Excuse me. Oh no, it won't roll. Okay. So, I'm understanding that the tape will not show on on the screen for us today, folks. Again, so um it is okay. It is. >> Okay. >> Okay. They're up on the podium on the side. That's where they're at. So, good afternoon everyone. Welcome to the administration's operations and budget committee of Tuesday, October 21st, 2025. The first item on the agenda is minutes from the previous meeting of September 30th, 2025. May I have a motion? >> Move approval. Second >> been moved and seconded. Are there corrections, changes? >> Seeing none, all those in favor signify by I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion carries. We have three um routine items. Um if you would if the uh item 2 A, 2 B, and 2 C. I could move them as a slate if that's okay with everybody. >> I'll move the block, manager. >> And do I have a second? I'll read them into the record. This is item 2A. It's an agreement between Henipin County and North Point and wellness to provide continued career pathways to health care for youth for youth and young adults of color ages 11 to 24 in high demand healthc care fields um from 01 to 20 26 to 12 of 26 not to exceed 100,000. The second one 2B is an amendment to an agreement with American Indian OIC to continue employment and training services to Henipin County residents who face barriers to employment and economic self-sufficiency and are the public assistance extending the date to 1231 of 26 and increasing the not to exceed by 250,000 for a new total not to exceed of 500,000. And then finally, item 2 C is an amendment six with the Hive Blane LLC for the provision of academic tutoring services from January 1 of 21 through 1231 of 26, increasing the not to exceed to $678,322 for a new total not to exceed of just over $3.3 million. Does anybody have any questions or wants any Go ahead, Commissioner Anderson. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh, on item 2C, um, if my recollection is right, this is the tutoring and reading services support that we help fund for county involved youth, which I think is wonderful and we should absolutely be continuing it. I know that there was um change in legislation uh to update the curriculum um for reading in schools. And I'm curious if I can get an update at some point, not right now, of the impact of that on county involved youth that are going through like are we seeing um improvements? Uh, I can tell you just from my experience and my kids going through updated curriculum, it's it's better. So, yeah, I know, right? Thank you, Commissioner Edson, for your part in that. >> Um, but I would love a followup. Uh, it doesn't have to be now, but >> administrator, >> uh, Madam Chair and Commissioner Anderson, we'll we'll follow up with the memo. This relates specifically to the um ESS uh area and not let's read um which is in the library but they uh use a similar curriculum and so we'll we'll um uh we'll follow up with the memo to talk about the the changes um over the last year. Thank you. >> Any other questions, comments? All those in favor signify by I. >> I. Motion carries. Item 2D is the item for discussion and action. Um may I have a motion? I'll move it. >> Second. >> It's dedicated a dedication of a tree in memory of Speaker Meritus of the Minnesota House of Representatives Melissa Hortman. This is offered by Commissioners Coni Connley and Lundy. Commissioner Connley, would you like to speak to this? >> I will. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, so in our own ways, we are still trying to grapple with the horrendous act that took Melissa and Mark Hortman and their dog Gilbert. Political violence of this depth did not start or end with Melissa Hortman, but the gravity of what happened to Melissa Mark and their beloved dog, Gilbert, and the attempted assassination of John and Ivette Hoffman shook us all to our core, and the impact is still lingering. Serving in public-f facing roles should not avail us to intimidation and violence. In what was a really dark time, Melissa and Mark Hortman's children were a source of light. As you may all recall, Sophie and Colin Hartman Hortman shared a list of very good deeds that we could choose to do in honor of their parents. The first act of kindness on their list um was to plant a tree. This resolution before you is in honor of that. Our team at Henipin will work with Melissa's loved ones for a tree dedication later next year. I look forward to gathering on the South Plaza next year to plant a tree and I look forward to keeping Melissa's memory alive and our efforts to improve and advance the institution of Henipin County with all of you and I want to pass it to my colleague, Commissioner Lindy. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh just, you know, I think uh Mr. Connley said it more eloquently than I. I just um you know, uh Speaker Hortman or Melissa and her husband Mark a lot were my state representatives. Uh obviously Senator Hoffman, my senator. Um and so I knew Mark. Uh the one time I got the great idea to mow the lawn grass on the edge of the golf course less frequently. I heard from Mark frequently on the uh on those three dimes that I saved by doing that. uh and so they were active members of the community not just uh as elected leaders but uh taking part in discussions offering uh feedback and thoughts and stuff and so uh many of our friends um you know shared uh families with them their uh kids are on swim team and so I think you know in small ways uh you know having something there to show uh the memory um for me uh this fall usually I reach out to all my elected legislators it was a change uh where I'm usually reaching out to people. So I think in every way that all of us can kind of honor this, honor the commitment and also I think nowadays more than ever we see so much anchor and people saying things and then they'll say it's okay the other side is saying things and they go back and forth. Um and I think maybe if we all take a moment to think about um just what does that always lead to? It leads to more violence. it leads to more harm and uh maybe taking a moment um in thinking about ways that we can take the temperature down that would be good and best for frankly all of us. So uh I would like to ask and encourage other commissioners who wish to uh be authors of this uh bar to also join in. >> Thank you. I think we would all raise our hands to that everybody and I just want to thank you for bringing this forward too. What a beautiful way to remember her. Do other colleagues have anything they'd like to add? This is a wonderful gesture. All those in favor signify by I. >> I. >> I. A resounding I. And that concludes our agenda. Good afternoon. I'll call this meeting of the health committee to order on Tuesday, October 21st, 2025. The first item of business is to approve the minutes from our previous meeting which was held on September 30th, 2025. Is there a motion to approve the minutes? So move >> miss the minutes have been moved and seconded. Any corrections or comments on the minutes hearing and seeing none. All those in favor please signify by I. I. Any opposed? That item passes. I'd like to move items 2 A and 2B together. These are routine items. If there's a motion >> second. >> Thank you. I'll read them into the record. Item 2 A is an agreement through HERSA for the Ryan White HIV AIDS program part A emergency relief project grant. The dates on this are March 1st of 2025 through February 28th of 2026. This is a receivable of a little over $6.1 million. And item 2B is an agreement to purchase reinsurance protection from catastrophic medical claims as required by contracts between Henipin Health and the Minnesota Department of Human Services. The date on this one is January 1st of 2026 through December 31st of 2026 with an NTE of $5 million. These two items have been moved and seconded. Any discussion? >> Hearing and seeing none, colleagues, all those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? Those two items have passed. There is one item for discussion and action. There's a motion, a second for 2C. I'll read it into the record. Item has been moved and seconded. 2C is to an extend the suspension of the ordinance 9 section 7 subsection one staffing. I will pass that to deputy administrator Murphy. >> Madam Chair, Kristen Melstrom here is here to present that item and answer any questions you might have. >> Thank you Kristen Melstrom. Welcome. Thank you, Chair Connley and commissioners. My name is Kristen Milstrm. I'm a Henipin County Public Health Planner and the coordinator of the EMS council here. And we're here today uh with a board request to extend the deadline for the final decision to March 31st, 2026 on the suspended staffing section 7 subsection 1 of ordinance 9. That section remains suspended until the end of this calendar year and without further action by the board. the previous staffing section that would require two paramedics for all 911 EMS calls would be reinstated. The purpose of this request is so that public health on behalf of the EMS council can collect and report a full year of performance measure data from 2025 before the board makes a final decision on this suspended section of the ordinance. The performance measures that were chosen by the EMS council were approved last November in 2024 and um set prehosp care benchmarks for stroke and trauma patients who would be considered high acuity patients. um by giving time to gather a full year of data uh public health and the EMS council um feel that it would give you a broader picture of the performance that's um that the EMS providers have been um providing while using the suspended staffing model of both two paramedics and a one paramedic one EMT model. Four of our prov providers use these models and then one provider in the county still uses a two paramedic model, but this would allow for um flexibility to meet the needs of the patients that they're serving. Um public health expects that regardless of the staffing model used that highquality care meets the state set benchmarks. That's being consistently provided with both staffing models. And with this extension until March of 2026, public health will just have time to collect and analyze the data and provide it back to you before that deadline. Thanks for your consideration and I'll stand for questions. Wonderful. Makes sense. Thank you so much. Any questions for my colleagues? Commissioner Gotel. >> It's Thank you first of all for reaching out to all of us and talking about these staffing models and also talking to us about how difficult it is to get the data that you need. So you actually need this extension. I think we're data driven up here and we really want to see the data before we move forward. So, I really appreciate all the hard work that you're doing here and I'm looking forward to looking at that when it comes to fruition. >> Thank you, Commissioner Fernando. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, I also appreciate the explanation and the desire for a complete data set. I I won't hold to any kind of direct timing, but if this is extended to 26 of end of March, presumably we would have something in January or February, you know, because there's still the action portion. So, if you could speak a little bit to timeline of full data set, complete analysis, some amount of um just how you're thinking about that would be great. Thank you, Madam Chair. >> Yes. Um, Chair Connley and commissioners, we did go through a very lengthy um, review of the board deadlines, which come up very quickly in January. So, if we hit the board deadline right away in the beginning of January, we'll be able to meet the, you know, the deadlines by March 31st. And I will be encouraging the EMS providers to provide data more quickly than they're accustomed to giving me, but we can get that done and provide it to you before that deadline. Thank you. Other questions or comments? Thank you so much. We appreciate it. Um with that, we will we will proceed to the vote. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? That item passes. That appears to be the end of our agenda. I will declare us a journ. I'm good. Okay. I will call to order the Human Services Committee. It is Tuesday, October 21st. It's 2:19 p.m. and I'm the chair, Heather Edson. Our first order of business is to approve the minutes from September 30th. I'll move them if I can have a second. >> Second. Thank you. All those in favor say I. I. >> I. Those say nay. Uh the motion carries. We have 10 routine items before us today. So it's it's packed. Um I will be moving them separately in blocks based on their funding programs. Um if I could have a motion to move 2A before us and I'll read it into the record. >> Second. >> Thank you. It's been moved and seconded. Item 2A is a human service and public health resolution including contracts and amendments to contracts with providers. More information is outlined in the human services and public health contract under 2515. Um, with that, do we have any questions? These are very routine. So, um, no comments. We'll move to a vote. All those in favor of 2 A, please say I. >> I say nay. >> The motion carries. And that passes. Item 2B are 2 E. I'd like to move uh before the board if I could have a second. >> Second. >> Thank you. And I'll read these into the record. Item 2B is an amendment for a joint powers agreement with the seven police departments consortium to continue services for the Henipan County embedded social worker program extending the date to December 31st of 2027. Item 2 C is an amendment to the joint powers agreement with the city of um St. Louis Park to continue services of the Hen County Henipin County embedded social worker program extending that also to December 31st of 2027. Item 2D is an amendment to the joint powers agreement with the city of Edina, city of Richfield to continue to expand services of the Henipin County Police Embedded Social Worker Program in Edina and Richfield, extending that also to December 31st of 2027. And item 2E is an amendment to the joint powers agreement with the cities of Maple Grove and New Hope to continue services the Henipin County embedded social worker program for the period of January 1, 2025 to January 31st, 2026. Um, with that, do we have any questions on those or comments? Uh, Commissioner Fernando. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Just want to express immense gratitude for this program that is clearly been very effective. This is only possible through partnership with our locals and most importantly trust from members who've offered us this feedback over the years. Um, of course, I I'll shout out Henip and staff for um our work in helping to convene and generate this iterative service. honestly um the entire time I've been on this board, but it is only effective because everyone is working together from law enforcement to community providers to mental health and behavior health um uh workers all the way through. And uh it's not the it's not the same as um COPE or other responses, but we have been able to learn from one another in a way that has been so effective throughout uh the county. of course want to I'll shout out to Director Kaiser out there as well. But we could not do this alone. We need police chiefs. We need law enforcement. We need every single type of provider. This is an example of a holistic community service where where county is working alongside um you know other jurisdictions and authorities and I look I'm eager to support it and look forward to further expanding in ways that the data uh shows. Thank you, Madam Chair. >> Thank you, Commissioner Fernando. Uh, Commissioner Anderson. >> Uh, thank you, Madam Chair. Um, I was wondering if I could just get a little bit of information on the end date for the item 2E for Maple Grove and New Hope. Uh, the others were extending to 27. I'm just wondering if there's anything substantively different about those two communities. Uh, that lead to the earlier end date. >> Uh, thank you. How about commission director Murphy? Do you have >> Madam Chair, Commissioner Anderson, Leah Kaiser is here to respond to that question, please. Thank you. >> Commissioners, this is Leah Kaiser, director of behavioral health. Um the answer, the short answer is that it just relates to the budgeting process by each of the cities. So, some cities will approve a longer duration than others. And so, we just respond to the needs of each community and set our our timelines accordingly. >> I appreciate it. Thank you. >> Yeah. Thank you. All right. And then Commissioner Lundy. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. U first I want to obviously thank you know the people out in the field doing the work. Um I hear from officers when I do ride alongs and meet with chiefs about the value of that. Um what I was wondering I I think I've shared with Leah and Jody is uh as we hit this budget season and everybody's having tight budgets, people are focused on cost. Cost and value are two different things. People assume they're the same. they are not the same. And I think a lot of cities are saying the cost of the embedded social worker program and I think that maybe obviously we have our work cut out for us for the end of the year but maybe you know next quarter first quarter of next year if we get a presentation I think it'd be really important that we provide a value statement to these cities. I think they know the value, but they tend to look at it as a line item. And I don't know if electeds and chiefs and stuff always forget that uh is we are having calls answered and helped by embedded social workers, we are removing calls from 911. Um uh police are the most expensive unit of government in a response. They just are. That's just you can look at the facts. Uh, and so every time we can take a call off of them so they do what they do best while people who need help with maybe addiction or if it's if it's stabilization, if it's family, the the bread and butter of what we do, that is a call that is not falling on people who frankly they will tell you are not equipped. So I think it's really important for us to have that conversation. Our budget's not going to get any better in the next couple years and neither are the cities. We really need to restate that value statement because I think people are looking at the cost and I think we have the data we can talk about just how many calls we answer and how many things that we have an effect on and um not that cities don't know that but I think sometimes we all forget and uh that kind of information is valuable and I think it might be a good time um I don't want to speak for Leah or any other team for their evenings but to do a little road show because I do I think councils as former mayor would also know when you're sitting on a and you get an update, a 10-minute update, it helps ground what the information about your city, and I think that would be useful. So, thank you, Madam Chair. >> Uh, thank you. And and just um a I'll just say a comment, a few comments. Um Leah Kaiser, your name was brought up multiple times at our recent um police chief meeting for district 6 and lots of compliments um about the embedded social worker program. One thing it was noted um the city of Edina police chief and fire chief had talked about um the work we're doing with cope to try to improve that and so I wanted to thank you for that initiative. Um I do know that um some of the paramedics have also said that we have some struggles there. They're having struggles with with COPE as well. But um the embedded social worker program, one of the other things they brought up was that they don't have their own car. And so throughout cities as we look at other first responders having their own cars um social workers do not. And so it's an interesting uh ponder because what what cities are doing then is giving them a city car. So anyways, love the program. So I'll go ahead and then So it's been moved and seconded. All those in favor of 2B through 2E, please say I. >> I. Opposed say nay. The motion carries and Okay. So I'll have a motion be to put 2F through 2H before us. Please. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Thank you. It's been moved and seconded. I'll read them into the record. Item 2F is an amendment to an agreement with the Substance and Mental Health Services Administration early diversion extending the date to September 29th, 2026 and increasing the receivable amount to 330,000 um for a new total receivable amount of 990,000. Item 2G is an amendment to an agreement with the Substance and Mental Health Mental Health Services Administration Community Crisis Response Partnership extending the date to September 29th, 2026 and increasing the receivable amount to 746, um 165 for a new total receivable amount of 2,23,763. Uh let's see. And then item 2 H is an amendment to an agreement with the Substance and Mental Health Services Administration advancing the systems of care model for youth and families, extending the end date to September 29th, 2026, and increasing the receivable amount by 900 oops, let's see, $941,170 for a new total receivable amount of $3,474,580. Uh, with that, are there any questions? Okay, with that, it's been moved and seconded. All those in favor say I. >> I. That's uh then moves on to our last one. Um, let's see. I'll have a motion to put 2 I through 2J before us. >> Thank you. It's been moved and seconded and I will read them into the record. Um, it is an item 2I is an amendment to an agreement with the Bureau of Justice Assistance for the US Department of Justice to continue the 911 alternative mental health response team extending the end date to September 30th, 2026 with no changes to the agreement amount. Item 2J is an amendment to the joint powers agreement with Minnesota Department of Human Services to accept federal financial partnership funds for non-emergency medical transportation services. Oh, that's exciting. extending the contract period through June 30th, 2026 and increasing the receivable amount by 1,ion500,000 for a new total receivable amount of $17,325,000. Any comments to that outside of celebration? Sorry. Okay. All right. So, with that, all those um in favor, please say I. >> I. I. >> And any opposed? The motion passes and there is no further business before us. I will call this meeting adjourned. >> It is chilling. I will call to order our public works committee for today. Um this is the transit and trash edition. Um the first item on the agenda is the minutes from our previous meeting. Uh may I have a motion and a second? >> Move approval. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Any additions or corrections? All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Any opposed? The minutes are approved. Um, I'm going to break these out. First in the uh the trash category. Uh, we have several routine items 2 A through 2C. Uh, if I could get a motion and a second uh for the block. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Uh, I'll read them into the record. Item 2A is an amendment to an agreement with Better Futures to provide deconstruction services extending the end term through 123126 increasing the not to exceed by $100,000 for a new total NTE of $500,000. Item 2B is to negotiate waste delivery agreements with licensed waste haulers period of 1 January 126 to 123127. identify market price for waste management services. And item 2 C is to negotiate four agreements with various cities for organics drop off. And I understand there is actually a uh a revision to this item um a this is an R1 uh before us um that takes off one of the the cities because that funding is through a separate model. Um so with that change of the the R1 um >> Mr. Chair >> Yes. >> Yes. So um the 2B I know that these are all very routine. >> Mhm. >> 2B is can look very routine but I wasn't sure what the will of this body was with that item if if there was interest in passing that today or progressing it etc. Um, for me personally, I um I shared an R1 for 2B and an email. Um, so u my my interest here is I appreciate the waste delivery agreements going through from a routine perspective. There is uh one agreement with the city of the first class that I believe a little bit more attention is needed. So I I didn't know what the what the will of this group was. Um, but I did email a potential uh path forward if depending upon how people want to do it. >> I appreciate that. And to that, I just wanted to ask because I know part of it was to separate out the agreement with the city of first class so that it could be a kind of a separate conversation. Um, so that that could that could be a conversation and in of itself. Am I summarizing roughly correctly? >> Yeah, that was my my interest. So it it just gets a little it's it's a little nuanced because this is a routine item. It's been a routine item for a long time >> and the item um should to be prevail allow staff to negotiate as they have previously. Um but as we have seen uh the city of the first class has a has a um there's a number of questions that I've had and um I'm kind of awaiting some feedback from them. So, personally, that's why I was interested in just uh separating it from the committee to board cycle. I I anticipate that this should be smooth. I just want to be clear, that's my interest. Uh but I wasn't sure what the body wanted for this item, so I didn't want to be too presumptuous on what should take place. >> I appreciate that. Um, if I could ask just a question of staff on this, the um when we approve uh kind of a block of contracts to be negotiated by X time there is there anything that I mean there's nothing that necessitates any of those contracts or that all of those contracts be negotiated in block? they can all be negotiated separately and um that whether it's a separated out in this action as a different action the staff work on the back end kind of remains the same is that accurate >> chair Anderson I I will say this my simple answer is whether this action is separated or together we will have the same conversations with each of the organizations that we would be negotiating agreements with. >> Okay. Um so from my perspective, I don't think separating it is necessarily needed um just because the negotiations are still going to happen with each individual entity separately. >> And and Mr. Chair, if that's the case, then I would move to progress 2B to the next board meeting without a vote here. That would be my uh >> I'll second the progress emotion, >> but I I know we're maybe we're a little bit out of order now. So, I wanted to just express like it and that's where it depends on the will of the body, but my objective is to is for um a little bit more detail from our first class city. >> Okay. >> Prior to myself voting in favor of this. >> Fair enough. Um I So, because we have a motion to progress item 2B separately, I'll take that vote first. Um, is there any additional discussion because I know we have a block. >> There was second. >> Seconded. I seconded. >> Yep. Um, any further discussion on the item to progress? And maybe my parliamentarian uh, is a motion to progress debatable? >> I Yeah. >> Okay. I I thought so, but I just wanted to make sure >> it's a motion. Yes. >> Some like a motion to table is not and so like and anyways sorry >> can I clarify that it's not the R1 that you're progressing just the original? >> Just the original. Yep. >> Um question of clarification. >> Sure, >> Mr. Chair. So the R1 the way I understood the R1 is that it covers everything covered in the original but it breaks out cities of the first class into a separate be it further resolve clause. that >> yeah madam chair uh excuse me m Mr. Chair um and commissioner green my interest there was to try to progress the the city of the first class so if there is an interest in maintaining before us is 2B it's not actually the R1 >> Mhm. So the original could the full thing could be progressed. It it would also achieve um the R1's aims. So there is no R1 at this point that was an option if colleagues felt strongly about passing something out of committee and then separating. But if it if it sounds like there is not that interest then um for me personally I I would >> seek progress the whole thing. Yeah. Exactly. >> Thank you. I I'm clocking now. >> Okay. Any further? Yes, Commissioner Connley. >> Uh just thank you, Mr. Chair. Just that I support the progress motion. There's some discussion that we're going to have later around cities of the first class and a whole policy. So, uh this makes sense to progress to next week. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> For two weeks. >> Yeah, it's for a while. It's November Thursday, November 6th. And this is progressing to the full board where we'll have the the full discussion and subsequent. Yep. So all right. Um any other discussion on the progress motion of 2B, not the R1. Um all those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Any opposed? That item is progress to the full board. Back to the now uh item 2 A and 2 C >> R1 >> R1. Um any discussion on those items? Hearing none. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Any opposed? They those two are approved. Um, now back to the rest of the agenda. Um, item 2 D and 2E are routine transit uh, items, but still kind of exciting. May I have a motion? >> Move approval. >> A second. >> We have a motion and a second. I'll read them into the record. Item 2D is to negotiate subordinate funding agreement with the Metropolitan Council for project staff services for the Metro Blue Line Extension light rail transit project for the period of January 126 to December 3126 and estimated receivable of just over $1.4 million. Item 2E is to negotiate a subordinate funding agreement with Metropolitan Council for staff services for the Metro Green Line Extension Light Rail Transit Project for the same period, an estimated receivable of $231,277. Um, do my colleagues wish to have any uh conversation on these two? Getting money from the Met Council for our staff is always welcome. Um, yes, >> I'll absolutely speak in favor of just sheer excitement for these uh two items. It in a in a time where government functionality is not guaranteed. It's hard to call these routine. These are significant items. This is uh a lot of work, a lot of workers, kind of a countless amount of of years of advocacy and most importantly an essential service for any society um and for community members who are trying to go about their day and you know live full and vibrant lives. So I'm just eager to see this continue to proceed. Um for those watching at home, we have been very close uh contact with our Met Council partners. We've been to DC several times. We've had very favorable visits with um FTA and otherwise and so just cannot express uh my gratitude and excitement to vote in favor. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> I appreciate that. Yes, Commissioner Lundy. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. I was going to take umbrage at the idea that this exciting I saw blue line. I was like, of course, it's very exciting. Um but I I do want to I said it the in our budget hearing. Uh I do want to highlight the fact that uh Henipin continues to do what we say we're going to do on transit. Uh that it isn't just we're for this or against that and then when it comes time to fund that we walk away from the table. Uh we continue to invest money. We continue to be honest with residents on what our plans are. We continue to uh put the money where we say it is. You can't build enough roads to fix our future. Um, and there are people, as I said in our budget hearing, uh, all you have to do is look at your insurance. Uh, cars cost more now than ever. And whether you have a car that's paid off, the insurance rates continue to go up. And people, especially in my district, who have a higher percentage of people who don't have reliable transportation, um, have a car that needs a repair and then look for the sticker shock on that. uh the cost of getting to a job, getting to education, getting to school continues to rise and our investment in transit, it's going to help everyone whether a person is well off or a person is not well off. Uh this investment will stay with us and so I know this is a small amount, but I like to celebrate every little bit we can. So, thank you. >> Thank you. Any other discussions? Yes, Commissioner Green. >> Um thank you. So just wanted to add my voice to the chorus that um yes as was said like while this is under the routine item section it feels like you know attention should be drawn. It's exciting. uh and to second also the remarks that Henipin County is out there advocating for transit is really I think leading the way in our region and uh always ready to receive partners in that work and you know there's so much conversation around how much transit costs and there's so much less conversation around how much highways cost and how much cars cost and as commissioner Lundy said the burden of car expenses on each individual household like let's take that and and you know add it up to the sum total for our communities. Uh so transit is something that we need and uh is the way to the future. So very excited about this. >> Thank you. I also just want to highlight that these two, you know, the subordinate funding agreements is something that allows Henipin staff to really embed themselves into the projects to make sure that they are run efficiently and that we are getting and achieving our goals around uh like a really functioning good transit delivered. So, I am I'm excited about the the work that went into getting us to this point of having our staff as part of the project staff um in collaboration and partnership with the Met Council uh because it is essential that we are all working together. I think Commissioner Fernando, you mentioned how this is government working uh and functioning, which doesn't always happen. So, I like it. So, thank you. Um, with that, all those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Opposed. Those two items are approved. Uh, final item on the agenda is for discussion and action. Approve the residential waste reduction and recycling funding policy negotiating score grant agreements. May I have a motion and a second for that? >> So move. >> We have a motion and a second. Um, Miss Ernie, >> Chair Anderson and Commissioners Ben Kudson is with us today to provide some background and information related to the residential waste recycling or reduction and recycling funding policy and the changes that we are recommending for the next four years. >> Thank you so much, Mr. Kenson. Chair Anderson, commissioners, I'll just shorten and say we're talking about the funding policy for cities. So, we receive about 4.4 million in SCORE funds every year from the state. SCORE is the select committee on the environment and on recycling in the environment. It's been around since 1989. So, I can say this, it's been around since the 80s. And we pass 100% of these funds through to cities to support their programs on the front line in this case offering curbside recycling, organics, trash collection. And so our funding policy really sets how how we allocate the score funds, how funds can be used. And we attach a few conditions to that as well, uh, such as standardized education and outreach. We allocate funds broadly for three different purposes. About 40% of it goes to just general waste reduction and recycling programs. 50% goes to curbside organics recycling, which if you take a look at that history, it's really increased over the past five years. A lot of action there. And then there's 10% that also goes for organics dropoff funds, city of Greenfield for example, and also uh to multifamily programs, which is a change that we made recently knowing that a lot of our residents live in apartment buildings that aren't served by curbside city programs. We are making some minor changes. We've engaged with cities about these changes. And so I will highlight the six or five changes briefly. We have a new term. It's a three-year policy this time. It goes through 2028 because we didn't want to go through 2029 because that's when extended producer for responsibility kicks in the first year of implementation in 2029. So, it's a three-year term. Second change is small cities receive a minimum amount of a floor amount of $3,300 for curbside organics. Even though they're small, they still have a program to administer and that's something they requested from us. The fourth change is we have new funding levels for curbside organics recycling. We've seen the landscape change a little bit over time as cities have achieved higher and higher signup rates. And so we're bumping up uh the the target for curbside, shooting for 60% part signups there. and then 30% signups in cities that only have a hauler requirement. We've seen a lot of a lot of your cities have moved from having a hauler requirement, just passing that through to having a city-wide contract for organics recycling. We've really seen a lot of benefits in that higher signups and and lower cost. And then the last change we're making is in response to recent board action where we'll have performance standards for cities of the first class. And if those standards are not met, we will negotiate an improvement plan, a recycling improvement plan with cities of the first class and we'll that has to be that's jointly negotiated, but it has to be approved by the county. And we're hopeful that we can find a suitable path forward. So that's a that's a summary of the changes and what we're looking at going forward. And with that, happy to answer any questions. >> Thank you so much, uh, Commissioner Allison. >> Thank you. I love this program. I love that we pass everything through. Um, and it comes from a state sales tax, right, on on garbage trash. Is that how it works? Just remind me. >> Yes, T Anderson. Commissioner Ellison, it comes the source of this is from solid waste management tax. So, if if you're a resinor business, if you look look on your trash bill, you'll see see a line item for that. >> Okay. So, and Ben, I have a few more follow-ups. So, I was I was looking at um the sheet and we had talked about this before. Um, I think I can't remember who I if I met with you before about this. Um, but just how the program works and I it's great to know that cities get money. I would really love to know how much who's doing the best of the 45 cities, you know, a ranking of them. Um, and then who's getting the most funding. Uh, and so I if we have a chart, I feel like that should be easily published. I'm doing some searches and I'm looking through all of our things and I can't find anything. So, we have like the equations of how it works, but I want to know who's doing the best. I mean, right, we had all these people um residents here protesting that we're not doing enough when I actually we're doing a ton on waste management. Um we're doing a lot of initiatives and I know that all of your departments are doing a really good job. It's too bad that we don't we have to figure out how we can get it to these groups that how how uh how much is being done. But I really would love to see some accountability back to the cities too because we we don't we're not responsible for what they do in terms of their own trash. And so I think it would be good for residents to know who is doing the best and their organics and how they're doing their trash. Chair Anderson, Commissioner Eden, we do have the information about how funding is distributed in 2025 and we can make projections on how that would be changing for 2026. We can send that to all of you. Um, and I'd ask Ben to speak to maybe who's doing the best, but I would also say there's probably the best in many different categories, not just a single category. And so like a single best might be a little bit difficult just kind of putting that out there. But maybe we can break that up into different um different categories to kind of share where where there are successes and then maybe where there are opportunities. >> Yeah. And Mr. Chair, I think that actually would be really I mean honestly a a an Excel spreadsheet about who is doing what really well. I think people don't understand that we're not necessarily responsible for people like for the trash, right? And so, um, I just think that would be really helpful that we're doing this work to help with MPCA. We're trying to, you know, meet state standards, but I just don't think that that's clear for residents. And honestly, it's not super clear because I can't pull it up in this residential waste reduction recycling funding policy. There's nothing that says like here's who did really well or who's trying these all these different initiatives. Cities are competitive with each other. They just are. And so, it would be really helpful if that was it was laid out more clearly. Chair Anderson, Commissioner Eden, I will say share that the team has a great relationship with the city staff. We meet with um what we call their recycling coordinators on a very regular basis. It's a space not only for us to share what our expectations are, our needs are. It's also a space where they can learn from each other. And so that is a forum in which we meet on a fairly regular basis and have those conversations and we will follow up. Thank you. Uh, Commissioner Lundy. >> Thank you, Chair. Uh, just, uh, I think it'd be good to have that kind of report. I also I look at participation not whether they have a can in the garage, but whether they put stuff in the garage and then take it down to the street because that's two different things. Um, in my book, I know some people count the fact that you got a can or you're getting charged, but you don't actually have a can, which uh some of the suburban cities, they everybody get they've tried to figure out if they want a can. If they're going to use a can, they'd rather pay the fee and not have to have to use it. So, I just that little tweak because not everybody's delivering cans or taking them, but they're getting charged. So, there's 100% participation if you go by that route if you're paying for it. Um, and and so I I think that's interesting. I I think something, you know, during the comments and uh I'll give credit or blame to Commissioner Eden for bringing it up, so I'll I'll go ahead and just jump on. Um I think we should start to calculate out the cost of moving trash to landfills and the cost of pollution, not just in the can, but moving it back and forth um how that that system works because we are receiving the trash and then we get to take care of it. I think how it arrives to us does matter um to that pollution quota and I think the couple of the people talked about the the semis they're going to be looking and as I have said here before those semis that go right through the middle heart of my district I know it goes through other districts goes through north Minneapolis the same people um would be affected by that as well so having that true cost of those things it it does matter if you're going to load up thousands of semis to carry trash right through the same area um Is it it it what are we trading for one impact for another? I don't know the answer whether one is lesser than the other but I think those are important details because uh thank you. >> Thank you Commissioner Coutell. >> Thank you. I would I want to talk further about the score dollars because this has been one of those things that I've actually testified several times about and the score dollars were cut and they were cut significantly and only 3% was added back two years ago. And if we really want to get on to doing zero waste, we need those score dollars back. If you heard the residents here, they want us to do more. It's hard to do more because the cities are the ones who have to implement all this stuff, and they need the dollars to do it. And so, just a just a cautionary tale about trying to I I don't mind seeing data, but I'm concerned about some of the smaller cities being able to compete against some of the others just because of staffing and because of the dollars that they're not getting right now. So I think it's good to have those reports. I mean we already saw in one of the briefings that what the haulers are supposed to bring in and I I did note that Eden Prairie did not have a report and I had talked to the city manager about that and saying that we really need to make the sure that these people are reporting back to us so that we can look at some of those kinds of things and I I think that's really important that we we look at that as a whole picture. >> Thank you uh Commissioner Green and then Fernando then Connley. Um, thank you, Mr. Chair. I wanted to say actually what um, Commissioner Gatell just said, which was this question about the score funding and what how much of it is actually coming to us and how much has been eroded and we don't need to get into it here. I just want to um put a gigantic asterisk by that uh, and maybe have that in our communications in the in the spreadsheet that I am excited to see with the fine tunes that Commissioner Lundy has added. um a note about uh what percent of that line item on our tax bill is actually coming to the counties to pass to the cities to do this work. Thank you. >> Thank you, Commissioner Fernando. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um first on data, I really appreciate data. I think that's a that makes a a lot of sense both from the um the historical perspective as Commissioner Eden just was brought up but then uh as Commissioner Goautell said we are going to meeting to defend at the legislature the need for for the performance from this from these funds. So that makes sense to me. Um, by way of this action, the the first resolving clause I would be comfortable passing today if it if that was necessary. Um, the one point of feedback is the cities of the first class. I think we need another reporting date, not just February 15th. Um, I don't know. I I I understand that quarterly is a bit much, but maybe it's twice a year. um just annually, if I read that correctly, in the middle of session is is not a a time that really inspires a lot of focus. And as we um have have observed and experienced, this is a really activated issue among residents and so ensuring that there's a couple of checkpoints would be favorable from my perspective. Uh the second resolving clause I'm not vote um comfortable voting for today, so maybe it's another progress item. My my reason is is of course focus on the city of the of the first class. We received their 15page document right around recycling rates and zero waste and I just remain perplexed about the intention of that city's policy position. Um it's in the in the last sentence of the first paragraph it speaks about not having a facility in the city. Right? that that resolving clause, excuse me, that um their resolution is shutting down the hurrican ending incineration and complete closure of the entire complete decommissioning of the entire facility. So th this has been the point of policy clarity that um I and we staff have been present in these rooms have been seeking and that's why I just call like that's why I I'm so maybe a progress is fine and let's see what else can be uncovered with more staff. But if you look at the attachment from today, right? Yeah. Um if you look at that um that the communitydriven NASA shut down the herk, it it it goes to their action and it's been this has been a point of difference. And so I think clarity from the from that uh entity as the operators of that organized hauling and the land of the use authority for where the hook resides will be necessary for any action that comes before us or any vote I should say. So that's uh so then the and then the last section of commentary I'll have Mr. Sharon and then I'll be done. I agree with the sharing the load piece. It's it's just an unc it's you know the the state mandates cities have direct authority and we are required to to provide a regional service. So, how do we want to think about that in this moment? And I don't know what meetings need to take place with whom, but we are in a tension point where this lack of uh the inongruence I think will be more difficult to clarify next year during session. I think now I think however difficult now is, I don't believe um spring of 26 will be easier. So, that's that is for for me. And I I know I sent you all uh we of course didn't move the R1, but I did send you all kind of what I'm trying to uncover here. Um it's it seems uh straightforward clarity that can be achieved in the next you know they they produce the report. So so the sharing the load and really clarifying authority is going to be essential. Um you know and it is you know it is of course we did have significant public comment. Um again as you all know this is a a very common subject for many of us uh certainly for myself and it is it's just really really uh difficult to want to provide the continued service of trash being picked up and solid waste being picked up consistently. We saw what happened in Philly with their trash strike. We're seeing what's happening in Oakland where they're just dumping stuff anywhere. Um I there are public health concerns with trash not being picked up. So we got to resolve it. However hard now is next year is technically going to be more difficult and so u again not not sure where discussion will end but maybe this one should get progress to just to give us a little bit more time. But those are those are my comments. Thanks chair. >> Thank you uh Commissioner Connley. >> Thank you Mr. Chair. Happy to support a progress and the reason why is first of all thank you Miss Ernie. Um and thank you to all the public work staff for your work on this policy. Thank you. Um this is really good policy and it really um uh sets us up to be in partnership with our cities. So there is no blaming of the city, but we do have one very big one and that's one of the cities of the first class. All my constituents are there minus Fort Nelling, right? Um and and what uh uh gives me pause is section D of the policy which talks about cities of the first class, right? and the report that we got back from the city that ends with they don't have a dedicated department for zero waste. Okay, they don't have a division to oversee all applicable waste ordinances, programs, procedures, education, and outreach that they would need to do to be in compliance with Henipin County. They don't have that that structure set. That really really worries me. And we have a policy that says starting January 1, we need reporting, right? And I think that there was even um pause about some of the things that they submitted to us. You could speak more to that, Miss Cerny, but I mean they set a target recycling rate for 50% by 2030, even though the city's formal goal is 80% by 2030. There's inconsistencies. I'd like more clarity before we have a policy that they're beholden to to get these funds. Right? So, um I think that this also says that uh you'll be working with them. They have to them being the city of Minneapolis. This is not me blaming the city. This is transparency, right? The city of Minneapolis will be pre presenting to their legislative body on October 30th. That gives us time to work with them through these I found multiple consist inconsistencies. You did too. So, you can speak to that. But I I think that we should progress this. Until that clarity for the cities of the first class, which is one in Henipin County, right? Um until we get that clarity, I think it's important to to to pause on this. Um again, we would we would give them until February 15th, that's three three months. We're talking about session, we're talking about the spring, all of that to get us an annual report that they don't even have the structure for yet. So, uh Mr. Mr. Chair, that's where I'm at, but Miss Cernie, if you've got other uh additions about kind of what we're seeing that could impact the policy from our biggest city. Thank you, >> Chair Anderson. Commissioner Connley, you did point out a couple of very specific things that we noticed. We have not had an opportunity to do we just received the the report. We have not had the opportunity to do a thorough review. We think that thorough review is very important and we definitely need to go back and have some conversations with city of Minneapolis staff and a progress um on this item would not impact our work or any other cities or anything at this point. >> Thank you, Commissioner Lundy. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh just I want to thank Commissioner Fernando for reminding me that one point I missed which is on that is uh it is absolutely impossible for Minneapolis not to have a transfer station in Minneapolis. Uh if they don't it means they're going to ship it somewhere and I know exactly where that somewhere is on a map. It'll be Brooklyn Park. Um and so the talk about not having transfer station Broken Park and shutting down the herk and we're concerned about communities of color as we shove uh 10,000 semis right through the middle of it. uh speaks some of the hypocrisy on some of this talk. So having Minneapolis accept the fact, accept it. There isn't to me no way I'll ever vote to shut down the Herk until they have a transfer station in their city to deal with their trash. Um it's not going to get stuck in one of my cities. Um it's just absolutely impossible. And I hope make that clear as can be to them. Um, we all have a role to play. Managing our trash and them dumping it somewhere else and making themselves feel good uh is not going to be one that I would support. >> Commissioner Fernando, >> thank you. Um, and in addition to that, and I appreciate uh how we're speaking about this from a very operational perspective, but if we were to lift up for a moment from an environmental standpoint, it is appropriate to have a solid waste facility in the city that generates the most trash. So I I I am I am also disinterested in con in contributing to other EJ communities disproportionately. So it is it is nuance. There are many perspectives that are present here and differing positions. There are people who want landfills yesterday. There are people who believe that that landfill capacity is available for multiple more decades. And so there's the operational need for congruence. I think we're speaking about that here. And then there is this environmental value. Um, and it is my strong belief that the largest generator of waste must have a facility to receive waste and we wish for it to be a recycling facility and I hope we're able to pursue that plan. Thanks, chair. >> Thank you. Any other comments on this item? I just want to add I I appreciate the discussion. Um, and I don't know if there was an official progress motion made, but >> a move to progress. >> All right. There's a a move in a motion and a second to progress. Um, and I'm just going to add my my two three cents to this. Um, I appreciate the focus on data, the score funding aspect. Um, and I want to highlight really, and this is going to be a dig at the state. Sorry, Commissioner Eden. Um, how pathetic the dollars are that are coming into this? Um, we set a floor of $3,000 for our small communities. You know how much you can do with $3,000? I mean, let's be honest, like, that does not cover anything meaningful. uh it it's not going to cover data collection. It's not going to cover certainly implementing a uh an organics program. Uh it's not going to cover uh really anything other than a few hours of staff time a year. And that is an increase over what has been provided over the the past few years. So if we want to actually get something done, it needs to be funded at a level that will accomplish our goals and I think score funding is where it should be. I really love the idea of making sure that we are seeing how much of that score the tax dollars are going into the the fund for our cities. Like that would be enlightening. Um, so I'm yeah, if we're going to do this, we need to make sure that we have the resources to actually accomplish it. Otherwise, we are just talking about things that we want to have happen. Um, and if the state's not going to be there as a partner, uh, and our cities aren't don't have the capacity or the willingness to acknowledge reality of, uh, how much it costs and what it will take to accomplish these things, um, then all of this is just theater and I'm not really interested in that because I really want to actually get to a place where we can reduce the amount of garbage being processed. Uh, and I'm looking forward to the producer responsibility because I think that is going to be a big part of being able to get to this. And so, uh, let's let's get there. Let's continue on our solid waste, uh, management plan, uh, and trying to execute in partnership with our cities to to do this. Um but let's uh let's make sure that we're we're finding leaders um across Henipin County to do that work with us. So with that the progress uh motion all in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Uh that is progress to the full board. >> And that concludes our agenda of our transit and trash committee. I feel like I just stare at you. Um, give me something. I'm good to go. Okay. Sorry. All right. Um, all right. I will call to order the resident services committee. It's Tuesday, October 21st. It's 3:09 p.m. and I am the chair, Heather Eden. Our first order of business is to approve the minutes from September 16th. Move approval. >> Second. >> Thank you. It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. The motion carries. We have two routine items before us today. I will move those in a block. Um I if I could have a motion to move 2 A and 2B before us, I'll read them into the record. >> Second. >> Thank you. Thank you. It's been moved and seconded. Item 2A is an amendment to an agreement with Better Futures Minnesota to provide lawn care snow removal salts sanding services for maintenance and Haman Countyy's inventory of the state of Minnesota tax forfeited properties extending the contract period from January 1, 2026 through December 31st, 2026. Item 2B is an amendment to the agreement with Better Futures Minnesota for routine exterior property inspections and the boarding and security of Henipin County tax forfeited properties. amending amending this to extend the contract period for the term of January 1, 2026 through December 31st, 2026. Are there any questions? All right, with that, there being no questions or comments, we will move for a vote. All those in favor, please, of item 2 A through 2B, please say I. >> I opposed. The motion carries. That concludes the resident services committee. We are >> adjourned. Committee We do have an HHS board meeting. Uh I'm going to give to 3:20. Uh so if people need a bio or just a moment to stretch