All right. Good afternoon everyone. My name is Robin Wsley and I am the chair of the administration and enterprise oversight committee and I'm going to call to order our regular committee meeting for today, December 1st, um, 2025. Before we begin though, I do want to offer a friendly reminder to all committee members, staff, and the public that these meetings are broadcast live to enable greater public participation. These broadcasts include real-time captioning as a further method to increase the accessibility of our proceedings to the community. Therefore, all speakers need to be mindful of the rate of their speech so that our captioners can fully capture and transcribe all comments for the broadcast. We ask that all speakers moderate the speed and the clarity of their comments. And with that, I will ask the clerks to call a role. >> Council member Payne, >> present. >> Vita, >> present. >> Cashman, >> present. >> Chugai is absent. Vice Chair Palmisano >> present. >> Chair Wanssley >> present. >> That is five members present. >> Let the record reflect that we do have a quorum. I'll also remind my colleagues that we'll be using speaker management today. So, please make sure to sign in or let the clerks know if you need assistance. Also, today is the last AO meeting of the term. Yay for us. Um you'll note that we have also as a result of this a very long impact agenda including some topics for close session. Um in order to manage this agenda we'll need to stay focused on managing our time together. Um and it's my goal with that in uh in consideration that we would get to our security briefing um by 3 p.m. Also within our close session time frame. Uh the clerks will be helping us monitor our time and I'll provide helpful reminders as needed throughout our meeting as well. Um before we move on to our publish agenda, I do have a proposed addition to it which is approving a bid for Nicollet AB bridge over Minihaha Creek rehabilitation project. There are copies in front of us if you would like to take a look of look at it and specifically copies of the request for council action. Uh if we added this to the agenda, it would become item number 53. Um that said, is there any discussion on including item 53 on the consent agenda? Seeing none, all those in favor say I. I. Those opposed say nay. All right, the eyes have it and that motion carries and the agenda is amended. Um, that said, we're going to start off with the public hearing. Specifically, item number one is a payroll update ordinance. Um, I will ask payroll director Tammy Hoff to come forward and speak on this item. >> Good afternoon, council members. Um, so this ordinance updates, modernizes, and clarifies the city's payroll, holiday, and related personnel code provisions to align with current administrative processes, um, state law requirements, and then just language standards. The existing code has remained largely unchanged since the 1980s. Um over time, updates to technology, labor agreements, and statutory requirements have made portions of the code outdated um or inconsistent with our current practice. Uh key changes are really modernizing um of payroll processing and payment methods. Um the language is updated to reflect our current practice, which is paying employees by electronic funds transfer rather than paper checks. um aligning our state pension statutes uh which is referring to state law governing pension deductions for police, fire, and general plan participants. Um they've been clarified and payment methods have been updated to electronic transfer. Um we've included Junth as a recognized city holiday. Um and then just general cleanup and reorganization. Um, so these revisions ensure that the city's payroll and personnel provisions are accurate, accessible, and reflective of our employment and financial management practices. The ordinance does not introduce uh any new fiscal impacts um but just codifies uh the current administration pra uh procedures. >> That's all I got. Thank you for that presentation, Director Hoff. Um, I will now open the public hearing for this item. Um, is there anyone here to speak on it? I'm seeing nos from our clerks. All right, then. Seeing no one wishing to speak, I will now close the public hearing. Um, is there any discussion from committee members? I see council member Cashman and Q. Thank you, chair. I just wanted to thank you so much, director, for your work on this and I'll move the ordinance amendment for approval. >> All right, the item has been motioned for approval. Is there a second? >> Second. >> All right, it's been seconded. Um, all those in favor say I. I. Those opposed say nay. All right, the eyes have it and that motion carries. Thank you so much. Uh, second item that we have is the Civil Service Commission appointment of Anthony Kelly for seat 1 beginning March 1st, 2025 and ending February 28th of 2028. I will now ask Director Nikki Odum to speak on this item. Hello. >> Good afternoon. Um, Madame Chair, council members. My name is Nikki ODM. I'm the chief human resources officer for the city of Minneapolis. I would like to provide some quick background on the civil service comm civil service commission and the appointment process. Um the Minneapolis Civil Service Commission is an independent three-member commission that is authorized by the city's charter. It oversees the city's employment practices including hiring, promotion, discipline, and discharge for certain city employees. The commission promulgates rules that cover all aspects of employment. The commission hears appeals from the employees who believe that the rules have been unfairly applied to them and hears appeals um from employees who have been recommended for discharge from their positions or who have been recommended for suspension of 30 days 30 calendar days or more. As I understand it, this arrangement was established to ensure that the application and enforcement of employment rules at the city were not political, but were based solely on merit and objective evaluation measures. The commission is a neutral body advocating neither neither the interests of the employees nor for the city. The city charter requires that three civil service commissioners be residents of the city of Minneapolis. That they favor merit, efficiency, and affirmative action in public service, and that they hold no other office or employment under the federal, state, municipal, or any other government, or any department, agency, court, or political subdivision of any such government. Historically, but not uniformally, the commissioner appointments have typically been made with one commissioner having human resources background, one having a legal background, and the other having um the third having a labor background. Each commissioner serves a three-year term in accordance with past practice. At the conclusion of the commissioner's terms, the vacancies were posted according to the current process for advertising vacancies for boards and commissions in the city. applications were screened for Minneapolis residents and professional qualifications. Um, relative knowledge of employment practice and labor or management issues as well as a commitment to fairness, neutrality, and affirmative action in line with the requirements of the city charter. I can with confidence state that Anthony Kelly has consistently demonstrated his expertise, qualifications, and unwavering neutrality in carrying out the responsibilities entrusted by him by our city's charter. His experience and deep understanding of our city's unique challenges and his highly um challenges as a highly unionized organization ensures that he meets and often exceeds the criteria set forth in the charter. He has upheld the principles of fairness, integrity, and transparency in every decision he's made, helping to maintain the public's trust in our civil service system. Reappointing Commissioner Kelly will provide continuity and stability, allowing him to build on the progress already made and continue serving the best interests of our employees and thereby the community. I respectfully urge you to support his reappoint and allow him to continue his valuable work on behalf of the city of Minneapolis. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you, Director ODM, um, for the presentation. And I will also open this public hearing on this particular item. I'm seeing if there's anyone here to speak. All right. Clerk saying no. All right. Well, let's close that public hearing. Um, is there anyone on the committee side who would like to speak? And I'm seeing Vice Chair Pomisano. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to thank Mr. Kelly, who I don't see in the audience. Um, I don't see Mr. Kelly here, but I just want to thank him for his work and his service. I think he's been doing this longer than I have been doing my job. And um, I'll go ahead and recommend this for approval. >> All right. So, the item has been motioned for approval. Is there a second? >> Second. >> All right. That item has been seconded. So all those in favor say I. I. Those opposed say nay. The eyes have it. And that motion carries. Um that said, all right, we get to move to the very substantial consent agenda. Uh there are items starting from 3 to 46. So number three is a gift acceptance from community's first infrastructure alliance for travel and lodging expenses. Four is a gift acceptance from the national association of county and city health officials of registration transportation lodging and appropriate meals and incidentals. Five is a bid for Hearth Avenue sanitary sewer reconstruction project. Six is a bid for 16th Avenue South Sewer Improvement Project. Seven is a bid for a Jerry Hoff parking ramp roof replacement project. Eight is a bid for the Fidley in Colombian uh Heights Water Plant Landscape Restoration Projects. Nine is contract with a Mary National Community Services LLC for loan portfolio management and loan development services. 10 is a contract with FVB Energy, Inc. for a Minneapolis thermal potential study. 11 is a contract amendment with Barrett Americas, Inc. for the 311 Lean system. 12 is a contract with Amy Moser Consulting, Inc. LLC for training and technical assistance for the blueprint approved institute. 13 is a contract with Primacy Strategy Group LLC for legislative representation services. 14 is contract amendments with Frederickson Government Relations LLC and Momentum Advocacy for Legislative Representation Services. 15 is contract with Harrison Neighborhood Association for anti-displacement services to Harrison Neighborhood Residents. 16 is contract with impact mailing of Minnesota Inc. for utility billing mailing services. 17 is contract with solution guidance corporation for project management software. 18 is contract with clay consulting LLC for occupational health services. 19 is contract with task unlimited inc to administer the city's low barrier employment program. 20 is a contract amendment with IP LLC to complete parking permit platform migration. 21 is a contract amendment with Tyizac Concrete LLC for upgrades of Shingle Creek West Americans with Disabilities Act pedestrian ramps. 22 is contract amendment with Restoration and Construction Services LLC for the Hilton Ramp Waterproofing Project. 23 is a contract amendment with M&B Services LLC for lead service line replacement project. 24 is a contract amendment with Morcon Construction Inc. for Hearth Office Buildout project. 25 is contract amendment with JL the theus Inc. for the biochar production facility phase one project. 26 is contract amendment with Safety Science LLC for rental of traffic control devices. 27 is a contract amendment with the standard for life insurance, long-term disability insurance, and FMLA administration services. 28 is contract amendment with Premier Electrical Corporation for electrical services. 29 is contract amendment with Minnesota Native Landscapes, Inc. for the Green Storm Water Infrastructure Restoration Project. 30 is contract amendment with Immigrant Law Center of Minnesota offering free immigration legal services to residents. 31 is contract amendment with Collins Brothers Towing of St. Cloud, Inc. for heavy duty duty towing services. 32 is contract amendment with Axon Enterprise, Inc. for cloud-based patrol, car evidence capture, and digital evidence management system. 33 is a contract amendment with Sha Lancquist Associates Inc. for the city hall restack phase three project. 34 is contract amendment with various entities to provide computer aided dispatch and related mobile equipment support services. 35 is contract amendment with short Elliot Hendendrickson Inc. for engineering and design services of the Logan Park Industrial Reconstruction Project. 36 is contract amendments with various organizations for partnership engagement fund projects. 37 is contract amendment with Keystone Compensation Group LLC for classification and compensation consulting services. 38 is contract amendment with Metropolitan Emergency Services Board. 39 is collective bargaining agreement international union of operating engineers local 70 AFL CIO. 40 is a memorandum of understanding with Greater Twin Cities United Way 211. 41 is a legal settlement, Natalyia Padet, v City of Minneapolis and Mitchell Erikson. 32 is a legal settlement, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, v City of Minneapolis. 43 is a legal settlement workers compensation claim of William Palmer. 44 is staff purchasing letters and joint purchases report 2025. 45 is Minneapolis advisory committee on aging appointments. 46 is designation of polling locations for 2026. And then as we amended the agenda earlier to include item 53 which is a bid for Nichollet a bridge over Minihaha Creek rehabilitation project. Lord Jesus that was a lot. So, um that said, I am moving these items forward for consideration. Uh checking the queue to see if any of my colleagues have any questions on the items and I will be uh pulling item 43 forward for a se separate vote. All right. All right. No one in Q. Great. Um, I will move approval of the consent agenda items uh 3 through 46. Wait, no. 3 through Yeah. 40. Yeah. 46. Also inclusive of 53, but not including item 43. That said, all those in favor say I. I those opposed say nay. All right, the eyes have it. Um and those items move forward. Um I would like to call a roll call vote on item 43. >> Council member Payne >> I. >> Vita >> I >> Cashman >> I. >> Vice Chair Palosano >> I. >> Chair Wanley. Nay. >> That is four eyes and one nay. >> All right, that item carries. Thank you. And then our first discussion item u which will be item number 47 which is a contract with the link for human trafficking advocacy training and survivor uh support services. I will invite neighborhood safety director Amanda Harit to come and speak on this item. Good afternoon, Chair Wanssley, council members. My name is Amanda Harrington. I'm the director of neighborhood safety department. I'm joined by Christina Dowling, senior project manager in the office of community safety, who's actually going to get us started on this collaborative presentation. Thank you, Director Harrington. Good afternoon, Chair Wansley and council members. I'm Christina Dalling, senior project manager in the office of community safety. here alongside director Harrington to talk about the human trafficking RFP for services in the South Minneapolis Community Safety Center as part of the initiative to create a safer ecosystem which is a network of organizations, services, and programs that come together to address the causes of crime and safety issues in the community with the ultimate goal of fostering a safe and thriving community. One of the ways in which we are doing this is by having services that address prevention, response, and restoration at the South Minneapolis Community Safety Center. After visiting many potential sites at the city for the center on November 2nd, 2023, city council and the mayor authorized the purchase of 2633 Minihaha Avenue and passed a resolution that the center will include both community safety services and police functions. During the 2023 budget process, $4 million was set aside for pilot programs, which director Harrington will address later in this presentation. And one of the pilots will be services related to human trafficking that I will get to in the next slide. With the space serving as a hub for both police functions and community services and resources to come together, the vision for this space is really a space where people can walk in are greeted by safety center agents, excuse me, who can direct individuals to services in the building in the community or if needed speak to an officer. Next slide. Thank you. Moving on to community engagement. OCS staff reviewed about 30 reports from past community events. Some of the events were initiated by the city while others were initiated by neighborhood groups or nonprofits. Some of the engagements were not specific to South Minneapolis and didn't involve just people who live, work, or play within South Minneapolis. However, there were consistent themes that emerged from the engagement about safety, services, and physical space. The themes from these prior engagements helped OCS staff develop a list of social services and resources for community members to provide their feedback on to help us shape the services at the South Minneapolis Community Safety Center. From March to May 2024, OCS staff did a series of community engagement events, which totaled about 2,000 community engagements, which included three street walking engagements where OCS staff partnered with crime prevention specialists and NCR staff to walk along Franklin Avenue and Lake Street, capturing real-time in-person feedback on services and resources people would like to see at the center. 40 community inperson community engagement events, excuse me. OCS staff partnered with NCR to design, plan, and attend the events, some of which include engagements with the African-American community, immigrant community, Native American community, older adults, unhoused, LGBTQIA plus, and youth. three food shelf events where OCS staff partnered with NCR again, one online survey that ran from May 6th to May 24th with the promotion of the survey on cultural media shows and at events and one virtual event based upon community feedback. The top social services and resources for the South Minneapolis Community Safety Center include affordable housing, mental health, substance use disorder, unsheltered homeless resources, youth, space for community meals, community meeting space, child care for those utilizing the services in the center, medical services, and legal services. Themes that emerged were not on the list from community members to select included services for domestic violence, human trafficking, and culturally specific navigators. When the center opens, our phase one services and resources available will be culturally specific navigators, mental health services, youth services, domestic violence services, and human trafficking services with other services to be engaged and planned for in later years. One thing I do want to note is that regarding human trafficking, in addition to what community members asked for during OCS's engagement events in 2018, community engagement was done for the city's framework for action addressing human trafficking and exploitation in Minneapolis. At that event, there was a request for an investment in human trafficking services and programming. I will now turn it back over to Director Harrington, who will talk more about the pilots. >> Thank you. As noted, $4 million was um allocated in public safety aid that was put in the finance and property services department until it was needed to be activated. Since then, some of that money was used so that um $2,350,000 remains of that original public safety aid set aside for pilots in the South Minneapolis Community Safety Center. The Office of Community Safety has budgeted that money to ensure that all phase one services are funded. And the chart that you can see shows approximately how much is budgeted for each of those phase one service areas. So that it does total the remaining $2,350,000 of public safety aid. That includes the $500,000 that we are asking today to be allocated to the human trafficking prevention and intervention contract with the link. The Office of Community Safety and Neighborhood Safety Departments worked together using the expertise and wisdom of Sunnu Shreza uh the senior adviser on human trafficking and exploitation prevention initiative to determine what services made sense in connection with the South Minneapolis Community Safety Center. The services in this contract include support for survivors um which will mean having staff available at the safety center as well as doing outreach and training for both professionals and the community related to human trafficking and safety. There is an expectation of collaboration with other service providers at the center. We're asking your permission to enter into a contract with the link for these services with a not to exceed amount of $500,000. The services would start when the safety center opens in 2026. We want to enter the contract now because this ensures there is no delay in opening the center due to services being in place. OCS has always promised that the center would open with services related to prevention, response and restoration. This service fits both in prevention and restoration. Although as I mentioned there will be other services in the center as well. That concludes our presentation. We are available for questions. >> Thank you, Director Harrington, and also thank you, Christina, as well for joining um the presentation. Um I do have myself and Q and then next up, uh Council Member Cashman. Um I just wanted to first get clarity that um this contract was originally attended or that the mayor originally proposed to give to our rescue. Correct. And now that's being switched to the link. Uh, Chair Wanssley, there has been no a formal request before this body to approve a contract for this RFP. This is the first request that has been bought brought for um this particular contract. I cannot go into all of the details about the RFP process uh because we haven't fully executed this process yet. That remains confidential. >> Right. I think that's where I'm trying to get clarity because originally we learned that services were supposed to be provided at the community safety center within the human trafficking kind of scope of things, but originally it was being proposed to be extended to um our rescue and it did not come through a RFP process. That's why we're having one today. Uh so I just want to get clarity that originally there was a different vendor considered potentially to provide these services. I can say, Council uh Chair Wsley, that there was uh two RFPs. The first RFP, as you noted, did not come before this body. I can't say who was awarded that contract because the RFP process is still open until the contract is fully executed. There is a legislative directive asking us to detail all of that, which we will do as soon as this contract is executed. Um, and the link is officially who we're going to contract with assuming approval from this body. >> Thank you for flagging the legislative directive. Um, from my understanding, I think it did come forward because of concerns around the original proposal for uh our rescue administering human trafficking services at this site. Um, which I think there's been lots of debate amongst this body around how that was a highly problematic organization. um and raised lots of red flags around why would we be entering a partnership um in regards to doing this critical service with them. So I'm very much looking forward to the outcomes of that directive and hopefully to hear what lessons what um process improvements the administration or OCS also learned as a result from that that process. Um, I'm also curious to know where will this um service physically be placed in the community safety center. I know um the last update you provided to the public health and safety committee regarding the community safety center. Um we were still working with the design services. There of course been this recommendation to have those services be separated from the third precinct interest. Um, but I did want to know right now in the design phase, how much square footage can we anticipate be allocated towards uh the human trafficking division of the site? >> Chair Wley, that's a good question that I can't answer specifically regarding square footage because what we have been designing into the process is, as you noted, separate entrances for the precinct side and the community safety center side. within the community safety center side there is a shared space for community organizations that are partnering with us in that center. So there isn't an office necessarily that is only for um the link or staff for um human trafficking prevention and intervention rather they would have a shared office space and then there are numerous private um conference rooms that they can use to speak privately with clients or with anybody else that they're supporting. >> Okay. Is there an architecture or like blueprint that's been drafted up of of the space as of yet from the firm that has been providing that services of like designing the layout for the community safety center? >> Chair Walty, I've seen a number of drafts of the um layouts. I will ask that um probably Will Christensen, the director of community safety design and implementation or somebody from the property services department follow up with you on the specifics of your question. >> Okay. I will note that as a followup. Uh thank you so much for that. And just also a little bit clarity of just uh what guided the decision around um doing the shared space because I is I recall also in the previous updates that there was an intention to maybe have more of office spaces be located in the community safety side. Um not necessarily like service administration um kind of spaces, but just wanted to get a sense of is that still the case? Is it mostly the share space with people or vendors just using office space there or there will actually be like services administered there including human trafficking services? Um, Chair Wsley, I will do my best to answer that question knowing that I'm not quite as connected to that body of work as I was in my previous position, but my understanding is that we have shared office space because we want to im we really want to encourage collaboration and we felt like if we siloed service providers into their own private offices that we would have less interaction, less collaboration regarding the needs of clients and community members. So, we really valued having shared spaces together whenever possible. That being said, I think there's a mix of it's a landing space for organizations that are going to work with us and that we want some services to be offered out of that space because we think there's a variety of ways that the community is going to utilize that space. In some cases, it's best for services to be done in an outreach format. And so this is a landing, it could be a landing space where supplies are kept and people are going out into the community to find people uh human trafficking victims for example. And we want there to be availability if somebody walks into the South Minneapolis Community Safety Center, whether it's the police side or the community safety center side and they need services. We like whenever possible for there to be somebody on site directly to interact with that community member who has needs. We don't want to have to send them someplace else or give them a phone number to call and follow up later. We want to be able to provide as as much immediate attention as we can. >> Okay, awesome. Uh, thank you for that. And I have the staff memo. And then, um, if you're also aware, I know 2026 has been the proposed date for the opening. Do we know when in 2026? I know there used to be a reference of quarters. Um, but yeah, do we have greater clarity on when in 2026? Chair Wley, I will also ask for property services to follow up on that piece because it may have moved since I was involved in the design process. >> Okay, another staff memo followup uh clarity on when in 2026 will this uh center be open. And then also just going back to the slides. Um thanks for the update around the usage of the public safety aid pilots. I know council made that appropriation about two years ago um of the four million to support these initiatives at the community safety center site. I did want greater clarity on what was the thought process behind including building security as part of the the pilot funding. Yeah, if you could provide a little bit clarity on that. Chair Wanssley. Uh, one of the things that we know in relation to the youth connection center, which has been in the public service building, is that there is utilization of the city's security staff, if um, youth come in and are disregulated. Sometimes the staff within that youth connection center need some assistance in helping keep the youth safe. In addition to that, when Christina and I went out to Denver, we actually saw a model where the security staff were there to greet people. They weren't just there to monitor and kick people out who were unruly. They actually welcomed people in and offered them water, tea, um, and then connected them to a service provider who would help them as a way of, um, kind of increasing trust in individuals in uniforms. And we like that model and would like to explore it with our um, city security staff. >> Okay. So, we would be using uh the city security vendor I I'm assuming at this site as well or another security firm potentially. >> Chair Wley, I think that's yet to be determined as that contract would likely live with property services. It might be city staff who are asked to work directly and trained specifically to work at that site or they may decide that it's best to contract that out to an outside organization. I don't believe that decision has been made. >> Okay. And thanks for the clarity. I I'm still a little bit stuck on I see security usually as like a breadand butter type of expense like something that should generally be absorbed by our our general fund likely as opposed to the pilot funding which was to support safety services I think in a broader scope of things. So, I would also like to add that to the staff uh followup uh finance and property services decision behind uh seeking out public safety aid as opposed to absorbing this within their general uh budget. So, >> Chair Wley, I will just say I know part of the discussion was because of the types of services that we were asking for security to do. It's not typical, as you are probably aware, if you walk into this building or or city hall, they're very nice. >> Um, security is, they're very friendly, but they're not um offering you kind of a a hospitality lens and connecting you to services in that way. And so, we in OCS at least considered it a pilot to utilize safety in that way, which is why we were suggesting rather than um property services that it come from that pool of money. >> Yeah, I like to follow up on that a little bit more. Um, but with that, those are all the questions that I had. Again, I'm just more so excited uh to see us actually go through a formal RFP process. I think council really pushed for that with wanting to see, of course, roll out of human trafficking services at the community safety site. you all did the diligence of community engagement and identify that as a need um within the community um and wanted to see that we use our proper channels, city channels to be able to engage with vendors who have the expertise in that area to administer those services. So, I'm glad that we did go through um after a lot of pressing, a lot of scandal and media scrutiny uh for us to have this public process to consider what is a very credible and I think well respected vendor who can um offer these services to our our broader community. So, um with that, I will motion this item for approval, but I also again will note Council Member Cashman is in quue. >> Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Director Harrington. I'm glad that you're being proactive and getting ahead of this to make sure that the services can start right away. So, I'm very happy to support this today. I just wanted to ask what we're have what we have existing right now for these types of services in the city because I see this is starting, you know, in 2026 and it'll be a three-year contract um for $500,000. But I'm wondering how it builds on existing services we have around trafficking um in the city right now. if you could just give a little bit of insight into how this will pair with what we already have. Chair Wley, Council Member Cashman, to my knowledge, there aren't direct services to victims for uh related to human trafficking currently in the city. A lot of the services are connected to the county to state um services and funding. And our work has really with um Sunnu been around creating policies and collaborations within systems that all work with these individuals rather than providing the direct services ourselves. And so I think this will be a new area that the city is exploring. >> Okay. And then will this be for citywide support or just within the jurisdiction of the Southside Community Safety Center? >> Chair Wley, Council Member Cashman. all services in the city should be available to anybody in our city. That being said, we know there is a significant um hot spot of human trafficking happening in South Minneapolis, which is why it's a really um >> great connection to having something physically in that area. But yes, of course, if somebody in North Minneapolis or Northeast or downtown needed those services, they would have access to this contract as well. >> Okay. Thank you. The reason I'm asking about this is because there is a constituent case that I'm working on that is involved with this and it's been very challenging to find the correct agency to help us whether it's MPD or the county attorney's office or 311 etc. It's so it's from a user experience. I would like to understand how council and our council staff who do constituent services can um better help constituents who need support with this. Um and so they don't have to necessarily go there physically but could get resources, you know, um anonymously and with, you know, protecting their identities and other types of sensitive information that goes along with these types of cases. Um, so if you have any resources that are available now, like, uh, I would really appreciate just just being able to tap into that. Um, and hopefully that access will improve next year with this contract. So, thank you so much, Chair Wley. Council member Cashman, I will note that there are a number of resources up on our web pages about how to get help related to human trafficking currently, but I'm also happy to have Sunnu follow up with you directly because she knows all of the resources that >> would be fantastic. Appreciate it. Awesome. No one else is in Q. So I motion for the item uh to be approved. Um Ashley, can I have a second on that? >> Second. >> Awesome. That has been seconded. So with that, I will ask all those in favor say I. I. Those opposed say nay. All right. The eyes have it. Um and that motion carries. Thank you so much, Director Harrington. Um and clerks, if there's any clarification on the staff memo questions, we can follow up afterwards. Um next up is item 48, uh which is a contract with Catalyst Consulting Group, Inc. for a 311 Citizens Request Management System. Um I will invite up 311 Service Center director uh Nazimi to speak on this item. Uh thank you so much. Floor is yours. Good afternoon, Chair Winsley and council members. Um, my presentation today is part of the request to approve a contract with Catalyst Consulting Group uh for a 311 citizens request management CRM system that was is being brought forward by IT. Um, again, my name is Mendan Zimi and it is my privilege to serve as a 311 service center director and I'm excited to share what the new 311 CRM will mean for our Minneapolis residents and the improved way it will enable us deliver city services. So, the presentation today is solely focused on the benefits of what impact the CRM will have on Minneapolis residents. Um the system we have today limits our ability to give people the smooth, transparent and accessible service they deserve. And this project is our opportunity to change that. Uh the vision guiding this work is simple. A modern resident senate senate system that makes it easier for people to get help and easier for us to deliver that help. Our current 311 um CRM has served us for 20 years and it no longer supports the level of responsiveness and transparency residents expect. This new CRM will simplify the experience for the public and for staff across departments. It will support equity and accessibility so that language ability or technology barriers don't stop anyone from getting service. And it will also improve how issues are tracked, resolved, um, and giving us tools we simply don't have today. Ultimately, it's about giving residents a smoother, cleaner, more transparent experience when they seek help. This next slide provides some background information. When I started at 311 2 and a half years ago, I spoke with many residents who shared ideas on how we could improve improve service. While we made procedure improvements, technical challenges remained. With the opportunity to implement a new CRM, we prioritized building a resident centered system. Before issuing an RFP, we gathered feedback from the community on what was working with the current system, what needed improvement, and what additional features would enhance service. We received over 800 responses to guide our work. Uh people were clear about three main priorities. First, they want a better way to track their service requests without calling back repeatedly. Second, they want an improved mobile app with more options. And third, they want a portal that's easy to use. These insights directly shape the project requirements. Uh we did not assume what people wanted. We asked and we listened. Some of the key benefits of what is coming with the new CRM. First is an expanded cell service. This is one of the biggest improvements residents will see um the expanded access to self-service both online and through an updated mobile app. Today, many residents have no choice but to call 311. Even for something simple like checking the status of a request they already made, they need to speak to a person. With a new CRM, people will be able to submit, check, update, and get information about their request on their own whenever it's convenient for them. Secondly, we'll have a unified 360 uh degree view of requests. For city staff, one of the most transformative changes will be a full 360deree view of service requests, what the industry calls a domino effect, where each step triggers the next one uh smoothly and predictably. Currently, information is fragmented across departments, slowing resolution and leaving residents less informed. With a new CRM, everyone from 311 to public works to regulatory services will have the same real-time information. This improves coordination, speeds resolution, and gives residents timely updates and a more reliable resident centered service experience. Uh, better reporting and real-time data. The new CRM will give us a real time dashboard and data. Today, a lot of our analysis is manual. It takes time to understand trends, identify bottlenecks, and communicate performance. With built-in analytics, we'll be able to see what's happening in the moment. Whether it's no related requests spiking, a neighborhood experiencing repeated issues, or citywide service delays. This will support transparency, accountability, and smarter decision- making. Uh fourth is we are getting an updated IVR, an AI chatbot. Our IVR today is functional, but it's limited. The updated IVR will be more intuitive and available in more languages. The AI powered chatbot will help answer questions even when 311 is closed. This means fewer abandoned calls and fewer people waiting on hold for questions the system can answer immediately. Um, handling complex processes. One of the realities of 311 today is that our current CRM cannot support some of the more complex workflows we manage. Staff often rely on manual workounds, spreadsheets, notes, and emails. The new CRM will streamline these processes. Tasks that require multiple departments will move through the workflow more smoothly and automatically. It will reduce errors, shorten turnaround times, and improve resident experience. Um, other benefits to residents will include a customer portal. A new customer portal will be one of the biggest shifts in the residents experience. For the first time, residents will have access to a public facing knowledge base to search for answers, something we don't have today. Uh, they'll also have self-service tools to create, track, and update their service requests. And they'll also have a highly accessible design available across devices and in multiple languages. Again, something that we do not have today where they'll be able to um access the portal on any device on an iPad, on the phone, on the computer. So this levels the playing field for residents who may not be able to call during work hours or who prefer maybe written interact um instructions where they can go to the public facing knowledge base for more information. Uh with a mobile app what we have today is very limited. Um many types of requests can only be handled by phone calling 311. With a new CRM, the app will be significantly expanded, available in multiple languages, and able to handle more types of requests than ever before. This is a major improvement for accessibility and convenience, especially for residents who rely on their phones as their primary digital device. This last slide shows the updated timeline this month. Um, it will finalize a contract and announce the vendor. In January 2026, we will begin the project. In October 2026, we will go live with phase A, implementing the CRM, which will include several communication channels, including the mobile app and the self-service portal. And phase B will start in early 2027 and will be rolled out in Q4 of 2027. and phase B will mostly be enhancements and integrations. In closing, we're thrilled about the opportunities this new CRM brings to both staff and residents. It is leading the implementation and 311 is providing a resident focused insight to ensure the system truly serves our community. A big thank you to our city chief information officer director Paul Cameron and the entire IT project team for their leadership, expertise, and support. This concludes my presentation and I stand for any questions. >> Thank you director for that presentation. Uh we do have vice chair Pomisano in Q. >> Director Nimi, thank you for this presentation. Um we've long been awaiting a new case management system and I'm happy to hear we're already starting to build that software. Um just this weekend I had a frustrated resident argue with me that 311 was closed. it was going to have to take three more days for her to get her request for ICE remediation on her street into the streets department. Um, that's pretty reasonable to not have to wait 3 days when they can't, you know, be able to drive or walk down their street, but it's also our streets department was open. It's reasonable that I was able to get the streets department that request and they were able to put in to go out and remediate it. Um and and so this is going to be a welcome new ad. I had questions about the timeline into how this would roll out and that has been answered on that previous slide. So thank you. By next year at this time, it sounds like that resident would be able to use those features and reach the streets department without me needing to intervene. So this is all good news and I'm happy to have you share it again in this format. Thanks. >> Thank you. I see President Payne in Q next. >> Thank you, Chair Wanley. Uh I was curious um if you know the extent to which this platform is turnkey or how much of it is going to be hyper customized for our specific use case. >> Uh through the chair, President Payne, I'll have uh CIO answer that question. Uh, Chair Wanssley, uh, Council President Payne, my name is Paul Cameron. I'm the chief information officer for the city. Um, the platform that we will be utilizing for the CRM, our goal is to make it as turnkey as possible. Um, it is being used in several other uh, major metropolitan areas. And uh so our um that that is our our hope and uh plan at this point in time is to to utilize this as out of the box as possible. >> And then a uh maybe conflicting question, is there an opportunity to integrate this with the CRM that we've recently implemented on the council side via the clerk's office? >> Yeah. and uh Council President Payne. Um uh I think at this point in time the um the the challenge for that has more to do with um uh process and cost from a uh um kind of a a different standpoint. And so I think that is something that we can look at for the phase B that second part of the implementation. But it's also not something that um I would feel comfortable now stating that it will for sure happen as well until we can have a closer look into that. I think one thing that we might be able to do as an interim, and I don't know if these conversations have happened, but um we have our constituent services team working within the clerk's office. Um and they're kind of a human interface to an extent. Uh, and I'm wondering, it might be wise for us to get a user created within our CRM who actually sits in 311 and maybe we could pilot from a process perspective how we might hand off cases to 311 just so that we can at least get a sense of what that might look like >> through the chair, President Payne. That is something that we have already we're already considering. We are uh we've put together a change management team uh that and we'll have someone from um the constituent services side be part of it and we are also meeting with them bi-weekly. So there's a lot of conversations and there they know about everything that we're talking about. So yes, that's something that we can usually do. >> Great. Thank you. >> Next, council member Kashm. >> Uh thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Director Zimi. Uh just a couple questions about the app features and how how those are going to improve. Are all of the 311 case types going to be available to be submitted through the app in the future instead of it's a little bit limited right now >> through the chair council council member Kashman? Yes, that is the goal. Okay. >> Uh because right now it's very limited. We only have about 20 something case types of the over 200 that we have. Right. And that's a limitation that you know the current app has. There's nothing we can do about it. So yes. >> Okay. So you're anticipating you're hoping that all the case types will be available through the app. And then will it have a multilanguage feature for residents who don't speak English? >> Uh through the chair, council member Kashman. Yes, we'll have actually it's going to be more and more expanded um languages um functionality than we have right now. Right now we only have four languages. This one will have all languages for not just for the app but for the for the uh external portal and also we it will also include a chat >> so it will also be in available in multiple languages. >> Great. Well, I'm really looking forward to seeing these these changes get rolled out. Um again, I'm glad that you're getting this in before the end of the year so that you can um that you can start your work early in in January of 2026. So, I'll move this item for approval. Thank you. >> Awesome. Is there a second? >> Second. >> All right. The item has been seconded. All those in favor say I. I. Those opposed say nay. All right. The eyes have it and that item carries. Thank you so much again, director Zimi. Uh, next is our item 49, which is a special event related non-disclosure agreement uh matter. I will invite Enterprise Events Manager Andrew Ballard to come and present on this item. Need some assistance, Mr. Malor? >> Oh, there we go. All right, we have one of our phenomenal clerks come to the rescue. >> Yeah, I'm sorry. Yeah, >> there we go. >> Thank you. >> Look at that. All right. Sorry about that. Um, Chair Wanley, uh, members of the committee. Uh, good afternoon. Um, for those of you who don't know me, my name is Andrew Ballard. I'm the enterprise events manager for City of Minneapolis. And uh we're here to talk uh today and ask for authorization uh to um enter into some non-disclosure agreements as it relates to uh large special events that the city uh could potentially be u uh bidding on responding to proposals on um and such. Uh what this does uh many um large event owners are now uh requesting uh non-disclosure agreements um in order to protect uh proprietary information on their part um to pro protect um schedules and uh information in the RFPs and such. Um and uh also to uh like we did last year um with Sundance to um allow the event organizer and event owner to announce which cities they're con considering uh as we go through um uh the bid process. Um excuse me. Um and um but many of these um NDAs are uh all of these NDAs, I'm sorry, are uh for information sharing purposes only. Um they do not commit any city funds. They do not commit any city uh resources or services. Um, we will work uh very closely with the city attorney's office to ensure that uh these agreements that we're discussing uh with each individual event organizer would um uh comply with all of the data practices uh requirements. Um also um none of these agreements uh would be signed by staff. they would be signed by um either the the city's chief operating uh officer uh or any of the deputy COS um in conjunction again like I said with the um city's attorney's offices. Um this uh uh being able to do this um would allow us uh to compete at a different level for uh large uh special events. Um and we're talking events of uh significant economic impact. um uh events that you know could realize you know hundreds of millions of dollars in economic impact uh for the city as uh you know we um we bid and try to compete uh with other cities for these events. Welcome any questions. >> Thank you Mr. Ballard. Um I do have myself in Q just more so for a comment around how I'll be voting but um basically I'm strongly opposed to essentially city council seating our authority to approve NDAs to the mayor's executive officers which this resolution and what was affirmed by uh Mr. Ballard's presentation would happen should this be approved. Um, the current process that requires council's approval is currently a common sense check and balance over the mayor's request to enter into NDAs on a case-by case basis. And I just don't foresee a scenario where a NDA needs to be written and signed so quickly that we couldn't take the twoweek process uh to bring it through the legislative process for presentation and for a transparent and democratic vote in consideration. Um, and I'm just nervous around the slippery slope of us just having any matters that ask us to concede our authority or delegation of our authority to the mayor's administration. What unintended cons will come from that? Um, so I won't be supporting this item. Um, and I do see uh, Council President Payne in Q next. >> Thank you, Chair Wanley. I I my question might have been answered by your comments, but my main question was was this a request for a specific NDA for a specific event we're actively working towards or is this a blanket request to enter into NDA's th >> at large this this is um a blanket request. Um most um uh most of it uh relates to um uh just timing. Um as uh the chair uh uh mentioned uh there are there are sometimes very much like um last year with Sundance um the Sundance Film Festival when we were doing that and brought the NDA before city council. That was something from a timing standpoint. Uh basically we had to walk that on. Uh it did not go through the committee process. We we had to bring it directly to um and again that was one where we got permission from Sundance to basically uh you know be in a public forum saying that we were bidding on the Sundance Film Festival. There are some uh event owners and organizers that uh that early in the process would not like uh um disclosure of um you know the cities that are involved in the process at that time. That's not to say that eventually you know we will say that you know we're bidding on this this event. We're competing for it. Um there are some events that um we are in the mix on that um you know as an example there's uh one uh very significant event that is coming up uh that that we're in in getting ready to get into the bid process for that if um and when we're presented with the NDA from that organization. It'll come before uh the next council meeting um in I think it's February after after this last this last meeting next week. So, it it it's those kinds of instances that this would uh assist us with in uh being competitive uh with other cities and being able to participate in the process. um uh you know, the the the event that that we're um uh possibly getting the NDA on, you know, is is a a $250 million economic impact event. >> Um so, uh something we I think is important for us to be able to compete for. >> Yeah. I think I think we want to come up with a mechanism to be responsive to these types of events. I'm leaning more toward towards Chair Wan's perspective on this. I think we should develop that mechanism and that mechanism shouldn't just be blanket cut counsel out of it. I would rather us delegate someone on council to be that point of contact and maybe be authorized to I think there's a way of doing this to to be responsive without necessarily handing over the entire blanket authority over um and also I think it's just always important to keep in mind the reason these organizations want NDAs is so that they can play jurisdictions off of each other to maximize what they get out of it. They don't they're not choosing a city because of our demographics or our economic vitality. They're choosing a city because um they're getting the most tax breaks or some other incentive to come and it is in their interest to maximize the incentives that each jurisdiction is willing to bring to the table by forcing us into NDAs. Now, um, as you said, the economic impact of these events is substantial and we would like to get those events, but I think that that's a policy decision that we should be intentional around and just cutting the policy makers out of that process, I don't think is a winning strategy. So, um, I don't think I'll support this version of it, but I'm definitely interested in coming up with a mechanism for us to be responsive. >> Okay. Thank you, President Payne. Um, next is Vice Chair Pomisano. >> Thank you. Per Council President Payne's last comment, Mr. Ballard, we're not committing anything here. We're not committing to um I don't know different tax incentives or anything like that with this. That's not what this part of it is for. Not to say that I I mean I agree with council president Payne that that is um something that large events in the past there was the idea of whether or not we would sign up to be a World Cup city next year. Uh we ultimately decided not to because of the extreme nature and and that just didn't balance the desire to have a large event like that with the needs of the residents in our city. Um but Mr. Ballard, you're not actually saying that we're signing up for anything here. No, all all we're signing up for is sharing information. Um being able to get the RFP. Um this is nothing. Like I said, this does not commit any funds, any city resources, any city services or or or anything from the city. All it is is it allows us to receive the request for proposals. So we can then as as as you said with you know using World Cup as an example see what they want to do. >> Um you know and you know and we may take a pass on it. We may jump in and and and go full steam ahead to try to to try to get the event. It's it it it's being able to know what um what the event owner is looking for and and to be able to get that information from them so we can um uh you know compete you know like uh compete on a level playing field with other cities. >> So I was I was initially hesitant with the concept of staff entering into NDAs without council approval. Um, but I have come around since agenda setting when I said we needed to talk about this. Um, it's really important to me that you're not committing any funds or services here. It's also important to me that we're able to look at things earlier in the process like a feasibility study type of thing. Just is it even feasible to have an event like that in our city? >> Um, to be able to know what those requirements would be. um having followed up with staff to get a better understanding of what this really means. Um something that was brought up earlier were was the idea of delays and I was skeptical of that too, but this this cycle itself is actually a good example. Um there's a three-week delay with the off week or ward work week last week and the holiday. Um, I understand the sensitive nature and privacy around bids for public events and if we aren't able to comply with NDA requests, then we just simply won't be able to bid. And I heard what you said about the turnaround time being pretty quick. Um, our highest level city staff here would be the ones signing off on the approved form, but can can you tell me, Mr. Ballard, is the CAO form a checklist or is it something that verifies the necessity and the conditions under which you would sign an NDA? I I think that would be something um again as we would once we once we get the NDA from the organization uh again we would work through with the the city attorney's office um to see if it's something that that we can even um commit to. I mean, we had uh last summer a lot of wrangling with uh Sundance in order to meet our data practices uh requirements. Uh they were able to um you know agree to to that and we we worked through that and I mean we made it fairly far into uh into the process with them. I mean, we were uh in the top six cities eventually before they made their their cut down to their final two. So, um you know, it's it's just one of those things. We don't know what uh the requirements are going to be until we actually, you know, get a hold of the NDA and uh you know, be able to work through that. So, um, Amy Shut is from the attorney's office is unfortunately not able to be here today. Um, and I know that she's been very helpful with this and very involved in crafting the resolution that's before you. >> Um, large scale events bring a tremendous amount of economic benefit and revenue to our city. We have to balance that with the needs of the residents in our city. Um, I think we should be making it easier for residents to have a variety of local events, um, as well as businesses that would thrive sometimes with increased activity downtown and elsewhere. Um, but I hear that there's hesitation and a desire to consider further um, and make some amendments or even significant changes to this resolution. So, in the event that this still needs some work, I could suggest forwarding just this asis without recommendation to full counsel and see if once Amy Shut can have a chat with us if there's things um that could be amended here to make it uh compatible with some of the questions from council. I do have something that I think is better. I do have an amended resolution, but I don't know that addresses all of your concerns. It hems things in by limiting its authority just to sports, cultural and arts events. And it also um it gives an initial trial period of one year so that we could evaluate the effectiveness, see what kinds of things are signed off and maybe by the end of it have um a different type of system more similar to what council president Payne is suggesting. Um, but I don't know that this would be, you know, ready for any type of full approval. So maybe I will suggest and make a motion to just forward this with without recommendation for now and see what we can figure out by next week. >> Second. >> All right. Vice Chair Pomisano has made a motion to forward this item without recommendation. It's been seconded by President Payne. Um, I just want to I put myself in Q for some follow-up uh comments. Um, I don't think there's a dispute or any questions about around like the significance of partnering with um event planners to bring in large scale events. No one's debating that. What is being debated is the language that is very clear-cut in this resolution that asks that the authority that is granted to council to approve these things, these type of requests then be delegated out to the city operations officer and the deputy city operations officer. So for us to concede our authority to do the oversight and ultimate approval of these type of requests and that just moved through the administrative side without any checks and ballots from this body that is what's being debated and I just want to offer some clarity because you referenced around the delays um specifically the Sundance where you had to walk on the item and cited that as an example of what you're trying to navigate through the pre present presentation of this um resolution. A walk-on, I just want for clarity purposes, is still moving through the legislative process. You bringing a walk-on thus allows this body to still deliberate if we are going to approve, consider, or take any action on the motion. It still initiates the legislative process. What you're requesting or what the mayor administration requesting is asking for us not even have that as an option. That is the problem. I don't think there's even around like the limited scope of authorities around like should this be limited to events should we try it out for a year that is actually none of the concerns it's council conceding its core authority to do oversightes of these type of requests and ultimate approval of these type of requests through our standard legislative process that's what we're giving up through the potential approval of this resol uh resolution so I want to give clarity on that and I think from your comments, Vice Chair Poman, on what you're presenting as a potential substitute also doesn't align with what I think is the core concern here. So, um I am more than happy to facilitate further conversations around that. I don't know outside of I will not be supporting a resolution that essentially concedes council's authority. I just want to name that. It's not around limited to events. It's not around commitments to funding or any of that. I will not be supporting a measure that concedes that authority. Just want to name that. Um, and why I feel hesitant of actually having this item leave committee. Um, but I will uh defer this or next I see council member Kashman in Q as well. >> Thank you, Chair Winsley. Thank you, Mr. Ballard. I >> I had a question about the last line. You know, the this doesn't include any commitment of funding or resources. What do you consider to be resources or could you further define that? I think that's one of my hang-ups with this resolution is like that is a very vague term. Um, and what does that mean to you in this context when you wrote it? Um well uh Council Me um Chair Wanley and Council Member Kashman, I um what we're we're we're looking to do is basically not put anything that would cost the city money forward. Again, this is something that would give us the ability to share information. Um it's not um committing any tax credits. It's not committing any uh agency or departmental um services. We're not committing the police department to anything. We're not committing public works to anything. We're not committing any uh type of incentives to any organization. That all comes later in the process as we start negotiating um contracts and and and working through the bid process. What this does is this allows us to um get the materials necessary to make an educated response to an event owner about whether or not the city of Minneapolis wants to pursue having their event in Minneapolis. >> So, the reason that I'm a little concerned about resources is even your staff time is a resource that's already been expended. And so I think that that could be a little bit, >> you know, stretched in terms of what city resources are spent like >> that can be staff time. And I think uh part of my concern is that when we approved the dinner do event permit um we asked for a memo about the amount of city resources that were spent on that event and that memo came back saying oh it was you know the $25,000 SE grant from Meetat Minneapolis that was the public expense. Well, later we found out there was a lot of other in-ind services and additional meet Minneapolis money spent as well as a staff person at the city's time and all of that was not included in my request around how much was spent on that event. And so that's something that gives me pause with this is resources is a very vague term. It could be anything. And if we could define that to a certain amount of hours of staff time or a certain dollar amount, I would feel a lot more comfortable. So, I will support the motion to move forward without recommendation, but just want to say that I completely agree with Chair Wells's assessment that we should shouldn't give away the authority of council to have some oversight. We should be more descriptive with what we mean by amount of city resources contributed before we sign an NDA, which is kind of a scary term to go in government. It's like very antithetical to I feel like our transparency, but I do understand what you're trying to do and I think it can have a huge benefit. So, I appreciate you taking the time to work with us on what we could uh support. >> Thank you, Council Member Cashman. I will note um again, I would actually I see their shared agreement to want to do further workshopping on this matter to create a process and I don't necessarily feel comfortable with moving this forward to full counsel. So, uh, we will take up, uh, Vice Chair Pomisano's motion, uh, to move forward with it without recommendation. Um, should that not be approved, I will ask and make a motion for this to be referred back to staff so that there can be those intentional meetings done to understand what is actually the goal. That doesn't allow us to also cut out council's authority in the mix. Um so with that um I will call the role on Vice Chair Pomano's motion. Let make sure no one else is in queue uh to forward this without recommendation. >> Council member Payne >> uh nay. >> Vita >> I >> Cashman >> I >> Chuck Tai >> nay. >> Vice chair Palmosano >> I. >> Chair Wanssley >> nay. That is three eyes, three nazs. Right. >> That item uh does not move forward. Uh as I mentioned, I will make the motion to refer this item back to staff for further conversations. Um and we'll ask for a second. >> Second. >> If you can call the role. >> Council member Payne. >> I. >> Vita. >> I. >> Cashman. >> I Chugai. I, >> Vice Chair Palisano, >> I, >> Chair Wsley, >> I, >> then six I's. >> Okay, that motion carries and that item has been referred back to staff. Um, next, we will move forward with Oh my lord. Um, I'm trying to do a a time check because we're trying to get to the close sessions by 3:00. Uh we do have our next item which is the master contract with various eligible agencies for the Minneapolis Health Department for 2026 through 2028. I'm going to invite up director uh >> Focus. >> Focus. Thank you to speak on this item and then ideally next we will move on to the close sessions. I'm not seeing my presentation on here. >> We're going to need help again. Thanks, Do you have wrapped up? Are we just cl getting some tech assistance here? Okay, >> it's not loaded up. Clerk staff, do you know? Does this require someone to come up and assist? No. Oh, okay. Perfect. Okay. Chair Wanley, uh, members of the committee, thank you for your patience. Good afternoon. My name is Chris Thocus. I am the director of operations and business improvement for the health department. I'm going to walk you through some background and context on the master contracts uh that we are hoping to move forward. Um, a little bit of background. The health department's current 5-year master contracts end on December 31st of this year. Uh we did issue an RFP that was posted on September 2nd uh for new three-year master contracts. The new process with procurement is that we are moving from five-year contracts to three-year contracts. Um the department received 137 proposals following a competitive review. Um, a total of 120 for-profit, community, nonprofit, and governmental political subdivisions were determined to move forward and met the requirements to be an eligible agency. Of these 120, 67 agencies met the city's equity and inclusion goals for contracts over 100,000 and are being submitted for authorization for approval to enter into master contracts. The other remaining 53 eligible agencies um will be moved forward at a later date. They're currently working on their um their uh documents to meet that requirement. Um changes that we went through in this particular master contract cycle. We broadened the criteria for eligible organizations to include for-profit organizations as well as smaller nonprofits. Um we hosted informational pre-application conference calls. Um so we did a lot of outreach to community um to broaden the base of organizations that might apply. We really walked them through the benefits of first of all what is a master contract with the city? What are the benefits to being a master contractor and how do you navigate the eupplier system? Um so we did a couple of um webinars or um teams meetings with uh organizations that were interested. We partnered up with procurement and answered any questions that they might have. Um we also combined this year um usually the health department goes through two separate RFPs um one for general master contractors and then a separate list of master contractors that support the sustainability healthy homes and environment team. Um this year we put one one contact uh one RFP forward um to build a master comprehensive master contract list uh rather than do it twice. It is a pretty big lift to do an RFP and so we combined efforts And then lastly, we did expand the master contract categories that people could apply for organizations could apply for. So we have uh preventative services, chronic disease, behavioral health, climate and environment, injury prevention, community engagement and outreach, um operations and infrastructure, as well as public health workforce development. So an organization could apply for one of those categories or multiple categories. Master contract details. The eligible providers list for master contracts will remain in effect for three years as I stated. So the whole full years of 26, 27, and 28. Um the eligible provider list is not an exclusive list used to distribute funding. We can still do RFPs if we feel that we need to cast a broader net. if we want to um to just um to gather more interest than is than what we have on our our existing list. Um the awards are not a guarantee of funding and the amounts are a three-year total, not an annual total and they are a not to exceed total. Um as you know, the advantages to having a master contract with the health department would be to facilitate contracting for activities that can't be predicted over the three-year period. Um, it reduces the burden for agencies to apply and compete for multiple RFPs during the three-year period and it speeds up the contracting process that allows the health department to execute deliverables in a timely manner. Um this the health department is heavily funded by state and federal grants and a lot of times those deliverables have um pretty tight timelines and so it is really helpful for us to uh engage our partners and um community organizations uh through a funding award notice if they're a master contractor. So that concludes my presentation and I stand for questions. >> Thank you Director Focus. I see uh council member Cashman in Q and then Vice Sheriff Homo. >> Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you um director Thul Thulkus. >> Thus, like focus a camera. >> Awesome. Uh I just wanted to thank you for this. I think we've seen on this committee the need for master contracts for public safety services uh like the Minneapolis um services. And a lot of times, you know, needs throughout the city seem to fluctuate and change. And it's important to have flexibility in our contracts so that we can deliver services without needing to reissue an RFP and do that whole cycle all over again. Um, so I think that it's smart to move into the these master contracts. And I will move this item for approval today. Thanks. >> Right. Is there a second for that motion? Second. >> All right. It's been seconded by council member Vita. Um, next we have vice chair Pomisano. And just before uh council member Kashman, did you mean to get in quue again? >> No. >> Oh, okay. >> Um, thank you, Madam Chair. I had asked for a presentation on this item because there was no information in the RCA at agenda setting as to what these contracts were for. Um, I understand the need for master contracts to be nimble and um have organizations already under contract to provide exactly the work we need um in the exact time, place or culturally appropriate way that we're going to need it. Um that's forward planning that I support. Um I think you said that these are up to amounts because this is a master contract. This is also millions and millions of dollars without any descriptions as to what services these different contractors could provide. And this is only a portion of them. Um, we normally see a master contract that's for a defined purpose. In the past couple cycles, we've seen master contracts for workforce development or for executive recruitment services or for public works consulting. Um but what you're saying um director focus is that an RCA will be done later for every single one of these as we appropriate money out to these different causes. >> Chair Wansley, Vice Chair Palm, um not an RCA. So we're moving one RCA for the first 67 master contracts and then the remaining 53 would move forward at a later time. And the way that we distribute those funds is to do a funding award notice >> so that >> off of those master contracts. And the funding award notices, we could have many that would not exceed the total of each contract. And we have quite a variety because we have contractors on this list that do um tree removal or weatherization. And then we have some very small nonprofits who we're hoping to work with to build capacity that might have a 30 or $50,000 three-year limit. Um, but it gets them in the door. They learn how to work with the city. We help to build their capacity as an organization. >> Um, with those other contracts, with those other master service contracts, we understand and the public understands what work is being provided, but not the case with this one singular huge master contract for the entire health department. Um, I see general categories in your presentation slide. Um, but do you have a sense of how many different programs you will be resourcing with these contracts that are in the health department? >> Um, Chair Wansley, Vice Chair Palmisano, I think it's hard to um to say exactly. Um, I another way to look at this might be for us to list each of the contractors and what category we are awarding them funds for because we do know that. Um, and each of them will have a separate master contract, >> right? I would have preferred to see those general categories broken down into health programs and then the vendors listed within each program. Um, like do we know what the total amount is available under this master contract? Is it the entire budget of the health department? Chair Wanley, Vice Chair Palmasano. I think that it exceeds the um the total budget of the health department. Um as I mentioned before, we are largely grant funded and we frequently get um new grants coming in. Um this gives us that flexibility. We really tried to analyze the organizational organization's capacity and um financial standing. look at the risk level from the um the length of the uh uh the length of um the lifetime of the organization, the the work that they've done in the past deliverables and tried to award an amount not to just using good um best funding practices of like not to ever exceed an organization's like 40% of their revenue. Um, and so we tried to use a variety of those criteria when determining those dollar amounts. >> Um, I appreciate that. Um, but I just think that it is really fuzzy to me what ultimate dollar amount you're asking us to approve. It seems like an awful lot and that information is really vital to me understanding this AC request and to for me at least would be necessary to take a vote. So, if I could use I very rarely use this, but the response memo um function to ask for some followup on um more specificity about these kinds of things. I mean, it honestly feels like you're asking us to approve the next couple of years worth of health department spending in one go without any information. So um I would have thought that after the auditor's report on the helix contract and the recommendations to the health department for better management of payment of contracts that there were new processes in place related to transparency and fiscal management that we would have received a lot more information. So I will be abstaining on this vote for now and I will hope that we could get that information by the time it comes to full counsel so that I can vote on it. Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you for that. Just double checking. Um, oh, I have myself in queue, but just seeing um timing. I won't divulge too much. Um, I think Vice Chair Pomano raised some of the things that um I was considering in regards to the recommendations from uh the city auditor in doing the Helix uh contract review and just wanted to get more clarity of how those recommendations um from the city auditor basically helped to shape the master contract process for this. Um, I think there will be many meetings in which the city auditor will give to the audit committee of how they're working with health to to better streamline those processes. Um, but that said, I will move I believe actually no, council member Kman already motioned this item for approval. So, I will Oh, would you? Yes. Okay, I see council member Kashman back in queue. >> Thank you, Chair. Uh, after Vice Chair Homosano talked about the approval, I did want to get some clarity on whether or not RCA's would still come forward. I think you already asked that question, but are RCA still going to come forward for these services or would they all be authorized unless it's under $150,000? >> Chair Wley, Council Member Cashman. So the detail of what the detail of the work and the very specific deliverables are outlined in each individual funding award notice and those fans come before uh for approval. Correct. Yeah. So the fans come through individually and that is where the the deliverables um are seen. So all of the detail for each of those categories is really outlined in the fan. Um we have very specific smart objectives, deliverables, um all of that that detail shows up in a funding award notice, not in the master contract. The master contract is a broader category and then the fan is where the details and the program that it's supporting shows up. >> Okay. So I want to ask the clerks then um if you're aware of the frequency and transparency that comes with a fan. Like does it always come through council? Is there a policy around like a an amount of funding that it has to be above in order for it to go through for approval? >> That is something we'd have to get back to you on. >> Okay. >> That information is that >> Oh, did you did you have something to add to that as well? >> Chair Wley, Council Member Cashman, um my colleague Hannah is our contract administrator and she said the fans actually don't come before the body. the RCAs do. So, it's the two RCAs that are are approving master contracts. Um, but the the detail that you're lacking is actually what we would put in a a funding award notice. >> So, but there's no mechanism for a funding award notice to come before the council or to be published online. >> Correct. I misspoke. >> Yeah. >> Is this like in line with our financial policies? I I put myself in quue because I think where I'm also hearing you all's we have approved master contracts in this body before. So I think you use the example from neighborhood safety uh department specifically. We just did one around violence prevention services >> similar or also workforce uh development from CPAD. They have a list of exhaustive list of organizations that they would like to partner with for certain services. But what we've seen through this body is when there's a specific effort from the administration to move forward with uh one of those vendors, a contra amendment appropriation is brought forward be before this body. So let's say you know we approve this just picking a random partner that you're that's listed here. Uh Wilder that has up to $800,000 based off of your list. I think there is a question of when you would like to move forward with those services will that amendment be brought forward to this body for approval and well consideration and approval. So, we've seen master contracts, but the individual amendments uh or that's align with the preparations for the proposed vendors come before this body. And I think we're now hearing that approving this list means that there will not be that process. And I think that's creating lots of concern um because we yeah, we haven't seen that happen with our financial policies. Um I don't know if we have director Fernandez uh here too or uh DCO uh Jelly someone to offer clarity on that piece. >> Hi director Fernandez. >> Chair Wley uh members of the committee my name is Pam Fernandez. I'm the director of procurement. So I would like to uh take this conversation a little bit back. Um so master contracts are usually uh done through just one single RFP and usually the RFP will tell us like you know what it is for like for example in the public works RFP we will have like different categories in them right and then we choose vendors for under those different categories. Um so like you asked you know we could redo that redo through a memo something like where these vendors fall under each country uh each uh category. Um now to the um so once that master contract is established and you will say you will put a cap on those uh contracts right and then uh when that cap is exceeded >> that's when we come to the council for an amendment okay but during the whole uh life of that contract there will be like what we call work orders you know so we call it work orders and those doesn't come to the council. Okay. So those are under that cap that you already approved uh for that master contract. >> Mhm. >> So that's that's the difference you know the work order which goes you know which happens under these contracts. It will be like many different ones for many different work and amounts >> those doesn't come to the council. There's um I think okay sorry I see yeah council member va and cute thank you chair winsley my I my questions may have been answered with these last um things but I think that's the concern is what in the past when we've seen these they've had a dollar amount attached to them and also like um a time frame the services don't concern me as much as what is the dollar amount like what is the full amount that is going to go to these contracts and like say someone is going to do a large amount of services is their contract for a million dollars versus $5,000 like that that's kind of more aligned with my questioning and I mean I understand the process of we have master contracts we're approving them >> but like what is if like what's the range is I think what we've received in the past like the range of dollars that each um component, you know, like each awardee would get, like what is the range of money that they would be receiving, whether that's $5,000 or $25,000. I think the conversations we've had we've had up here are about people having leftover dollars and where that goes and then maybe an amendment later. But that that's the piece that's missing for me. What is the what is the potential partnership amount with these um these contractors is is the information that I want to know. I've never seen it here. I mean, I appreciate you not wasting what 20 sheets of paper to put to list every single um contractor on the agenda, but I do think having dollar amounts and if that's a staff memo, I think that's fine. But that's what I need for my comfort is just like who is the organization the ser someone's already requested the service area but what is the dollar amount and it doesn't have to be exactly the right dollar amount but that also helps me to understand where the health department's budget is how much of that is being used towards these organizations what it and and it also guides us through how we communicate to constituents about the services in their community because This isn't necessarily the health department doing the work. This is an organization in their community that's doing the work and I'm able to say, you know, the city is contracting with North Point to do X, Y, and Z, right? And so, like, I think for me, I just need to see the list of who the organization is and how much money is going to be associated with each one of these organizations and over what time period is that expected to be. Thank you for that, Council Member Vita. In further conversation also with Vice Chair Pomisano, I think I'm getting greater clarity on what's also being asked. I would say I I actually don't I think this goes beyond a staff memo. I think this is actually redoing the RCA in many ways. Um I'm just going to reference the master contract that we approved uh for CPADS specifically uh for the workforce um development services for 2026 through 2028. They also have the total amount in which each contract reflects um and they have that in the RCA language. They said this the total number of contracts that we're looking at comes to amount of $14 million. And then they give a breakdown in the RCA of each one of those contracts. Pride Project for Pride of Living should not exceed $7.2 million. And so we're missing that level of clarity and transparency in the RCA phase, which I I do agree should give us pause. Missing >> I'm sorry, chair. I just got a message saying it is in the the dollar amounts are in the RCA. >> Yes. in the if it's the the large con uh I'm looking at like what's reflected on the presentation if it's like slide seven that lists the dollar amounts I I think um yes it's it's the formatting I think is a little bit off that we're used to um and if there's the total amount so I do think if it's in the total amount that we could get more clarity of how much are these 69 million I'm sorry 69 contracts actually totally too cas for theirs. So I do think there is some some changes that needs to be made to the RCA ahead of full counsel. I will actually say a motion to move this forward without recommendation just to give staff the time to do work on this before it comes forward for further consideration. Is there a second on that? >> Second. >> Okay. Oh, I see council member Cashman. >> Thank you. I would still like to uh ask for a followup on what exactly constitutes like a change in a master contract that would bring an action toward council so that we can at least anticipate, you know, if we're approving these these master contracts. At what point do we have the opportunity to review or have an oversight function on how much is being spent and how much is going out? I know we have a financial policy around a contract like $150,000 contract, but I believe we also have some other processes that we have reporting of certain uh contracts that are under that amount being reported on a regular basis too and just want to make sure that we'll have that opportunity. >> Yeah. And staff memo uh acknowledging that. And then I think vice chair you also mentioned just more clarity of how you came to the totals for each vendor because I think you raised a piece of just taking a glance at the dollar amounts allocated to each potential vendor looks like it could exceed the total budget of health health's total budget in general. So I think there's some clarity on that too of how did you land to these uh amounts assuming of course that you don't go and meet that threshold that's allocated. But I do think we've had lots of conversations too around like being a little bit more realistic of then bringing appropriations that align with what's actually being spent. Um, so yeah, with that, if we feel good about the motion to move this forward without recommendation, I will ask staff to >> Sher Wsley. Yes, we did have a motion by Cashman, Council Member Cashman to approve. >> Can I ask Council Member Cashman, would you be amendable to withdrawing that so we can do the Thank you. Okay, so that motion has been withdrawn. So we can now take up the motion for forwarding without recommendation with more work requested of help ahead of full counsel. >> Council member Payne >> I. >> Council member Vita >> I >> Cashman >> I >> Chuck Tai is absent. Vice Chair Palisano. >> Um I said it abstain. >> Chair Wsley >> I. >> That's four eyes. >> All right. So the motion to move this forward with our recommendation u carries um and that's the outcome of that. All right. Um so last item 19 minutes later than we intended uh will be our closed session uh which uh I will now uh ask the city attorney to provide a legal basis for uh so I'll pass it to you Abson. >> Thank you Chair Wansley. There are two items for a close session today. The first uh is we'll be closing for labor negotiations. This is for consideration of strategy for labor negotiations involving the Minneapolis Police Officers Federation. Consideration of negotiation strategies or discussion and review of labor negotiation proposals may be held in a closed session under Minnesota statute section 13D.03. In order to close the meeting to the public, majority of the committee must vote to close the meeting. In deciding whether to close the meeting for labor negotiation strategy, the committee should weigh the right of the public to know what its government is doing against the need of the city to reserve the confidentiality of its labor negotiations strategy. Following the labor negotiations matter, the next item on the agenda is the receipt of a security report or briefing on emergency response procedures in the event of increased federal activity. Under Minnesota statutes section 13 DO5, Subdivision 3D, meetings may upon proper motion be closed to receive security briefings and reports, to discuss issues related to security systems, to discuss emergency response procedures, and to discuss security deficiencies in or recommendations regarding public services, infrastructure, and facilities. If disclosure of the information discussed would pose a danger to public safety or compromise security procedure or responses. Financial issues related to security matters must be discussed and all related financial decisions must be made in an open meeting. Before closing the meeting under this section, you must in describing the subject to be discussed refer to the facilities, systems, procedures, services or infrastructures to be considered during the closed meeting. Thank you. >> That was a mouthful there. Thank you, CEO. Um, I now move that our public meeting be closed as authorized under the provisions of the open meeting law, specifically Minnesota statute section 13D.03 for the purpose of receiving a briefing on the strategy for labor negotiations involving the police officers federation and Minnesota statute section 13D.05 05 subsection 3D for the purpose of receiving a briefing on emergency response procedures in the event of increased federal activity. May I have a second to that motion? >> Second. >> All right, there was a a jinx right there by two of our colleagues. Uh that's been seconded. All those in favor say I. >> I. Those opposed say n. There's no opposition. All right, that carries. We will now close the public portion of our meeting and convene in close session for the viewing public. I will note that the broadcast of this meeting will continue and the administration enterprise oversight committee will reconvene in public after we have conducted the close session. With that, thank you and see you all. Okay, we have four. All right, tech team. One minute warning. All right. So, we're back from our close session. Um, and there's no other business to complete before us, but I will ask the clerk to call the role to verify we have a quorum before we adjourn. >> Council member Payne, >> present. >> Vita, >> present. >> Cashman is absent. Chuck Tai is absent. Vice Chair Palmosano >> present. >> Chair Wanssley >> present. >> That is four members present. >> All right, let the record reflect that we have a quorum and we've concluded all business that's come before us today. Happy end and last day of AO y'all. We made it. All right. Have a good holiday. Bye.