Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021 12-13 CCM REGULAR SESSION MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION DECEMBER 13, 2021 VIA ZOOM 1. INFORMAL OPEN FORUM WITH CITY COUNCIL CALL TO ORDER INFORMAL OPEN FORUM The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Informal Open Forum called to order by Mayor Mike Elliott at 6:48 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Mike Elliott and Councilmembers Marquita Butler, Kris Lawrence-Anderson, and Dan Ryan. Councilmember April Graves was absent and excused. Also present were City Manager Reggie Edwards,Acting Finance Director Andy Splinter, City Engineer Mike Albers, Community Development Director Meg Beekman, Planner/Zoning Administrator Ginny McIntosh, City Clerk Barb Suciu, and City Attorney Troy Gilchrist. Mayor Mike Elliott opened the meeting for the Informal Open Forum. No one wished to address the City Council. Mayor Elliott moved and Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson seconded to close the Informal Open Forum at 6:50 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. RECESS AND RECONVENE Mayor Elliott called for a short recess of the meeting at 6:51 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 6:57 p.m. 2. INVOCATION Councilmember Butler wished everyone a happy holiday. She explained her quote was related to the Council's approach to offering innovative services in the City. Councilmember Butler quoted Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., "We may have all come on different ships, but we're in the same boat now." 3. CALL TO ORDER REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING 12/13/21 -1- The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Regular Session called to order by Mayor Mike Elliott at 6:59 p.m. 4. ROLL CALL Mayor Mike Elliott and Councilmembers Marquita Butler, Kris Lawrence-Anderson, and Dan Ryan. Councilmember April Graves was absent and excused. Also present were City Manager Reggie Edwards, Acting Finance Director Andy Splinter, City Engineer Mike Albers, Community Development Director Meg Beekman, Planner/Zoning Administrator Ginny McIntosh, City Clerk Barb Suciu, and City Attorney Troy Gilchrist. 5. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 6. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA City Clerk Barb Suciu explained Item 10a, Resolution Approving Allocation of American Rescue Plan Act Funds, was removed from the agenda and Item 61, Public Safety Act - Professional Service Contract(LEAP), was pulled from the Consent Agenda and will be considered as Council Consideration Item 10a. Councilmember Ryan stated a resident's name was misspelled in a previous set of minutes. He explained he would contact City Clerk. Suciu to provide the proper spelling to correct the minutes. Mayor Elliott moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to approve the Agenda and Consent Agenda, as amended, with amendments to the Work Session Minutes of November 15, 2021, and the following consent items were approved: 6a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. November 15, 2021 —Work Session Meeting 2. November 22, 2021 — Study Session Meeting 3. November 22, 2021 —Regular Session Meeting 4. November 29, 2021 —Work Session Meeting 5. November 29, 2021 —Special Session Meeting 6b. LICENSES GASOLINE SERVICE STATION AM PM Corner Market 6501 Humboldt Avenue North DBA Winner Gas Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Two Rivers Investment Inc. 6840 Humboldt Avenue North dba Van's Automotive Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 LIQUOR LICENSE OFF-SALE 3.2% Casey's Retail Company 2101 Freeway Boulevard 12/13/21 -2- DBA Casey's General Store Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Kabalan Co. 1505 69th Avenue North dba Pump N Munch Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 LIQUOR LICENSE ON-SALE INTOXICATING FLIK International Corp 6155 Earle Brown Drive Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Topgolf USA Brooklyn Center 6420 Camden Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 LIQUOR LICENSE ON-SALE INTOXICATING SUNDAY FLIK International Corp 6155 Earle Brown Drive Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Topgolf USA Brooklyn Center 6420 Camden Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 MECHANICAL ACI Plumbing LLC 6217 West Lake Street St. Louis Park, MN 55416 All Pride Plumbing 21930 Heidelberg Street Northeast Stacy MN, 55079 C P H Investment Co 19456 Ellington Trail dba Dryer Vent Wizard of St Paul Farmington, MN 55024 C & M Heating & Air 13862 Wintergreen Street Conditioning Inc. Andover, MN 55304 J-Berd Mechanical 1 Industrial Boulevard Sauk Rapids, MN 56379 Liberty Comfort Systems 627 East River Road Anoka, MN 55303 Recher HVAC 1125 Mississippi Drive North Champlin, MN 55316 SPI Mechanical LLC 1116 Lincoln Street Northeast Minneapolis, MN 55413 Three Rivers Mechanical 1147 5th Avenue Anoka, MN 55303 Weld & Sons Plumbing 3410 Kilmer Lane North Plymouth, MN 55441 Wencl Services 8148 Pillsbury Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55420 Wenzel Heating &A/C 4 145 Old Sibley Memorial Highway Eagan, MN 55112 A M Brothers 66th Avenue North Suite 5 dba Cloud Nine Smokeshop Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 AM PM Corner Market 6501 Humboldt Avenue North dba Winner Gas Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 12/13/21 -3- Diamond Lake 1994 LLC 3245 County Road No. 10 dba Cub Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Two Rivers Investment Inc. 840 Humboldt Avenue North dba Van's Automotive Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 RENTAL INITIAL (TYPE IV—six-month license) 1107 57th Avenue North Alexander Irwin/Irwin Properties 5245-47 Drew Avenue North Jesse Forsell INITIAL (TYPE II—two-year license) 1501 Amy Lane HP Minnesota I/Pathlight Management 6835 Colfax Avenue North HP Minnesota I/Pathlight Management 6807 Quail Avenue North Tai Pham RENEWAL (TYPE IV—six-month license) 3813 61 st Avenue North Dhaneshwarie Himrah 2208 69th Avenue North 3511 Fremont LLC 5606 Bryant Avenue North MNSF II WI LLC /Michael Atwood 3007 Ohenry Road IH3 Properties/Invitation Homes 3012 Thurber Road Angelique Papilla/Risen Home Care RENEWAL (TYPE III—one-year license) 6407 Orchard Avenue North HP Minnesota I/Pathlight Management RENEWAL (TYPE II—two-year license) 3349 49th Avenue North Isaac Obi 3213 62nd Avenue North Sara Brang RENEWAL (TYPE I—three-year license) 4220 Lakeside Avenue North Richard Arnston 3813 58th Avenue North Xian Lin/Prosperous Property 5351 71st Circle Ghulan Abbas Pyarali 1300 72nd Avenue North Marinela and Scott Selseth 3834 Oak Street Xian Lin/Prosperous Property 6c. APPROVE THE 2022 CITY COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE 6d. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-154 DESIGNATING POLLING PLACES FOR THE 2022 ELECTION 6e. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-155 SETTING SALARIES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2022 6f. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-156 APPROVING THE 2022 FEE SCHEDULE 12/13/21 -4- 6g. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-157 APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY PERSONNEL POLICY OFFICIALLY RECOGNIZING AND DESIGNATING THE NATIONAL HOLIDAY OF JUNETEENTH AS AN OFFICIAL CITY HOLIDAY 6h. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-158 PROVIDING FOR THE REDEMPTION OF CERTAIN OUTSTANDING GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 2013B OF THE CITY 6i. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-159 APPROVING CHANGE ORDERS 1 AND 2 AND ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED AND AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYMENT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2018-14, 2018 BRIDGE REHABILITATION PHASE 2 6j. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-160 AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A CONVEYANCE AND LEASE TERMINATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER AND THE MOUND CEMETERY ASSOCIATION OF BROOKLYN CENTER 6k. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-161 ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2021-22, CONNECTIONS II SHINGLE CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT 61. PUBLIC SAFETY ACT — PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT (LEAP) This item moved to 10a. 6m. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-162 ACCEPTING STREET IMPROVEMENTS FOR CONTINUAL MAINTENANCE FOR EASTBROOK ESTATES 2ND ADDITION 6n. EXTENSION OF CIVIL AND CRIMINAL LAW SERVICES RFP TIMELINE ONE YEAR 6o. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-163 APPROVING THE EXECUTION OF THE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT SUPERCEDED THE EXISTING AGREEMENT, FOR THE BROOKLYN BRIDGE ALLIANCE FOR YOUTH EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2022, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE DOCUMENT Motion passed unanimously. 7. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS/RECOGNITIONS/DONATIONS None. 12/13/21 -5- 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS 8a. ADOPTING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 12 OF THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCE REGARDING TENANT PROTECTIONS AND APPROVE A RESOLUTION TO ALLOW A SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF THE ORDINANCE City Manager Reggie Edwards introduced the item and invited Ms. Beekman to make the staff presentation. Community Development Director Meg Beekman stated this was the second reading and public hearing for an Ordinance that would protect tenants. The Twin Cities Metro Area is currently experiencing record low vacancy rates, which is driven by high demand for rental housing combined with unmet supply. There is a very significant housing shortage, and it is a national trend. Rent is climbing faster than incomes, there is increased interest from outside investors, landlords are in a position to be choosier about their tenants, and there has been a reduction in the number of landlords accepting Section 8 vouchers. The 2020 Census Report identified the cities with the lowest vacancy rates in the country and Minneapolis/St. Paul was the only large city in the top ten cities with the lowest vacancy rates. Ms. Beekman stated 37 percent of Brooklyn Center's housing stock is rental, which includes 829 properties and 4,340 units. Only about 8 percent of single-family properties are rented. Nearly all of it is considered naturally occurring affordable housing due to its age and condition. The average rent in Brooklyn Center is affordable at between 50 and 60 percent area median income (AMI). Nearly all of the rental housing in the City was constructed between 1961 and 1979 and are largely homogenous with one-and two-bedroom units. There are very few three-and four-bedroom units. Six percent of all housing units, or 17.1% of rental housing, are legally-binding affordable. Ms. Beekman noted the City has been conversing with residents and tenants in the community about rental housing. Many renters are on month-to-month leases,making their housing situations more tenuous. Tenants report frequent rent increases, meaning more than one increase per year. As earlier stated, rent and incomes are not increasing at the same rates. Capital improvements in buildings typically coincide with rent increases, so they see deferred maintenance in some cases. Tenants report concerns over retaliation, such as non-renewals or maintenance fee chargebacks, if they complain about maintenance issues. Furthermore, there is a lack of clarity on how to report maintenance complaints, which has been exacerbated due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and inconsistent parking policies resulting in towing. Lastly, residents have expressed concerns about safety and security. Ms. Beekman explained State law limits the authority of cities to regular private leases between landlords and tenants. In December 2018, the City adopted a Tenant Protection Ordinance that applies protections when a rental property sells to a new owner, provides a three-month advance notice before a new owner can make major changes to lease agreements or non-renew leases, and provides relocation assistance if the new owner chooses not to follow the notice period. In March 2020, the City began working on a housing policy work plan, which includes updating the rental licensing program to strengthen tenant protection. 12/13/21 -6- Ms. Beekman added the City began a citywide housing study in January 2021 with the Center for Urban and Regional Affairs (CURA) and Research in Action (RIA) on a citywide housing study. That work has completed its engagement phase, and the Housing Advisory Council is being reconvened to begin reviewing that work and identifying policy recommendations for the City. The housing study is anticipated to be completed in early 2022. The deliverables from the study will be used to complete a Housing Policy Action Plan to address the housing priorities in the city. Staff is anticipating moving forward with programs and policies based on the results of that study. Ms. Beekman stated as a result of extensive input from the community, Staff have been working with the City Attorney's Office to draft an ordinance relating to tenant protections. This ordinance was to include multiple areas of concern from tenants such as just cause non-renewal,pre-eviction notices, maintenance fees, damage deposits, material changes to the lease, and discrimination relating to public assistance status. Based on the current low vacancy rates and the urgency created by the phasing out of the Eviction Moratorium, staff thought it to be necessary to expedite portions of the ordinance relating specifically to items addressing evictions and non-renewals. Ms.Beekman explained the Ordinance presented that evening includes a pre-eviction filing notice, which requires a 30-day written notice before filing an eviction and allows for the parties to work out the issue. Once an eviction is filed on someone's record, it is more difficult for them to find housing in the future, and the proposed Ordinance would help to alleviate concern. Ms. Beekman stated the Ordinance also includes a just cause non-renewal,which establishes a just cause requirement to be met to prevent a property owner or property manager from non-renewing an existing tenant's lease. Just causes could be nonpayment of rent, material noncompliance, tenant non-renewal, occupancy by a family member of a property owner, building, demolishing, conversion,rehabilitation,renovation,complying with a government order to vacate,or occupancy dependent on employment. Ms. Beekman stated the Ordinance declares a waiver is not allowed by a tenant to waive their rights and allows for private enforcement, where a person harmed by an owner in violation of the Ordinance may bring action against the owner in District Court. Ms. Beekman explained the Ordinance did go to the Housing Commission, and the Housing Commission received feedback from multiple housing advocacy groups such as African Career, Education & Resource (ACER), Homeline, and the Housing Justice Center, as well as numerous Brooklyn Center tenants. It was strongly recommended by all agencies and tenants to expedite and approve the ordinance specifically relating to evictions and non-renewals. The Housing Commission unanimously approved a recommendation to approve the proposed Ordinance. . Ms. Beekman stated they have also received feedback from landlords. In regards to the eviction notice requirement,there would be more time where a landlord may or may not be collecting rent, landlords may increase income and credit score requirements if evictions are more difficult, and landlords will be quicker to provide notice of eviction rather than accepting late payments or working out payment plans. As for the just case non-renewal, it could increase evictions as non- renewals are often used instead of an eviction, and landlords may become stricter on minor lease 12/13/21 -7- infractions. An alternative solution offered was to require a 75-to 90-day notice for non-renewals instead of a 30-day notice. Ms. Beekman offered to answer any questions the Council may have. Mayor Elliott thanked Ms. Beekman for the presentation. He noted the heightened interest in the topic from the community, and the Council has not acted as quickly as they should have. It has been the work of many organizations and residents to create the Ordinance. Additionally, Ms. Beekman and the City Attorney have put a lot of work into the writing of the Ordinance. Councilmember Ryan stated he found some information from the Attorney General's Office on the topic of retaliation. Councilmember Ryan quoted a memorandum from the Attorney General, "A landlord may not evict a tenant or end a tenancy in retaliation for the tenant's "good faith" attempt to enforce the tenant's rights, nor can a landlord respond to such an attempt by raising the tenant's rent, cutting services, or otherwise adversely changing the rental terms. For instance, if a tenant has reported the landlord to a governmental agency for violating health, safety, housing, or building codes, the landlord cannot try to "get even" by evicting the tenant. If within 90 days of a tenant's action,the landlord starts an Eviction Action or gives the tenant a notice to vacate,the law presumes that the landlord is retaliating. It will then be up to the landlord to prove the eviction is not retaliatory. However, if the landlord's notice to vacate comes more than 90 days after a tenant exercises the tenant's rights, it will be up to the tenant to prove the eviction is retaliatory. These provisions also apply to oral rental agreements." Councilmember Ryan stated his concern is that the Council understands the implications of the Ordinance and the changes it could create. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she would like to defer comments until after the public comment period. Hearing no objections, Mayor Elliott opened the Public Hearing. Bob G. stated he owns and operates 86 rental units in Brooklyn Center, and his largest property is on Willow Lane. He explained he has spent his life providing reliable, safe, clean housing. He originally purchased a duplex at the University of Minnesota while he was in college, so he has been involved in renting for a long time. Bob G. explained he was asking the Council to vote against the Ordinance as there are other tenant protection ordinances and laws in place at other levels of government. Bob G. stated while he agrees with the idea of protecting tenants from scrupulous landlords, this Ordinance creates major loopholes for bad actors that will make housing in the community worse off Proving a just cause for a lease violation is next to impossible. He has had over 1000 tenants, but he has not had a just cause eviction, except for six or so nonpayment of rent as those is easy to prove. Bob G. asked the others to think of themselves as housing providers. It takes a lot of money, at least $200,000 or more, to create a single unit. There is a huge time and money investment in providing housing. Most of the time, a tenant will treat a property well. Every once in a while, a tenant will be disrespectful to the property,neighbors, or the community as a whole. He asked the Council to consider someone living in their home and being disrespectful to the property and the neighbors. For example, maybe a tenant is dealing drugs in the hallway, routinely harasses 12/13/21 -8- neighbors, or vandalizes other tenants' vehicles. There could be a boyfriend that shows up in the late hours to throw rocks at windows. Bob G. noted he has someone who canceled garbage service and kept six months' worth of garbage in their garage resulting in a mouse infestation for multiple units. Bob G. stated all of those scenarios are just cause violations. However, none are provable in a court of law. By being unable to manage certain people, it creates a negative environment for all renters. They should not make a wholly bad environment due to a few bad actors. Bob G. stated he has spent 33 years investing his time and money into providing safe, reliable, clean, affordable housing. If the City wants a cleaner, safer, more reliable, more affordable housing environment, then it is vital to receive input from housing providers. Making it more difficult for housing providers to provide housing will ultimately decrease housing availability. More vacancies would give much more power to tenants naturally. He asked the Council to oppose the Ordinance and offered to provide input to improve the Ordinance that will help the community. Fadumo M., Housing Organizer at ACER, explained she was there to share a story related to the lack of protection for non-renewals. During the pandemic, a friend of hers and a mother of nine did not have her lease renewed. She was unable to find a place for over a month. During that time, the woman and her nine children lived at their grandmother's one-bedroom apartment. Fadumo M. stated non-renewals are used to displace people silently, especially when there is not a reason for eviction and the landlord wants to make more money. Renters need an actual reason, other than profit, for why they are losing their homes. Fadumo M. added non-renewals have been especially devastating during the pandemic. For example, someone lived in a rental property for 11 years and was forced to move, risking their physical health. Some people are put into precarious month-to-month leases where they don't know what their future holds. Tenants should be given adequate notice before an eviction so they are not in danger of losing their housing stability. The notice helps the tenant and landlord to resolve issues. Fadumo M. noted she only shared a few of many stories of tenants in Brooklyn Center. Fadumo M. stated all of the feedback from landlords shared by Ms. Beekman was essentially retaliation. Landlords are saying they will retaliate by making it more difficult to access housing if the Ordinance passes. Fadumo M. pointed out it must be extremely difficult for tenants to make requests of their landlords. Randy stated he has been a resident of Brooklyn Center for about 50 years. He owned a condo previously and became a reluctant landlord. He explained the Ordinance would make people on both sides angrier and cause landlords to force people out long before they should. Landlords will say they have to do an eviction or non-renewal whether or not they want the tenant to leave because of the timing constraints and threat of the tenant claiming retaliation. It seems backward in trying to resolve issues and makes the process more difficult for everyone. There is the potential for people to get thrown out of housing for no reason. Lovetee P. stated she has experienced retaliation, non-renewals, evictions, and security issues. Some people live in her area that has been on month-to-month leases for three years. The tenants 12/13/21 -9- have asked for renewals multiple times, and they have wanted renewals even more due to the pandemic. The month-to-month leases were due to a previous landlord that instated the month-to- month leases for no reason. The tenants don't know what their futures will look like. Lovetee P. asked why landlords are evicting tenants when there is a huge amount of sick and jobless people. The country is going to crash. Eviction should not even be a concern, and people should be kept safe. If they give people more notice for evictions, it does not help the issue of eviction. Tenants are also applying for rental assistance and not being approved. The country is going through a crisis, and they should be talking about lease renewals rather than evictions and non-renewals. Lovetee P. added there are security issues at her residence, and there need to be cameras in the parking lot. There are additional expenses incurred when someone steals or tows a resident's car. For example, one of her neighbors with a handicapped parking pass had her car towed, and it took over 40 days to get it back. They even had to protest to have the vehicle returned. It is not right for landlords to evict residents for speaking up for what is right. Lovetee P. stated the Council needs to listen to her concerns. She asked how long it would take for something to change. Lovetee P. showed a notice she just received from her landlord notifying her of a rent increase. The landlords are using their words and actions against their tenants. If the City wants people to be safe and happy, they need to protect the rights of tenants. Lovetee P. explained the rent assistance is moving slowly, and they cannot request maintenance anymore in fear of retaliation. Leases should always be renewed unless the tenant wants to leave. People are resorting to shelters due to non-renewals and evictions. The issue is very serious. Cecil S., President, and CEO of the Minnesota Multi-Housing Association (MHA) stated his organization is opposed to the Ordinance. The policies are detrimental to the rental housing market of Brooklyn Center and should be rejected. The members of MHA, along with himself, are in the business of making homes for people. They take great pride in their work as it is meaningful and important. It is the best business practice to keep people housed. Evictions and other displacement are costly for the resident and the property owner. Therefore, evictions are rare. Minnesota has one of the lowest eviction rates in the country. The State has not reached its pre-pandemic eviction rate despite predictions that evictions would increase after the moratorium ended. Cecil S. stated the Ordinance is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. Problems need to be defined, and targeted solutions need to be identified to respond to those problems. MHA did not engage in the development of the Ordinance, which is remarkable considering it is an Ordinance that will regulate the housing industry in Brooklyn Center. The housing providers were not engaged meaningfully in the development of the Ordinance, and the Council does not understand the negative side effects and damaging potential. MHA urges the Council to fully engage with housing providers in the community to properly understand the implications of the potential regulations. Cecil S. suggested they look at the individual problems at the properties with problems instead of imposing a broad-sweeping policy. The City could offer specific tools and remedies to address 12/13/21 -10- the real issues,particularly those that already exist in State law and City Code. Cecil S. reiterated his opposition to the Ordinance. Erik F. stated the issue is very complex that requires complex solutions. He agrees that housing providers were not asked to provide input on the Ordinance. He works with Soderbergh Apartment Specialists, a company that owns and manages about 25 percent of the rental housing in Brooklyn Center. In speaking with Ms. Beekman and some Councilmembers, he learned the company's properties were not a source of complaints. Soderbergh Apartment Specialists take pride in the quality, safe housing at or below the 60 percent AMI. Erik F. stated the Ordinance is going to have drastic effects on the community, especially because housing providers were not consulted. He noted he sent a detailed email to the Council and could expand on it if need be. There are unintended consequences for the well-intended Ordinance. An eviction is a tool of last resort, and housing providers in his network are acutely aware of the damage eviction does. It is also difficult and expensive for property owners. Everyone would prefer to work out the issues apart from the eviction process. Erik F. explained he has multiple examples of situations where the Ordinance would have a negative effect. His tenants facing economic insecurity are usually in the situation due to something catastrophic, and a 30-day notice does not provide sufficient time to support a tenant through a catastrophe. The Ordinance creates a timing issue. The Ordinance ultimately deters housing providers from entering into negotiations because the risk of default gets pushed out. When there is more flexibility, housing providers are incentivized to work out an alternative solution. Erik F. noted Soderbergh Apartment Specialists have grace periods on their leases because they understand people do not always get paid on the first day of the month. However,if the Ordinance passes, they will have to reevaluate that policy. It is heartbreaking to hear from residents that are experiencing the consequences of poor owners. Erik F. explained he has a tenant who smokes marijuana very regularly, and they lost a great resident who lived next door to the tenant who smoked. The second tenant chose to move out because of marijuana use. Additionally,there is a single mother with a wonderful child who lives above the unit with the marijuana smoker that is trying to exit the lease because she does not believe the apartment is a safe environment. Under the proposed Ordinance, there are no tools to remedy the aforementioned situation. Erik F. reiterated his opposition to the Ordinance and suggested the City engage with property owners to develop a better solution. Nancy S. stated she has been on a month-to-month lease for about a year and a half. When she got home today, she saw her rent increase again. She stated all of her requests go ignored. They have given her an eviction notice twice before, but she explained she had nowhere to go so they worked something else out. She does not know why she is on a month-to-month lease. Nancy S. asked if the landlord has the right to increase her rent if she is on a month-to-month lease. Marie V. explained she lives at Georgetown Homes, and she agrees with previous speakers. The office of Georgetown Homes is always trying to increase the rent. They do not update the units, and everything is falling apart. Paying rent should allow them to live in a nice place. They do not 12/13/21 -11- have anywhere to go, so they are putting up with it. Additionally, they are afraid to speak up in fear of retaliation. If a tenant goes to the office, they respond with a non-renewal of lease or eviction. It is not right. Marie V. stated her unit is falling apart, and the carpet smells. She asked how long it will be before a change. She urged the Council to fight for them and speak for them. Tilee D.noted she lives in Georgetown. She stated people should have a longer notice for eviction. Housing providers should not retaliate against tenants with evictions. If the tenant is damaging the property or disrespecting the property, it is one thing. If someone is having financial difficulty or lost their job due to the pandemic, that is another thing. People that are unable to get on the rental assistance list are evicted. It is hard to find housing in the case of an eviction. Georgetown will give an eviction notice with only 30-days' notice, and that is not enough time to find proper housing. Tilee D. explained Minnesota housing depends on credit, and a majority of people do not have good enough credit to get a second place. If they do have good credit, it still takes a long time. If housing providers were in their shoes, they would treat them differently. The majority of people living in Georgetown Homes are black and African. Georgetown gets away with things they do to the Africans that they would not do to Americans. Foreigners do not like to retaliate or stand up because they are afraid and many foreigners do not know their rights so they hold back for the sake of peace. Tilee D. explained if she was evicted, she and her child would have nowhere to go because she does not have family in Minnesota. 30 days of notice is not sufficient time to find another place to live. It is not fair to use eviction as retaliation. Some people try their best to pay their rent, and some people have lost hours at their jobs. Tilee D. noted she is speaking on behalf of many people facing the same issues. She added shelter is not a safe alternative. Roger K. asked if he could address the Woodbine Street project. Mayor Elliott stated it was a public hearing related to the Tenant Protection Ordinance. He explained open forum, the opportunity to speak on any matter, was held earlier that night. Roger K. stated the letter he received stated there would be time to speak about the project during the meeting that evening. Mayor Elliott stated there would be time to speak about the project, but they are currently discussing the Tenant Protection Ordinance. Roger K. asked to speak after the Tenant Protection Ordinance discussion was completed. Mayor Elliott stated he could speak during the fourth public hearing. Cassandra B. stated those in disagreement with the Ordinance do not understand the feelings and perspectives of the renters. Some housing providers may run their properties differently than other landlords. Cassandra B. explained they have the right to care about the property, and they want the same respect. The 30-day notice for eviction does help a tenant because it allows the tenant to figure out what they need to do. Cassandra B. noted the opponents disagree with the Ordinance because it gives them less power. Currently, landlords have all of the power. Even the good tenants are being walked on by some landlords. Cassandra B. explained she cares about where she lives and her surroundings. She respects her neighbors and wants respect from her neighbors. She also respects people in the 12/13/21 -12- office. The eviction notices will help tenants and give them time to speak to the landlord. It is a process for property owners to file evictions. Tenants don't have great credit, and the evictions put them back even further. Cassandra B. stated they are still in a pandemic, and many people are still trying. Not all tenants can be put in the same basket. Similarly, there are good landlords and bad landlords. Tenants need to have a say in the happenings of where they live. She explained she is a good tenant, and the landlord does not respond to her concerns about the residence, such as people smoking marijuana. Instead,the landlord retaliates against people that want to live in a better environment. Tenants are giving their money, so they should have a say in what happens in the residences. Joy stated she has worked as a housing provider, and the Ordinance does not bind the property owner. Instead, the Ordinance allows tenants to take corrective action. Once an eviction is filed, it is on someone's record. Even if a tenant were to win their eviction case, it stays on their record. Evictions work against a tenant in the present and the future. The housing options become even more limited, and tenants have to find a landlord that will accept their evictions. Tenants do not feel like they can hold their property owners accountable for repairs or other maintenance because they have limited housing options. Joy recommended the attendees think about the proposed Ordinance from the perspective of tenants. The community should be supporting one another. Some people do not want to own a home, and that is okay. She asked how they foster positive relationships between property owners and tenants. Martina S. stated she lives at Georgetown. A few months ago, her neighbor had bed bugs. It was treated, but the landlord said it was not management's fault. The tenant with the original case of bed bugs had to pay for the treatment of all affected units. However,the management still charged Martina S. for bed bugs. Martina S. explained it was unfair. Another resident from Georgetown stated the policies are not working. People checked if there were bed bugs in his unit last April. His neighbor had bed bugs. Around that time, he left for military duty. When the neighbor's unit was cleaned,the bed bugs migrated to his unit. His fiancé had to take their kids to his parents' home. The previous manager acknowledged it was not his fault because it was cleaned. When the resident returned, he received bills for the bed bugs. If they keep saying he owes money for the bed bugs, he will take out a lawsuit against the management because the management cannot charge him for something he does not owe to them. The resident explained when he highlights problems, they retaliate. He stated management's treatment of tenants is highly racially influenced as there are a lot of people of color that live in Georgetown. It is an issue of racial equality. Brooklyn Center needs to improve its policies as they do not currently support the daily life of the residents. The City should take a holistic approach to improve housing conditions. Another example of the bad management at Georgetown is they told him he owes late rent. He showed them a receipt of the transaction but still had to pay additional money. 12/13/21 -13- Mayor Elliott thanked him for his comments and stated they are taking note of their concerns. The concerns are not new to the Council, and they are working on the issues. Housing is fundamental, and they will follow up on his comments. Beatrice A. stated she has lived at Georgetown Park since 2011. In recent years, the tenants have not been treated well. There have been cars stolen. If tenants go to the management and report a car is missing a part, the manager says it is not the property owner's fault. The tenant then is responsible to get it fixed. Her brother's car has been stolen twice, and the management did not provide a good answer. They had to replace the car with their own money, but they are still respectful to the office. Beatrice A. added the property owner wanted to create an extra parking space and had the tenants pay for it. When they billed her for the extra space, she said she did not ask for an extra parking space. It is the responsibility of the property owner to pay for their property. She stated her role is to pay her rent and keep her property clean. It is not right for the management to treat them that way as they are taking care of their property, but the management is not caring for the tenants' property at all. There were even lockdowns in the area at one point, and it was very scary. Beatrice A. stated for the money the tenants spend, especially on the parking cost, the property owners should repay them for costs incurred related to their cars. If tenants speak up for their rights, the owners will retaliate. Beatrice A. told the property managers if they want her to leave, then they should help pack up her belongings and find another place for her to go. The management doesn't care about the property of Africans, and they only care about their property. Jayme stated she lives in Victoria Townhomes and was speaking on behalf of several residents. She explained her brother Randall Smith was just murdered on the 17th. On the 18th, she received a letter from the property managers that they were not renewing her lease. They did not provide her with a reason why. In talking to other residents, 14 residents received non-renewals of their leases. Jayme noted she understands the concerns of the property owners that have spoken, but some good renters are being mistreated. If there are people that are mistreating property or smoking marijuana, they should not have their lease renewed. However, there are people like herself that are respectful, quiet tenants who are being put out. Jayme explained a lot of people at Victoria Townhomes have received COVID-19 assistance, and that is part of the reason why their leases are not being renewed. Additionally, sewers and tubs are backing up,the management doesn't keep the property clean,there are no screens on windows, and closet doors have fallen on children. Even if they are receiving COVID-19 assistance,renters should be able to live in a place that is safe and secure. She noted she has been working with ACER in the last few weeks. Jayme stated she received a 60-day notice, but the official notice didn't come for a couple of weeks after the 18th. She asked the City to protect the tenants that are not destroying property and for the City to speak to management to improve conditions. Jerry S. stated he strongly suggests the Council passes the Tenant Protection Ordinance. The landlords that oppose the Ordinance do not want to be regulated. If the Ordinance passes, the property owners will have to provide more reasoning before removing someone from their housing. Jerry S. explained he lives in a unit that was built in 1964. Almost every year,there has 12/13/21 -14- been a rent increase of around $100. The owners should have gotten enough profit by now. He asked the Council to pass the Ordinance. Mayor Elliott asked what Erik F.'s specific concerns with the Ordinance are. Erik F. thanked Mayor Elliott for the question and noted his appreciation for the dialogue. It is difficult to hear about the negative experiences of the tenants living in other properties, and it angers him to hear about how other landlords operate. The proposed Ordinance, however, does not address the concerns they have with their landlords. Erik F. stated his concern with the Ordinance is the unintended consequences. His business operates according to the rules, and they are highly regulated by City and State law. The residents that have spoken have not been represented byorganizations or advocates that can address their P p issues, but there are resources out there to assist them. The Ordinance does not address their concerns. Erik F. stated the issue with the Ordinance is timing. He prefers to settle things outside of court. When there are stricter regulations, it makes the process more difficult. The Ordinance will increase mental health concerns on both sides of the issue as it will make the process more frustrating. A side effect of the Ordinance will be increased evictions, which have a substantial impact on mental health. Erik F. explained all of the quality housing operators support protections for tenants. They want them to feel cared for and heard. The Ordinance creates problems that will have implications on residents and operators that are not facing issues currently. Most of the residents are wonderful people, and operators have great relationships with them. Unfortunately, the just cause non- renewal portion of the Ordinance makes it more difficult for the property owners to support their good tenants. It is very difficult to prove many of the just causes in the court of law outside of nonpayment. Erik F. stated there is a way to fulfill the goals of the Ordinance and address the concerns of the residents. The licensing policies in Brooklyn Center are some of the best in the country and provide a targeted approach to some of the bad property managers. Those can be used to remedy some of the issues. St. Louis Park and Minneapolis have notice provisions on an intent to file, and 30 days is the longest he has ever seen. Timing is a concern. Erik F. explained he would like to work with the City Council and Staff to create an ordinance that would help everybody. Mayor Elliott stated the Ordinance seems unnecessary for Erik F. because he works with his tenants. He noted not every tenant has the luxury of a landlord with similar practices. If they do nothing, it affects the tenants with a worse landlord. Erik F. noted he shares the Council's concerns regarding the landlords with predatory practices. However, the Ordinance itself will affect how all landlords operate. While the tenants of quality landlords are not currently experiencing problems, they will begin to experience issues if the Ordinance passes. The 30-day notice provision would be very cumbersome for the grace periods that work around people's pay days and finances. Erik F. stated they would typically call a tenant to address those issues, but the Ordinance may force landlords to file a notice to get the long 12/13/21 -15- process started in the case that issues cannot be resolved. There are tools already in place to protect the residents that have been commenting, and the Ordinance in question may have negative broad- reaching impacts on the whole community. Mayor Elliott stated if someone fell behind on their rent, the Ordinance would be enacted to give the tenant notice. Although they wouldn't be required to, the landlords may send a notice after a missed payment. Mayor Elliott asked how that would be detrimental to the tenant. Bob G. asked to speak to that question. Mayor Elliott asked if Bob G. was with Erik F. Bob G. stated he was not with Erik F. and explained he is a landlord himself, so he has an answer to the question. Mayor Elliott asked to hear from Erik F. Erik F. stated the notice of intent to file is alarming. It would discourage landlords from entering into an extended payment plan because the provisions are so long. The landlord would have to file a 30-day notice or hold stricter to their existing guidelines. As earlier stated, most of the tenants that are falling behind on rent are in the position because of something catastrophic. That catastrophe will not be remedied in 30 days, so it puts an undue burden on landlords when the payments require an extremely long window of notice. If the payment isn't completed in the window, the landlord would have to file another notice, which pushes the process out another 45 to 60 days, or they don't enter into a payment agreement because it would be difficult for the parties. He noted that is a hypothetical scenario. Erik F. noted in St. Louis Park, the 7-day notice encourages landlords to work with the tenants because there is the ability to move quickly. Most of the time, the issues are settled outside of evictions. However,defaulting on a payment or moving out with money owed affects future rental verification processes. Eviction is not the only harm to come out of the process,and most landlords would prefer to avoid the eviction process. An agreement between parties would not negatively affect a tenant down the line. Erik F. suggested a longer notice period of non-renewal such as 75- or 90-day which accommodates time for the tenant to find housing. He added he does not know any landlords who would like to remove a good tenant. Mayor Elliott asked if Erik F. would prefer a non-renewal notice period. Erik F. confirmed he would prefer a 75-or 90-day notice period instead of a just cause for non-renewal. It accomplishes some of the goals such as 30 days being a short time for someone to find alternative housing. When there is a just cause situation, it is difficult to prove and disrupts other residents in the process. Bob G. stated one of the most common issues is the nonpayment of rent. His tenants know rent is due on the first day of the month. They send out a letter reminding people rent is past due on the seventh day of the month asking them to pay. On the fifteenth, they send out a letter telling the tenant to enter into a payment plan within three days or the landlord will file an eviction notice. That gets to the seventeenth of the month. If they spend time working out a payment plan, that may take them through the end of the month. If there is still no payment of rent, it would then be 12/13/21 -16- time for the landlord to file for notice of eviction. With the 30-day notice requirement,the landlord would be out two months of rent before they can start the eviction process. Bob G. stated the Ordinance, on the other hand,would encourage property owners to file for notice of eviction on the second day of nonpayment because there would be at least 30 days before the eviction process. Bob G. explained he sees renters that normally don't pay until the 3rd, 4th, or 5th of the month. Those tenants may receive eviction notices which cause undue stress on multiple parties. Bob G. stated he has given a five-day grace period for his entire career,but the Ordinance forces sooner and sooner notices. Bob G. stated he has never evicted a tenant within 30 days of the 1st of the month, and it seems impossible with all of the steps involved. The Ordinance will create a lot more notices for eviction. He explained he does not want to send out notices, and his tenants do not want to receive notices. Samuel S., an Attorney and Research Director with Homeline, explained Homeline provides free, confidential legal advice to tenants through their hotline. He noted Homeline supports the Ordinance. The pre-eviction notice will help them remain in their homes by allowing them to address the underlying process. Alternatively, it allows the tenant to seek legal advice about how to protect their housing. It is good for both tenants and landlords and will result in fewer eviction processes, saving everyone time. Samuel S. stated the 30-day notice period would not speed up the eviction process. While landlords may have to give notice a few days earlier, but tenants would rather receive a notice a few days earlier if it provides them an additional 30 days to handle the eviction. Homeline has not looked at the specifics for Brooklyn Center, but it has for Minneapolis. In Minneapolis, the vast majority of evictions are filed within 30 days, so it will not speed up evictions. Samuel S. explained the notice will not affect landlords that are already working with their tenants. Samuel S. stated the just cause for non-renewal will help people to stay in their homes. Tenants have expressed a strong fear of retaliation. Minnesota does prevent retaliatory notices to vacate, but proving the notice is retaliatory falls on the tenant. One landlord mentioned it is difficult to prove a tenant is smoking marijuana. Similarly, it is difficult for a tenant to prove a notice is retaliatory. The only way they can prove it is retaliatory is by forcing the eviction. If the court decides against them,they have less time to leave their housing. The Ordinance will help residents stay in their homes, stay in their homes longer, and allow them to assert their rights as tenants. Samuel S. added the COVID-19 protections have most ended, but the conditions caused by the pandemic have not ended. Agnes O., a representative with ACER, stated she was not a tenant, but she has rented in Brooklyn Center. She explained she favored the Ordinance. Some of the things mentioned by landlords seem retaliatory, as noted by Fadumo M. A landlord stated it was difficult to prove just cause with the example of the smell of marijuana or damages. Smoking recreational marijuana is illegal in Minnesota, so that should protect the landlord because the tenant is engaging in illegal activities. Similarly, damages are illegal. There is usually a recording of the unit before someone rents it, so it would be easy to prove if there were damages done by the tenant. 12/13/21 -17- Agnes O. noted her agreement with Joy that evictions have a devastating impact on tenants. A history of evictions make it difficult to rent in the future and forces individuals into subpar housing. The landlords that have expressed concerns for residents should also be concerned about evictions. The landlords also mentioned evictions are rare. If that is true,then the Ordinance wouldn't impact landlords very much. Agnes O. added there were comments about existing laws that could allegedly do the same thing as the Ordinance or provide protections for the concerns brought up by tenants. She asked what those specific laws were. Mayor Elliott thanked the commenters for sharing. Mayor Elliott moved and Councilmember Butler seconded to close the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. Mayor Elliott stated the Council has heard a lot of testimony and asked if the Council had any questions or comments. Councilmember Butler thanked the commenters and those who have worked on the Ordinance. The Staff would not bring something to the Council without it being vetted. She stated she fully supports the Ordinance. Mayor Elliott stated City Attorney Troy Gilchrist could comment on the discussion and what the provisions allow for. Mr. Gilchrist stated they have heard from people on both sides of the issue. Over the months,they have heard from several tenants about their struggles. They originally started with a much broader ordinance, but they pared it down to address more specific issues. The City has worked with advocacy organizations to fine-tune the wording. Mr. Gilchrist explained the law on the topic is still developing, so there is a degree of uncertainty. It is up to the Council to decide what they would like to do considering the uncertainty. The Council can continue the matter to a future hearing to allow Staff the time to reach out to folks that felt they were not engaged as a part of the development process. While it may not change the approach or the Ordinance, that is an option. Mr. Gilchrist agreed with Councilmember Butler that the Ordinance would not be presented to the Council without a lot of work going into it. However, Staff can continue to gather information and revise the Ordinance as directed by the Council. Mayor Elliott asked if Mr. Gilchrist had any thoughts on if the 30-day notice would limit landlords. The Ordinance intends to create parameters for the landlords to protect the tenants. He asked if Mr. Gilchrist had any thoughts on the period. 12/13/21 -18- Mr. Gilchrist stated some of the commenters suggested the Ordinance would cause the landlords to file a notice earlier to get the 30-day process started before even reaching out to the tenants. That is not necessary from a legal perspective,and that would be a practice chosen by the landlords. They would be using the 30 days to work out a payment agreement with the notice in place. The Ordinance does not require landlords to file a notice before working on a payment agreement nor does it prohibit landlords from entering into a payment agreement with tenants. The landlord could try to come to an agreement with the tenant right away and later file the 30-day notice. Even if the 30-day notice was filed, later on, it would not preclude the parties from working out an agreement. Mayor Elliott thanked Mr. Gilchrist for his comments. Mayor Elliott stated he fully supports the Ordinance as it does a great deal of good to address a lot of the concerns the Council has heard from tenants. The Ordinance has been crafted in a way that provides flexibility to landlords to be able to evict tenants if there is a need to do so. Councilmember Ryan stated he was distressed to read the minutes of the Housing Commission meeting where they took public comment on October 19, 2021. The issues raised by tenants of a certain property disturbed and angered him. Some issues could be better addressed through a rental license ordinance. Additionally, the tenants were speaking about one property. The commenter who operates 25 percent of the units in the City had the fewest complaints against him. The landlords on the call pointed out they have not been engaged in the process. Councilmember Ryan noted his appreciation of Mr. Gilchrist's comments that there is not a legal requirement for landlords to issue notice on the second of the month. However,because of the 30- day notice provision, landlords will take a position to minimize their risk. In practicality, it is what operators will do. There was a suggestion that a better means for a non-renewal is to do a 75- or 90-day notice for the problematic tenants. Councilmember Ryan added the issue is very serious. When the City undertakes regulation, they must keep in mind the law is a blunt instrument. The Council has to be clear on ways a regulation may have unintended consequences and recognize that not everyone has been engaged in the development of the Ordinance. Councilmember Ryan stated he would like to see the matter continued but for it to still be handled expeditiously. He is concerned about the impact on all of their neighbors and renters. He wants renters to be treated fairly, and he wants the landlords to operate the properties effectively so they can guarantee the maximum amount of affordable housing. It is a practical matter, so he is advocating for an expeditious continuance. Councilmember Ryan moved for a continuance. Motion failed for lack of a second. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she is empathetic to the concerns of the tenants and noted she wants quality housing for all residents of Brooklyn Center. There are repeated bad situations and testimony from tenants of only a couple of properties. She asked what they can do from the licensing structure to remedy the issues and improve the expertise and the quality of housing providers in the City. 12/13/21 -19- Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson explained she would like to know about more potential unintended consequences before voting on the Ordinance. She suggested they have a work session with Homeline,MHA,the Minneapolis Realtors,ACER,and other apartment operators in the City. Everyone wants the same thing, which is good quality living conditions for everyone. She asked what the best way is to achieve those results. She noted she is not convinced the Ordinance is the best solution at the current time. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson would like to have a conversation with all stakeholders and all members of the Council present. Mayor Elliott stated two members of the Council commented the issues at hand could be addressed through licensing. He asked Ms. Beekman and Mr. Gilchrist if that has been considered or if it is viable. Ms. Beekman stated Staff has spent an enormous about of time working on the provisions after hearing from the community. Staff believes the proposed Ordinance is the most effective way to deal with the concerns. However, if there is more that the Council would like for Staff to consider, then they can do that. The concerns shared that evening is not new to Staff. Mr. Gilchrist noted his agreement with Ms. Beekman. The staff has put a lot of work into the Ordinance, but the Council is welcome to hear from more people on the matter. As mentioned by Councilmember Ryan, it is important to measure twice and cut once when it comes to the law. It is ultimately up to the Council on how they would like to proceed. Mayor Elliott stated, given the interest from the Council, it would be proper to continue the matter until January 24, 2022, which would allow Staff to speak with landlords and property owners and return with their comments. He asked Ms. Beekman if that would provide enough time for Staff. Ms. Beekman stated they can do outreach and think creatively about the Ordinance before then. Mayor Elliot asked Dr. Edwards if Councilmember Graves will be present that day. Dr. Edwards stated he did not know the answer to his question. Mayor Elliott asked Mr. Gilchrist if they needed to continue the discussion to a particular date. Mr. Gilchrist stated there is not a need to choose a certain date because the public hearing has been closed, and there is not a need to notice for a future hearing. If the idea is for Staff to reach out to property owners, then it would make more sense for it to be at the end of January or the beginning of February to allow time for outreach. Mayor Elliott stated there is a consensus of the Council to continue the discussion of the Ordinance amending Chapter 12 of the City ordinance regarding tenant protection to January 24, 2022, with a backup date of February 7, 2022. Councilmember Ryan thanked Mayor Elliott and members of the Council for their collaborative effort. He stated his mind is not closed on the Tenant Protection Ordinance. He merely heard contradictory testimony from people that are experts. His idea to go through licensing to protect tenants was specific to the properties with the majority of the complaints. The residents have shared terrible things that have been happening in Brooklyn Center due to low-quality housing operators. 12/13/21 -20- Mayor Elliott asked Staff to bring ideas back around issues, such as bad carpet, and if that could be addressed through licensing. The eviction issues cannot be addressed through licensing, but perhaps some of the other comments could be. Mayor Elliott noted his support of the Ordinance, and there are tenants in the meeting that will be hurting as a result of the Ordinance not passing at the time. The situation will be tenuous for another month or two, and it is especially difficult during the holiday season. He implored residents to ask questions of the Staff so the Council can act on the Ordinance at a future meeting. It is incumbent for the City Council to address the issues at hand. Mayor Elliott asked members of the Council if they needed further information from Staff to aid in their decision-making process. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson agreed the Council needs to solve the problems at hand. She explained the Council is doing the best they can to solve the issues they have in the very best way. If possible, she would like a work session to include organizations and other stakeholders to engage in a thorough conversation. A work session could help everyone to get on the same page. She noted she would be prepared to vote on the Ordinance once there was a complete conversation in- person rather than emails back and forth. That way they can address any unintended consequences and answer more questions. Hearing no objections, Mayor Elliott directed Staff to schedule a Work Session regarding the Tenant Protection Ordinance. Dr. Edwards noted there is not a regular meeting on February 7, 20202. Instead, the first regular meeting in February is February 14, 2022. He asked if the Work Session would be before January 24, 2022. Mayor Elliott confirmed the Work Session would be before January 24, 2022. Dr. Edwards stated Staff would find a date for a Work Session. Discussion of Remaining Agenda Items Councilmember Butler stated it is 9:50 p.m. and asked what else on the agenda is necessary. She stated she was tired, and they have consistently been going late on Mondays. Mayor Elliott asked Staff what was necessary throughout the rest of the agenda. Dr. Edwards stated there are public hearings that have been noticed, and there are time-sensitive matters that need to be addressed. Mayor Elliott asked which departments are involved. Dr. Edwards stated there is a presentation on tax increment financing (TIF) which is time-sensitive. He stated they can come back to the item on events at another time. The presentation on transportation is time-sensitive because of the special assessment. Ms. Beekman agreed the special events ordinance is not time-sensitive. It has been noticed, however, so she would defer to the City Attorney. Ms. Beekman suggested they continue that item. The TIF plan is time-sensitive, as is the business center topic because there's a State time limit on that item. 12/13/21 -21- Dr. Edwards stated the Woodbine item was also on the agenda. City Engineer Mike Albers stated the Woodbine discussion can be continued to the January 10 meeting so they will be able to have the certified assessments in place before looking at the next steps in the process at the end of January. Dr. Edwards asked if that would affect anyone's abilities to do partial payments. Mr. Albers stated it would not affect anyone's abilities to do partial payments. They just need to complete certified assessments before moving on to the next steps. Mayor Elliott asked Mr. Gilchrist if they have to open the public hearing on the special events ordinance or if it could be continued. He also asked if they needed to select a particular date to continue it too. Mr. Gilchrist stated they could continue the topic,but it would have to be continued to a certain date. Mayor Elliott asked Staff if there was a specific date they needed to complete the item. Ms. Beekman and Dr. Edwards stated they did not have a specific date in mind. Ms. Beekman suggested they move the special events ordinance to the January 10, 2022 meeting. Mayor Elliott moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to continue Item 8b, Approving an Ordinance Amending Chapter 23 to Allow and Regulate Special Events and Approve a Resolution to Allow a Summary Publication of the Ordinance, and Item 8d, Resolution Certifying Special Assessments for Improvement Project No.2022-01, Woodbine Area Street Improvements to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls, to the January 10, 2022 meeting. Motion passed unanimously. 8b. APPROVING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 23 TO ALLOW AND REGULATE SPECIAL EVENTS AND APPROVE A RESOLUTION TO ALLOW A SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF THE ORDINANCE This item was continued to the January 10, 2022 meeting. Continued Discussion of Remaining Agenda Items Mayor Elliott asked if they needed to act on item 10b. Resolution Approving an Amendment to the City Manager's Agreement,that instead of the city providing a vehicle for use by the Manager, the Manager will receive an annual car allowance for$6,000 annually. Dr.Edwards stated it would not take much time, but they could also move it to a later date. Mayor Elliott stated they could get that done quickly that evening. Extension of the Rules Mayor Elliott moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to allow the meeting to extend beyond 10:00 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. 12/13/21 -22- 8c. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-164 APPROVING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 9 Dr. Edwards introduced the item and asked Ms. Beekman to make the presentation. Ms. Beekman stated Aeon has made an application and received approval from the City, to construct a 49-unit addition to their existing multi-family property at 6221 Shingle Creek Parkway, known as the Crest. As part of the project,Aeon intends to renovate the existing units and building, construct an addition to the building, and complete certain site and parking lot improvements. Ms. Beekman explained City Council has approved the land use request, as well as the use of conduit bonding,which will be used as the primary mechanism to finance the project. The Council originally reviewed the plan at April 26, 2021, Concept Plan Review work session. At their April 26, 2021 meeting, the City Council discussed a concept plan submitted by Aeon. One of the questions asked by Aeon at that meeting was about the use of tax increment financing funding to achieve more deeply affordable units in the project. The Council indicated their support of the use of up to $1,400,000 in TIF to achieve a reduction in the average rents for the project. Ms.Beekman stated Aeon is now requesting the establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 9, the use of increment generated by the district to support the project, and the proposed rent structure. The use of TIF would allow additional three-bedroom units to be provided at a more deeply affordable rate. She noted a table detailing the rent structure for the project included in the meeting packet. Ms. Beekman stated, based on the final financial analysis, Aeon is requesting up to $1,100,000 in tax increment financing from the City to achieve the project rents. It is anticipated that the TIF note would be paid within 15 years. The District is set up to begin in 2024 and may be open for up to 26 years. The Council may choose to close the District once the TIF note is paid, or may opt to keep it open. One hundred percent of any excess increment collected, once the TIF note is paid, would be collected by the City and must be used to support the preservation or creation of affordable housing units. Ms. Beekman explained it is estimated that the district would collect a total of$6,833,786 during its 26-year collection period. The City Council is being asked to approve the establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 9 and approve a Tax Increment Financing Plan for the district. Once the District is established and the plan approved, the Brooklyn Center Economic Development Authority will be asked to approve a TIF Assistance Plan between the EDA and the developer, which outlines the conditions for the use of the increment. Ms. Beekman offered to answer any questions on the proposal. Mayor Elliott moved and Councilmember Ryanopenthehearing. seconded to public Y Y Motion passed unanimously. No one appeared to comment. 12/13/21 -23- Mayor Elliott moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to close the public hearing. Motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Ryan asked Mr. Gilchrist if they could act on the TIF and have an Economic Development Authority meeting to work out the details. Mr. Gilchrist stated Ms. Beekman would be in a better position to answer the question. Ms. Beekman stated the Council has to approve the Resolution, and the EDA has the opportunity to ask questions during the EDA meeting. Councilmember Ryan thanked her for the clarification. Councilmember Ryan moved and Mayor Elliott seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2021-164 approving a modification to the Redevelopment Plan for a Housing Development and Redevelopment Project No. 1, establishing Tax Increment Financing District No. 9 therein and approving a Tax Increment Financing Plan, therefore. Motion passed unanimously. 8d. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO.2022-01,WOODBINE AREA STREET IMPROVEMENTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS This item was continued to the January 10, 2022 meeting. 9. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS 9a. PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO.2021-006,FOR THE REZONING AND ESTABLISHMENT OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO ALLOW FOR AN APPROXIMATELY 64,000-SQUARE FOOT MIXED OFFICE/LIGHT INDUSTRIAL BUILDING AND RELATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS (6440 JAMES CIRCLE NORTH) Dr. Edwards introduced the topic and invited Ms. Beekman to continue on the topic. Ms. Beekman stated Planner and Zoning Administrator Ginny McIntosh would be making the presentation. Mayor Elliott asked if the matter was time-sensitive. Ms. Beekman stated there was a State statutory requirement for timing on the topic. Ms. McIntosh stated the request at hand includes a site and building plan, rezoning, and planned unit development (PUD). The subject property was formerly home to the AMF Earle Brown Lanes, which was closed in 2015. The applicant McGlynn Partners LLC is requesting review and consideration of a proposal to redevelop the former AMF Earle Brown Lanes property, located at 6440 James Circle North,to an approximately 64,000-square foot mixed office and light industrial building with related site improvements on an approximately 4.03-acre site. 12/13/21 -24- Ms. McIntosh explained the building was originally built in 1978 for a bowling alley. Before that, it had been zoned as an industrial park. The building and site subsequently sat vacant until 2017, when the property was purchased by Tashitaa Tufaa, ODAA Center LLC. While the Property Owner successfully brought through a request for issuance of a Special Use Permit in 2018 to operate an event center with an ancillary restaurant and bar and requested a re-issuance of the permit in 2019 to allow additional time to initiate the project,the plans were never realized within the appropriate time frame yet again. The permit subsequently expired in January 2020. Ms. McIntosh noted the property owner kept City Staff up-to-date and discussed potential redevelopment opportunities for the subject property as they came up. However, it was not until this past year when a relationship was formed between the property owner, McGlynn Partners LLC,and Endeavor Development,and the new proposal was created. A concept review ultimately went before City Council on May 24, 2021, for the proposed approximately 64,000-square foot mixed office and light industrial building. Based on the feedback provided, the applicant applied for review and consideration under Planning Commission Application No. 2021-006. Ms. McIntosh showed photos of the current conditions of the site. She noted the site in question is near a site owned by the EDA. She added the City is undertaking a major update to the Zoning Code to ultimately align with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The City's 2040 Comprehensive Plan guides the Subject Property as "Business Mixed-Use", meaning it would encourage redevelopment or development of commercial, office, general business, and light industrial uses. Ms. McIntosh noted a PUD allows for flexibility in the Zoning Code for developments that would not be allowed under existing regulations. They are used to achieve high-quality development or to achieve other City goals in exchange for zoning flexibility. As the request by the applicant includes a request to re-zone the Subject Property from C-2 (commerce) District to Planned Unit Development-Neighborhood/Business Mixed-Use (PUD/BM-U) District, City Code dictates that the City Zoning Ordinance be amended to reflect the rezoning. The City's 2040 Comprehensive Plan guides the Subject Property as "Business Mixed-Use" and would therefore not require an amendment. Ms. McIntosh showed a site and building plan submitted by the applicant with an entirely new building. City Staff reviewed the setback requirements based on the current zoning and the potential new zoning. The proposal would meet the minimum green strip requirement and parking numbers. As for the building materials, the proposal indicates use composed primarily of precast concrete and glazing. With that said, City Staff has requested the submitted plan set be revised to provide enhanced architectural features and address screening concerns. They are looking for four-sided architecture, additional glazing and design elements, enhancements around the entrances, and the installation of fencing along the rear property line to provide screening. Ms. McIntosh added the proposal identifies five curb cuts. City Staff requested the removal of the proposed new curb cut off Freeway Boulevard as both ends of James Circle North are full access but uncontrolled. City Staff does not anticipate traffic lights will be installed on either end of James Circle North. Additionally,James Circle North provides direct access to Interstates 94,694, 100,and 252. Submitted plans meet drive aisle and parking space dimensional requirements. City 12/13/21 -25- Staff looked at newer speculative developments in Maple Grove and Brooklyn Park in determining overall parking needs and requirements. Ms. McIntosh stated City Staff is requesting that as part of any approval, distribution facilities would be prohibited as a use, except for cases where it is an accessory use and then only when it occurs from a manufacturing facility or warehouse where a product is made or packaged on-site. City Staff also requested diagrams be provided showing turn radius for large trucks such as dump trucks or semi-trucks. In looking at parking, City Staff looked at the number of offices and warehouse spaces. There is a different amount of required stalls depending on the eventual building use, but City Staff is not currently concerned with the parking requirements. Ms. McIntosh showed a slide of a diagram with parking spots and curb cuts. Ms. McIntosh stated a photometric was provided, which generally indicated compliance with City Zoning Code and lighting requirements, except the cast portion fronting along with Quality Inn. It was requested the applicant review opportunities for pedestrian level lighting at the requested sidewalk connection between Freeway Boulevard and the west parking area. All lighting shall be concentrated downward and shall be cohesive in color and complementary to the building. Ms. McIntosh stated a new trash enclosure is indicated, but it did not provide clear detail. Applicant should provide updated details pending any approval and confirmation of proposed tenants and needs for trash and recycling. All ground-mounted or roof-mounted equipment shall still be screened for Code requirements. Also, one of the conditions of approval is that no outside storage or display of materials, equipment, or products accessory and necessary principal and permitted use to be allowed. The proposed landscaping would meet and exceed requirements,and no signage was included in the proposal. Ms. McIntosh noted the Assistant City Engineer, other City Staff, and other agencies reviewed the proposal. As there are nearby busses for public transportation, it was requested to include pedestrian paths and bike racks. The Assistant City Engineer requested a realignment of one of the entrances to align with a neighboring property and a detailed tracking movement diagram. Certain permits and a watershed plan would be required. There is a stormwater pond on the property, and there is a requirement for a Utility Facilities Easement Agreement and Construction Management Plan and Agreement to be submitted. The Fire Inspector and Building Official stated the application would have to incur a sewer access charge as designated by the Council, comply with Minnesota accessibility code, and comply with the 2020 Minnesota fire and building code requirements. Ms.McIntosh added a public hearing notice was published in the newspaper on November 4,2021, and mail notifications were sent out to properties, both taxpayer and occupants, in the vicinity. To date, the Staff has not received any public comments. A City sign was installed on the property along Freeway Boulevard and the west portion of James Circle North noting that a development proposal was under review and to contact the City with any questions. Ms. McIntosh noted the Planning Commission held a public hearing for the aforementioned application at their meeting on November 18, 2021, and the Commission was generally supportive of the proposed improvements to the subject property. The Commissioners asked several 12/13/21 -26- questions about previous attempts to redevelop the property into an event center, appropriate fire access, and City Staff requests to prohibit distribution facilities as a primary use. Ms. McIntosh stated no public comments were received either in advance of or at the public hearing, although two members of the public were in attendance, including a representative of neighboring CES Imaging, located at 1701 James Circle North, who had a general interest in the development proposal but no immediate concerns or questions. Representatives of the applicant, including Endeavor Development, who is co-developing the project with applicant McGlynn Partners LLC, were present and provided background on the proposal, the market need for this type of development in Brooklyn Center and across the Twin Cities,and their company. Following the close of the public hearing,the Planning Commission elected to unanimously recommend City Council approval of the requested site and building plan, rezoning, and establishment of a Planned Unit Development. Ms. McIntosh stated the request by the applicant includes a request to re-zone the Subject Property from C-2 District to Planned Unit Development-Neighborhood/Business Mixed-Use (PUD/BM- U) District, City Code dictates that the City Zoning Ordinance be amended to reflect the rezoning. Should the City Council proceed with the rezoning, a motion to approve the first reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 35 of the Zoning Code of Ordinances regarding the Subject Property located at 6440 James Circle North would be needed. Following the motion, a second reading and public hearing would be scheduled for January 10, 2022. Ms. McIntosh offered to answer any questions. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson thanked Ms. McIntosh for her thorough presentation. Mayor Elliott moved and Councilmember Butler seconded to adopt a RESOLUTION No. 2021- 165 approving Planning Commission Application No. 2021-006 for approval of a site and building plan, rezoning, and establishment of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the Subject Property located at 6440 James Circle North based on the findings of fact and submitted plans, and as amended by the conditions of approval in the resolution. Motion passed unanimously. Mayor Elliott moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to approve the first reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 35 of the Zoning Code of Ordinances regarding the zoning classification of the Subject Property located at 6440 James Circle North and set the second reading and public hearing for January 10, 2022. Motion passed unanimously. 10. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS 10a. RESOLUTION APPROVING ALLOCATION OF AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT FUNDS This item was removed upon adoption of the agenda. 12/13/21 -27- 10a. RESOLUTION NO. 166 APPROVING AND RATIFYING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH THE LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTION PARTNERSHIP INC. Mayor Elliott noted Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson had questions on the service contract with LEAP. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked Dr. Edwards if the item was in the 2022 budget they recently approved. Dr. Edwards confirmed the$150,000 for the Implementation Committee could be used for professional service contracts such as the one with LEAP. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked who negotiates the contracts. Dr.Edwards stated Staff reviews and negotiates all contracts. The Implementation Committee may review and negotiate future professional service contracts through the Mayor. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she wants to be certain the contracts going through the Implementation Committee are also reviewed by Staff and legal personnel before being presented to the Council. She noted the Implementation Committee is different than other commissions as the other commissions do not have chairpersons that already work with contracts. She explained there needs to be checks and balances in place. Dr. Edwards stated that will be the practice in working with the Implementation Committee. Mayor Elliott moved and Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson seconded to approve a professional service agreement with Law Enforcement Action Partnership (LEAP) to assist the Public Safety Act Implementation Committee. Mayor Elliott moved and Councilmember Butler seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2021- 166 approving and ratifying a professional services agreement with the law enforcement action partnership, Inc.- Councilmember Ryan voted against the same. Motion passed 3-1. 10b. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-167 APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY MANAGER'S AGREEMENT THAT IN LIEU OF THE CITY PROVIDING A VEHICLE FOR USE BY THE MANAGER,THE MANAGER WILL RECEIVE AN ANNUAL CAR ALLOWANCE FOR$6,000 ANNUALLY Dr. Edwards stated Staff decided providing a vehicle to the City Manager is not in the best interest of the City. Dr. Edwards noted Acting Finance Director Andy Splinter was at the meeting to provide more information as needed. Providing a vehicle for the City Manager to use would create more costly taxes for the City, the garage maintenance would be tenuous, and having human resources track the mileage would be extremely inefficient. Instead, it is more efficient to provide an annual car allowance,as included in the budget for previous City Managers. Mr. Splinter added he discussed the topic with Dr. Edwards when it was approved, and the driving of the car between work and home would add an enormous about of tax to both Dr. Edwards and the City. Mayor Elliott asked if they were voting on an annual car allowance instead of providing a vehicle 12/13/21 -28- for the City Manager's use. Mr. Splinter confirmed that was the Resolution in question. He noted the amount of money was the same as in previous contracts. Mayor Elliott moved and Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2021-167 approving an amendment to the City Manager's employment agreement. Motion passed unanimously. 11. COUNCIL REPORT None. 12. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Elliott moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded adjournment of the City Council meeting at 10:33 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) ss. Certification of Minutes CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER) The undersigned,being the duly qualified and appointed City Clerk of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, certifies: 1. That attached hereto is a full, true, and complete transcript of the minutes of a Regular Session of the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center held on December 13, 2021. 2. That said meeting was held pursuant to due call and notice thereof and was duly held at Brooklyn Center City Hall. 3. That the City Council adopted said minutes at its January 10, 2022, Regular Session. City Clerk Mayor 12/13/21 -29-