Details Meeting Name: City Council Agenda status: Final Meeting date/time: 4/9/2025 3:30 PM Minutes status: Final   Meeting location: Council Chambers - 3rd Floor Published agenda: Agenda Accessible Agenda Published minutes: Minutes Accessible Minutes   Meeting video: Video   Attachments: Meeting Items (54) Public Comments (73) 54 records Group Clear sorting Clear grouping Group by Type Group by Result Export Export to Excel Export to PDF Export to Word Show: Legislation only Legislation only All agenda items File # Ver. Agenda # Type Title Action Result Action Details Video AO 25-18 1 1 Administrative Order Amending CDBG Project Budgets: $50,000 of funding for 1050 Payne Avenue (Eastside Pizzeria) project. Received and Filed   Action details Not available RES 25-396 1 2 Resolution Authorizing the Department of Planning and Economic Development to apply for the Metropolitan Council Livable Communities Demonstration Account Pre-Development Grant Funds for projects at 680-694 Minnehaha Avenue E. (Hamm's Brewery Redevelopment) and 1170 N. Arcade Street (Face to Face). Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 25-466 1 3 Resolution Approving the Memorandums of Agreement between the City of Saint Paul and AFSCME Clerical, Local 2508; AFSCME Technical, Local 1842 and the Professional Employees Association, Inc. creating a pilot program for the purpose of establishing an equitable language compensation premium for the Saint Paul Public Libraries. Laid Over   Action details Not available RES 25-474 1 4 Resolution Approving the City’s cost of providing Collection of Vacant Building Registration fees billed during February 20 to November 19, 2024, and setting date of Legislative Hearing for May 6, 2025 and City Council public hearing for June 18, 2025 to consider and levy the assessments against individual properties. (File No. VB2509, Assessment No. 258808) Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 25-475 1 5 Resolution Approving the City’s cost of providing Securing and/or Emergency Boarding services during December 2024, and setting date of Legislative Hearing for May 6, 2025 and City Council public hearing for June 18, 2025 to consider and levy the assessments against individual properties. (File No. J2509B, Assessment No. 258108) Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 25-476 1 6 Resolution Approving the City’s cost of providing Collection of Fire Certificate of Occupancy fees billed during December 18 to January 21, 2025, and setting date of Legislative Hearing for May 6, 2025 and City Council public hearing for June 18, 2025 to consider and levy the assessments against individual properties. (File No. CRT2508, Assessment No. 258207) Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 25-477 1 7 Resolution Approving the City’s cost of providing Excessive Use of Inspection or Abatement services billed during October 22 to November 21, 2024, and setting date of Legislative Hearing for May 6, 2025 and City Council public hearing for June 18, 2025 to consider and levy the assessments against individual properties. (File No. J2509E, Assessment No. 258308) Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 25-478 1 8 Resolution Approving the City’s cost of providing Removal of Diseased and/or Dangerous Tree(s) services during December to February 2025, and setting date of Legislative Hearing for May 6, 2025 and City Council public hearing for June 18, 2025 to consider and levy the assessments against individual properties. (File No. 2504T, Assessment No. 259004) Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 25-479 1 9 Resolution Approving the City’s cost of providing Replacement of Lead Water Service Line on Private Properties, and setting date of City Council public hearing for May 7, 2025 to consider and levy the assessments against individual properties. (File No. 2501LDSRP, Assessment No. 254000) Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 25-480 1 10 Resolution Approving the City’s cost of providing Repair of Sanitary Sewer Service Line on Private Properties, and setting date of City Council public hearing for May 7, 2025 to consider and levy the assessments against individual properties. (File No. SWRP2501, Assessment No. 253000) Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 25-508 1 11 Resolution Declaring the official intent of the City to reimburse certain original expenditures related to the capital projects from the proceeds of tax-exempt bonds to be issued by the City after the payment of such original expenditures. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 25-512 1 12 Resolution Directing the Department of Safety and Inspections to proceed with the Denial of the Tree Trimmer & 1 Vehicle & Tree Trimmer - Each Add’l Vehicle License and adverse action against Schroeder Outdoor Services LLC d/b/a Schroeder Outdoor Services (License ID #20240001825) for the premises located at 5346 Lakeside Avenue North. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 25-513 1 13 Resolution Directing the Department of Safety and Inspections to proceed with the Denial of the Liquor On Sale-181-290 seats and Entertainment (B) License and adverse action against Pupraya Thai Restaurant LLC d/b/a Pupraya Thai Restaurant LLC (License ID #20220001254) for the premises located at 945 Rice St Unit A. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 25-526 1 14 Resolution Authorizing the Department of Parks and Recreation to apply for grant funds from the Minnesota Department of Cannabis Management’s CanRenew Community Restoration grant for Right Track, the City’s Youth Employment Program in an amount of up to $200,000 a year for SFY 26. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 25-528 1 15 Resolution Approving the agreements with Lime (Neutron Holdings, Inc. dba Lime) and Spin (Pheenix USH LLC, dba Spin) to provide e-scooter sharing services for the 2025 electric scooter and electric-assist bicycle season, with the option to renew for two additional one-year terms. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 25-529 1 16 Resolution Authorizing the City to enter into a Sub Merchant Agreement with NIC Services, LLC, First Data Merchant Services LLC, and Pathward, N.A. that includes an indemnification clause. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 25-532 1 17 Resolution Approving the use of a Project Labor Agreement on the Raspberry Island Schubert Bandshell project. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 25-534 1 18 Resolution Accepting temporary and permanent easements and authorizing payment to property owners for the Minnesota Street Reconstruction Project. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 25-572 1 19 Resolution Memorializing a City Council decision to grant the appeal of Julia McColley and West 7th/Fort Road Federation from a Planning Commission decision to deny the appeal regarding a zoning administrator’s Statement of Clarification for a truck dispatching yard and maintenance facility at 560 Randolph Ave. Adopted Pass Action details Not available Min 25-14 1 20 Approval of Minutes Approving the minutes of the Saint Paul City Council meetings of February 5, 12, 19, and 26, 2025. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RLH TA 24-335 3 27 Resolution LH Tax Assessment Appeal Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 586 BURGESS STREET. (File No. VB2501A, Assessment No. 258809) (Public hearing closed and laid over from March 26, 2025) Adopted As Amended Pass Action details Video RLH TA 25-118 2 29 Resolution LH Tax Assessment Appeal Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 759 CHARLES AVENUE. (File No. VB2507, Assessment No. 258806) Adopted As Amended Pass Action details Video RLH TA 25-120 2 39 Resolution LH Tax Assessment Appeal Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 120 LYTON PLACE. (File No. VB2507B, Assessment No. 258827) (Public hearing closed and laid over from April 9, 2025) Laid Over Pass Action details Video RLH TA 25-76 3 46 Resolution LH Tax Assessment Appeal Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1141 UNIVERSITY AVENUE WEST. (File No. VB2506B, Assessment No. 258823) (Public hearing closed and laid over from April 9, 2025) Laid Over Pass Action details Not available RLH TA 25-115 3 33 Resolution LH Tax Assessment Appeal Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 686 EDMUND AVENUE. (File No. VB2507, Assessment No. 258806) Laid Over Pass Action details Not available RLH TA 25-121 2 28 Resolution LH Tax Assessment Appeal Deleting the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 725 CHARLES AVENUE. (File No. J2507E, Assessment No. 258306) Adopted Pass Action details Not available RLH SAO 25-19 2 30 Resolution LH Summary Abatement Order Second Making finding on the appealed of JoAnn Lorvig Tsoumanis to a nuisance abatement ordered for 1400 CHARLES AVENUE in Council File RLH SAO 25-2. Adopted As Amended   Action details Not available RLH TA 25-191 1 31 Resolution LH Tax Assessment Appeal Amending Council File RLH AR 24-112 to delete the assessment for Graffiti Removal services during July 3 to 12, 2024 at 354 CHEROKEE AVENUE. (File No. J2504P, Assessment No. 258403) Adopted Pass Action details Not available RLH FCO 25-16 2 32 Resolution LH Fire C of O OR Correction Order Appeal of Michael Frattalone, dba Frattalone I, LLC, to a Fire Certificate of Occupancy Correction Notice at 2286 COMO AVENUE. Adopted   Action details Not available RLH SAO 25-25 2 34 Resolution LH Summary Abatement Order Appeal of Peter Middlecamp to a Summary Abatement Order at 1997 FIFTH STREET EAST. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RLH TA 25-77 2 35 Resolution LH Tax Assessment Appeal Deleting the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 463 FOREST STREET. (File No. J2507B, Assessment No. 258106) Adopted Pass Action details Not available RLH TA 25-128 2 36 Resolution LH Tax Assessment Appeal Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 104 IVY AVENUE WEST. (File No. J2507E, Assessment No. 258306) Adopted As Amended   Action details Not available RLH TA 25-137 2 37 Resolution LH Tax Assessment Appeal Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 606 LAFOND AVENUE. (File No. VB2507, Assessment No. 258806) Adopted   Action details Not available RLH TA 25-104 2 38 Resolution LH Tax Assessment Appeal Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 58 LAWSON AVENUE WEST. (File No. 2502T, Assessment No. 259001) Adopted Pass Action details Not available RLH TA 25-122 2 40 Resolution LH Tax Assessment Appeal Deleting the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1024 MINNEHAHA AVENUE EAST. (File No. VB2507, Assessment No. 258806) Adopted Pass Action details Not available RLH FCO 25-13 2 41 Resolution LH Fire C of O OR Correction Order Appeal of Gary Blair to a Correction Notice-Reinspection Complaint at 1771 REANEY AVENUE. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RLH TA 25-162 2 42 Resolution LH Tax Assessment Appeal Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 828 SEVENTH STREET EAST. (File No. J2507P, Assessment No. 258406) Adopted Pass Action details Not available RLH TA 25-117 2 43 Resolution LH Tax Assessment Appeal Deleting the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 2026 SPRINGSIDE DRIVE. (File No. J2507P, Assessment No. 258406) Adopted Pass Action details Not available RLH TA 25-136 2 44 Resolution LH Tax Assessment Appeal Ratifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 900 THOMAS AVENUE. (File No. J2507B, Assessment No. 258106) Adopted Pass Action details Not available RLH VBR 25-16 2 45 Resolution LH Vacant Building Registration Appeal of Remi Iselewa to a Vacant Building Registration Requirement at 981 UNIVERSITY AVENUE WEST. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RLH SAO 25-27 2 47 Resolution LH Summary Abatement Order Making finding on the appealed nuisance abatement ordered for 1670 YORK AVENUE in Council File RLH SAO 25-15. Adopted Pass Action details Not available RLH AR 25-23 2 48 Resolution LH Assessment Roll Ratifying the assessment for Collection of Vacant Building Registration fees billed during March 20 to September 24, 2024. (File No. VB2507, Assessment No. 258806) Adopted Pass Action details Not available RLH AR 25-24 2 49 Resolution LH Assessment Roll Ratifying the assessment for Securing and/or Emergency Boarding services during October 2024. (File No. J2507B, Assessment No. 258106) Adopted Pass Action details Not available RLH AR 25-25 2 50 Resolution LH Assessment Roll Ratifying the assessment for Demolition services from September 2024. (File No. J2503C, Assessment No. 252002) Adopted Pass Action details Not available RLH AR 25-26 2 51 Resolution LH Assessment Roll Ratifying the assessment for Demolition services from September 2024 (C.D.B.G.Funds). (File No. J2504C, Assessment No. 252003) Adopted Pass Action details Not available RLH AR 25-27 2 52 Resolution LH Assessment Roll Ratifying the assessment for Excessive Use of Inspection or Abatement services billed during August 22 to September 20, 2024. (File No. J2507E, Assessment No. 258306) Adopted Pass Action details Not available RLH AR 25-28 2 53 Resolution LH Assessment Roll Ratifying the assessment for Graffiti Removal services during August 21 to October 8, 2024. (File No. J2507P, Assessment No. 258406) Adopted Pass Action details Not available RLH AR 25-29 2 54 Resolution LH Assessment Roll Ratifying the assessment for Removal of Diseased and/or Dangerous Tree(s) service during October to November 2024. (File No. 2502T, Assessment No. 259001) Adopted Pass Action details Not available RES 25-434 2 21 Resolution Amending Appendix A-2 of the Administrative Code to establish the creation of the City Council Public Safety & Community Wellness Committee. (Laid over from March 12, 2025) Adopted As Amended Pass Action details Video Ord 25-30 1 22 Ordinance Amending Chapter 310.04 of the Legislative Code to regulate a more efficient method of cancellation when licensee is not in compliance with providing materials to be engaged in licensed activity. Laid Over to Second Reading   Action details Video Ord 25-21 1 23 Ordinance Granting the application of Central Internal Medicine Associates PA to rezone property at 635 Cleveland Avenue South (southwest corner at Bayard Avenue) from OS office-service to T2 traditional neighborhood and amending Chapter 60 of the Legislative Code pertaining to the zoning map. Laid Over to Final Adoption Pass Action details Video Ord 25-29 1 24 Ordinance Amending Chapter 193A.08 of the Legislative Code pertaining to rent stabilization. Laid Over to Second Reading Pass Action details Video Ord 25-31 1 25 Ordinance Creating Chapter 193 of the Legislative Code (Title XIX) pertaining to Tenant Protections. Amended and Laid Over for Second Reading Pass Action details Video RES PH 25-31 1 26 Resolution-Public Hearing Ratifying the assessment for sanitary sewer replacement within the street right-of-way from the public sewer to the property line, done with the Cleveland Avenue Street reconstruction project. (File No. 19258C, Assessment No. 226002) Adopted Pass Action details Video  Add New Comment 73 records Group Clear sorting Clear grouping Group by File # Group by Name Group by District Group by Opinion Export Export to Excel Export to PDF Export to Word File # Date  Name District Opinion Comment Action Ord 25-29 4/11/2025 2:00 AM Deb Avenido   Against We need more deeply affordable housing, and renters need to be ***ured that their rent will not rise so high that they can no longer afford to live in their homes. That's why I voted for rent stabilization in 2021. There is no proof that it caused the current housing construction slowdown. There are many factors affecting it. I'm opposed to big profit-making developers being given breaks. Building more housing doesn't mean more affordable housing will be built. We need to think outside the box: We need zoning reform, and we need to consider the city acting as a developer and building more affordable housing as public infrastructure, like we do with libraries, rec centers, etc. I am against giving new development deferment from rent stabilization indefinitely. I'm concerned that older rental housing, under the rent stabilization ordinance, could be torn down in order to build new buildings not affected by rent stabilization and displace renters in the process. +2 Ord 25-29 4/10/2025 4:39 PM John Slade   Against This is a corporate giveaway to Ryan Companies and other huge developers who are using their money power to override our democratic vote. +1 Ord 25-31 4/9/2025 9:52 PM Grant Abbott   For At a time when the market is failing the provide the public with sufficient affordable housing, and homelessness is increasing, tenants must have adequate protection. Landlords have a desire to make as much profit as possible, so the temptation to take advantage of tenants is great. Reasonable protections for tenants must be in place. That's why I support this ordinance. Ord 25-29 4/9/2025 9:46 PM Grant Abbott   Against The reason I oppose this ordinance is that it will not solve the problem of homelessness. Yes, developers should be able to cover their cost and make a profit. But the cost to the city of homelessness must be considered as well. What is the cost to the police? What is the cost to health agencies? What is the cost to public safety? What is the cost to the education of children? Developers must be held accountable for their market failure to provide adequate safe and stable housing for the people. Make a profit, yes. But developers must also pay taxes that cover the cost to the city of insufficient affordable housing. When there are no homeless individuals or families, then no tax. Why must the public be asked to cover the cost of this market failure? +1 Ord 25-29 4/9/2025 9:38 PM       Thank you for the opportunity to comment. I oppose the ordinance as written. Developers are given the benefit of the doubt. It is the way capitalism works. You can't expect them to build apartments, if they can't make a profit. The need of the public for safe and secure housing is of secondary importance. The public should work hard to afford housing. As a result, we have a growing population of unhoused individuals and families. That is a cost to cities that is not considered. How much money do cities have to spend as a result of homeless individuals and families? What is the cost to police? What is the cost to heath agencies? What is the cost to the education of children? Is this factored in? Housing for profit is okay, but not at the expense to public health, public safety, and the future of the children? I say, let the developers make a profit, but let them be taxed to cover the cost of housing the homeless. No free ride. Ord 25-29 4/9/2025 9:15 PM Jess Corner   Against Exempting post-2004 buildings from rent stabilization doesn’t encourage smart growth—it rewards large developers and undermines the protections that keep people in their homes and keep smaller-scale developers in our communities. It penalizes the reuse of historic properties and tips the scales toward demolition and luxury builds. Our 1905 house isn’t perfect, but it’s solid, energy efficient, and AFFORDABLE—something new construction often isn’t. The space isn't an issue, it's entirely usage and what we're choosing to incentivize. This is a step backwards, and sets a precedent that shifts power away from communities and toward profit. It won’t create more affordable housing. It will just make it harder to stay. +1 -1 Ord 25-29 4/9/2025 7:02 PM Jordan Brasher   Against I am a renter in Ward 1 and I urge the CM in my Ward, CM Bowie, to vote NAY in opposition to this amendment. If this amendment is p***ed, it will create a two-tiered (effectively segregated) system of housing in the city wherein new housing being built is only for the rich or those who can afford to live in non-rent-stabilized housing. At least as troubling as this is the fact that the citizens of St. Paul voted at the ballot box to affirm the 3% annual cap on rent increases. The council has already gutted the initial measure and this amendment stands to gut it further, gutting along with it the will of the majority in the city who voted in favor of rent stabilization. Rent stabilization measures are NOT at the root of St. Paul's housing crisis, and if the council thinks that it is, it must provide concrete evidence to support the claim -- which it has not. CM Bowie, vote against this amendment. -1 Ord 25-31 4/9/2025 5:13 PM Elaine Tarone   For I strongly support Councilwoman Johnson’s initiative for tenant protections. I t is a good first step in the right direction. Ord 25-29 4/9/2025 5:06 PM Elaine Tarone   Against I strongly oppose any exemption for new construction to rent stabilization. Portland Maine p***ed strongest rent stabilization in country in 2020 with no new construction exemption and in 2023 the city saw a 10-year high in housing development. +1 -1 Ord 25-29 4/9/2025 5:02 PM Elaine Tarone   Against I strongly oppose any exemption for new construction to rent stabilization. Portland Maine p***ed strongest rent stabilization in country in 2030 with no new construction exemption and in 2023 the city saw a 10-year high in housing development. -1 4/9/2025 3:07 PM Paul Pfeiffer Ward 2   Against Undoing rent stabilization is disrespectful to people who voted to protect renters rather than profits of developers and landlords. Renter protections and exemptions do not need to be considered together and should not be. City Council’s efforts should focus on protecting renters’ rights and table discussion of exemptions until unbiased data is produced. The Council relies on opinions of developers who are motivated by profit, not by what is good for the people of St. Paul. Minneapolis’ Federal Reserve research quoted former rent control official in New York City who said, “It’s easy to look for immediate impacts [of a policy change]…in the long run, it’s really more about [changes in] demographics and demand.” “Data” from council members included outcomes in housing markets like Washington DC (678,972), San Francisco (808,988) and New York (8.258 million) that don’t even the population similarities to St. Paul. Ord 25-29 4/8/2025 6:57 PM Andrea Buiser   Against I urge my Councilwoman in Ward 1 to vote NAY to any changes to amend the Legislative Code pertaining to rent stabilization. In 2021, Saint Paul citizens voted YES to a Rent Stabilization Ordinance, myself being one of them. The ordinance kept residential rent increases to NO MORE than 3% in a 12-month period. I believe wholeheartedly that this ordinance, which protects the rights of renters across the city, should be kept in the Legislative Code as it is written. This is what we voted yes to. We voted yes to keep rent affordable in St. Paul. I am a homeowner but I am vehemently opposed to amending any language in the Legislative Code pertaining to rent stabilization. Rent control is tantamount to fair housing in St. Paul and I hope the Council to understand the long-term impacts of acquiescing to developers and real estate lobbyists aiming to soften rent control restrictions. The other ordinance outlining tenant protections is NOT ENOUGH to protect tenants in St. Paul. Please vote NAY +1 -1 Ord 25-29 4/8/2025 5:19 PM Twin Cities Housing Alliance     Elimination of new housing from rent control may help increase new housing production. And, TCHA believes that only a full repeal of the rent stabilization policy will create a healthy housing ecosystem in St. Paul and the entire region. The impact of rent control is detailed in TCHA's Public Cost of Rent Control resource - https://tchousingalliance.com/news-and-resources/tcha-2023-year-in-review-zatls-htrc6. Please review. +1 -1 Ord 25-29 4/8/2025 4:28 PM Janet Pope   For I am writing to urge support of the proposed Rent Stabilization Amendment. There is a serious shortage of affordable housing in St Paul of approximately 11,000 units. Therefore it is critical to do all we can to house all our neighbors and promote housing development by large and small developers. Limits on rents are a serious impediment to this development of more units so must be alleviated. In addition, further development in our city is critically needed to help alleviate the high property tax burden of St. Paul residents and businesses. I support tenant protections as well, so I also want to commend the City Council for putting teeth into administrative citations so that predatory and unfair landlords can now be fined. Ord 25-29 4/8/2025 3:43 PM Sherry Pofahl Johnson   For I am thrilled to see Councilmembers take necessary steps to p*** TWO important, interrelated bills that will strengthen our City's financial future, enable new housing, and secure the rights of tenants. I supported the rent stabilization ordinance because tenants' rights matter, but now we know it's hurting developers' ability to build. Plus, we're facing a market with difficult financing and tariffed materials. We must release constraints on new development. But what if new builds threaten naturally occurring affordable housing? That's where tenant protections can slow things down, with the Affordable Housing Notice-of-Sale requirements. Please release narratives about "Big Developers." Whatever our City does to limit them will have an outsized impact small and medium-sized developers. Our 1-4-Unit Housing work, 2040 Plan and beyond will sufficiently limit the impact of "Big Developers" if we let the market respond to the desperate need for more housing. +1 Ord 25-29 4/8/2025 3:05 PM Dave Hage   For I've been a renter myself, struggling to pay the rent, but even so I support this amendment. The best solution to the housing shortage is to build more housing - so let's not discourage that. Mayor Carter is right: St. Paul is a growing city, and that's GREAT, but a growing city needs to make housing for its people. Density is good and long overdue. Ord 25-31 4/8/2025 2:52 PM Elizabeth Wefel   For This tenant protection ordinance is an important companion to the ordinance loosening the rent control ordinance. We need to protect our renters while we also seek to incent new development. Please p*** this ordinance. +1 Ord 25-29 4/8/2025 2:49 PM Elizabeth Wefel   For Cities across Minnesota, and across the country, are facing a housing crisis. There are many factors that contribute to it and only so much that a city council can do to combat. St. Paul has done an excellent job of taking important steps such as revising its zoning code to allow for more density. But we can't address this issue with both arms tied behind our backs. The biggest thing holding development back in our cityis our current rent control ordinance. We should have concern for the impact of increased rents on the residents of St. Paul but the current ordinance makes things worse for current and future residents by suppressing new Housing development in our city. We desperately need more housing construction in our city to house people and to help our tax base, which helps control property taxes. Although I would prefer the ordinance be repealed in its entirety, this proposed change is an important first step and I urge that the City Council adopt this change! Ord 25-29 4/8/2025 2:47 PM Richard Gehrman     I support amending the rent stabilization code. Overall I don't support rent stabilization at all. I live in an apartment more than 20 years old and the landlord is having difficulty maintaining the building. However exempting new construction and construction since 2004 at least will help encourage new construction. Ord 25-29 4/8/2025 2:25 PM Deanna Sande   For The proposed amendment will make it much easier for developers, including small and local developers, to secure financing to build homes. It does this by creating simplicity and predictability for investors. Those who build housing in the metro area have a choice, and if Saint Paul makes it too difficult to secure financing they will build in other areas. This limited amendment Ord 25-29 4/8/2025 2:25 PM Everett Dalton   For City Councilmembers, Thank you for considering this amendment. As a student and recent entrant into the Saint Paul rental market, I’ve experienced firsthand the difficulty of finding adequate, affordable housing. Rent stabilization meant to protect vulnerable renters. But in reality, it’s created barriers to building new rentals at a time our residents desperately need it. Construction has slowed; options are fewer. It’s low-income residents and renters who are negatively impacted by this policy, not homeowners or the wealthy. While many factors impact affordable construction, this is a lever we can pull to reduce friction, building more units, which, as Minneapolis has shown, actually reduces rent. This option will help students like me, renters, and working families access housing we can afford. As a constituent, renter, and student, I believe this amendment would stabilize rentals in St. Paul. I urge you to support it to move toward real housing justice in St. Paul! Thank you. +2 Ord 25-29 4/8/2025 1:23 PM Lily   Against This amendment will mean that no building built after 2004 will ever enter rent control. Meaning there is incentive to build and 0 incentive to maintain existing buildings. There should be a limit to how long a building is out of rent control! The amendment is short sighted and will ultimately only benefit the builders, not the renters this legislation was originally meant to protect. +3 Ord 25-31 4/8/2025 11:25 AM Jenn P   For I support strong tenant protections. I comend the council for taking this balanced approach to the issue of housiy- rolling back rent stabilization while also implementing support for tenants. There's a real power imbalance and it's important to have strong tenant protections to prevent abuse +1 Ord 25-29 4/8/2025 11:20 AM Jenn P   For I support this legislation because this limited amendment will encourage growth while still preserving the benefits of the original ordinance. When it p***es, more than 90% of the city will remain under stabilization. Renters will continue to be protected from displacement, while our improved growth alleviates the crisis of affordability in housing. The city has limited control over the cost of building materials and the state of the economy which is the true deterrent to building more housing, but it's important to try implementing things that are within our control to try an make small improvements to the problem of housing shortage. Ord 25-31 4/8/2025 3:02 AM Aaron Keniski   For The city needs policies that both protect renters and make it easier to build the homes our city needs. +1 Ord 25-29 4/8/2025 3:01 AM Aaron Keniski   For I’m writing in support of the rent stabilization amendment. We need to amend the rent stabilization ordinance to enable Saint Paul to build more housing and grow our tax base. Ord 25-29 4/8/2025 2:50 AM Tom Reimann   For For the sake of renters (including future renters), expanding the tax base, and sustainable development as a city, we need abundant housing, which means building new units. This amendment, in concert with the tenant protection proposal, seems like the right move. Ord 25-31 4/8/2025 2:49 AM Tom Reimann   For I urge p***age of this ordinance in conjunction with the rent stabilization amendment to improve renter protection while allowing for new housing construction. +1 Ord 25-29 4/8/2025 2:41 AM Noah Rooze   For I am in favor of this amendment to cut red tape and encourage new developing the city. This is a rare slam dunk that benefits existing and new residents, tenants and developers, and increases the city's tax base. -1 5 Ord 25-29 4/8/2025 2:39 AM Jessa Anderson-Reitz   For Renters need affordable options, making housing growth essential. The status quo would lock in our current housing shortage for decades, leaving renters without the autonomy they need to leave poor living situations, even forcing them to stay in unsafe or unstable housing due to scarcity. I urge the council to p*** this amendment. Ord 25-29 4/8/2025 2:29 AM Tom Reimann   For For the sake of renters (including future renters), expanding the tax base, and sustainable development as a city, we need abundant housing, which means building new units. This amendment, in concert with the tenant protection proposal, seems like the right move. +2 -1 Ord 25-29 4/8/2025 1:57 AM Lisa Gallatin   For I appreciate this issue being revisited and believe the council should vote to support this amendment. Ord 25-29 4/8/2025 1:55 AM Suzanne S Rhees   For I'm a resident in the Como Park neighborhood, and am keenly aware of the lack of new housing and the commercial development that more housing would support. Since moving to St. Paul in 2016, I've been shocked by the sharp rise in property taxes. One reason is the heavy tax burden that the lack of new development puts on existing homeowners. Many large tracts of land sit vacant, foreclosing options for affordable rental housing, condos, and other medium-density options. While rent stabilization seemed protective of existing tenants, it has become an obstacle to development of all sorts, as evidenced by the slow build-out of Highland Bridge. Therefore I strongly urge p***age of the proposed amendment. Thank you. Ord 25-29 4/8/2025 1:27 AM Therese Sexe   For I’m writing in support of the rent stabilization amendment. We need to amend the rent stabilization ordinance to enable Saint Paul and local developers to grow. Ord 25-29 4/7/2025 10:27 PM       My wife and I moved to Lowertown in Aug 2018. We intend to stay in our condo long term and care deeply that Downtown achieve a population of 20 to 30 thousand residents so that our neighborhood can sustain grocery stores, pharmacies, and all the services needed to support a diverse, walkable community. We need new housing to achieve this goal: Small, medium and large sized units. Affordable, mid-level, and luxury units. Rental and owner occupied units. The investments needed to build these units will not come to Saint Paul without the p***age of this amendment, so I urge the City Council to do so immediately. The current residents of Downtown know we need PEOPLE. We will welcome diverse people and diverse housing, so there is real opportunity here to create a special community, if you p*** this amendment, build housing and plan for vital and healthy expansion of Downtown. Lastly, I also believe that p***ing this amendment is the right thing for ALL of St Paul not just Downtown Ord 25-29 4/7/2025 9:53 PM Jeanne Kaplan   For Please p*** this amendment. I'm a renter who wants more tenant protection . +2 1 Ord 25-31 4/7/2025 9:27 PM Robert Wales   For This should really be tied into any weakening of rent stabilization. As a city we need to bolster housing but it will do no good to have a surplus of market rate housing without tenants who can afford to occupy more affordable rentals and live in the city. We need protections so that people can maintain their housing security and not fall whim to surging pricing or at will increases or terminations. Especially when we are ready to give leeway to larger developers who will seek to drive pricing higher in a geographically limited city. +1 Ord 25-29 4/7/2025 9:22 PM Robert Wales   For I am a meh for. This should be a part of and should have been a part of the compromise previously. That said we should and can’t ignore that developers have been using this as a convenient excuse and we shouldn’t further allow it to be an excuse for bad faith and diminish any efforts to bolster tenant protections. Nor should we allow a trickle down effect to take place. +1 Ord 25-29 4/7/2025 8:56 PM Daniel Waddell   For We need to amend the rent stabilization ordinance to enable Saint Paul and local developers to grow. Our tax base in hemorrhaging and anything we can do to restore developer confidence and encourage housing is a new good for the city. Rent control has not brought any meaningful benefits elsewhere and this is a step in the right direction to simplify our building process. More work needs to be done to enhance the permitting process but let’s not hold ourselves to a policy that is not working and restore some confidence. +2 Ord 25-31 4/7/2025 8:43 PM Susan Woehrle     Please support and strengthen tenant protections. +1 Ord 25-31 4/7/2025 8:42 PM Lathan Kistler   For Thank you for bringing this forward. As a former renter I remember the situations when landlords used their positions of power over their renters. This bill will help to protect and improve options for renters and I am thankful it is being considered. +1 Ord 25-29 4/7/2025 8:41 PM Susan Woehrle     Please preserve rent stabilization in its current form! +1 -3 Ord 25-29 4/7/2025 8:37 PM McCullough Mischke     St. Paul needs to be doing everything it can to encourage new development and developers. Rent control policies have the exact opposite effect. We should repeal all rent control policies, but this amendment is a start. +3 1 Ord 25-31 4/7/2025 8:36 PM Alana Hawley   For Tenant protections are crucial to keeping people in their homes, and safe from potential abuses by landlords. +1 Ord 25-29 4/7/2025 8:33 PM Alana Hawley   For Housing is the most basic need that a successful society meets. Rent stabilization works to KEEP PEOPLE HOUSED, and I support it! +1 Ord 25-31 4/7/2025 8:30 PM Rachel Willson-Broyles   For +1 Ord 25-29 4/7/2025 3:50 PM Chris Blake   For Renters need affordable options while encouraging housing growth. Our current situation would lock in our housing shortage for decades, possibly leaving renters struggling due to scarcity. It would also prevent us from improving the city's tax base while maintaining affordability. These changes need to be made. Thank you. +4 Ord 25-29 4/7/2025 2:11 PM Kathleen Fischer   For I urge you to p*** the proposed exemption for new construction because the best way that Saint Paul can alleviate the growing burden that property tax increases are causing for low-income renters and homeowners is to build more housing. Many low-income households in Saint Paul have struggled to afford the steep increases over the past few years. I know you know this: it’s why you fought hard this past December for a city budget that would keep property tax increases to five percent. Unfortunately, Saint Paul’s budgeting challenges are likely to get even harder in the coming years. We are not repairing our streets, sewers, bridges, parks, and other city-owned infrastructure at the pace they are falling apart. We are not funding city services to meet the level of need. Our low-income residents cannot afford the pace of property tax increases, but they also depend on the city to maintain the infrastructure and services they use every day. Kathleen Fischer, 1017 Ashland Avenue +6 Ord 25-29 4/7/2025 11:39 AM Cody Fischer   For I urge you to support the proposal to permanently exempt new residential buildings from rent control. Opponents argue it’s too early to make a change, but the evidence is clear: Saint Paul’s policies are uniquely inhibiting housing growth. While other factors, like interest rates and material costs, also impact production, the one factor we can change is city policy. Affordable housing is essential for renters, and the current situation locks in the housing shortage for decades. Without more housing, renters will remain in poor, unstable conditions, and the city will struggle to grow its tax base. With federal cuts and a looming state deficit, housing growth is crucial for Saint Paul’s fiscal health. We must act now to avoid a future of unaffordable housing. +8 Ord 25-31 4/6/2025 12:50 AM Melissa Wenzel   For Dear City Council Members, Our city's renters deserve the sort of tenant protections that is being proposed, which ensure that landlords can’t discriminate against potential renters, that landlords and property owners must provide renters with fair and sufficient notice of sale when their home is being sold or when there may be a possible eviction due to a family’s inability to pay. That Saint Paul renters aren’t charged an exorbitant price for security deposits, and that landlords can’t retaliate against tenants for simply trying to protect their rights. These are foundational and crucial for our renters to have these rights, and yet is a pretty basic set of standards that should not negatively impact landlords. Thank you for supporting these important and impacting changes to our current tenant protections! Sincerely, Melissa Wenzel Ward 2 +1 Ord 25-29 4/6/2025 12:35 AM Melissa Wenzel   For Dear City Council members, We all know that Saint Paul has a housing shortage. Rental prices come down when supply of stock increases. We see this happening across the river in Minneapolis, and in major cities around the nation. Thus, I am writing to support the Rent Stabilization Amendment before you. I am pleased that this agenda item is occuring at the same time as a proposal to strengthen tenant protections. When these two agenda items p*** with your support, it will result in unlocking new housing construction while gaining even stronger tenant protections. Both are essential to solving this crisis. Sincerely, Melissa Wenzel Ward 2 +10 Ord 25-29 4/5/2025 5:35 PM Rachel Molzahn   For We need to increase housing in St Paul in order to attract more business, and ensure property taxes don’t become burdensome for current residents. Please consider common sense approaches while continuing to protect renter’s rights. +5 Ord 25-29 4/5/2025 4:48 PM Galen Benshoof   For Without substantial new housing production, Saint Paul's current shortage will soon become a crisis. Without changes to rent stabilization policy, it is obvious that we will not get the additional housing we need. I support these common-sense changes to protect affordability in our city. +9 -1 2 Ord 25-31 4/4/2025 6:36 PM Jacob Hooper   For Ive been directly impacted by many of the things this bill addresses (like absurdly high deposits). Thank you for this. +2 Ord 25-29 4/4/2025 6:30 PM Jacob Hooper   For I am a renter who supported the original rent stabilization ordinance. I support amending it. I am really concerned about the lack of development and new housing being built in Saint Paul. I still support rent control to protect renters, but we have to make sure it is implemented in a way that doesn't do serious damage to the city. When I supported it on the ballot, it was under the hope that my elected officials would implement it in an intentional manner as one "tool in the toolbox." Tweaking policy to make it work is good. Adapting to changing cir***stances is good. We need more housing. +6 Ord 25-29 4/4/2025 10:08 AM David A   Against We are making a dangerous and near-sighted mistake by treating private investment as more desirable than stability for our neighbors. The Highland Development already is getting $100 million in taxpayer dollars to support private profit. Letting developers hold us hostage is a terrible mistake. The global housing crisis is b/c of the financialization of housing. Housing as an ***et, with a right to unlimited profit, is incompatible with housing as a human right, or stable, secure housing for our city. 3% is quite reasonable and more than allowed in Germany or Canada. Canada has province-wide rent stabilization that is set each year to match the financial situation of renters. Other countries still have private development. We can and must leverage community land trusts, cooperative conversions, create rotating loan funds, and renovate old buildings for community ownership. Public investment should create permanently affordable community ownership, not private profit. +2 -2 Ord 25-29 4/3/2025 8:36 PM Henry Parker   For I am writing to express my strong support for the rent stabilization amendment. Much of the slow down in multi-family production and the fall in the values of apartment buildings is the result of the rent stabilization ordinance, which has led to greater property tax burden on the rest of the city. We have also missed out on the opportunity to add more homes and more residents to our city as a result. Henry Parker 2001 Selby Ave St Paul, MN 55104 +6 -2 Ord 25-29 4/2/2025 6:56 PM Levi I.   Against This new attempt at gutting rent control is pro-developer and not pro-renter. There's no evidence to suggest rent control has stifled development. I moved to Saint Paul because of the initial rent control being p***ed. +4 -4 Ord 25-29 4/2/2025 6:02 PM Steve Tuckner   Against Rent stabilization was originally p***ed to give renters security so that their rent would not increase an inordinate amount year after year. It was meant to stabilize rents not profits for developers. This ordinance is just one more step to help developers profits. The theory of build, build, build is that eventually rents will stabilize (maybe), but that developers will certainly make great profits. We are trading a possible outcome, of stabilizing rents, with the certainty of profits for developers. How about instead we guarantee stable rents for renters and we find other ways to build the housing we need. In particular, the city could act as a housing developer using its bonding and borrowing capacity to hire the union construction firms to build the housing infrastructure that we need, for the people that need it, where the city needs it. +4 -3 Ord 25-29 4/2/2025 5:52 PM Jamie Marshall   Against I am against further exemptions of rent stabilization. I stand by what I, and a majority of voters, approved as a ballot measure. Rent stabilization is not the cause for any slowing of new housing construction, but it is being used as a justification so that developers can continue expanding their profits paid for by ballooning rents. To move ahead on this important and contentious item without an elected council member in my Ward 4 is undemocratic. +3 -2 Ord 25-29 4/2/2025 5:47 PM Lily Eggers   Against I believe that altering an initiative that succeeded at the ballot box, due to concerns which are not yet sufficiently backed up by data, would significantly jeopardize both tenant rights and the Council’s credibility. +3 -2 Ord 25-29 4/2/2025 5:43 PM Brandon Conrady   Against I am against further cuts to rent control in this city. The current data before us fails to properly establish a causal relationship between rent control and the lack of construction in the city. For reference, Minneapolis used to have significantly more permits approved for new construction than us, but they too experienced a dip in new construction like we did. In fact, their drop in new permits was even greater than ours. Blaming rent control may please developers and landlords but won't actually help us. Please vote against this ordinance. +5 -1 Ord 25-29 4/2/2025 5:37 PM Jeffrey Grizzell   Against I am against the city further attending rent stabilization. The city has already made exemptions that go against the democratic will of the majority who voted to p*** the original ballot measure. +4 -1 Ord 25-29 4/2/2025 5:28 PM Cole Hanson   Against As a resident of Ward 4, I’m deeply concerned that the City is moving forward with significant changes to rent stabilization without meaningful data on core issues like vacancy rates or rental property ownership / management. These are essential to understanding the policy’s impact—and in many respects, we’re flying blind. I’m also troubled that this decision is being made while Ward 4 remains without an elected representative. Our ward has one of the highest renter populations in the city, with four universities and dense multi-unit housing along University Avenue. Our voice matters. I respectfully urge the City Council to table this ordinance until Ward 4 voters have the opportunity to elect their representative and that person can weigh in on this critical issue. +5 -4 Ord 25-29 4/2/2025 5:24 PM Ethan Besser Fredrick   Against I am opposed to creating larger exemptions for rent stabilization. The city government has betrayed voters for years by watering down what was p***ed by a ballot measure. If landlords are permitted to drastically raise rent, we will see a spike in homelessness and all its ensuing social problems. It’s really that simple. At the same time, it is not at all clear that rent stabilization played a role in construction slow downs as interest rates and construction costs are a much more significant factor. Don’t raise our rents just to appease developers. +5 -2 Ord 25-29 4/2/2025 5:12 PM Karen Allen   Against Rent stabilization has had a negative impact on the production of new housing in the city. Given the shortage of housing, the expensive construction market, the property tax burden on existing residents and the future of the city's budget, this amendment is needed to reduce barriers to housing production. I believe this should be p***ed in tandem with renter protections - renters are a huge portion our city population and should be protected from predatory or unfair housing practices by unethical landlords. +6 -2 2 Ord 25-29 4/2/2025 5:03 PM Matt O'Toole   For The current rent stabilization regime has had a disastrous effect on rental availability and affordability. It's chased away new development, created a 3% floor on rent increases, disincentivized investment in existing properties, and damaged city finances because every new development requires some sort of public subsidy. It has benefitted no one. +5 -5 1 Ord 25-31 4/2/2025 2:23 AM Noah Schneider   For +1 -1 Ord 25-29 4/2/2025 2:23 AM Noah Schneider   For +5 -2 Ord 25-31 4/1/2025 9:59 PM Katherine DuGarm   For The city needs policies that both protect renters and make it easier to build the homes our communities need. +3 -2 Ord 25-29 4/1/2025 9:57 PM Katherine DuGArm   For Tenants need protections. I support this ordinance at the same time as 25-31. Tenants also need housing and rent stabilization is currently stifling our ability to meet our housing supply needs and unlock the growth we need for a more sustainable Saint Paul. I still believe deeply in the need to protect renters and fight for long-term affordability. +7 -3 1 Ord 25-31 4/1/2025 8:39 PM Jeanne Kaplan   For I support this legislation. Renters need this protection. +3 Ord 25-29 4/1/2025 8:38 PM J. Mark Gilbert   For Rent stabilization was a mistake, and demonstrates why governing by referendum is a bad idea. This amendment will help undo the damage, and, most importantly, get us building the homes we need. +10 -6 2