Recently the question has been asked as to whether we should um restart that practice and if so what would be the the ways to do that. Um, so today is a first conversation about those questions, the pros, the cons, how it might work.

I will say from a technical aspect, I mean part of the reason the co-aming was ended was maybe some confusion about that the the signing the double signage could have. That's a concern of as the city traffic engineer that's a concern I have is that you're putting up you know multiple signs at an intersection and if you know someone just sees one of them are they confused about what they're seeing.

Um I think that that's something that um the city of Minneapolis was really intentional about implementing and it's something that has evolved since this sunset it and something we should strongly consider. Um because if this reopening does, you know, if there are multiple requests that come through, we could be in a situation where every street and the city has a rename or a co-ame.

I think the distinction between renaming a street and why there's the role for the Heritage Preservation Commission versus a co-aming of the street is really that distinction between replacing the street name and simply having an honorarium that is also attached to the street itself.

I just think that there are a lot of other ways we can honor our community leaders in a way that doesn't compromise our public safety. There are so many other critical aspects um of our infrastructure that deserve our focus. that I don't think that co-enaming um serves a critical public purpose.

I also think it's important that that body in addition to the criteria that you have here all all the criteria are positive which is good. I think there also needs to be some vetting for anything negative in someone's history.

I think it's really simple the process that we already have done particularly with the el um Elcati Lakmood um of street name and I think also you know figuring out that process is something that should be done um through a third party I agree I don't think it should be uh it's not a good use of a council member's time to evaluate who has significance and who has priority U and also essentially I just want to ground ourselves in the fact that we're talking about how do we how do we respond to constituents who are asking for us to just have a commemorative white sign on a pole that costs less than $300. Like that is what we're talking about.