ARC Packet 05-17-2023CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION
May 17, 2023 6:00 p.m.
City Hall 1101 Victoria Curve
1. Call to Order
2. Approval of Agenda
3. Approval of Minutes
a. March 15, 2023 Regular Meeting Minutes
4. Public Comments
5. Unfinished and New Business
a. FAA Noise Policy Review Public Comment Period
b. ARC 2023-2024 Work Plan 6. Acknowledge Receipt of Reports and Correspondence a. Review of Airport Operational Statistics (link: https://www.macenvironment.org/reports/)
1. Complaint Information
2. Runway Use Information
3. Noise Monitor Information
a. MAC Reports
b. News Articles
7. Commissioner Comments
8. Adjourn Meeting
Alternate formats or auxiliary aids are available to individuals with disabilities upon request. Please contact city hall at 651-452-1850 or cityhall@mendotaheightsmn.gov
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION
City Hall 1101 Victoria Curve Meeting Minutes
March 15, 2023 6:00 p.m.
The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Airport Relations Commission was held on Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at Mendota Heights City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve.
1.Call to OrderChair Norling called the meeting to order at 6:00pm.
The following commissioners were present: Gina Norling, William Dunn, David Sloan, Jim
Neuharth, Bruce Bobbitt, and Arvind Sharma. Absent: Jeff Hamiel.Staff present: City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson and City Clerk Christine Lusian.
2.Election of Officers—Chair and Vice Chair
Motion by Dunn and second by Bobbitt to nominate Gina Norling as Chair for 2023. No other nominations made.
Motion carried 6-0.
Motion by Sloan and second by to nominate Arvind Sharma as Vice Chair for 2023. No other nominations made.
Motion carried 6-0.
3.Approval of Agenda
Motion by Neuharth/Second by Dunn to approve the agenda. Motion passed 6-0.
4.Approval of Minutes
a.January 18, 2023 Regular Meeting Minutes
Motion by Dunn/Second by Neuharth to approve the minutes. Motion passed 4-0-2
5.Public Comments
None.
The Commission welcomed new member Bruce Bobbitt.
6.Unfinished and New Businessa.ARC Rules of Order
City Administrator Jacobson stated that the Commission’s Rules of Order were approved in2010 and need updating to incorporate City Council directed changes relating toCommissioner term limits and attendance requirements, in addition to general housekeeping changes such as meeting dates and times.
3a
City Administrator Jacobson noted that the City Council has asked that term limits be reinstated for the Commission and noted that language doing so has been added to the bylaws. Going forward, Commissioners will serve terms of four years, with a maximum of serving three consecutive full terms. Additionally, the city council has asked that the terms be staggered, so that at least two members shall expire each year. To achieve a reorder of staggering, existing commissioners will be grandfathered in.
Commissioner Dunn asked that the City Administrator determine the staggering of terms
and which commissioner is placed in which term.
City Administrator Jacobson highlighted the council attendance requirements noting the
uniqueness of the Commission and its schedule of meeting every other month. She noted
that absences in a calendar year shall not exceed two consecutive meetings or more than 25
percent of the total meetings.
Commissioner Bobbitt suggested that the language regarding notification from the city
administrator shall be received after two absences, removing the reference to missing two
consecutive absences.
Commissioner Bobbitt asked if the Commission uses a specific parliamentary procedure for conducting meetings and it’s there was a parliamentarian or expert attending.
City Administrator Jacobson explained that the city (council) generally uses Robert’s Rules of Order but that no specific procedure has been approved for use. She and the other Commissioners noted that the ARC is less formal and generally follows Roberts Rules for conducting meetings.
Motion by Dunn/Second by Sloan to adopt the ARC Bylaws with the proposed amendment to Section 5 regarding attendance notification. Motion passed 6-0
b. ARC 2023 Work Plan
Norling introduced and City Administrator Jacobson presented for review and discussion its
current work plan for recommend updates or new action items for inclusion.
Jacobson explained the higher level vision and values that is needing update versus the
more measurable goals and tasks that agency staff carry out. Various other work plans feedinto ARC work plan, such as the City Council, NOC, FAA, MAC, NRC, etc. ARC's specificpriorities may include education and outreach and mitigation of noise exposure.
Action: Jacobson to email ARC. Norling to create a one-page document by strategy.
c.FAA RNAV Project Update
City Administrator Jacobson provided an update of information received as part of the NoiseOversight Committee meeting. An online slideshow showed departure assignments, south
flow layers of arrival and departures, project preferred alternate list, and concourse and gate changes primarily.
Older navigation technology (VOR) is being phased out and replaced with satellite based technology (RNAV) during summer 2025 with no change in departure procedures. NOC would like to update federal representatives about the FAA RNAV project, as a past project didn't go well; Olson is leading discussions on the concerns.
Action: Jacobson to send NOC link to ARC where the presentation is and when the
upcoming stakeholder event is.
7.Acknowledge Receipt of Reports and Correspondence
a.Review of Airport Operational Statistics (link: https://www.macenvironment.org/reports/)i.Complaint InformationCommissioners present reviewed complaint information.
ii.Runway Use InformationCommissioner Neuharth reviewed 12L total operations, 12L night, 12R total,
night, and north of corridor and had no concerns.
iii.Turboprop Information
City Administrator asked if the Commission needs to continue to track thisdata. Commissioner Neuharth and City Administrator Jacobson suggested
talking with Michele Ross of MAC about trends. If the data continues to trend
downward, then the Commission can take it off its monitoring list.
iv.Noise Monitor InformationNone.
b.MAC Reports
None.
c.News ArticlesNone.
8.Commissioner CommentsCommissioner Bobbitt expressed his appreciation for the welcome and introductions.
9.Adjourn Meeting
Motion by Neuharth/Second by Dunn to adjourn the meeting Motion passed 6-0
Chair Norling adjourned the meeting at 7:32pm.
Minutes taken by Christine Lusian City Clerk
_____________________________________________________ Airport Relations Commission
DATE: May 17, 2023
TO: Airport Relations Commission
FROM: Cheryl Jacobson, City Administrator
SUBJECT: FAA-Noise Policy Review Comment Period
INTRODUCTION
On Monday, May 1, 2023, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) published in the
Federal Register a Request for Comments seeking public input on four key
considerations of its Civil Aviation Noise Policy. The FAA is asking the public for input
regarding how the FAA analyzes, explains, and presents publicly changes in aircraft
noise exposure to affected communities.
BACKGROUND
The Request for Comment builds on and responds to public feedback on the FAA’s
January 13, 2021 Federal Register Notice. That Notice provided an overview of the FAA’s
noise research portfolio and sought input to assist the FAA in assessing how resources
should be directed to better understand and manage the factors underlying concerns
from aircraft noise exposure.
The primary question of interest that the FAA is now seeking input on is, should FAA
transition away from a monolithic noise policy with a single metric comprising the
system in favor of an expanded system of metrics? As part of the review, the FAA is:
•Looking at current use of DNL or Day-Night Average Sound Level as the primary
noise metric for assessing cumulative aircraft noise exposure.
•Reviewing whether to continue to use the DNL 65 dB level as the metric and
threshold for determining significant noise impacts in environmental reviewsunder the National Environmental Policy Act or the definition of the limit of
residential land use compatibility.
•Considering if and how alternative noise metrics may be used in lieu of or in
addition to DNL to better inform agency decisions and improve FAA’s disclosure
of noise impacts.
5a
Additional information, including a series of short videos explaining the Noise Policy
Review at: https://www.faa.gov/noisepolicyreview.
Attachments: Noise Policy Review
MAC Letter dated March 15, 2021
MAC-NOC Letter dated February 17, 2021
ACTION REQUESTED
The posting of the Request for Comments started a 90-day comment period during
which the public can share their input by submitting a written comment to Docket FAA-
2023-0855 at www.regulations.gov. The comment period closes Monday, July 31, 2023.
The Commission should discuss the Request for Comments and determine if a comment letter from the city should be submitted.
Metropolitan Airports Commission
6040 28th Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55450 • 612-726-8100 • metroairports.org
Minneapolis-St. Paul International • Airlake • Anoka County-Blaine • Crystal • Flying Cloud • Lake Elmo • St. Paul Downtown
March 15, 2021
Mr. Kevin Welsh
Director, Office of Environment and Energy
Federal Aviation Administration
Docket Operations, M-30
US Department of Transportation
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE
Room W12-140, West Building, Ground Floor
Washington, DC 20590
Re: Docket No. FAA-2021-0037
“Overview of FAA Aircraft Noise Policy and Research Efforts”
Dear Mr. Welsh:
There is a long history of efforts at Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) operated airports to reduce noise
impacts from aircraft operations. As Chair of the MAC, I am keenly aware of the challenges airport noise continues
to present in communities around MSP and our reliever airport system. These challenges exist even though our
organization has a decorated history of proactively addressing noise issues, funds one of the most extensive noise
mitigation programs in the nation and maintains a robust community engagement calendar.
The MSP Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) operates as an advisory board appointed to provide a balanced forum
for the discussion and evaluation of noise impacts around MSP. Among other things, the NOC is tasked to provide
policy recommendations or options to the MAC Commission regarding airport noise issues. In its history, the NOC
has amassed a distinguished record of identifying and analyzing airport noise issues around MSP. In February, the
NOC unanimously approved the attached letter for filing on the Federal Register Notice titled, “Overview of FAA
Aircraft Noise Policy and Research Efforts: Request for Input on Research Activities to Inform Aircraft Noise Policy”
published on January 13, 2021. The recommendations offered in the NOC’s letter are sound and originate from
the collective experience the Committee has garnered in this field . The MAC Commission has reviewed and
unanimously endorses the NOC’s letter.
Thank you for your ongoing efforts to study and manage aircraft noise issues around the country. The MAC is
particularly enthusiastic about the extensive research on the effects of aircraft noise on individuals and
communities including speech interference and children's learning, health and human impacts, impacts to
cardiovascular health, sleep disturbance, and economic impacts. This coordinated effort with academic
institutions should produce useful data to inform this discussion moving forward.
I appreciate the partnership between our organizations and am confident we will be included in future discussion s
on the matter.
Minneapolis-St. Paul International • Airlake • Anoka County-Blaine • Crystal • Flying Cloud • Lake Elmo • St. Paul Downtown
Sincerely,
Rick King
Chairman
cc: Brian Ryks – MAC Executive Director
NOC Co-Chairs Jeff Hart and Dianne Miller
6040 28th Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55450 • 612-467-0741
February 17, 2021
Mr. Kevin Welsh
Director, Office of Environment and Energy
Federal Aviation Administration
Docket Operations, M-30
US Department of Transportation
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE
Room W12-140, West Building, Ground Floor
Washington, DC 20590
Re: Docket No. FAA-2021-0037
“Overview of FAA Aircraft Noise Policy and Research Efforts”
Dear Mr. Welsh:
Thank you for inviting comments on the Federal Register Notice regarding the scope and applicability
of research initiatives being undertaken by the Federal Aviation Administration to address aircraft
noise.
The Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) is the primary
advisory body on aircraft noise issues associated with the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport
(MSP). The NOC is composed of six community representatives and six aviation industry
representatives that provide policy recommendations to the Metropolitan Airports Commission
(MAC), which owns and operates MSP 1. For more than 18 years, the NOC has provided a balanced
forum and amassed a distinguished record of identifying and analyzing airport noise issues around
MSP, which has resulted in the development of many innovative solutions 2. These solutions are based
both in acoustical mitigation as well as non-acoustic methods, such as stakeholder and community
collaboration. The NOC recognizes the importance of collaboration and, in conjunction with MAC staff,
maintains a robust calendar of engagements designed to meet and collaborate with our stakeholders.
1 The NOC aviation industry representation includes air carriers, cargo air carriers, chief pilots, charter air carriers, and the
Minnesota Business Aviation Association. NOC community representation includes the cities of Minneapolis, Bloomington,
Eagan, Mendota Heights, Richfield and an At-Large community seat on the Committee representing the cities of Burnsville,
Inver Grove Heights, St. Louis Park, St. Paul, Sunfish Lake, Apple Valley and Edina.
2 Please see https://www.macnoise.com/our-neighbors/msp-noise-abatement-efforts.
6040 28th Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55450 • 612-467-0741
The results of the FAA Neighborhood Environmental Survey validate a principle known by the NOC:
Noise concerns around MSP do not stop at 65 decibel (dB) Day-Night Average Sound Level (DNL).
Between 2017 and 2019 the NOC reviewed reports of more than 450,000 total noise complaints
attributed to MSP operations. Complaint locations were overwhelmingly from locations with an annual
noise level below 65 dB DNL, with only one percent of complaints filed from homes within the 65+ dB
DNL noise contour.
It is with the above as background that the NOC formulates the following comments and suggestions
in response to the FAA’s request for public comment on the Neighborhood Environmental Survey.
First, the NOC encourages the FAA to continue to explore and accelerate implementation of creative
noise reduction strategies. Technology designed to reduce noise at the source is tremendously
beneficial to residents, and often provides mutual benefits to airports and operators. Research on a
Low Noise Augmentation System being tested in Europe or landing gear noise reduction tests being
conducted by Boeing and Safran are examples of exciting progress that will take years to materialize.
The NOC is also closely monitoring research conducted by MIT through ASCENT on advanced
operational flight procedures, such as modifying landing gear and flap extension and changes to
aircraft speeds, to reduce noise at the source. Federally developed incentive programs should be
considered for aircraft operators to install or employ noise reduction equipment and methods to
accelerate the adoption of these systems and incorporate noise reduction equipment into the fleet as
quickly as possible. The NOC encourages the FAA to build capabilities into the Aviation Environmental
Design Tool to quantify the noise reduction benefits provided by such advanced operational flight
procedures and accurately model these low-noise procedures and systems. These capabilities would
allow the agency to further reduce the impact on affected residents, by actively designing and
implementing noise abatement procedures at airports that would reduce the frequency of flights over
residential and other sensitive land uses.
Second, as outlined in the survey results, non-acoustic factors will often help to predict the likelihood
that a person is highly annoyed by aircraft noise. Frequency of successive overflights may be causing
higher annoyance levels. Further, drastic or abrupt changes to aircraft activity or the mere perception
of change will alter the patterns of complaints received at MSP. National public awareness and
sensitivity to aircraft noise was heightened after NextGen procedure implementation issues at airports
such as Phoenix Sky Harbor and San Francisco. These are two potential examples that may have
impacted the survey responses. Locally at MSP, the discussion of Area Navigation procedure
implementation was contentious, disruptive, and highlighted the fact that early and effective outreach
to communities is a critical component to successful implementation. The NOC suggests the FAA
evaluate the survey results in concert with operational or procedural changes occurring during the
6040 28th Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55450 • 612-467-0741
survey period at these airports. The NOC further encourages the FAA to find creative ways to integrate
timely and holistic community involvement when pursuing changes at airports with a long history of
intelligent dialogue and active participation in noise, like MSP.
Third, the NOC urges the FAA to fully consider the impacts of aircraft noise beyond the current federally
established 65 dB DNL threshold when making policy decisions on the impacts of aircraft noise in
communities around U.S. airports. In its efforts, the NOC would encourage the FAA to think creatively
about strategies to reduce noise impacts for residential areas outside of traditional sound insulation
programs. The NOC monitors the current MSP residential sound insulation program, which is the most
unique and expansive program in the country. Resulting from an agreement settling litigation at MSP,
the MAC currently offers sound insulation to homes within the actual 60 dB DNL contour. This program
achieves an excellent record of homeowner satisfaction with 95 percent of respondents indicating the
improvements were effective at reducing aircraft noise. The NOC recognizes and appreciates the value
of this successful program. Further, the NOC also recognizes that residential sound insulation is not
the only form of noise reduction. Therefore, this Committee encourages the FAA to think broadly about
alternative and innovative forms of noise reduction, including operational abatement measures, and
provide the necessary tools and resources to airports to enable these efforts. This is an opportunity to
build upon the long-established collaboration and ingenuity among airports, communities, regulators,
and industry.
Fourth, the NOC urges the FAA to consider the use of alternative noise metrics to evaluate single event
and threshold noise impacts, such as number of events and time above decibel thresholds and
maximum sound levels. While the MAC uses the DNL metric, as directed by federal regulations, the
NOC finds that alternative metrics are useful and necessary to more effectively communicate with
residents concerned about aircraft noise. The MAC operates the largest system of permanent sound
level meters around any airport in the country. Data from this system is available daily and reported
to the NOC monthly to provide a more complete assessment of aircraft activity. From this system, the
NOC monitors Events Above 65 dB and Time Above 65 dB regularly. Further, sound octave data is used
to investigate sound source, Ln data has been used to explain ambient environmental sound, and Lmax
data helps to explain unusually intrusive events. The NOC will also incorporate data from temporary
sound level meters during work plan studies to inform Committee members. In 2016, communities
around MSP passed resolutions stating that the FAA’s noise metric for determining significant impact
does not convey the magnitude of high single event noise levels and that alternative noise metrics aid
in making quantitative assessments for aircraft noise impacts and communicating those impacts to
surrounding communities. Given the use and acceptance of alternative metrics in this community, the
NOC would encourage the FAA to further study the inclusion of alternative metrics into future efforts
to quantify aircraft noise exposure. Specifically, metrics that quantity the frequency of aircraft activity
6040 28th Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55450 • 612-467-0741
and considers the time that activity occurs, would augment the benefits of DNL while also addressing
the concerns of residents that feel an average level is not representative of their experience.
Finally, we applaud the efforts of the FAA to objectively study and understand the effect that aviation
noise exposure may have on communities that neighbor airports. The collection of research outlined
in this Federal Register notice is extensive. Current research on the Effects of Aircraft Noise on
Individuals and Communities including Speech Interference and Children’s Learning, Health and
Human Impacts Research, Impacts to Cardiovascular Health, Sleep Disturbance, and Economic Impacts
will be crucial elements in the portfolio of scientific evidence on the impact of aviation in the
community. These results will more effectively inform future policy makers on the best use of
resources and techniques available to minimize the impact on our communities. The NOC would
encourage the FAA to prioritize these efforts and complete its research to enable the next phase of
this discussion to begin. In keeping with its mission to provide noise program recommendations to the
MAC, the NOC is poised and eager to participate in discussions as to how aircraft noise in communities
near airports may be effectively managed as well as the FAA’s future decisions on federal noise policy.
Sincerely,
Jeff Hart Dianne Miller
NOC Airport User Co-Chair NOC Community Co-Chair
cc: MAC Planning, Development & Environment Committee
Brian Ryks, MAC Executive Director / CEO
_____________________________________________________ Airport Relations Commission
DATE: May 17, 2023
TO: Airport Relations Commission
FROM: Cheryl Jacobson, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Commission Work Plan
INTRODUCTION
The Mendota Heights Airport Relations Commission has developed an annual work plan for
a number of years. At its meeting on May 17, the Commission is asked to bring up to three
goals for identified priority areas that they would like to see accomplished by December 31,
2024.
Attachment: Airport Relations Commission 2023-2024 Work Plan Work Sheet
BACKGROUND
The Mendota Heights Airports Relations Commission advises the City Council on matters
relating to airport noise and operations at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. The
commission monitors proposed rules, procedures and programs which impact air
noise within the city and makes recommendations regarding strategies to mitigate the city's
air noise exposure.
Mendota Heights benefits from its close proximity to MSP International Airport but is also
directly affected by aircraft operations. Aircraft noise is a major issue for some in Mendota
Heights. The city’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan provides the following aviation related goal:
Reduce negative airport impacts in Mendota Heights, and work diligently with all noise
issues and agencies to decrease aircraft noise in volume and decrease the area of noise
impacts. (Source: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 3 Transportation, page 24)
ACTION REQUESTED
The Commission should plan to share their suggestions and work together to identify goals
important to the city and its residents relating to the airport and air noise impact.
5b
City of Mendota Heights Airport Relations Commission
2023-2024 Work Plan Work Sheet
To build the Commission’s work plan for 2023-2024, please bring one to three goals for each priority area that
you would like to see accomplished on or before December 31, 2024. If you have suggestions or changes to a
priority category, please suggest them at the end of the worksheet under the additional/new priorities and
related strategies space provided.
Plan to share your suggestions, at the upcoming city council work session.
Priority: Inform and engage Mendota Heights’ residents regarding airport related issues
2023-2024 Suggested Goals
1.
2.
3.
Priority: Monitor airport operations, trends and advocate for the Mendota Heights community
2023-2024 Suggested Goals
1. Work collaboratively with other communities on mutual concerns in regards to airport
development and operations
2.
3.
Priority: Mitigate the city’s air noise exposure
2023-2024 Suggested Goals
1. Advocate for modified takeoff procedures and corridor compliance
2. Advocate for specific noise control measures through operational changes and advanced
technology
3. Advocate for equitable distribution of aircraft traffic and a more equitable runway use system
Additional/New Priorities and Related Strategies?
Suggested Priority?
2023-2024 Suggested Goals
1.
2.
3.
Additional/New Priorities and Related Strategies?
Suggested Priority?
2023-2024 Suggested Goals
1.
2.
3.
Additional/New Priorities and Related Strategies?
Suggested Priority?
2023-2024 Suggested Goals
1.
2.
3.
Complaints by Location—By Month
(2022, 2023)
Location = Complainants
2022 Mpls Eagan Edina MH Blmgtn
January 39 33 6 2 2
February 39 29 7 2 3
March 68 45 21 5 3
April 54 37 6 6 3
May 92 55 10 10 6
June 132 63 8 12 8
July 109 67 14 10 11
August 123 83 19 16 16
September 114 41 13 9 9
October 74 45 12 10 6
November 56 34 9 7 7
December 32 23 7 4 2
2023 Mpls Eagan Edina MH Blmgtn
January 31 26 3 2 3
February 39 25 8 4 10
March 51 26 9 4 4
April 74 31 12 4 10
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Percent of All Departures by Location
(2022, 2023)
2022
Mpls/
Richfield
30R
Eagan
12R
Edina
30L
MH
12L
Blmgtn
17
January 23% 8% 28% 12% 29%
February 29% 6% 36% 8% 21%
March 27% 7% 39% 9% 19%
April 12% 14% 19% 18% 37%
May 18% 11% 22% 15% 33%
June 22% 9% 25% 12% 31%
July 20% 9% 22% 15% 33%
August 19% 7% 21% 16% 38%
September 18% 28% 24% 22% 7%
October 24% 15% 31% 14% 15%
November 21% 8% 28% 12% 30%
December 17% 12% 28% 15% 28%
2023
Mpls/
Richfield
30R
Eagan
12R
Edina
30L
MH
12L
Blmgtn
17
January 22% 7% 31% 10% 29%
February 19% 6% 25% 12% 36%
March 19% 10% 25% 13% 32%
April 21% 10% 26% 12% 30%
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
6a.1
68
45
21
5 3
51
26
9
4 4
27%
7%
39%
9%
19%19%
10%
25%
13%
32%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Mpls Eagan Edina MH Blmgtn
March Complaints by Location and Departures by Location
Complaints 2022 Complaints 2023 %Departures 2022 %Departures 2023
March Complaints March Night Departures
2021 2022 2023 2021 2022 2023
Minneapolis (30R) 4,602 2,992 1,072 11 177 81
Eagan (12R) 2,813 2,310 1,897 77 96 186
Edina (30L) 692 527 117 80 241 237
Mendota Heights (12L) 210 185 136 16 55 98
Bloomington (17) 174 123 52 3 3 24
Total 8,491 6,050 3,274 187 572 626
54
37
6 6
3
74
31
12
4
10
12%
14%
19%18%
37%
21%
10%
26%
12%
30%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Mpls Eagan Edina MH Blmgtn
April Complaints by Location and Departures by Location
Complaints 2022 Complaints 2023 %Departures 2022 %Departures 2023
April Complaints April Night Departures
2021 2022 2023 2021 2022 2023
Minneapolis (30R) 3,296 923 2,317 11 18 80
Eagan (12R) 2,059 1,412 1,557 77 84 129
Edina (30L) 973 90 320 80 70 175
Mendota Heights (12L) 177 77 97 16 68 41
Bloomington (17) 185 123 61 3 35 33
Total 6,690 2,625 4,352 187 275 458