[music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. [music] [music] Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] [music] [music] Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] [music] >> [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Hey everybody. [music] [music] >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] [music] Heat up >> [music] >> here. >> [music] [music] [music] >> it would behoove us to get a little bit more information about a lot of our topics. Um, so we've spent the last month doing that and I'm going to in a moment um turn it over to Mr. McVey to share more about what we learned and how we did that engagement. Um, I believe all of the council members were engaged in different parts of different conversations with different department directors. Um, and then we also got some feedback from Miss uh Miss Britt, Dr. Brit um as to her thoughts on the different what we heard and what she thinks would be most viable. Um before we dive in, I also want to clarify something for the record. We um misstated um an element of the Collegebound program at the last meeting and I just want to be really clear that um the program is not it is automatic enrollment. So student children as soon as they're born are automatically enrolled in the program. Um parents then have the option to add additional dollars to the program or participate in other ways, but it is an automatic enrollment. So, I just wanted to make sure that that was clear for the record and apologies to um the department for having had that be misstated last time. Want to make sure we are accurate here at this table. Um with that, I'm going to turn things over to Mr. McVey to tell us more about what we've learned. >> So, um thank you, Madam Chair. I will try to give cliff notes to all this because I realize there's a lot going on in here and I don't know, I'm really sorry we sent this out to in this format, honestly. I mean, it works. Um, Miss Vang was very supportive of how this was all put together, but I realize it's a lot to digest in a very short period of time. And, um, I will start off with, um, council members, thank you for working with myself and with Miss Vang to make the interviews with department heads possible and with their program management staff. uh be the general I'm going to give you a 36,000 foot level overview of our interviews and then we can get into the weeds with each individual department. Um all four departments they're interested in the work that we are doing. Um here at the audit committee however there is some hesitation generally to undergo an audit currently as in like this calendar year. Um that was unfortunately expressed by all four of the departments that we interviewed. Um a lot of it's due to timing. For one thing, there's been a transition. Um several departments have new um department heads. Uh there's also the concern about available staff resources and triage with us as we conduct these audits. H being said, it's actually not going to be that significant of a lift for them because we're going to be doing a lot of the work ourselves. Um and then there was also a question about data utility, which we can get into a little bit. Um we can get into further details on that with some of the departments especially like with DSI in particular. Um they all generally expressed a preference for a latter half of 2027. That being said, we do there are in conversation with Miss Vang last week. There we there are ways to maneuver in terms of how we scope our questions which we tried to do as you'll see within the um research questions that we proposed. These are just to facilitate conversation. They're not actually the end all and be all at this point in time. But uh circling back the um in terms of the latter half 2027 I actually and Miss Vang agrees with me as well that we can do audits yet this year for some as long as we frame the research questions in a certain way because um for instance like with the office of financial empowerment there were questions that they had with um and I know council member Johnson you can speak to this as well uh with uh equity in terms of their outreach to the public because they admit they agree that there are they need to improve on that and that there's a lot of people that don't know about that particular program of collegebound and also in a whole range of things with uh DSI as well. Um we can really get into the weeds on that one because it's such a massive department. That being said um I don't have much more to add over a general um summary for all departments. um we can discuss individual departments and I imagine there'd be a conversation unless you want to go through each um uh research question line item by line item. I will add um as a m one just minor clarification madam chair we have not heard back yet in full from Dr. separate regarding uh the uh costing she basically at this point we have a very rough idea of where we're going to be in terms of cost for these audits but she was we haven't gotten a specified um dollar amount yet from her and along with timing it was kind of like a rough estimate she needed to have more time to look at it I imagine she's going to get back to us this week if not early next week so it is Tuesday so fingers crossed so with that being said madam chair I defer back to you Great. Thanks so much u again Mr. Ve for both that summary and also for coordinating so much of this work. Um I think it would probably be helpful to hear from those of us who were part of the different conversations if we have things to add um to what you just shared. Again as you mentioned we have very very comprehensive um summaries in front of us. Um, but it might help folks wrap their heads around it to hear from any any reflections or suggestions or insights that council members or anyone else did. I Mr. Lasset or Miss Dworth, you did not participate in that conversations with department directors, right? No. >> So, any summaries that we would share from our conversations? And I don't know if either of my colleagues wants to start. >> I can miss Johnson. >> Okay. Yeah. I mean, I I participated in the um collegebound discussion and appreciated kind of hearing from the director uh about not only just some of the program pieces, but where they're currently at and just getting clarification. One of the things that I kind of shared with them as well is that this body really considered that topic as part because it came up in some of the mayoral discussion and conversations we had with the mayor and they just shared with us just how um at this time you know they they also kind of shared with the mayor as well. It doesn't appear that that that they felt very strongly that this would be necessarily helpful to their program or hurtful. Really just overall they're in a place where they're even doing their own re-evaluation work as we speak cuz the program is getting to um kind of it it's its point in time where they can actually go through and do some of this work. And so just even in the questions, you know, I I specifically was like, would this be like helpful? Would this be, you know, beneficial to you all if this if the committee brought this up? and I kind of got a sense that they didn't have a didn't have really strong feelings that it would be I mean I I would look to my colleagues for the discussion but my kind of takeaway from it was more so that um that's not that there wasn't really they didn't feel like there was much to really offer to the audit process and so it just didn't I left feeling like this wasn't necessarily the route to go um and that the conversations that they had shared even with the administration was predominantly that they were in a decent spot right now in the program. They were reviewing things as they spoke, but that the team itself wasn't going to be as active or helpful as we might want them to be if this was brought up as a topic. >> Thank you. >> Um, Miss Coleman. Yeah, I've had I think we had a pretty similar conversation with public works if they are one of the departments that's seen not just new leadership but leadership um come in that was not previously a part of the department. So I think they're you know similarly are asking a lot of the same questions and are undergoing their own you know the same questions but same types of questions um and undergoing their own internal evaluations and decision-m around how to get things done in the department you know obviously I think unlike with collegebound our public works department has been around for a very very long time and so there's probably a [snorts] limit to how much can change under any individual director. So maybe that's an argument for going forward anyway, but it was very similar in that it I think that the department was concerned about duplicative processes when they are already in the midst of of doing some of this analysis about a lot of staff time going into this when they want it going into their own processes that are being designed to work and answer the questions that they want answered. I I definitely walked away feeling like some of the conversations we've had around public works would be really valuable for a not a topic down the road, but that this timing did not feel like the right time. And I think that that that was a shared perspective amongst those who were in that meeting. Um thank you to you both. I can share I was in both the DSI uh conversation and the district council reform conversation and um I think that both departments started in a similar place to what I'm hearing my colleagues say um sort of this a reticence I would say to lots of reasons why this isn't a good time DSI it is very much the case that poly is the new innovation there and that we I think there was general agreement among all of us in the conversation that we should not touch anything that has to do with poly because it is literally just being rolled out and there's just it it's too soon to tell um how that is doing and um com certainly to compare that over previous um iterations would really be apples and oranges. So um giving poly some time to get started um at least a year we've discussed um seems prudent. We did however talk about a number of questions that could be asked and answered without now um without waiting for Paulie. Um, one interesting question that came up was this idea of um, the the the perception of DSI's work with businesses and permitting versus the reality and how a few really bad experiences, really bad permitting processes um, can color the rest of how people perceive the department and how the department is seen generally to engage. And we went down the road a little bit of talk asking, you know, should we interrogate those small number of examples where things went really badly and try to figure out what went wrong? Because if the risk is so outsized for the few that go really wrong, then it would really there would be a huge impact of just making sure that whatever those things are that went wrong don't go wrong again in the future. there might be some poly connection with those obviously or some things that poly might help with but it didn't seem so um didn't seem like the overlap was so complete that you couldn't look at those cases and learn something from them even now. Um and then there was also a potential question about outdated license ordinances that aren't in alignment with state law. This could definitely be something that would be studied could be studied now. Where have where are ordinances no longer in in alignment? um what's the impact of having these outof-date ordinances and what should be changed. So those were two sort of um I think they're both in the summary that you have here, but those were two that stood out to me as really interesting topics that could be studied now. Um and then for the conversation with peed about the district councils, um we there was a general consensus that because each district council is so different, we would really be talking about auditing district councils themselves, individual district councils, all of them, because it would be difficult to audit say PED staff's interactions with district councils and understand much about the situation given how different they all are. Um given that we we sort of landed on some questions related to um the fact that we have contracts with district councils, but we don't often we don't necessarily have um we don't know if our evaluation of those contracts is still aligned with our expectations of district councils because the system was created in the 70s. Um looking at whether or not we are still measuring performance in the way that we expect performance to be. So, for example, um not just how many people are engaged, but who is engaged? Were the people who were engaged representative of the community? Um how do district councils evaluate their own work? How do we know if they're effective? How do they know if they're effective? What do we want engagement to look like? Um in today's day and age, you know, compared to maybe when these started in the 70s. So, there were a lot of interesting questions there that again, um even though we do have a new director of the department, she's been a deputy director for a time. she's um served in the city council office for some time. So, it's not so much change in that d department that I think and district councils obviously have been around for a very long time that that would be too fresh and too raw to to audit. So, couple of things there. Um and then lastly, I can just share director Brit director Dr. Brit's email to us. Um she said, "I took a look at the proposed next round of topics. I definitely suggest not prioritizing the collegebound topic given the likely changes coming up and the potential for considering it later in scope. Of the three remaining topic areas, it looks like the district council reform, business licensing, and building code operations might be the two most optimal choices for the next round that also have staff buyin and openness to change as a result of the study. I think the street maintenance study would be critical, but it appears the public works and the street maintenance division might have better openness were the study selected for future consideration. That being said, any of these three seem worthy of immediate consideration by the committee. So clear as mud and again our goal is to recommend three >> three >> eliminate one and recommend three for the council to choose two. So look to I think at this point colle all of us for open discussion suggestions reflections on what was shared and what's in front of us. I know that what was shared chair. Yeah, thank you. I know that it was shared just of like a regret of like the template, but I just want to share commission that I love that I I appreciate this. I don't need um spark notes for some of it and I do appreciate the thoroughess as always that comes with uh the work uh you know I would say of the folks that are here but your work specifically. So thank you for getting that through. Um I just would pay attention to um you know just some of the cost estimates who for each of them and may share that uh it could be helpful to have um some balance there but I think from what I'm hearing you know I I don't have any reason to recommend collegebound at this time personally and so I would offer that as a suggested the all the rest of the three except for that one. >> Madame Chair or I'm sorry, Council Member >> Coleman. >> May I piggy back on what Council Member Johnson just said? Um the um folks at OF were very interested in us looking um taking a second look at them maybe in like two years time, >> but definitely right now is not the time. And honestly, I mean, I was just looking back at my notes from back in June. And again, the only uh there was never any mention about Collegebound in our um survey that we have for residents or in our survey that we have for city staff and it only came up um four separate times at district councils and it was just in passing. I think there in terms of interest in the community, I think that there are topics that are far more timely than collegebound right now. I think it'd be really interesting to look at them though in say 2028 perhaps if they have the time and resources for that. So anyway, um, Council Member Coleman, I'm sorry. >> No, I think that's great and super helpful. I feel very good about dropping collegebound. I just want to make sure I'm understanding. So there's the district council reform question for PED. That seems very clear, but then there's two potential separate questions for DSI. one around the small handful of very negative cases and one around sort of outdated or duplicative ordinances and regulations. Is that accurate? Yes. And there are those were the ones that came up in the conversation. I think that what Mr. McBay did beautifully was then take those ideas and even further elaborate on them so that really any one of these numbers could become many of these could become an audit topic. So what we're really presenting to the council is three bucket or three buckets large buckets within which we would try to gauge what people are most interested in and then scope something even more specifically than that. But yes to your point there's um there's numbers of audits within each of these. >> Got it. Okay. Then yeah I mean in that case so if if the three buckets that would be set in the inforward are PEDSI public works I would do that I would then recommend to the council that we move forward with DSI and PED and it I feel like public works does not feel as ripe at this point but again if we have to choose three and then we can narrow sorry just trying to understand this process a little bit better then does the council have any input in how we narrow the DSI and or if we were to split that into multiple, >> yes, we would bring these, we would essentially bring these back to the council. We would talk to our colleagues about what um flavors within each of these are most interesting to folks and see if there's consensus that develops. Um and then we would put forward a recommendation essentially resolution to the council based on what we hear back. >> Got it. I will say I think that building code operations and Mr. M remind me of um I think that was the one that was we didn't talk about that very extensively and I think that might have been because it had a lot to do with poly. Um so uh madame chair part of the reason we didn't get into as much detail of the building code is for two reasons because a Pauly and b because of I don't know if you recall ma'am but there was mention of u ongoing litigation with DSI and potential um ramifications that audit um topic that particular we'd have to frame it in such a way basically if we were to conduct a performance audit to be fair. This is my professional opinion. We are the legislative branch. That's the problem, the executive branch. So, at the end of the day, we have that discretion to make in terms of forming our own opinion, how we scope our topics. But again, we're a very collaborative body and we have a very collaborative process, which I think is actually beneficial to everyone involved. And so I'm always being able to uh uh to work with the e executive when with those kinds of concerns within reason >> emphasis on within reason and I would remind the committee of that as well. So >> thank you Mr. Okay. And yeah, the litigation specifically relates to DSI's fees. Um, and so that we would really need to avoid fees generally looking at that because while some things are under litigation, they really need to stay as they are. Um, but yes, the if you look at page two, building code response times and efficiency, a lot of what the building code came down to, because we don't we don't actually um affect the building code, that's determined by the state. what it was really about was our inspections, our um property code enforcement, and again, so much of that is going to be changing with poly that it just felt like it didn't make sense to evaluate that. Licensing on the other hand, while it also will use poly, um was there were additional questions that could be asked that weren't just poly specific um especially again going back to some of those like worst case scenarios that felt auditable. Now, >> may I add, Madam Chair, um uh Director Jean mentioned that and I'm trying to remember, um one of the name of the uh one of her, uh senior managers at DSI, um but he raised a really excellent point that it would be really nice to look at how we are aligning um our regulatory stance, especially because we have responsibilities for over 300 different licenses here in St. Paul. I did not know we had that many. I was quite surprised to hear that. But um seeing how we are aligning those actually with state standards and also seeing if there any reason to update the legislative code in particular with regards to these licenses because some of these business licenses may be rather antiquated. And so um just wanted to bring that up as well because I just that just came back to my memory. So and that's all I have to say. >> Thanks Mr. Fay. Yeah, and unlike um most of our audits, that would actually be a legislative action that we could take as a result. So, it wouldn't be um hoping that the administration does something with what we found. We could actually act on that as a council. >> I'm hearing um general comfort with the idea of moving forward district council reform, um business licensing, and then um I know you had said, Miss Coleman, building code operations as well. I'm I I think basic [clears throat] what I was trying to convey just now is that that felt a little bit it kind of seemed like it more came down to business licensing after we had the conversation even though it looks like it's two topics. Um so I think that would only be two topics we would be advancing if we limited it to that. Miss Johnson. >> Yeah. Can I ask just a contextual question I guess regarding so I guess like the department of public works I think I I understand some of the hesitation I guess I am wondering just like did they share kind of a little bit about why not now you know I I am curious just kind of a little bit more if you could say a couple more things about that meeting just because of how long they've been doing the work and while they are somewhat of impacted by poly, not to the extent of where I see some of the questions being. And so I was just wondering a little bit more. >> Totally. I'm happy to answer that. Although Mr. McGra, you should definitely jump in. Um, >> of course I'll just say quickly I think their concerns nothing poly related just that they are that director Barber felt strongly that they were in the process of themselves doing a lot of this evaluation and determining kind of what our best practices doing a lot of the cross jurisdictional study and so I think my impression and again Mr. McQuay, correct me if this is not yours, but is more concerned about it being duplicative and taking up additional staff time. So, I I I don't think it's the end of the world if we move forward with this. I just agree that if they're asking the exact same questions just on a different timeline, it might not be as fruitful as some other paths, but I have no no skin in this game. I'm still >> um Thank you, um, Chair Ngerker. I it's interesting because when we got a different response from um and now I'm trying I'm blanking on who we just did the audit with last year and they were looking at um you know some of the same um you know they were doing their own internal thing and when we came in to talk about doing the audit we partnered with them and it came out to be a very good >> parks and libraries. Yeah parks. So, it's like it I think it could be framed differently because we wouldn't come in and be duplicative. We'd come in and and actually partner with them and actually give them some resources that they wouldn't have had maybe um with what they're doing and we have some history in doing that. That's exactly where we got to in the conversation is like how do we do this in a way that feels like it complements the work that's happening and that maybe asks different questions but obviously done in very close partnership. The request was still the more time that we heard from a couple of other places that you know this could be a great topic a year and a half from now, two years from now, a year from now even. Um but again that was just their perspective >> there was um if I may add madam chair there was uh and council member Coleman you can probably speak to this as well there was a general consensus during our interview with um public works they didn't have they were struggling to come up with generate uh research questions for us to consider as well and we ended up drawing a little bit what I put in here in conversation with Miss Vang was um research questions that actually were used by other um cities for their own performance audits um elsewhere in the country looking at street maintenance and pothole report or pothole repair, excuse me. And so um we didn't get a lot of um input from as much input in public works as say like what we did with um DSI or from um OF or from peed. And so I actually am of the opinion that and um colleagues I would love to hear your thoughts on this but I think public it would be really there's a lot of interest in the community looking at public works. I think there is um Miss Stillworth you um I think put it really well that we can really [clears throat] work with departments to really frame uh research um study questions and to really is that 2023 >> yes that's from before my so um but we can do that And uh where was I going with this? Oh yes, I remember now. We can do that in uh perhaps actually just have it later on in 2027 because um we were thinking that we could potentially we that could be the very first topic that we do for our next cycle basically. Potentially we'd have that ready to go listed. That's something that a the committee wants to do and b that the council agrees with as well potentially. That was something that Miss Vang and I discussed last week a little bit in passing. I think only maybe 30 seconds on it, but it's something that is possible. So, >> thank you, Mr. McF. Yeah, and I will I will throw out to the group as well. I mean, we had this we decided to have three topics recommend to the council who would choose two topics. We can always recommend two topics to the council and just say these are the two we think would be best and share the ones that we considered in addition and why not why those didn't rise to the top and then the council can always decide they like one of these other ones better and bring that forward. But if we're if we're really feeling like some of these are great topics but not for right now and there are a couple that are great topics for right now specifically district council reform business licensing. Um, and by the way, right now, again, for the second one of these in particular is not until the beginning of 27 at the earliest. >> So, right now is definitely not right now for either of any of these. Um, I think that's important to keep in mind that we could we could recommend too. >> So, just throwing more into the mix. Miss Johnson, >> I would just share that like if this came to me in form of three, I would really be interested in the public works. Honestly, um I think the street street repair, I'll just my personal pain is the street repair and potholes of the three are is my personal favorite. Um I hear the the conversations around maybe, you know, thinking about their process and where they are as a department. And with that respect, I also think there's a ability to really showcase the work that the department is doing around uh repairs and street maintenance repairs in a way that I think this audit could be really actually helpful to that. Um, I think there's there's a lot of questions that get had about potholes and street repairs in the community and that's where like I think but I think also just going back this was supported to by several district councils um and the topics I was trying to remember or recall how many but I don't have that one in front of me. >> I do. >> Okay. hoping. >> Um, but just to like I I just would put that in of >> if these three came to me then I would want to have false conversation with Director Barber about kind of fully understanding that because I probably would be of the mindset of the council >> to move this one forward. But Mr. McVey, >> 15 out of the 17 district councils and also it was mentioned four times in the survey. So I just want to bring that up as a person who's just like it's often talked about in my area. Um and so I hear the department I completely understand that. I think the difference and distinction I'd offer just from being a part of all these conversation is that there's heavily relates to being relatively giving very little data for us like to actually make the process and the audit process cor like helpful and they're planning to do a lot of significant changes. So even though there's there's just not going to be that much data there in comparison to a department that is integral to the work that we all do, I think there's a slight difference. Um but we just offer that as a as a couple pieces. Not to say it at all, but I think if I personally have an interest in that um but I also think that like so do 15 of 17 districts, including I think all of them in my ward. >> Thanks, Miss Johnson. Miss Coleman. Yeah, I felt super strongly that this was a good topic to bring forward. I only offered the perspective that the department shared with us and so I have no objections. I want to be super clear that I don't object to moving forward with it. I just I think that we will have to navigate how to work with the department that doesn't want us to do the audit, but I imagine that that has been navigated in the past and that will not be the first time we'll have to experience it. So, I have I have no concerns about going forward with all three of those. I do think the point that Morth made earlier is a really astute one that I think a lot of departments are saying don't study us because we're studying ourselves and to the extent that we can frame it as let's help you help yourself you know take some of this work off your plate you can study some other aspect of yourself there's enough to study um that might be received differently um okay so I'm looking to the room right now I think the proposal is to eliminate collegebound and recommend the And I'm seeing some heads nodding. So I'm going to formally make that motion. Um is there further discussion of that motion? >> Mr. Litter. >> Yeah, Chair Naker. I Yeah, I feel that there's a consensus developing around that of uh dropping the collegebound. I would just put in, you know, since that was the mayor's um suggestion, you know, in the interest of maintaining that relationship, um you know, circling back uh with the office and um we've been working on the self assessment tool and maybe offering that as an interim, you know, that um what questions does the mayor's office have and want to have answered and maybe that can be put in the self assessment in the meantime um that that could maybe be, you know, a good use of that um tool and a way to also maintain goodwill between >> this body and the mayor's office. >> Thank you for reminding us of the very uh fruitful line of discussion we had last time about the self assessment as sort of another like audit light self audit idea. Where can you update us on where that creation of that tool is at? Are you you both working with Miss Bang on that or Noah's working on it >> and Noah? Yes. Um, >> we've been going back and forth on >> Mr. McVy, you had two examples that you found and we're reviewing them. >> Okay. >> And the idea was maybe to have a subcommittee >> kind of further develop it and maybe there'd be a standard set of questions that would be in each one and a custom set based on the topic. So, it hasn't been kind of ironed out. >> Okay. Unfortunately, we didn't have time to or I should say I didn't have the forethought to bring this up with Miss Fang that maybe we should put have just a brief moment to discuss this on the agenda, but I'm hoping that we can actually um touch on uh the self assessment in a I don't know if we're meeting in August, either in August or in September. So, and then go on from there. I was very um supportive of uh Mr. Joet's uh suggestion of having a subcommittee of the committee look examine this in depth because we do have one um version that is from a institution of higher education also I have came up with another version that actually is you similar to what's used by um Minnesota management and budget and so one's a little bit more rigorous and the other one's a bit more user friendly but perhaps if we can merge the two together that could be very useful um for departments to use and that could actually be an ongoing practice where they are completing those self assessments every year providing them to us as a committee so we actually understand their internal control framework that they have and where things are going well where things where we could really tailor our research questions. I was so excited when I saw that email actually so >> I can't help anyway. >> Great. Well, we will definitely add self- assessment to the next agenda um when we next meet. And I I think the question of whether we meet in August or not really relates to how quickly we can get a resolution together um and talk to our colleagues and adopt um two of these and then because our next role as an audit committee will be to affirm the scope which will take Dr. Britt working on the scope which will my guess is we're not meeting in August but we'll see. Um I think it's on everybody's calendars and we have the option to cancel it and it probably will be. So um but I will add that to our next topic, our next agenda whenever it is. Thank you. >> Um Miss Johnson. >> Yes. Just a question for clarification. We are dropping building code operations from the recommendation. >> I think it makes sense to just call this business licensing because I really think the department was clear that there's not much we can do on building code right now. >> Okay. >> I Yes. >> All right. So, our three topics to be clear would be district council reform, business licensing, street maintenance, and pothole repair. The council would be asked to choose two of those for the next calendar year, end of 26, beginning of 27, getting us through mid 27th is. It's always when it comes to the audit committee. >> Good timetable, though. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> It's great. >> We're becoming more efficient. We're improving our operations continuously as a committee. >> Quality management's improving. >> Exactly. Next time we'll audit ourselves. No. Okay. Um so with that uh any further discussion? Seeing none. All in favor say I. >> I. >> All opposed. All right. Motion passes. Thank you all. We have our three buckets of topics which we will now talk about amongst ourselves how to bring those to our colleagues. Um not right now after this. With that that brings us to our second topic which I believe is a much briefer one. Our community engagement update. I would look to Mr. McVey for an update. >> Okay. Let's see. I forgive me council members. I just need to and colleagues I need to get myself organized here. So there we go. Okay. So uh between June and now I actually met with my two final district councils. I thought at our last meeting I said I'm done now. Well um two district councils actually reached out to me and want me to come meet with them in person after they had reached out and provide feedback to us um in correspondence. So I was like, "Sure, I will come present to your board, meet with folks in your neighborhood. Happy to do that." And so I met with uh Payne Failen on uh let me pull up my calendar here. Uh let's see here. Payne Failen on the 23rd. Had a wonderful conversation with folks there. And prior to that, I actually stopped over and met with the folks in Frog Town. And uh also, yep, that's it. So, and we had a very good conversation. Um met with a lot of folks and um they gave us a lot of different ideas. I did remind them that we are actually currently in the middle of at that time we were doing our risk assessment and narrowing down topics for um further committee discussion ultimately also for council consultation which they understood that but they gave us some ideas to take into consideration for um the future which um I need to document that and then I'm going to get make sure that Miss Vang has that um at a later date so that way we can bring that to the committee say in 2027 or 2028 whenever we get around to that. Again, that being said, um I am I actually was able to meet with all but two of the district councils over um and otherwise I was able to have conversation with all of them um through email or other written correspondents. So, I'm really thrilled about that and I really just want to underline how much I appreciate our district council's cooperating with us and making this all possible. Um got to meet a lot of really wonderful people through this process. I'm looking forward to doing this again next year and continuing this forward. So, um, that being said, I am going to shift gears and I'm going to be meeting with several civic organizations. I'm not going to be doing that until this fall, though, because I'm a little busy right now with my internship in capstone for grad school for one of my master's degrees. And I'm going to be up in Canada for the last two weeks of or not the LA well technically the la yeah the last two weeks of August through the first week of September visiting friends and cousins. So I will be touching back on that in September for certain. And uh some of the organizations I hope to get in touch with is um the League of Women Voters St. Paul, a Minnesota Foundation, the Citizen League, um the Chamber of Commerce, Neighborhood House, Isaiah, which um my church is actually involved with Isaiah, so that's going to be pretty easy for me actually. Um the Asian Economic Development Association, um the Brown Community Center, um the Alliance, the Downtown Alliance, Open Arms, Starhouse, and a few other organizations as well. I'm not going to go through the list because we you all have much more important things to do than listen to me rant. So, >> Mr. McFay, first of all, thank you so much for all of your work and we've been I've been hearing from folks who are aware of us now in a way that they never were before and it's because of you. So, thank you. Um would it be possible I think it would be great if you could share the list of of civic organizations you plan to visit and give us the opportunity to add names. I'm thinking about groups that are that tend to be more critical of the city. Inside St. is one that comes to mind immediately. Um, St. Paul Strong is another one. I think it's important to be reaching out to our critics as well as neutral or friends. And I also think about neighborhood groups that aren't necessarily district councils that like Railroad Island neighborhood group comes to mind. So, we could probably beef up the list and then, you know, from there definitely prioritize the ones that are most important because there will probably be a longer list. >> I will I gladly accept. So, um please >> and continue to call on us to help also. >> Um we can definitely add that to the next agenda item if that's something the committee wishes to do. Madam Chair, >> great. >> And I am the committee's humble servant. So if anyone wants to make suggestions at any time, I would gladly accept them. >> So >> thank you. Any questions on community engagement? >> All right. Well, with that, um, that brings us to the end of our agenda. I hope everyone has a very safe and happy summer. Um, until we see each other again, which is probably going to be in September. Um, if Miss Dworth has if we not don't see each other until she has retired after 31 years at the University of Minnesota, we are so happy for you. We can't wait to hear about kind of rocking life in the next phase of your adventure. Um and until then we are journal.