Tap to roll the tape. Good afternoon everyone and welcome to the administration's operations and budget committee of Tuesday, April 21st. Um, we start the agenda with the minutes from the previous meeting of March 24th, 2026. May I have a motion to approve? >> Second. It's >> been moved and seconded. Any comments, corrections, or changes. >> All those in favor signify by I. >> I. >> Motion carries. Um, item two is a public hearum. Item 2A. It's a public comment on the issuance of debt under the county's 2026 2030 capital improvement plan. Um does staff have a summary before we begin comments? Sher goel commissioners. Each year the county completes a 5-year capital improvement program. This includes all the major infrastructure improvements that the county intends to complete over the next 5 years. The purpose of today's public hearing is to gather public input on the financing of capital projects funded with debt under Minnesota statutes section 373.40. The county anticipates issuing up to $275 million of general obligation bonds to fund the cash flow needs of various projects included in the county's adopted 2026 to 2030 capital improvement program pursuant to Minnesota statutes. The capital improvement bonds will fund a variety of capital projects, including library projects at Southdale and West Tonka, remodeling at the adult correctional facility, infrastructure preservation and improvement projects at various locations across the county, including several large efforts at the government center, Madina public works facility, and the HHS medical center campus, and various road and bridge projects. All projects have been previously approved by the county board as part of an annual capital budgets and five-year capital improvement programs and any amendments there too. It is anticipated that one or more series of bonds will be issued this calendar year. Thank you. Okay. So, this is a public hearing. It will be conducted in person and via telephone. Persons not in attend attendance today but interested in commenting are invited to call the toll-free number. I'll give you that number right now. It's 1-855-34-8151. Again, the number is 1855348151. If you're stream streaming, you'll see this displayed on the screen. Um, and while we wait for callers, um, I will see if anybody in the audience would like to come forward and speak to the capital, um, budget. Anyone speaking to the capital budget? Not seeing seeing anyone. Is there anyone on the call on the line? Can I ask staff in the back if there's anyone calling >> at this moment? There is no callers. >> Okay, we're going to give it just a couple of more minutes. I want to thank the staff for the hard work. Every year we have to go through this capital budgeting. We want to make it a very public process. We want to make sure people have the opportunity to look at it and to comment on it and give us feedback. You can also email or call your commissioner if you have feedback. I will check again. Is there anyone on the line? Anyone calling in at all? >> At this moment, there is no call. >> I'll make a motion to close the public hearing on item 2 A. Second. >> Any comments, questions? All those in favor signify by I. I. Motion. Motion carries. Item 2B is another public hearing. This one is the 2026 HUD annual action plan. The public hearing will be conducted in person and via telephone. Persons not in attendance today but interested in comment are um invited to call the toll-free conference number. Again, it's the same number 1855-348151. And I believe it's up going to be up on the screen screen. Um the number again is 1855-348151 and is displayed on the screen. While we wait for callers, I'm going to ask um Miss Julia Wellier to provide some background on this on the 2026 plan. Welcome. >> Thank you, Chair Gutell Commissioners. Julia Wellie from Housing and Economic Development. Today's public hearing is a required step in our 2026 action planning uh with HUD. uh commissioners received the draft action plan on March 23rd at the beginning of the public comment period. Um our action plan outlies outlines how we propose to use funds from our federal um HUD partners. Uh the grants being the community development block grant, home investment partnerships, and the emergency solutions grant. We use these uh grants to support um housing activities such as creating and preserving affordable housing, rapid rehousing, housing sustaining services, as well as um park improvements in suburban Henipin County for the program year. Um starting July 1, um uh we did release the public a draft plan. This public comment period remains open till tomorrow, April 22nd. Residents can find the action plans and information for providing input on our housing plans and accomplishments web page. Uh we'll include public comments heard today and throughout the public comment period in our final action plan. We'll return to this body in May to seek uh authorization to submit the plan to HUD and to negotiate and execute agreements with HUD and our city and community partners. Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Wier. At this time, I'll ask the staff if there are any callers online. At this moment there is no caller. >> Okay. There's no callers online right now. So I'm going to ask if there's anyone in person here who who would like to come up and address uh about the HUD plan, the 2026 plan. Anyone in the audience? Anyone? I'll wait a couple more minutes here and see if anybody else is calling in. Just checking back. Is there anyone calling in >> at this moment? There is no caller. >> I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing. >> So moved. >> Been moved and seconded. All those in favor signify by I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. Motion carries. Um that concludes our public hearing. Thank you. Um item three is open appointments. The 2026 Community Advisory Board applicants and appointments. We're going to start with the birth justice community advisory board and um um this is just just going to be and it's going to be brought to the full board later but I don't believe what we have for people who are interviewers a couple of the others. So there's no interviews on this. So we received this. So we'll we'll move it to the to the board meeting after this. Item 3B is a community advisory board applicants for community action partnership cap HC board. Again, we do not have any pre-recorded on that. Item 3C is the community advisory board for appointments to the human resources board, and we have no pre-recorded there. On item 3D is a 2026 community advisory board applicants and appointments for the race equity council. And um we have then item 3E is the community advisory board for the workforce innovation. So, we do have interviews for both the race equity and the workforce innovation. And I'll ask the staff to play those interviews. And we have a a list here of the candidates. Good morning, commissioners. My name is Katherine Buouie and I am seeking reappoint to the race equity advisory council. Thank you for the opportunity to continue serving Henipin County in this capacity. Serving on REACK has been one of the most meaningful leadership experiences I've had. Over the past term, I've worked alongside fellow members, county staff, and leadership to strengthen the council's structure, reestablish our committees, and refocus on our work on our work making it actionable, data informed, um, and data informed recommendations. In the in my time on the council, including serving in a leadership role, I've prioritized creating clarity in how we operate, ensuring uh our work aligns to the seven disparity areas and that our annual report reflects both the community voice and practical pathways for county action. I've also working to worked to strengthen relationships with staff uh so that our recommendations are both actionable and implementable. In addition to my work with React, I've spent time volunteering with Henipathan County Health and Human Services. That experience has grounded my perspective, seeing firsthand how residents navigate systems, where barriers exist, and how critical it is that our work translate to real improvement in access, clarity, and outcomes. The next phase of REACK's work is especially important. We are operating in a time where disparities remain persistent and public trust requires both transparency and results. If pre-appointed, my focus will be on three areas. Strengthening implementation pathways so recommendations are actionable and measurable. Deepening committee work to ensure priority areas produces clear outcomedriven insights. And then enhancing accountability and communication between REAC county leadership and the communities we serve. I also believe that there is this is a moment for React to continue evolving ensuring our work not only identifies disparities but actively contributes to solutions in a way that improve systems at scale. I want to thank the board of commissioners for your continued support of REACK and for taking um our advisory role seriously. I'm proud of the progress we've made and I would be honored to continue contributing to this work in partnership with you. Thank you for your time and consideration. Hello, my name is Dr. Kimberly Wilburn and I am interviewing to renew my position on the CAPHC board and to join the race equity advisory council. Um, I will not spend much time on CAPHC as I hope to continue the work that I've been doing and um, just need to renew my position. I will therefore focus on the race equity advisory council. Racial equity and the dismantling of systemic racism systemic racism has long been a passion of mine. Racial equity has been part of my platform in my two successful runs for Minnitankka City Council, and I have been supportive of and involved in the formation of our DEI commission and supportive of the work of our DEI staff. My resume includes my anti-racism training and work, which includes being a past chair of the anti-racism team for Christian churches in the upper Midwest. I applaud the county board when they recognize racism as a public health crisis and I'm committed to helping the county address issues of racial inequity. Um, so I hope you will consider me for this position. Thank you. >> Hello and thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Jacqueline Lee and I am applying to serve on the Race Equity Advisory Council because I care deeply about building a more equitable and inclusive community where everyone has the opportunity to thrive. I especially passionate about advancing racial equity because I firsthand how systemic barriers impact people's lives. Working in the medical field for many years and now as a current nurse practitioner in a community hospital serving underserved populations, I witnessed disparities in access to care, health come health outcomes and resources. These experience have reinforced my commitment to addressing inequities and advocated for those who voices are often under represented. What I bring to this council is willingness to learn, listen, and collaborate. I value diverse perspectives and believe that effective solutions come from engaging directly with the communities most impacted. My work in healthc care has taught me to my excuse me, my work in healthcare has taught me the importance of trust, cultural awareness, and meeting people where they are. I've also developed strong skills in communication, problem solving, and working across different viewpoints, especially in high pressure environments where thoughtful and equitable decisions matter. I approach this work with humility, accountability, and a focus on meaningful action. If selected, my goal would be to contribute to thoughtful, practical recommendations that not only address inequities, but also create sustainable systems for the future. I want to help ensure that policies and decisions are guided by equity and truly reflect the need of all community members. Thank you again for considering my application. I would be honored to contribute to this important work. Thank you. >> Hello and thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Jacqueline Lee and I'm applying to serve on the Race Equity Advisory Council because I care deeply about building a more equitable and inclusive community where everyone has the opportunity to thrive. I especially passionate about advancing racial equity because I've seen firsthand how systemic barriers and people lives working in the Hi, my name is Mary Nemmer and I'm chief executive officer of CAPPY which stands for communities advancing prosperity for immigrants. I'm applying for a position on the Henipin counter Henipin Carver Workforce Development Board as a representative of a community-based organization. At Cappy, we serve more than 10,000 immigrants and refugees each year, the majority of whom reside in Henipin County. From our headquarters in Brooklyn Center, we've built strong, trusted relationships with both local government and community partners, working together to advance economic opportunity and workforce inclusion. My career has been deeply rooted in workforce development. Prior to becoming CEO, I worked directly in employment services where I gained experience in employment counseling, program design, management, data analysis, and employer engagement. This hands-on experience continues to shape how I approach workforce challenges today, always centering both job seekers and employer needs. In addition to my role at Kappy, I currently serve on the governor's workforce development board as a community-based organization representative and on the executive committee of work well Minnesota. These roles have given me a statewide perspective on workforce systems, policy, and cross- sector collaboration. I am also pursuing a master of public affairs at the Humphrey School, further strengthening my ability to contribute thoughtfully to policy and systems level change. I'm seeking this appointment because I believe deeply in building an inclusive workforce system that works for everyone and refugees who bring tremendous talent, resilience, and economic potential to our I would be honored to bring both my professional experience and community perspective to the board. Thank you for your consideration. >> And that concludes our interviews for today. So at at this time I'd entertain a motion to progress this to the next board meeting. That would be items 3A through 3E. >> So move second. >> All those in favor signify by I. I. >> Motion carries. Um we have a lot of routine business, but they're different enough I'm going to go through them. And if you want an explanation, just stop me. Um item 4A is ratification of permits, leases, lease agreements, and related property agreements approved by the county administrator from October 1st of 25 through 12:31 of 25. I'll move it. >> Second. >> All those in favor signify by I. >> I. Motion carries. Item 2B is to negotiate an agreement with Inner City Christian Ministries for rental of the 22 parking stalls at 1801 Park Avenue, Minneapolis, starting uh May 1st, 26 through 4:30 of 27. Um, and the first year gross rent is $18,000. Do I have a motion? >> Second. >> Moved and seconded. All those in favor signify by I. I. >> Motion carries. Item 2 C is authorized transfer of surplus properties located at 3200 Queen Avenue North, 3211 Penn Avenue North and 3206 Penn Avenue North in Minneapolis to the Hikra. Do I have a motion? >> I'll move it. And I would like a presentation. >> Been moved and seconded. Go ahead, Commissioner. >> I just like to learn about it. Yep. >> Madam Chair, Ryan Kelly from Housing and Economic Development this year. that work there. Thank you, Chair Gatel. Commissioners, the item before you would authorize the transfer of three surplus properties in North Minneapolis from Henipin County to the Henipin County Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Properties at 3200 Queen Avenue North and 3206 and 3211 Penn Avenue North have been declared excess land and are adjacent to several city-owned parcels. These properties have been vacant for over 15 years and provide an opportunity to not only have these unproductive lots once again provide tax revenue, but to also advance several county priorities through the potential of redevelopment, including disparity elimination, affordable housing production, economic opportunity, and climate resilience. In November of 2024, a joint request for proposals was opened with the city of Minneapolis to solicit development concepts for the northwest corner of the Pen Lowry intersection and for the northeast corner of the same intersection. Today's action would authorize the transfer of these properties to the HR for final disposition for redevelopment as affordable housing with active ground flooror uses. If approved, a companion action accepting the transfer and recommending disposition based on the collaborative RFP will be considered by the HR. And there was a memo uh describing a little further this process previously sent. And I'm happy to answer any questions. >> Commissioner, any questions, please? >> Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to express uh gratitude of course to staff uh at Minneapolis and at Henipin. This is not the first RF or the first effort I should say to uh shift these properties into something that um residents, community, businesses, developers would be able to use and has quite a long history. You might notice 1999 is one of the first resolution numbers listed in the background and uh want to extend gratitude to all of the proposers. I know that of course not everybody got selected. Um but there was a significant uh community input, multiple opportunities for community input in terms of on site and want to extend again my my gratitude to sticking with it. I think even with me on the board, this is the second or third effort to try to dispose of this uh the the surplus properties. Thank you, Madam Chair. >> Any other questions? Go ahead, Commissioner Lendy. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to um first of all agree with the proposal in front of us. Uh I'm wondering if there might be opportunities to look at all of our surplus property at the county and really take a hard look at especially if they're adjacent to city-owned properties or things that we could bundle up cuz I think you know we all talk about the cost of housing but yet you know I think in the news Lakeville was saying we're going to put a pause on a year that's not putting housing in the market that's doing the opposite and I wonder sometimes people are starting to slow down on this that putting more land but making keeping our hooks in it to say it has to go to housing. or would be our best uh ability to do that. And I think I've seen some cities that are uh in my district that are kind of they don't want to invest in affordable housing. Um and so uh I just think that might be something I would like to see if there's a way for us to score points higher. If there's a proposal that comes to us to ask for uh county funding or a grant program, I actually think they should score higher if it's on land that we've been partnering with so that we actually get to drive some more housing development and opportunities. Um so I obviously applaud this. I just think we're going to have to even be more pushy, I think, uh because we can't tell cities what to do, but we can sure put stuff out there and I think really start to drive that narrative. Then I think putting more points into the grant programs will get the attention of people. So thank you. >> Okay. Um seeing no other comments, all those in favor signify by I. >> I. >> I. Motion carries. Um the next item is 4 D, which is to negotiate award modification with St. Lewis Park Housing Authority starting July 1st of 2025, but ending in June 30th of 2070 with increasing the not to exceed by $40,000 to a new total of $786,635. Do I have a motion? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Been moved and seconded. All those in favor signify by I. >> I. >> Motion carries. Um item 2E is amendment to an agreement with the regions of the University of Minnesota to provide the programming maintenance for two community gardens extending the end dates to 1231 of 26 and a not to exceed of 30,000 for the new total of a not to exceed of 116,000. And if Angela was here, she'd want to move it. Who's going to move it? >> I'll move it. >> Moved and seconded. Any comments? All those in favor signify by I. >> I. Motion carries. Item 4F, negotiate various agreements to fortify contracts for periods between 420226 and 13127. Uh total not to exceed $176,142.37. I'll move this. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Any comments? All those in favor signify by I. >> I. >> I. Motion carries. Item 4G is amendments to seven agreements extending the terms and increasing the not to exceed amounts to allow for acceptance of the PY 26 and the PY27 funds. And I'm going to ask um staff just to give an explanation because people won't know what this is. >> Madame Chair, uh Nola uh Slater Johnson is here to >> Nola. Welcome. Thank you. >> Good afternoon, chair, commissioners. My name is Nola Slacker Johnson and I oversee the Department of Workforce Development. Uh, this board action in front of you is seeking to extend the terms and increase the NTE amounts to allow for acceptance of funds from the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development for the programs including WEOA adult and dislocated worker, the Minnesota Dislocated Worker Program, WA Youth, and the Minnesota Youth Program. To enable our program providers to receive and fully utilize these program dollars, the contract terms must be extended and increased for the following organizations. Goodwill Easter Seals, Avivo, Hired, Minnesota Training Partnership, Carver County, the Brooklyn Park Economic Development for Brooklink, and then Tree Trust. Each partner organization will be delivering a coordinated community-based set of workforce services designed to meet individuals where they're at on their path to employment and advancement. This includes proactive outreach and engagement, comprehensive assessments, and individualized employment planning, and career coaching, all informed by labor market information. Participants may access a range of education and training opportunities from occupation skills development to foundational education. These are provided in tandem with critical supports such as transportation, housing, stability, child care, food, clothing, and other essential work or training related needs. This increased or this integrated system not only connects individuals to jobs but builds long-term career pathways and economic stability within our communities. I can answer any further questions if you have any. >> I'll move it. And I have a a question. >> I'll second. Go ahead. >> Thank you. Uh this is really exciting to see this kind of come through. Um my hope is as this just as you are working with these organizations if you're able to offer kind of trend data to us over time around utilization demand um as we all know counties function counterylically to the economy. There's lots of reports on where the economy is going and how the job market is um perhaps not aligning with job availability and so excuse me um candidate availability and so I am just wondering if via our provider community we might be able to get some early trends um forecasted. Um I've asked some of these questions to the state via AMC but they they're not looking at it in the way and they're not looking at it from a career perspective. it's just number of people, number of vacancy whereas what's been described here is more around alignment of skill, alignment of education, etc. Uh so yeah, that that would be my encouragement. Um any data we can get as early as possible around what what we are likely going to be experiencing um forecasting into next year and beyond would be uh really meaningful. Thank you, Madam Chair. >> Thank you. Any other questions or comments? That's a really good comment. All those in favor signify by I. I >> motion carries. Thank you. Um we have several addendum items. Item 4 is a lease agreement with Isheron for lease of space at 800 South 10th Street, Minneapolis starting May 1st of 26 going to April 30th of 2029. Um $20,000 for the first year rent. Um staff, you have a report. >> Madam Chair, Spencer Agnu is here from facility services to talk about this lease. Thank you, Chair Catel. Good afternoon, Commissioner Spencer Agnu with facility services. Uh, this request is for a lease agreement with um a group called Iseroon. They're a local nonprofit specializing in family and children's uh social services with a particular focus on women exiting domestic violence. This property is uh uh was acquired last year with a larger piece of land uh that was required for the assembly of property required for the HCMC uh parking ramp project. This building itself is uh has been vacant. Um is intended to stay as a liner building to the ramp. Um so earlier this year we issued a request for proposals for lease of the property to activate it and um take on the operating costs. Uh the proposal from Iseroon was far away the best proposal. They proposed to use the building to um um for office space and for service delivery for their existing social services serving families and ch uh women and children. Um in addition to the base rent, they'll take on all operating costs as well as tenant improvement costs. So, uh substantial savings for the county there. Glad to answer any questions. Thank you. >> That's great. And I'm really loving the organization here. >> I'll move it, Madam Chair. >> I have a second. >> Second. >> Been moved and seconded. Any other questions? All those in favor signify by I. >> I. >> Motion carries. Item 4 I is um with Energy Center Minneapolis LLC to provide steam utility services to the central library for a 10-year term from May 1st of 2026 through April 30th of 2036 with the three additional 5-year renewal options not to exceed $4,500. I'll move this. Do I have a second? Second. >> Staff, can you give me a quick report? Uh >> Madam Chair, Christy Duffy from facility services is here to provide the background. Welcome. >> Thank you, chair, board members. I'm Christy Duffy with facilities operations. When the Minneapolis Public Library System merged with the Henipin County Library System in January of 2008, the county assumed Central Libraryies existing 20-year steam utility service contract. This contract expires April 30th, 2026. The county negotiated a new 10-year contract with Energy Center Minneapolis with three additional optional 5-year renewals. Steam is approximately $300,000 annually and the contract allows for a 3% escalation each year. And I'm happy to answer questions, >> questions. All those in favor signify by I. >> I. >> Motion carries. Thank you. Um item 4J is negotiate agreement with the city of Long Lake to contribute to the cost of repairing the controlled access EMS gate between trunk highway 12 and CASA12 not to exceed $7,318. Would you like to move this commissioner? >> Sure. Okay, >> I'll second. >> Okay. Moved and seconded questions or you want to >> All those in favor signify by I. >> I. Motion carries. Um that concludes our agenda. We are journ like to call today's meeting of the law, safety, and justice committee to order. We have just a few items. First up is 1A uh minutes from March 24th. If I get a motion and second, please. >> I'll move it, Mr. Chair. Go to >> We have a motion, a second. Any changes, corrections, additions? Seeing none, all those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed? Motion carries. Next up, we have a presentation on the law enforcement availility report. Uh just for a little background, uh this is a report was uh requested by the board uh to look at the future status of law enforcement personnel across Henipin County, not including not just including Henipin County Sheriff, but also all agencies and specialty uh units. Um and so we have uh Javana here to present it, please. Good afternoon. My name is Javana Con and I'm the chief human resources officer for Henipin County. Thank you chair Lundy and commissioners for the opportunity to present today on the future availability of law enforcement. Today's presentation will provide an overview of key findings related to the future availability of law enforcement officers as well as recommendations for addressing staffing challenges that may lie ahead. The research and analysis for this report were conducted by the county's HR team. The team reviewed national, state, and local data to inform the report that was provided to each of you to understand past officer availability. We reviewed M Minnesota Postboard historical licensing data covering the last 20 years. The Minnesota Post Board is a licensing agency for all sworn law enforcement positions across the state of Minnesota. To understand current staffing levels of agencies across Henipin County, we consulted our HR peers from cities and specialty organizations like the Metro like Metro Transit. They provided five years of data related to the number of budgeted officers, the number of active officers, and the number of retirees. We used postboard data, Henipin County Sheriff's Office data, and national data to project future officer availability for the jurisdictions across Henipin County. Next slide, please, Kayla. Thank you. And now I'll talk a little bit about um the the purpose of this um report. In recent years, law enforcement agencies nationwide and in Minnesota have faced challenges in recruiting and retaining staff needed to meet the agency and community needs. The issue stems from fewer officers entering the profession than are needed to replace retirees, fill vacancies, and respond to projected growth in the profession. We do expect this trend to continue. To better understand the future availability of licensed officers and to assist with budget forecasts and decision-making, the Henipin County Board of Commissioners directed the county administrator to develop a labor study of the future state of law enforcement personnel across the jurisdictions within Henipin County. The study was to include five and 10-year projections for four key data points. Those data points are the availability of licensed law enforcement officers, retirement and withdrawals from the field. We also refer to those as exits, the entry of new licensed officers, and the and calculations of costs for um personnel. Next slide, please. I'd like to share with you a couple of key findings from um from our research. agencies are competing for the same pool of candidates and we know this because um ultimately we we have found that we don't have enough officers coming online in the future to meet uh future needs. New officer numbers are outpaced by retirements and turnover. There's a widening gap between the number of licensed FTEEs needed and the number available and hired. A few more findings. More officers are leaving positions mid-career than at the time of retirement. Also, we know that it will be challenging for public employers to manage rising personnel costs, particularly smaller communities. Next slide, please. So this slide, this is where we begin to get into some of the data that we've we were able to collect. This chart shows us Minnesota Postboard data from the last 20 years or so. Again, um Minnesota's uh the Minnesota Post Board is the licensing agency for all law enforcement positions. What we see here, um, the blue line represents exams taken over the last 20 or so years. The orange line represents the availability, uh, of of officers. Um, and we shouldn't call them officers at this stage. They're just they're candidates. So that means they they've passed their exam. They are available to be hired. So they are possibles. Okay, we'll call them they're available. Okay, the green line represents the number of individuals actually hired in each of the last 20 or so years. So when you that green line we call those folks postliclicicensed. That means they've been hired by an agency. What you'll notice is that when we look at the labor market, so let's look at the blue line and the orange line. There was really high interest in law enforcement. I would say back in two 2008 or so during the housing crisis. But you will also notice with the green line, agencies were not doing much hiring at all. Okay? Interest was high, supply was high, demand was very low. Okay? Um at about 2015 or so, you can see interest decline and hiring increase. So, we've been on the opposite sides for a long time here. Okay. When we look at the orange line, let me get close to the mic. When we get when we look at the orange line, what we see is a again, this is the line that represents availability. When we look at that line, we see a clear 10-year decline. Okay? That means the number of folks who are passing the test, who are taking and passing the test, has been declining for the last 10 years. Not until 2025 do we see a small uptick in the number of candidates who are uh passing that exam every year. When we look at the green line uh beginning in about 2022, we see that green line again this is the number of of individuals hired. We see that green line cross the orange line. And so you may be asking how is it possible that we can hire more individuals than actually pass the exam in a given year. And the reason is that when an individual um takes the exam, they are eligible to be hired for three years. Some of them are not hired in the first year that they pass the exam. They may be picked up in the second or third year. And so what we see is that for 2022 through about 2025, we're hiring more candidates than passed the exam, but we're hiring from that's because we're using surplus from previous years in order to project in order to look at the future state of law enforcement. What we did is we did a um regression analysis, a five-year regression analysis on the orange line which is availability and also the green line which is hiring. With regard to availability, the um the trend is is pointing uh is is negative. The trend is negative over the next 5 years. I'm sorry, over the next 10 years. And that is because the trend has been consistently negative over the last 10 years. Okay. So that's what we see for the future. Um availability will be declining. The availability of candidates to be hired will actually be declining over the next 10 years. With regard to hires, our trend analysis, the regression analysis shows us that hiring is expected to increase. So the number of people available to be hired will increase. But that is only because between 2022 and 2025, we've actually been hiring more um candidates than are really available in the market, if that makes sense. Okay. So, those two things cannot continue to happen if we really expect that we're going to have enough folks to hire in the future. Um, in order for that that green line to continue to trend upward, in order for us to continue to hire, um, that uptick that I talked about in the year 2025 for available candidates, that trend would have to continue. It is not likely that that will happen. So, what that means ultimately is that we do not expect that we will be um that there will be enough candidates to hire to fill the future need. Okay. um with regard to availability because we did trend that out for you. I want to show you if you could go to the next slide please Kayla. So what we have here is um we did some projections of the um staffing levels over the next 10 years and then budgets over the next 10 years. And at the top of the blue bars, what you see, um, those those are the projections for available candidates that we just discussed, those numbers are declining. But even if they were real numbers, even if we thought that we could hire all of those folks, that would not be enough staff, that would not be enough individuals to help us reach the budgeted numbers that we need. Okay. So, the next I'd like to use this. This slide has actually a dual purpose. And I'd like to just imagine for a second that we um we are looking at the gap between the blue bar and the black line which is budget. So that's a gap. And what's actually happening in that gap? Um we don't want to just look at available um individuals. We want to look at those who are actually being hired. When we look at when we do projections and we look at the number that we expect to hire over the next 10 years and we also look at um the at we look at turnover turnover within that gap turnover is actually outpacing um new hires. So that's how we know that that gap that you see there which is which is widening as we get to 2035 we expect that gap to persist. There just are not enough people um expressing interest in the field at that time and not enough people to hire. So we expect this gap to continue. So that leads me to recommendations regarding what we could do um to ensure that residents receive the services that they need going forward. Next slide please Kayla. So I will just cover um a few recommendations for you there. There is a full list um in the report. So couple of options moving forward. Um we recommend that um there is a a coordinated effort, a coordinated approach by law enforcement uh uh around recruitment. And so we've seen this I know that some cities have done this work where a number of cities get together they do a posting um in collaboration they do interviews together and what it does is it brings more candidates to the table and it's basically you know you create some economies of scale there. Another recommendation is to engage in a collaborative and comprehensive long-term work workforce planning effort. So these projections that I shared with you today are based on the last 5 years or so of data. Normally when you do projections you want to um update them to make sure that the pattern that you expected is being followed otherwise you make adjustments. And so I think it would be important for um some group, some organization possibly to take on this work of really um continuing to keep up with um projections uh regarding the future availability of officers. Another recommendation is to evaluate the opportunities for staff to take on duties that do not require a licensed officer. So, we've seen some of this happening with social workers, um partnering with police departments, law enforcement agencies. We've also seen this with community service officers. So, um my background is with cities and um we've always had in cities, they've always had community service officers who take care of the the non um licensed duties. So, that's an option moving forward. Um, another recommendation, uh, due to the increasing costs and other factors, um, we think that some of the smaller agencies might want to consider contracting with with the larger agencies. We do expect to see exponential increases in personnel costs um, over the next 5 years. um we are projecting a 30% increase and then 10 years out from 2025 2035 we are looking at um an increase of about 68%. Those figures include not just wages but parah contributions health insurance dental insurance all of those um wages and and benefits. Okay. So this is going to be um very expensive moving forward. Um, as I close and stand for questions, I would like to uh thank Commissioner Lundy and the board for allowing me to present today. I'd also like to thank the HR team members who worked on this project. Also, I'd like to thank um our peer communities that provided data, which you will find in the uh full report. And I'd like to thank um assistant county administrator Chella Guzman Vagard and Liz Moore for their um support and guidance um as we prepared this project. I will now stand for questions. >> Uh thank you very much for the presentation and the work on this. Uh before I open up to questions, I just uh you know I think today is about receiving the report, asking questions. cuz I know that uh after later today I'll be sending out this report to all the chiefs. A bunch of them knew this was coming cuz I talked to them about this. When I was trying to get their input on what would a report look like that would be useful to them uh about a year ago when we brought this to the board. Uh they of course want to see okay what did you find out? And so this will be going out. I'll make sure board members are all aware that when that happens so you know that your chiefs received it. also elected officials have been interested because there is opportunities to do things differently or to do things together and I think that's one of those things that everybody's trying to face right now is um just those things. So um just want to preface it but I'll be quiet and commissioner goel. >> Thank you Mr. Chair. I appreciate first of all thank you for suggesting this report and I want to thank the HR staff and the public safety for working on this. I'm really interested in one of the pieces about um how do we keep staff there longer, you know, how do we how are we going to engage in that because I think that's a really big piece if we can slow turnover um and people leaving mid-career for what of a reason or something that could be a real impact on on what we see and those could be things learnings that we could give to some of the other smaller cities and the same thing because they're facing the same issue we are. >> Yes. Oops. Excuse me. Uh, Commissioner Gotaell. Um, yes. Um, with retention will be a big part of this since we know that um, there aren't enough people to be hired. We do have to work on keeping those. We have um, there was a study done by the International Association of Chiefs of Police in 2024. Um, they have a a number of respondents, hundreds of respondents. And um some of the things that matter most we've seen um are of course compensation um workload and also just the culture of the um of the work environment. So those are certainly things that we can work on and we would advise um our our community partners to do the same. >> And I and if I may just make one more comment, Mr. chair. Um, I just want to say that I think you're right about saying that the smaller entities may want to regionalize or come together and one and I I think that's something where everybody could should start conversations now rather than later to see what makes sense and is if there's other places around the country where they're doing this. what are some of the best practices to make that happen in a really smooth transition and so that the communities that that feel like they're losing you know their police department don't don't feel that way that they feel like no they're actually going to gain more services. So I think it's really important how we proceed on that. >> Commissioner Anderson, >> thank you uh Chair Lundy and thank you for the the information. I have some questions on the um the budgeted or the projected budgeted FTEES and the the growth in that that chart. I I'm looking at the report here chart four I think it is. um the the growth in that I I would be interested to know what um how you calculated that projected growth. It seems really low from uh like a growth perspective. I'm used to seeing like growth in many industries like tied to um inflation, community growth, whatever it might be. And um you know, is this assuming that our growth stays pretty flat from a population? like uh can you talk more about how we're calculating that projected growth and um is that presumed to be an accurate um representation of what the need might be? >> Yes. Um thank you for the question, Commissioner Anderson. So what I can tell you um and this is this is also detailed in the report. So I'm going to reference the report a little bit here. The bureau, the national bureau of labor statistics is um uh projecting a 3% uh increase in growth in this profession over the next 10 years. Okay. There deed has some numbers available as well and deed is projecting between let me see here I think it's 4.6% and 5.1% growth and that depends on whether you're looking statewide or at the 7ount metro area. Okay? because we know that there are challenges um real challenges as we saw with the postboard data um in terms of interest we we were more conservative in our projections and we use the 3%. Also um the um in the in in our assumptions you will see that we um are keeping population growth flat because I believe growth is projected to be just very low. I don't remember the exact numbers, please forgive me. Um, but growth is projected to be low. We also assume that that crime and those those factors that drive the need for um law enforcement officers remains flat. >> Thank you. If I if I may, the um how so I from looking at some historical information in our own like the last 10 years I feel like our growth has been well over 3% over 10 years. It's been closer to 4% every year type thing. >> Um, and I think that like I'm trying to square that like that last 10 years of of growth with a projection of 3% over 10 years or like a 3% annualized uh growth. It just doesn't quite seem like it maybe on a on a national scale, but um >> in areas where there's higher needs, we're going to see uh potential higher growth uh potential like our growth may not match um maybe different than other parts of of the state. And so I'm curious how we're we're looking at that or if that just wasn't we looked at the national uh and applied it here. So at um Commissioner Anderson, we looked at um national data, we looked at statewide data, and then we tried to um then focus on Henipin County specifically. And again, we we did take a more conservative approach mostly because we understand that um there are some real challenges with availability which are documented in the um in the post boards um in their data um which I showed in that first chart. And so, you know, in terms of, you know, the growth that we've experienced in the past, um, what I am understanding, what I'm seeing is a, um, a possible slowdown, but understanding that we use, you know, a national number, the reality could be somewhere between that 3% and say the 4.6% that uh, that deed is saying they expect to have. So, but again the deed number is 7ount metro area. There was not a Henipin County specific number and so that that was the rationale for deciding on 3%. >> Okay. Thank you, Commissioner Green. I don't know if you had I'm just going down the line. >> Thank you so much. You saw my look somehow. Um, thank you for for describing what the plan is with the report. I really appreciate it. That was my first question. Thank you so much. This is really interesting. Really appreciate it. Um I wanted to mention I've been in conversation with a number of police chiefs recently and pretty much all of them spoke of this trend in the last 10 years of increased sort of um mutual backup and resource sharing. And and I in my notes when I was thinking about what I would say like I used the word collaboration and it's definitely collaboration but it was conveyed as much more like really relying on each other. >> Um and this that that chart that you showed explains that very much so. Uh I'm looking forward to hearing what their reactions are and also um some of the differences because there are differences largely in the size of the police forces and then also >> uh what I also got a sense in this conversation was that the cities that have bigger police forces are experiencing these hiring challenges more. you know, that sounds a little bit like of course. Um, but I'm interested in sort of the different ways that um, cities will need to respond and will want to respond to the data and ways that we can support them in deepening those partnerships. >> Thank you, Commissioner Green. So, I I will say that um I I cannot speak for um the Henipin County Sheriff's Office and I certainly don't want to speak for the board, but I will share that um as we prepared this report um we did not we did we we are not presenting recommendations uh under the assumption that Henipin County would take the lead on um any or all of these recommendations. Um, as you alluded to, you know, we would hope that the uh law enforcement community would be interested in the recommendations and that there would, you know, um, agencies would rise to the surface as they choose to lead maybe a certain portion of this and um, you know, really do some additional work um, some deeper dives around the information provided. >> Thank you, Commissioner Fernando. >> Thank you. One question and a few comments. I'm really grateful for all of this work. One question. So, if it's about 3,000 or so projected officer from a budget perspective when we're looking kind of future, did you do that projection for non-licensed positions? Like, is there a sense of officers within the workforce and non non-deputed roles? >> Um, thank you, uh, Commissioner Fernando. We actually did not look at non-licensed staff. we did focus on licensed staff. So that might be something um to consider for the future. >> Yes. Great. Thank you. So chair, I'll just have a few comments. Um and it makes sense you the the scope chosen here to have it across the county inclusive of the municipalities kind of that aggregate is really really helpful and it's you know important to not scope too much if that makes sense. Few comments and they'll be focused on the five recommendations. Uh Commissioner Lundy said earlier do differently and do together. That's actually a good framing for these wrecks in my opinion. So the the do the do together part of course is really evident in number one and two. What does a coordinated approach look like for recruitment etc. What uh what does it mean for us to be a bit more kind of comprehensive with how we're um how we're reviewing uh you know operationalizing the work. >> So I think that you're sending it to the chiefs. you said I don't want to make it a formal work group or task force. I'm not suggesting something to that effect, but under this kind of do together category, what might be more straightforward than not in terms of streamlining, not even a formal consolidation, but streamlining the objectives in this time period. I was not here when Henipin um merged with Minneapolis library or when the medical exam examiner's uh office kind of uh covered all of the counties or several counties. But however those efforts started perhaps might be something to consider with this as a basis because of something you said um at the beginning uh uh Miss Con which was we're recruiting the same people. So un unless we have and Minnesota is not a state demographically where we're projecting um people entering the workforce from an age perspective. >> That's right. We sometimes get people coming back but usually we are working with our existing um candidate pool and at times recruiting in and then technically if you looked at the last 20 years it's been very favorable for our workforce um to have people from various countries immigrate, migrate and seek refuge here. And I'm uh very very grateful for all of those families and communities uh seeing Minnesota as home. So yeah, I I think those first two again not a for doesn't have to be a formal task force with all the but what what might be more straightforward than not. I think that dovetales quite well with number three and five. So this is under the do differently category using commissioner Lundy's framing from earlier. So community service officers and nonsworn staff which is why I had asked earlier how many is that? you know, if it's 10% of the total amount, that's not as interesting. But if there if there's a significant number of non-sworn staff or an opportunity for community service officers, not unlike um for example, if we have community service offers or community investigators searching uh following up on gone on arrivals after domestic violence calls, as an example, uh those might be actually a lot more um practical to implement because other jurisdictions may be we might be applying a different work assignment to a licensed or a non-licensed individual if that makes sense. And then last but certainly not least, number four is really well written and that should technically apply to all of our job classes or job areas for which we are um I made the comment in earlier uh in the previous committee we we just need ear we need forecasting as soon as we can. We do know that when people don't have employment, their outcomes generally uh that we as a county strive for decrease and their likelihood of needing public assistance increases. So we have several reasons to be motivated and to maybe not operationally lead on behalf of everybody >> but to perhaps you know lead by by way of method and um and and maybe making more comfortable for various groups to consider what might it look like to partner differently. That's my feedback. Thank you uh Mr. Chair. >> Thank you Commissioner Edson. >> Uh thank you for this very helpful. Um, a few things on this. Um, I can read my own little notes here. Uh, retention obviously important. I got that. The one thing it it looks like there was only 25 of the 34 agencies that reported. So, I I mean this is good, but it's not a total picture. And I also think we have shifted a lot to there's a I mean, we didn't include Commissioner Fernando, you had asked it. um social workers and how departments are are making this move to have that kind of co-response model or that response where they're having just social workers. So um I think it's it's missing a little bit of a picture here. So I mean I agree with the regionalized to some extent, but this is not this is not really a decision the county makes, right? This is a study. This is local police departments get to make their own decisions on this. So, I guess my question is is as we look at this study, what is and we send it to cities. Um, are we, you know, we asked for this and Commissioner Lendy, I think it was a good idea, but what was your intention when you were when we were asking for this? I think departments, we were talking about this at the state level. This has been something where we've been really thinking about this and this is not in just this field to be clear. This is in so many fields. So, what is our intention with getting this information? And I guess I'm curious and this might not be with with you necessarily because Commissioner Linda, you're the one that requested it. So what was your intention when you got it? Because what I just would say is like if the county is going to be a convenor that makes sense, but local jurisdictions have control over their police departments and the decisions that they'll be making. So can you just give me a little bit more information on what you were thinking? >> Yeah. Um I thought we would deputize all police departments, non-controversial. We'll just take everybody over. Um, no. Uh, I think it I think our power is >> Don't make a media clip about that one. That's kidding. Just kidding. >> I've already started an enemies list. I'm number one on a bunch of them. Um, no, they we have power as a convenor. I think uh and so I think there are best practices that we all can do together. At a micro level, we compete like cats and dogs for personnel. If we can get staff from Brooklyn Center to come to the sheriff or if if Ocio can get somebody from Minnetonka, they are competing heavily. So at a micro level, we're competing. But at a macro level, there's common themes across all of these things. Um I'll give one pension. Right now we force officers to not do things. When they start their pension, they are procluded from certain types of work. During COVID, we let nurses come back in the profession part-time because we were so desperate for nurses. So, there was the state gave a waiver on uh how their pension plan. We could look at ways where could we use officers who have retired. Can they be investigators? Can they do tasks that may or may not require that? could we get legislative action so that we can capture this pool of talent that may only want to work halftime and I don't work at 4 in the morning but investigative services. So I think there's opportunities. A lot of the chiefs have ideas on this and I think that's where we our power really is convening, harnessing and putting that together on a macro level knowing that at the small level everybody's competing for talent. And so having data that we all can say, okay, this is accepted. I think some of this was expected. And I think some of the parts now we can start to look at the macro stuff cuz some of the legislative action I'll turn it back is was onetime money which is really cool except for when the one time money runs out. So uh CSOS are usually the first part of a if there's a riff where the chief's got to cut budget. CSOS get it first. CSOS are one of the key components of getting a person from a cadet to a CSO to a cop. It's like a ladder. So it's almost like we have by cutting CSOS, we've cut off part of that ladder that we might get candidates. So I think there's lots of opportunities. I think chiefs have been looking for kind of a quietly they get to look at everybody else's numbers and not have to wonder what secretive everybody's doing, but what can we do together? So I'll turn it back on. >> No, I think that's helpful. I just I I just wanted to know what our role was as what you were envisioning for that. So that that's that's helpful. And I mean honestly, I just think if we're going to be doing that work, I think we should look at the non-sworn staff and, you know, looking at our clinicians that are are providing care. And quite frankly, I mean, did you see those robots running races in uh China? They are pretty awesome. So, they could be our traffic patrol ticket to get people. Oh, yeah. I'm I'm going with the robots. All right. >> I'm done. I I'm going to ignore the robots because my my chief of my city would be the first one to want another bunch of drones and robots running around. Um, no I uh so I want to thank for the report and I think the purpose you you nailed it which is just to get a baseline so that we're all talking same common languages. I think all the chiefs know these things, but because they compete so heavily, I mean, one of the things that we've seen is um and I'm going to leave cities out, but I can think of two suburban cities that had leadership crisis andor incidents and immediately they went from 25 officers to three. >> And overnight, within months, they went from full staffed to not staffed at all pretty much. I mean, and we've had to step in. We've got, you know, that idea on what's budgeted. The city of Minneapolis has budgeted for 860 officers. I think they're 160 short. They're going to they've got budget. So, that's one of the things about budgeting is you can be budgeted, but if you're not, where are you at? And that's the big bubble. I think when you look at the countywide is the effects, uh, you know, until Minneapolis gets to be closer to full staffed, uh, I think all the chiefs will say it does have an effect on every other community. Um, and so I I think those things will help. Um, I've talked to the sheriff's office. Uh, I think everyone is eager to really look at what can we do together and I mentioned that by purpose that there are opportunities. I think the the pinch thing capturing retired people who have a ton of experience and who just hit the time where they're like, hey, I want something more in life or so a little less. And so, is there a way we can capture some of that talent? A lot of them do background checks for the county. Uh, a lot of departments use them. Is there a way? We talked a couple years ago in the CJCC about using uh retired officers at detectives or like crime scene investigation where we don't have enough people to uh to do that um that we could harness those because not everything requires uh that. So, I think there's lots of opportunities for that. Um, and one example I'll give is the city of OIO. They had six officers. They had a chief, a sergeant, and for patrol. One of the hardest things they had was the fact that no one wanted to go there because there's only a chief, a sergeant, and for patrol. There was no upward mobility, no sideway. And so they actually increased their tax levy by 30%. And I realize they're a small city, but it was still 30% to go from six officers to 10. and that gave them some other specialty things to recruit. But I think some of those conversations about can people keep doing that? Can you keep doing that? I I actually don't think we're going to be able to do that and not just OIO but anywhere. So the more we can do together uh police departments share resources already. Um the sheriff's department does investigative services, crime scene, um K9 units, you'll find that some cities will don't have K9. Everybody loves a K9 at a of a community event. They cost $50 to $75,000 just for the dog. Then the training and basically that dog if it gets hurt, you just you like broken Park did, you just lost a $75,000 investment into uh a dog or sometimes the dog doesn't work out and you still spent $75,000. There is no uh refunds on those. So things like that where people will call K9's from other jurisdictions to help them. So I think there's some shared resources where they're doing it now, but is there a way to pull those together? Um and then I'm really interested about the report was find out people are leaving before they they tap out as far as max or salary. So really getting into that. We don't know are they leaving to go to other jurisdictions or are they leaving the profession and we need I think that's something that probably would be a legislative ask to really do a deep dive and find out because how can we treat something if we don't know if they're leaving because of something and we're guessing throwing stuff in the dark. Um you hope we hit it but I do think that's uh very important. Um and I think you know we've gone through fits of we love our cops we don't like our love our cops. That has been very clear in the press. We have people who absolutely do not want to see police. People feel that. And I think that hurts when you're trying to do recruiting when people feel like, "Why would I want to go work for something? Why would I want to be a traffic engineer? Everyone just all they do is spend time ripping the traffic engine. I go to city meetings and they rip traffic engineers. I'd be like, I'll go find somewhere else to work." Um, no one here and there wants to work in an environment where you're treated like you're uh a necessary um, you know, not necessary. I should be there. Um, I also think that um, there's some good stuff the legislature I think could do on many different fronts and I think collectively by pulling people together and this report isn't the answer to anything, but it's a starting point. The chiefs have been very interested in this because I did reach out to about a dozen chiefs before I brought the bar to the board to say what would you want to see? What would be important? What kind of data? What that? And so the fact is we're treading water and we're actually watch going out to floating out to the ocean because we're not keeping up. And the other thing I'll just say is there's opportunities for other ways to look at calls. If there are ways to make sure our licensed law enforcement are responding to calls that require them, but not do calls for addiction treatment like Brooklyn Park where they using the alternative response. Those things can take calls off of the cops so that the cops can be doing stuff that only they and they alone can respond to. So, um, I just appreciate the report. I know the chiefs have been looking forward to it. I have a conversation with service department. I I definitely see the power of convening um and I think that helps and um because we can either sit and hope things will change and that hope is it's a great city but uh it doesn't actually do much for policy. We're going to have to step into this more clearly and I think that and the last thing I'll just say is we have to look at consolidation. There's going to be cities are not going to be able to afford the future costs that we know is going to happen. richer cities are going to increase their pay and they're going to get officers to join and the smaller cities are just not going to be able to keep up. Um that'll show up and eventually we will be helping them anyway so we could do that proactively. So again, thank you. Um I don't know if you had anything else to close with or Chella, I'm sorry. >> I do not. Um thank you Commissioner Lundy and and board members. >> Okay. I I'll let your chief add the robots. I know exactly what he No, I I can't remember. Do we need to have a motion to accept the report or we just is it just presented? Okay. Uh we have one item u which is if I get a motion a second. We have a motion sec a second for 3A which is acceptance of donation for general support of sheriff's office operations. Does any need background or questions? Seeing none, all those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion carries. And with that, the law, safety, and justice committee agenda is complete. Declare the meeting adjourn. Good afternoon. I'll call to order our health committee on this Tuesday, April 21st. The first item of business on our agenda is to approve the minutes from our meeting held March 24th. Is there a mo a motion to approve? >> So moved. >> The minutes have been moved and seconded. Any corrections or comments on the minutes? Seeing and hearing none. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? The minutes have passed. We have three items that are routine on our agenda today. Items 2 A, B, and C. I'll ask for a motion to move the block. >> I'll move the block. >> Uh these items have been moved and seconded. I'll move I'll read them into the record. Item 2 A is to a to amend an agreement with DHS for Nlloxxone training and Nlloxxone kit distribution services which will allow for adjustments to budget line items and attachment name. There's no change to the term or the amount. 2B is an amendment to an agreement with DHS for opioid response services for the HCH healthcare for the homeless program allowing for adjustments to budget line items and attachment name no change to the term or the amount. Item 2 C is an amendment to an agreement with the city of Minneapolis to receive funding for programs and services. We're extending the end date to December 31st of 2028 and increasing the NTE by just over $4 million for a total uh new total NTE of $4.7 million. Uh these items have been moved and seconded. Would anyone like a summary or description of any of those items? All right, seeing and hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? Those items passed. That is the end of our agenda and I'll declare a journ. I'm just going to stare at you. I ate like 15 pieces of candy back there. I feel sick. I did like literally have a sugar crash going on. I will call the the Human Services Committee to order. It's Tuesday, April 21st. It's 3:37 p.m. Our first order of business is to approve the minutes from March 24th. May I have a motion, please? Second. >> It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor, please say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion carries. We have one routine item before us today. If I could have a motion be to put 2A before us and a second. >> Second. >> And I'll read it into the record. Item 2 A. It's been moved and seconded. Sorry. Thank you. Um, item 2A is the human services and public health resolution including contracts and amendments to contracts with providers. More information is contained in the board report uh 2605. And if there's any questions, we have Mr. Huitt here as well. All right, looks like we're good. Um, so we will uh no questions. We will move for a vote. All those in favor of approving item 2A, please say I. >> I. >> Opposed? Motion carries. And we have two agenda before us today. If I could have a motion for 2B and 2C before us, I will read them into the record. Move >> those. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Second. >> Thank you. They've moved and seconded. Item 2B is an amendment to an agreement with the Minnesota Department of Health for grant funding to expand the lead agency capacity to improve competitive integrated employment outcomes for people with disabilities, extending the contract period through June 30th, 2027 and increasing the receivable amount to 1,33,726 for a new total receivable amount of $3,1,178. $8. And item 2 C is a joint powers agreement with the city of Minneapolis accepting grant funds from the city's local affordable housing aid funds and allocation from its general fund for the provision of shelter operations during the period of May 1st, 2026 through April 30th, 2027 in an amount not to exceed 1,250,000. And if there's any questions for Oh, yeah. Yes. Commissioner F or actually Commissioner Conley, you were first. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Just a question on 2C. It looks like this is a new JPA. Um, so I I would love just a little bit of I read the background, but just um some understanding around the newness of the JPA. >> Um, Mr. Huitt, do you are you going to go or Kareem Murphy? >> Uh, thank you, Chair Ederson, Commissioner Connley. Julia Welli as uh acting director of housing stability is here to speak to this item. >> Thank you. Uh Chair Eden, commissioners Julia Welli with housing stability. This um joint powers agreement with the city of Minneapolis um is a new one. Um this one as noted will will um fund extension of shelter operations. So vendors for this funding were actually selected during our 2025 2026 winter shelter RFP which expanded singles shelter capacity. This funding will keep those beds online through the end of this year. Um at which point new contracts uh funded through the super RFP uh will replace expiring ones with a more sustainable system of inclement weather beds. Um, so this is new funding um that's helping us keep beds online for this year and then we'll fund the full system um portion of make sure the system is full and complete and sustainable next year. Uh does that work? >> Yes. Thank you. That's I've been hearing about this and so this is the thing that I've been hearing about which is fantastic. Thank you >> Commissioner Fernando. >> Yes. Thank you. I'm not um Thank you, Madam Chair. 2B is wonderful. This is a significant amount of that's a significant increase. That's more than I've recall. So, I just wanted to commend that. Um having a total receivable exceeding 3 million for this uh outcome is just not the financial levels that we've always seen for um this area. And so, I just wanted to express gratitude to the grant writers and the providers and to um uplift that. Thank you, chair. >> Yeah. Thank you. Well, when they're being cut from the federal level, it is actually really nice to see. So, yeah. Yeah, that's right. So, uh, with that, there looks like there's no other questions. Uh, we'll move for a vote. All those in favor of approving items 2B and 2 C, please say I. I. >> I. Opposed. The motion carries. And that concludes the human services committee. I will call to order our public works committee for today. Our first item on the agenda is to approve the minutes from our March 24th meeting. May I have a motion >> and a second? We have a motion and a second. Any additions or corrections to the minutes? Hearing none. All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed? The meeting the minutes are approved. We have four routine items and I would take a motion for the block. So moved. Second. >> Uh we have a motion and a second. I'll read them into the record. Um item two is to negotiate an agreement with Minneapolis for cost participation and maintenance for the intersections of Cass 52 Henipin Avenue and First Street and Robert Fiser Drive in Minneapolis, a sub project uh of an existing one and county cost of not to exceed of $950,000. Item 2B is to negotiate an agreement with Brooklyn Park for cost participation and maintenance for Cass 152, Brooklyn Boulevard and Welcome Avenue intersection with an estimated receivable of $184,600. Item 2 C is to an amendment two to an agreement with HDR Engineering to provide additional professional services for CASA 33 and CASA 35 in Minneapolis uh otherwise known as Park in Portland for multimmoal safety improvements uh in the on a project increasing the not to exceed to four just over $4.6 million. And item 2D is an amendment two to an agreement for ERF grant funding with Minneapolis extending the end date to 5827 with no change to the not to exceed. Any questions or comments from my colleagues? These are all pretty routine things. So, uh, hearing none. All those in favor say I. I. I. Any opposed? Those items are approved. Thank you. And we are adjourned. Good afternoon. I will call to order this meeting of the Henipin County Housing and Redevelopment Authority for Tuesday, April 21st, 2026. The first item of business is to approve our agenda. Is there a motion to approve? >> The agenda has been moved and seconded. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? Our agenda is set. Item 2 A is the minutes from our previous meeting held March 10th, 2026. Is there a motion to approve the minutes? Move >> approval. Second. >> Minutes have been moved and seconded. Any corrections or comments on the minutes? Hearing and seeing none. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? Our minutes have passed. Item 3A is the claims register for the period ending March 31st, 2026. Is there a motion to approve? >> It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? Uh, the claims register has passed. We have one item of new business, and that's item 4 A. This is to terminate and forgive the portion of 2009 AHIFF agreement with Urban Homeworks associated with 620 23rd Avenue North for an NTE of $125,000. terminate the portion of the agreement associated with 22006th Street North Minneapolis for a receivable of $41,667. I'll move that if there's a second. That's been moved and seconded and Abby Lucen will present on this one. Thank you. Button. There we go. I'll start over. Um, good afternoon, Madam Chair and Commissioners. In the late 2000s and early 2010s, partially in response to the foreclosure crisis, affordable housing developers across the county began purchasing smaller apartment buildings and bundling them into scattered site portfolios. The HA invested affordable housing incentive fund in a number of these scattered site projects, including rental reclaim 1, which is the subject of today's action. Rental Reclaim 1 includes three addresses for a total of 12 units and was awarded originally in 2009. The current financial and security environment makes operating scattered site portfolios difficult and in some cases unsustainable, especially for the smallest building types, duplexes, triplexes. Um, one of the three properties in rental reclaim 1, 620 23rd Avenue North, fa faced repeated break-ins, other crime and vandalism, housing in Action, made the decision to work with residents to move them out for their own safety. Despite uh fencing, boarding, and regular patrols, the vacant building was vandalized again and again, stripping out the plumbing and the wiring. Housing in Action was um subject to a cyber attack last year and is not financially able to make the repairs necessary to bring the the building back to habitable condition. Um staff are recommending early forgi for forgiveness of the share of the AHIFF loan related to 620 23rd Avenue North and release of the related mortgage note and declaration and accept repayment um of the prora share of the AIF loan related to the duplex 2200 6th Street North and release of the related mortgage note and declaration. There's no change proposed to the third property which is a forplex on Emerson Avenue North. I'm available should you have any questions. >> Thank you. Um Commissioner Anderson. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for the the update. Um so the the properties that are that we're forgiving, are they habitable right now? >> Thank you for the question, Commissioner Anderson. Um the the one property we are forgiving is not habitable. It is currently valued at about um >> a dollar. So, um, the forgiveness analysis involved whether Housing and Action would be able to repay. >> Okay. And it sounds like the, um, the the entity doesn't have the financial means to make it habitable um, due to a lot of different circumstances. Um, is there like I guess I'm curious what the next steps are for this property. Does it like does it make sense to keep it in that possession if it's not going to be habitable or is there some other means of like rehabbing that that property and like what's what's the future state? >> Yes, thanks Commissioner Edison for that question. The goal of releasing the affordability requirements is that um a buyer could come in, rehab the property, and make it habitable um hoping that by reducing the complexity and making it more sustainable in the long term would attract said buyer. >> Got it. Yeah. >> Thank you. >> Yes. >> Other questions? Um that was actually kind of my question was kind of what happens to the building now? Is it just sitting vacant until there a buyer is found? Is it on the the roles of the entity that has it now but can't really maintain it? So, does it just sit vacant until a buyer is found? >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, in conjunction with this action, the city of Minneapolis is taking a similar action. Minnesota Housing and all the project funders. Um, Housing and Action will continue to own the property and continue to patrol, keep it boarded, keep it safe, but um, we wanted to move this along so that something could happen with the property. Thank you. That makes sense. Any other questions? Seeing and hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? That item passes. That concludes our agenda and I will declare us ajourned.