the [24:25] guide to the city's policy framework. [24:27] Staff, as I mentioned, has prepared a [24:29] resolution which if adopted would [24:31] accomplish several outcomes which I've [24:33] already gone over but listed here in [24:35] summary. First, it would formally adopt [24:38] that guide to the city's policy [24:39] framework as the foundation for the new [24:41] enterprise policy on policies. At the [24:44] same time, it would rescend the previous [24:45] action from 2004, which as I noted is [24:48] outdated and does not reflect the city's [24:50] governance structure. Again, the guide [24:52] is included in your briefing materials [24:54] and will be attached as an exhibit to [24:55] the resolution for incorporation by [24:57] reference. Second, as provided in the [25:00] guide, the various categories of city [25:01] policy would be defined as I've already [25:03] outlined them for you, which aligns with [25:05] the new government structure as we [25:07] discussed. Enterprise policies would be [25:09] the shared responsibility of the city's [25:11] governing body. Administration policies [25:13] would be the mayor's responsibility and [25:14] as appropriate, the mayor's cabinet, and [25:16] department policies would be within the [25:18] authority delegated to the departments [25:20] under both enterprise and administration [25:22] policies and any applicable laws. Third, [25:25] authority for policy and specific roles [25:27] and responsibilities are clearly [25:29] articulated within the uh guide, which [25:31] also reflects, as I said, the new [25:33] government structure. And finally, it [25:35] authorizes the creation of a new policy [25:38] review group to serve as the city's [25:39] internal policy review and evaluation [25:41] team as well as the development and [25:44] maintenance of a city policy library to [25:46] provide access to city policies. [25:50] I should also note that the council did [25:52] allocate or reallocate funds in this [25:55] year's budget from the legislative [25:56] department uh to pay for the acquisition [25:59] of a new enterprise policy management [26:01] system. Uh that work was foundational to [26:05] our understanding of what the needs of [26:07] the enterprise were. And so as the [26:10] attorney and clerk's offices finalized [26:12] this work, our intention was to turn to [26:14] the work of acquiring that new system. [26:16] We still have the $300,000 that council [26:20] authorized for the acquisition of that [26:21] new system in our budget. We have [26:23] already cons uh consulted with President [26:25] Payne. We anticipate uh requesting that [26:28] that money be rolled over so that to the [26:30] 2026 fiscal year budget so that we can [26:33] complete the work of procuring that new [26:35] system with the already allocated funds. [26:40] So this slide then outlines anticipated [26:43] next steps for the project. As you can [26:46] see, once we have the new framework [26:47] formally adopted, we expect that before [26:50] the end of this year, staff will [26:51] accomplish two major objectives. First, [26:54] we'll formally establish the policy [26:56] review group so that it can carry [26:58] forward the rest of this project. [27:00] Second, we'll bring forward, as I just [27:01] noted, the budget amendment to carry [27:03] forward the existing project funds so [27:05] that work to acquire a new system to [27:07] manage enterprise policies can be [27:09] completed in 2026. [27:11] As soon as we establish the policy [27:13] review group, we anticipate that we'll [27:15] be organizing two working groups that [27:17] represent multiple departments. The [27:19] first work group will be responsible for [27:22] leading the acquisition, configuration, [27:24] and implementation of that new [27:26] enterprise policy management system. The [27:29] second team will be tasked with [27:31] identifying and collecting all existing [27:33] policies and classifying them according [27:36] to this new framework. Neither of those [27:38] scopes of work will be completed in the [27:40] next two months. Rather, we will [27:42] organize those work groups and those [27:44] work groups will proceed working in [27:45] parallel uh into 2026. And then looking [27:49] into the next year, steps four, five and [27:51] six, we anticipate by by the second [27:54] quarter, we would be working on [27:55] completing implementation and launch of [27:58] our new enterprise policy management [27:59] system and the creation of the new [28:02] digital policy library. Once those [28:04] systems are in place, we'd begin the [28:06] work of putting the reclassified [28:07] existing policies into the policy [28:09] library after running them through the [28:12] new policy management system. That will [28:14] no doubt consume much, if not all of [28:16] 2026. I fully anticipate council will [28:19] remain keenly interested in the progress [28:22] of this project and to that end I would [28:24] expect the PRG would be making regular [28:26] reports on a regular cadence to the [28:28] appropriate committee once council has [28:30] organized and established its new [28:32] committee structure for the 2026 2029 [28:34] term which as we know will happen in [28:36] January. [28:39] With that, Mr. Chair, I've completed my [28:41] presentation. I'm happy to respond to [28:43] questions the committee might have. [28:44] >> Thank you. I'll first pass it to Council [28:46] Member Cashman. [28:48] >> Thank you, Chair Chavez. Um, question [28:49] for you, Cler Carl. Um, how does this [28:53] relate to the government structure [28:54] implementation ordinance that we're [28:56] having a public uh that's being referred [28:58] to staff at the same time that President [29:00] Payne's also authoring? [29:02] >> Uh, Chair Chavez, Council Member [29:04] Kashman, there's no direct tie to the [29:06] ordinance that council president has [29:08] given notice of that's being referred to [29:10] staff. This is really related to the [29:13] work of policy development, bringing [29:15] forward policy proposals and then [29:17] implementing policies adopted by uh the [29:19] governing body of the council and the [29:20] mayor. So this is uh reflecting the [29:24] government structure and how those [29:25] policies are defined but would be [29:28] necessary in terms of day-to-day [29:29] operations regardless of the government [29:31] structure. So as an example, we already [29:33] have a policy in place that was adopted [29:35] in 2004, I noted, which provides a [29:38] policy on policies and a process. That [29:41] policy is outdated and does not reflect [29:43] government structure. This new one would [29:44] rescend that previous one and put in [29:46] place a new process uh that does reflect [29:49] the new government structure and which [29:51] then also would provide how the [29:53] administration uh brings forward policy [29:55] proposals, reviews those proposals on a [29:57] regular basis and maintains them for [29:59] access both internally to the enterprise [30:01] and externally to the public. [30:03] >> Okay. And then how does the policy [30:06] review group how what was the [30:08] composition of that from the 2020 uh [30:10] 2004 [30:12] policy on policies? [30:13] >> Uh I don't have the act in front of me [30:16] but my memory of that when I came in [30:17] 2010 it was still in existence. There [30:20] was a group of departments identified [30:22] based on structure and function uh those [30:26] those departments who had um a touch on [30:29] enterprisewide operations. And so it [30:31] included, as an example, the finance [30:34] officer, the HR director, the IT [30:36] director. Um, and it was a group [30:39] co-chared by what was then the city [30:41] coordinator, now the city operations [30:43] officer and the city clerk. Um and so [30:45] that group was responsible for [30:48] facilitating the internal review [30:50] processes when policies were being [30:51] proposed in terms of making sure the [30:54] appropriate departments internal to the [30:56] enterprise reviewed and vetted and gave [30:58] feedback before a policy proposal made [31:00] its way up the chain to the city council [31:02] for consideration. [31:04] >> Well, is am I correct in understanding [31:06] that not all policies go to the city [31:08] council for consideration under the new [31:10] government structure [31:11] >> through the chair? Council member [31:12] Kashman, you are correct. Um and that is [31:14] not a change based on government [31:16] structure. In the before government [31:18] structure, there were authorities [31:19] delegated to two departments to make [31:21] department level policies. So the change [31:24] in this one is that administration [31:26] policies shown in green. Enterprise [31:28] policies existed in the 2024 model and [31:31] department policies operated in the 2020 [31:33] 2004 model. I should say what we've done [31:35] is in reflection of government structure [31:37] added the administration policies which [31:40] are reflected both in the charter and [31:41] the code of ordinances. Okay. I think my [31:45] hang up here then is that council's not [31:47] doesn't have a seat on the policy review [31:49] group. If it's including the [31:50] administrative policies passed by [31:52] council ordinances that the council [31:54] passes, it seems that the council should [31:56] have a role in shaping [31:58] the way that they're rolled out at least [32:00] from an oversight perspective, which is [32:01] one of our core functions, and [32:03] transparency perspective, which is [32:05] another of our core functions. Is there [32:06] a reason that there's no council seat on [32:08] the policy review group [32:10] >> through the chair consumption? It's a [32:12] staff group and so the council's [32:14] interests are represented by the clerk [32:15] who stands for as the department head of [32:16] the legislative department. All policies [32:19] of an enterprise nature, enterprise [32:20] policies would come through the [32:21] council's legislative process and go to [32:23] the appropriate standing committee and [32:25] ultimately for adoption by the full [32:26] council. So the policy review group is a [32:28] staff group. Um, and as I noted, it [32:31] would be facilitated by the city [32:32] operations officer who represents, let's [32:34] say, twothirds of the administration, [32:36] and would include representation from [32:38] the city attorney and the city clerk, [32:40] which represent uh the city's legal [32:42] officer and then the head of the [32:44] legislative department at a staff level. [32:46] >> Got it. Thanks. [32:49] >> So, we have vice chair Chadri. [32:53] >> Thank you. Uh, thank you, Clerk Carl, [32:54] for the presentation. So, this based off [32:59] of the response to council member [33:00] Kashman's question, this is basically a [33:04] replacement from the existing 2004 [33:07] policy. It's rescending that [33:09] >> uh through the chair. That's correct. [33:11] >> Could you detail again what's in the [33:12] 2004 policy and how that is not in sync [33:15] with current government structure? [33:18] >> Certainly, through the chair. Uh the [33:20] current structure, if you're looking at [33:21] the slide in front of you, again, [33:22] wouldn't include the the green [33:24] administration policies. There were [33:26] citywide or enterprise policies that [33:29] were adopted by the council and the [33:30] mayor together as the city's governing [33:32] body. The PRG existed in the 2004 model [33:36] just as it's proposed to continue [33:37] existing here. Its role was to [33:39] facilitate the internal review, vetting, [33:42] and evaluation of existing or proposed [33:44] policies and to make sure that all of [33:46] the perspectives of departments impacted [33:48] by policy proposals were brought forward [33:50] to the council as part of its [33:51] consideration. Department policies are [33:54] those policies which deal with work [33:56] expectations and which clarify the [33:58] direction of implementing and [34:00] administering policies at the department [34:02] level uh within operations through the [34:04] authority delegated to them by the mayor [34:06] and council. So the difference here [34:08] again is adding in the recognition of [34:11] government structure that the mayor as [34:12] the chief executive officer has the [34:14] authority under the charter to issue [34:17] directions and orders to the [34:18] administration and we through the code [34:21] have codified that as the issuance of an [34:23] executive order and by executive order [34:26] the mayor then promulgates what are [34:27] labeled administration policies. So [34:30] that's the one change from the 2004 [34:33] model to the 2024 model or I should say [34:35] the 2025 model [34:38] >> is the is there a policy uh review group [34:41] currently meeting [34:43] >> uh through the chair council member Shri [34:46] there is a policy review group uh it [34:49] doesn't really meet it's been active for [34:51] many many years occasionally when [34:53] there's a significant policy that's new [34:56] uh the group is uh convened by email a [35:00] draft is circulated to those members and [35:02] a request is made. Do you have any [35:04] issues with this proposed policy? [35:07] >> Who's on the current makeup of that? [35:09] >> It changes based on what the policy is. [35:11] So, if it has a heavy uh involvement in [35:13] personnel matters or human resource [35:15] matters, then the HR director would be [35:17] involved in that. But as a regular [35:18] routine, it's coordinated through the [35:20] city operations officer. There are [35:22] attorney and clerk representation on the [35:24] group. I myself uh from the clerk's [35:26] office am [35:28] >> okay. And then for the public that's [35:30] following along and then also even for [35:33] myself what are examples of highle [35:35] enterprise policies. [35:38] >> Uh [35:39] >> so we can define that a little bit [35:40] that's separates it from like the code [35:42] of ordinance updates that we do. [35:44] >> The policy in front of you right now the [35:46] attorney can also add but I would [35:48] suggest the policy on policies is for an [35:50] example an enterprise policy that sets [35:52] forth this is our expectation. These are [35:54] the directions and here's the process on [35:55] how enterprise policies will be [35:57] developed and maintained, brought [35:59] forward once they're adopted, where [36:00] they'll be placed in the uh policy [36:02] library, and how often they'll be [36:04] reviewed and brought forward to the [36:05] council. So, that's an example of an [36:07] enterprise policy, but the attorney [36:09] probably has more to offer. [36:12] Um, council members, another really [36:15] recent one is the ADA Title 2 policy [36:18] that you all passed, which is about [36:20] providing reasonable accommodation to uh [36:24] in residents and other individuals who [36:26] interact with this this city. And so, I [36:29] mean, that's again an enterprise policy. [36:31] It affects the the kind of the rights uh [36:34] of members of the public. And but yeah, [36:38] I mean, and so that's, you know, we [36:40] crafted that policy with this whole [36:42] framework in mind. [36:44] >> Okay. Thank you. Um, would we be able to [36:50] add the 2004 policy to the limbs file [36:53] since we're rescending it or the item [36:56] proposes rescending it and replacing it [36:58] with this? [36:58] >> If we haven't through the chair, I'll [37:00] say we will. I know I sent it around [37:02] with the email that I circulated to all [37:04] of you so it's easy for me to retrieve. [37:06] Um and happy to add that. [37:10] >> Okay, great. That's all my questions for [37:12] right now. [37:15] >> Thank you. Um and can you remind us so [37:20] for the PRG component [37:22] delegating the authority to conduct [37:24] internal reviews? Who's delegating the [37:26] authority? Council is delegating [37:29] authority for the enterprise policies [37:31] which fall within its scope of its [37:33] jurisdiction as the governing body down [37:35] to the departments the policy review [37:38] group that this is the system that would [37:39] be in place for the development and the [37:41] presentation of enterprise policies. [37:44] >> So the city council will be delegate [37:45] like taking away its power on this. [37:47] >> No final authority for all enterprise [37:49] policies still remains. This is [37:51] literally the staff work to generate, [37:54] review, bring forward recommendations, [37:56] provide input from the professionals who [37:58] are the subject matter experts in the [37:59] administration so that your policy work [38:01] is informed by them. [38:04] >> Okay. But what would be the difference [38:05] between our regular process now where we [38:07] develop stuff and staff always gets can [38:09] give input and they do so with emails, [38:11] calls, you name it. I guess that's my [38:15] yes, that's a question I have. [38:16] >> Yeah, Mr. Chair, I would say this is a [38:18] formal process that the city enterprise [38:20] would follow with respect to policies. [38:22] We also have a similar process, as you [38:24] know, with respect to ordinances, which [38:26] would be public facing laws. Enterprise [38:29] policies really are about the enterprise [38:31] operation. And so this is within the [38:33] scope of the governing body's authority, [38:35] the delegation of staff to say we want a [38:37] consistent process that operates in this [38:40] way for when policies are proposed, how [38:43] that subject matter is developed, how it [38:45] is reviewed. the internal vetting and [38:47] evaluation process and ultimately a [38:49] recommendation to the council through [38:50] its appropriate standing committee. So, [38:53] it really is sort of mirroring the [38:54] existing process you're used to and how [38:57] actions come to all of your committees, [38:59] but specifically providing how that [39:01] operates for enterprise policies. [39:04] >> Thank you. Next up, we have Council [39:06] Member Wansley. [39:08] >> Thank you, Chair Chavez. more so of [39:09] comments that I think is building upon [39:12] like inquiry that I'm hearing from um my [39:14] colleagues and starting off with the [39:16] question raised by council member [39:17] Kashman in terms of it sounds like [39:20] there's an interest to see um in [39:22] addition to the delegation of staff [39:24] through the city clerk's office on the [39:25] legislative side um to support the work [39:28] of this uh policy review group of having [39:31] some designation of a council other [39:33] liaison on it. I don't know if it's [39:35] leadership or whatever that might be. [39:37] Um, but I would love to have more [39:40] conversations ahead of Thursday um to [39:43] figure out what that could include or if [39:45] there's something more needed for the [39:47] reporting piece um to kind of satisfy I [39:51] I think there's a sheer just like desire [39:54] for representation must counsel around [39:56] that or on that policy review group. So, [39:59] I just wanted to know like that was my [40:01] original question, but I'm hearing that [40:03] also be reiterated by my colleagues and [40:05] hope we could find some type of [40:07] resolution before Thursday. [40:10] >> Council President Payton. [40:12] >> Uh, thank you, Chair Chavez. Uh, uh, the [40:15] clerk spoke to this. I some of this is [40:17] coming from my intention to build a [40:21] policy library because we just don't [40:22] even know where all of our policies are. [40:24] But I think embedded in this kind of you [40:26] perhaps software project is a bigger [40:28] question about power and authority and [40:32] council's authority to create enterprise [40:34] policies cuz I think that that's been [40:36] something that's been contested um on a [40:38] topic by topic basis. And so, you know, [40:41] this original work kind of grew out of [40:43] trying to create more clarity around [40:46] this. Um, and then even I would say the [40:49] initial draft of this was closely [40:51] replicating the original 2004 policy [40:55] which was largely led by the city [40:56] coordinator. And we shifted that [40:58] language to say facilitated rather than [41:00] led by in the uh resolution. I actually [41:03] did note that we need to update the um [41:05] the actual guide to reflect some of [41:07] those changes, but and also included the [41:10] city attorney and the city clerk so that [41:12] we had administration, council, and city [41:16] attorney all at the table. Um but I I'm [41:19] also very receptive to a lot of the [41:21] questions here because I've been working [41:22] with the clerk on this for a year or so, [41:25] but this is maybe a little bit new. And [41:27] I uh Mr. Cler, could you just say in [41:29] terms of timeline uh is there urgency to [41:33] getting this passed right now or is [41:35] there time for me to work with my [41:36] colleagues to better uh reflect some of [41:39] their uh intentions [41:42] >> through the chair council president? I [41:44] would say that the ability to meet the [41:47] timeline [41:49] is the urgent piece. The most urgent [41:51] piece of course is the rollover of the [41:53] funding to acquire a system. uh that [41:56] funding was in this year's budget. It's [41:58] been saved, hasn't been spent. Uh of [42:01] course, under financial policies, if we [42:02] don't roll over, we lose that money and [42:04] then we will not be buying a system. So, [42:05] of course, as I mentioned to you, uh of [42:08] highest priority for me is capturing the [42:10] monies that were already allocated in [42:11] this year's budget by the council for [42:13] the acquisition of that enterprisewide [42:15] system. [42:16] >> Yeah. And I think that's the critical [42:18] issue here is that we're we're we're not [42:20] impeding that work moving forward. and [42:22] we're definitely working together on [42:23] that budget amendment to ensure that [42:24] that work doesn't get impeded. So, I [42:27] would actually make a recommendation [42:28] that we hold this for a cycle. I don't [42:30] know that we have an extra cycle that [42:31] might carry us into the next year, but I [42:33] think that um I don't think that that [42:35] will, you know, be a devastating blow to [42:39] the timeline of this project because I I [42:41] I'd like to be able to address every [42:43] everybody's questions and and concerns [42:45] here to be able to make sure that we're [42:47] really cuz this is really foundational [42:48] to how we want to operate as a new [42:51] government structure. So, I don't want [42:52] to have people feeling like this is a [42:54] rushed process. um if we would have had [42:57] this on the day of you know cycle [42:59] earlier I think that would have been [43:01] helpful but um you know may may we can [43:05] forward this without recommendation and [43:06] then if by Thursday there's still more [43:09] questions uh we could maybe hold it [43:12] otherw [43:16] preference [43:17] >> uh you can finish I'm on queue [43:19] >> oh okay uh I I'll I'll finish and let [43:23] Chavez [43:25] >> Thank I'll just make a motion to delay [43:26] till the next committee of the whole [43:27] meeting. I think if we only give [43:28] ourselves two days that it's not [43:30] impossible to address the various [43:32] concerns on this day. So I'll make a [43:33] motion if I can get a second. [43:35] >> I'll second that. [43:35] >> Is there any discussion on the motion to [43:37] delay this till the next committee of [43:38] the whole meeting which is on December [43:41] 9th. Is that correct? At 1:30 p.m. [43:43] >> Correct. [43:44] >> All right. So there's no discussion. No [43:47] one's on quue to debate. All those in [43:48] favor say I. I. Those oppose say nay. [43:51] Any absentions? The item is delayed to [43:52] December 9th. [43:53] >> Thank you. All right colleagues [43:56] um [43:58] with that we've concluded all business [44:01] to come before the committee today and [44:02] hearing no objection I will declare this [44:04] meeting adjourned