The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2020 08-10 CCPCouncil Study Session V I RT UA L meeting being conducted by electronic means in accordance with Minnesota S tatutes, section 13D.021 P ublic portion available for connection https://zoom.us/j/96610478372? pwd=eF J mMkprMkNV V mF2S kN0YnJ MMFlF Zz09 A ugust 10, 2020 AGE NDA 1.City Council Discussion of Agenda Items and Questions - 6 p.m. 2.M iscellaneous 3.Discussion of Work S ession Agenda Item as T ime P ermits 4.Adjourn C IT Y C O UNC IL M E E T I NG V I RT UA L meeting being conducted by electronic means in accordance with Minnesota S tatutes, section 13D.021 P ublic portion available for connection https://zoom.us/j/96610478372? pwd=eF J mMkprMkNV VmF 2SkN0YnJ MMF lF Z z09 A ugust 10, 2020 AGE NDA Meeting M ute Testing: The host will place all attendees on mute and ask that all attendees unmute themselves be fore starting the meeting. 1.Informal Open F orum with City Council - 6:45 p.m. Provides an opportunity for the public to address the Counc il on items which are not on the agenda. Open Forum will be limited to 15 minutes, it is not televised, and it may not be used to make personal attac ks, to air personality grievanc es, to make politic al endorsements, or for political c ampaign purposes. C ounc il Members will not enter into a dialogue with presenter. Questions from the Council will be for clarific ation only. Open Forum will not be used as a time for problem solving or reacting to the c omments made but, rather, for hearing the presenter for informational purposes only. I will first call on those who notified the Clerk that they would like to speak during open forum, and then I will ask if anyone else connec ted to this meeting would like to speak. W hen I do, please indic ate your name and then proc eed when I call on you. P lease be sure to state your name and address before speaking. 2.Invocation - 7 p.m. - Ryan 3.C all to Order Regular Business M eeting This meeting is being c onduc ted electronically under Minnesota Statutes, section 13D .021 due to the pandemic. For those who are connec ted to this meeting, please keep your mic rophone muted. I f there is an opportunity for public comment, y ou may unmute and speak when called upon. P lease do not talk over others and anyone being disruptive may to ejec ted from the meeting. The packet for this meeting is on the C ity's website, whic h is linked on the c alendar or can be found on "C ity Council" page. 4.Roll Call 5.P ledge of Allegiance 6.Approval of Agenda and C onsent Agenda The following items are c onsidered to be routine by the C ity Council and will be enac ted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a C ounc ilmember so requests, in whic h event the item will be removed from the c onsent agenda and c onsidered at the end of C ounc il Consideration I tems. a.A pproval of Minutes - Motion to approve minutes for the following meetings: July 20 - Work Sessi on wi th Financial Commi ssion July 22 - Work Sessi on July 27 - Study Session July 27 - Regular Sessi on b.A pproval of L icenses - Motion to approve licenses as presented. c.Resolution Declaring a P ublic Nuisance and Ordering the Removal of D ead Trees at C ertain Properties in Brooklyn Center, MN -Moti on to approve a resol ution Declaring a Public Nuisance and Ordering the Removal of Diseased Trees at Certain Properti es in Brooklyn Center, MN 7.P resentations/P roclamations/Recognitions/D onations 8.P ublic Hearings The public hearing on this matter is now open. I will first call on those who notified the C lerk that they would like to speak to this matter, then I will ask if any one else on this meeting would like to speak during this hearing. W hen I do, please indic ate your name and then proceed when I call on you. Please be sure to state your name and address before speaking. 9.P lanning C ommission Items 10.C ouncil Consideration Items 11.C ouncil Report 12.Adjournment C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:8 /10/2 0 2 0 TO :C ity Council F R O M:C ur t Boganey, C ity M anager T H R O U G H :D r. Reggie Edw ards , D eputy C ity M anager BY:Barb S uciu, City Clerk S U B J E C T:A pprov al of M inutes B ackground: I n accordance w ith Minnes ota S tate S tatute 1 5 .17, the official records of all mee4 ngs mus t be documented and approved by the gov erning body. B udget I ssues: -None. S trate gic Priories and Values: O pera4 onal E xcellence AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip4on Upload D ate Ty pe 7-20 Work S es s ion 8/6/2020 Backup M aterial 7-22 Works es s ion 8/5/2020 Backup M aterial 7-27 S tudy S es s ion 8/6/2020 Backup M aterial 7-27 Regular S es s ion 8/6/2020 Backup M aterial MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL/FINANCIAL COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND STATE OF MINNESOTA JOINT WORK SESSION JULY 20, 2020 CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council/Financial Commission Joint Work Session was called to order by Mayor Elliott at 6:30 p.m. The meeting was conducted via Webex. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There was a motion by Councilmember Ryan and seconded by Councilmember Butler to approve the agenda as submitted. The motion passed. OVERVIEW/INTRODUCTIONS Mayor Elliott welcomed the City Council and Financial Commissioners who joined the meeting. He added tonight’s meeting is to review the Capital Improvement Plan for 2021-2025. He noted this year’s budget process is incredibly important due to current economic challenges caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Present were Mayor Mike Elliott and Councilmembers Marquita Butler, April Graves, Kris Lawrence-Anderson and Dan Ryan. Also present were Financial Commissioners David Dwapu, Dean Van Der Werf, and Emanuel Kpaleh. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Finance Director Mark Ebensteiner, Assistance Finance Director Andrew Splinter, Doran Cote, Public Works Director, and City Clerk Barb Suciu. Mayor Mike Elliott called for introductions from those who have joined the meeting. Councilmember Ryan stated he has served on the City Council since 2007. He added he is a 45-year resident of the City of Brooklyn Center. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she has served on the City Council since 2013. She added she and her husband and two children have lived in Brooklyn Center since 1987. She welcomed the new Financial Commissioner. Councilmember April Graves stated she has served on the City Council since 2015. She added she has lived in Brooklyn Center since 2011. She noted she serves as the City Council Liaison to the Community & Recreation Services Department. Councilmember Butler stated she has served on the City Council for four years. She added she has lived in Brooklyn Center on and off for about 25 years and is a graduate of Brooklyn Center High School. She added she is the City Council Liaison to the Financial Commission and serves on the Brooklyn Bridge Alliance and the 252 Collaborative with other cities and leaders working on that project. 7/20/2020 Page 2 Commissioner Van der Werf stated he has served on the Financial Commission since 2012. He added he has been a resident of Brooklyn Center for 52 years. Commissioner Dwapu stated he has served on the Financial Commission since 2018. He added he has lived in Brooklyn Center for 12 years. Commissioner Kpaleh stated this is his first meeting with the Financial Commission. He added he has lived in Brooklyn Center since 2012. He noted he is an Accountant and has a lot of experience in Finance, and is happy to be joining the Financial Commission. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN 2021-2025 City Manager Curt Boganey stated this meeting is the first of the 2021-22 budget planning sessions. He added, as noted by Mayor Elliott, the upcoming fiscal year will be different from any that have been previously experienced. He noted tonight’s meeting will focus on the 15-year capital improvement plan and capital project budgets for the upcoming year, which are the foundations upon which the City operates. Mr. Boganey stated the global pandemic has caused some delay in the budget planning process. He added this is the first Brooklyn Center budget for new Finance Director Mark Ebensteiner. He welcomed Assistant Finance Director Andrew Splinter and Public Works Director Doran Cote. Public Works Director Doran Cote stated the Capital Improvement Plan is non-binding and intended to be fluid. He added priorities can change dramatically from year to year. He noted, ultimately, 2021 CIP projects will be incorporated into the budget, and approval of the budget. Mr. Cote highlighted Capital Improvement Projects in four categories: public utility projects including water tower, lift stations; street projects, including reconstruction and overlays; parks improvements, including trails, shelters and equipment; and capital maintenance building projects. He added a variety of funding sources include utility fees, special assessments, franchise fees and liquor operations. Mr. Cote stated proposed projects for 2021 include parks improvements, lift station improvements, and street improvements, including the Bass Lake Road corridor. He added stormwater improvements are planned, and Hennepin County has requested replacement of the signal at 65th Avenue, as well as a new turn lane at 63rd Avenue. He noted the public works shop will be updated and brought into OSHA compliance, and projects adjacent to the Opportunity Site will be delayed to 2022. Mr. Cote stated one of the big changes for 2021 is the Brooklyn Boulevard project. He added watermain replacement at Dupont Avenue and I-94 is necessary due to pipe failures. Finance Director Mark Ebensteiner reviewed proposed 2021 projects in the CIP fund, costs for which would total $16.1 million, primarily related to two projects: $14.4 million for Brooklyn Boulevard Phase 2, $11.5 million of which would come from external sources; and the 53rd Avenue 7/20/2020 Page 3 improvement project in connection with the City of Minneapolis. He added the remaining funding would go toward replacement signage, playground equipment and office updates, for which $4.3 million would be funded by the City of Brooklyn Center. Mr. Ebensteiner stated the capital improvement funding policy provides resources of funding from capital improvement funds and is a very formal and specific policy. He added the City Council has typically directed these funds toward municipal facilities including parks, trails and buildings, but also some improvement projects like Brooklyn Boulevard. He noted Local Government Aid can be used on a project by project basis with Parks District, Watershed District, County, and State funding. Mr. Ebensteiner reviewed the capital outlay of $60 million over the next 5 years, with $15.3 million to be funded internally. Bond sales are projected in 2021 and 2025 which will provide funding for Brooklyn Boulevard Phase 2 and the City’s share of the Highway 252 project. This will likely be repaid with property tax and could require $850,000 annually in additional property tax funding. Additional funding is being sought to lessen that load. Municipal State Aid (MSA) funding can be used for four projects in 2021: Grandview Park area improvements; 53rd Avenue improvements from Penn Avenue to Lyndale Avenue; Lyndale Avenue; and Brooklyn Boulevard Phase 2, for a total of $3.5 million. Mr. Ebensteiner stated Municipal State Aid (MSA) provides funding for maintenance of streets that are on the State system, and this funding comes from highway fees. He added there are 21.3 miles of MSA streets in Brooklyn Center. He noted there has been an 8% reduction Statewide in MSA funding due to COVID-19, and cities are not eligible for advances. Mr. Ebensteiner stated the City has a healthy cash balance, but in the future, City Staff intends to take advantage of the advance if it is made available, and the City is eligible to receive it. He noted this is an interest-free loan that allows the City to complete projects without running up a large debt. Mr. Ebensteiner stated cash balances remain healthy. He added MSA funding may be reviewed as a means to decrease bonding in 2025. He noted additional MSA and other funding may be available due to the Highway 252 project, and it may not be necessary to issue full bonds. Mr. Ebensteiner stated the City Council approved the franchise fee increase effective January 1, 2020 with $1.5 million debt issued for this fund. He added, in 2021, that will increase to $2 million in funding from additional debt service property levy, repaid with property tax. Mr. Ebensteiner stated a substantial franchise fee will relieve some of the pressure of the levy. Mr. Ebensteiner stated the special assessment fund of $1.78 million is used to fund street projects and then allocate the funds. He added revenue varies from year to year, based on projects, and the City often issues special assessment bonds to be repaid by assessments. He noted that requires a lot of tracking, and there is sufficient cash flow to support the debt service. Mr. Ebensteiner stated costs for larger utility projects is estimated at 12 million in 2021 including Grandview Park south area reconstruction and total utility replacement for $5.57 million; the 7/20/2020 Page 4 northwest mill and overlay project for $1 million, and Brooklyn Boulevard Phase 2 for $ 2.9 million. He added utility funds have not been finalized in the 2021 budget and are currently in the process of being evaluated so the CIP Plan can be updated for each utility. He noted utility rates in the water fund have increased over the last few years related to debt payment for the water treatment plant as well as capital projects. Payments will be allocated over future years for users of the system to keep rate increases as smooth as possible. Mr. Ebensteiner stressed the importance of ensuring that there is sufficient cash available to fund CIP and operations, allowing future users to pay for utilities and infrastructure, while operating at a cash balance that is lower than target. Mr. Ebensteiner stated each utility has a target cash balance based on factors including quarterly City billing. He added it is a good idea to have three months of following year's operational costs available at the end of the year. He added the following year’s debt service is also important to have on hand. Mr. Ebensteiner stated Mr. Splinter has done a great job reviewing the plan and maximizing use of cash for operations. He added the City will average $500,000-800,000 over the next 10 years in internal cash and utility fees that can be used for projects. He noted a 10-year average is included in the balance. Mr. Ebensteiner stated the sanitary sewer fund has debt issues this year, and is anticipated to continue until 2030, for a total of $10.9 million over 10 years. He added these debt issues help stabilize the need for significant jumps in sanitary sewer rates. Mr. Ebensteiner stated the storm drainage fund will have a small increase based on projects for upcoming budget cycle. He added debt issuances have been identified in storm drainages in 2021, 2022, 2029 and 2030. He noted quarterly rates will increase from $15.52 increase to $15.98. Mr. Ebensteiner stated it is anticipated that the streetlight fund can be covered with current rates and will remain at $6.55. He added there is sufficient cash balance for current needs. He noted some additional capital could come in that would utilize cash balances. Mr. Ebensteiner state the total for 2021 to fund Capital Improvement Projects would be $10 million, repaid from the property tax levy, water utility and sanitary sewer. He added the bonding would be $15.2 million in 2021 and 2022. He noted this is a big number, but it is a small portion of the funding. Mr. Ebensteiner stated funding increases over the next two years due to neighborhood reconstruction and Brooklyn Boulevard Phase 2 will have a financial impact on the property tax levy. He added increases are based on bond issuances and how they affect debt service. He noted the debt service portion of the levy would increase by 2.1% for 2021 and 19.4% for 2022, and the impact of the levy as a whole would be .15% for 2021 and 1.44% for 2022. 7/20/2020 Page 5 Mr. Ebensteiner stated the quarterly utility bill will increase from $177.67 to $185.95, or an increase of $8.27 increase. He added there will be some change, but this is a good way to move forward, as no change would be difficult to recover from. Mr. Boganey stated the street reconstruction projects will start after 2022, and the franchise fee agreement with Xcel Energy expires December 8, 2023. He added the City Council has considered adjusting special assessments almost every year for as long has he has been the City Manager. He noted the City Council has been consistent in their resolve to maintain the special assessment policy out of fairness to 80% of residents who have already been assessed. Mr. Boganey stated it has been discussed that once the entire assessment cycle is completed and starts again in 2022, that would be the appropriate time to change the policy. He added City Staff is planning a Work Session Agenda item to discuss this issue, to receive feedback and comments from the City Council and take the next steps if necessary. Mr. Boganey stated many communities, including Brooklyn Park, have adopted franchise fees that cover the entire cost of the City’s share of a street reconstruction project. He added property owners would pay through their utility bills, and there would be no special assessments. He noted costs would be covered by bond issuance and levy adjustments. Commissioner Kpaleh stated he has heard about the property tax increase. He added the COVID-19 pandemic has caused dire conditions across the country, and a lot of people are losing their jobs, and things are getting really hard. He asked whether the property tax could be adjusted instead of increased. He asked whether some projects could be delayed until 2022. He noted that would be a way to give a break to Brooklyn Center property owners. Mr. Boganey confirmed the property tax levy can be increased or decreased by a vote of the City Council. He added tonight’s discussion is related to the debt service levy of approximately $1.2 million, or 5% of the total levy of $19 million. He noted an option is for the City Council to complete projects that require a levy increase for debt service but reduce the levy that pays for operations. He noted another option is to delay the projects, after reviewing this question more closely. Mr. Boganey stated, based on his experience, cities decide not to do capital projects as a way of saving money, and do not complete infrastructure projects. He added a sewer or water main may need to be replaced but it is not visible to the public, or funding for roads reconstruction is spent on other services, and projects are delayed. He noted cities keep their taxes low by doing this, but the projects will end up costing taxpayers more in the long run as infrastructure costs get more expensive over time. Mr. Boganey stated, however, a project can be delayed by one or two years. He added the City Council can make those types of decisions. Mayor Elliott stated he would like to see some analysis on what it would cost to postpone some of these projects by one or two years and have some numbers to support these decisions and not just 7/20/2020 Page 6 pontifications. He added there may be some historical data available. He noted Commissioner Tpaleh raised an important point that some projects may not need immediate action. Mayor Elliott stated it is important to review information, rather than acting out of fear-based decision-making. He added the City should be prudent in making decisions, and if infrastructure needs to be replaced and cannot wait one year, the City Council needs to know that to help make sound decisions that are not based in fear. Mayor Elliott stated several projects are slated for the upcoming year. He added he would like to consider delaying projects for another year, to determine what the economic crisis will mean in terms of people’s ability to pay increased taxes. He noted the City Council should delay non-essential projects and will need information to make these decisions. Mayor Elliott stated the City is nearing the end of the 30-year cycle for roads improvements. He added the impact of increasing the tax burden for residents should be considered, as a 20% unemployment rate is projected. He noted the City Council should review options that will show what it would look like to push projects out another year. Mr. Boganey stated, as the City Council has done in the past, a maximum levy is discussed and potentially established at the next joint City Council/Financial Commission meeting. He added this sets the upper limit for taxes, which provides parameters for City Staff for staying within the levy amount, including capital projects and operating costs. Mr. Boganey stated it was not his intention to make anyone fearful about not investing in infrastructure. He added infrastructure conditions are assessed annually, and recommended projects are based on assessments, and not the assumption of deterioration. Mayor Elliott stated a number or percentage of increase chosen out of thin air by the City Council is bad practice. He asked whether the City Council can get a written analysis of each of the projects, where they are now and what will happen over the next year or two if nothing is done about them. He added that is a more prudent way to approach this, rather than selecting a number with very little information. He noted the City Council has yet to see the other budget presentations. He asked whether this information can be available at the next Joint Budget meeting. Mr. Boganey stated City Staff can provide information before the City Council is required to vote on capital project plans. He added it would be difficult to get the information together before the next Finance meeting. He noted it is not possible to provide a prediction of what will happen in the next year if a project is delayed. Mayor Elliott stated, if this analysis has already been completed, as indicated by City Staff, then the analysis should be available for the City Council to review. He added he is referring to assessments about whether or not projects need to be done. Mr. Boganey stated that information is available. 7/20/2020 Page 7 Mayor Elliott stated the analysis should include some statement about the projects, and what would happen if they were delayed for one year. Mr. Boganey stated City Staff does not have the ability to predict that type of outcome, as these are long-term projects with 30-40 year life spans. Mayor Elliott stated it is important to have additional information, so the City Council can make sound decisions with the advice and support of the Financial Commission. Councilmember Butler stated she agrees with the comments that have been made. She added the City is not even halfway through with COVID-related repercussions, including financial impacts to residents and the City. She noted it will be key to get assessments on what projects can be delayed, and what savings will be realized. Councilmember Ryan asked whether projects that are recommended receive extensive evaluation in terms of how they are prioritized. He stated some projects that are not pressing may be deferred. He added perhaps City Staff could go back and provide that type of evaluation. He asked whether failure can sometimes be anticipated. Public Works Director Doran Cote stated the City’s street projects are rated every year or every other year, to determine their condition or trends and some predictions can be made. He added, for instance, the Grandview Park area is scheduled for 2021, and all of its roads are a 1, 2 or 3 on a scale up to 10, which is not very good. He noted City Staff can gather additional information. Councilmember Ryan stated he would not generally agree with delaying projects in a normal economy, but it's incumbent upon the City to do everything possible to make prudent decisions. He added he is not acting out of fear, but rather on a maximum of caution. He noted he would appreciate it if City Staff could go back and see what savings can be netted. He stressed the importance of keeping in mind that this discussion relates to 5% of the net levy, and the real money is somewhere in the General Fund. Mayor Elliott stated 5% of the budget will be approximately $900,000. Mr. Boganey clarified the 5% relates to the levy, not the budget. Mr. Elliott asked what 5% of the levy would be. Mr. Ebensteiner stated the current debt service levy is around $1.2 million, or 5% of the total levy of $19 million. Councilmember Graves stated the total levy includes $16 million in Local Government Aid funding. She added the debt levy is what the City issues as debt to cover proposed projects. Mr. Ebensteiner confirmed this. Councilmember Graves asked why the City must issue such a big debt levy if much of the funding comes from other sources. Mr. Ebensteiner stated the local costs portion must be funded with available cash, or the City will need to bond for that portion. He added the majority of the $19 million goes to the General Fund, to support operations, including public safety, administration, and 7/20/2020 Page 8 community development. He noted property tax collection is the primary source of funds for general operations. Councilmember Graves stated she would like to have a deeper assessment on projects that can wait a year or two. She added the City Council has made sound decisions in the past in collaboration with City Staff and the Financial Commission, which is why the City has such a good rating. She noted she is personally excited about the Brooklyn Boulevard project which is a huge portion of the project funding. She noted she lives on Brooklyn Boulevard, and reconstruction will improve sewers as well as safety, with better sidewalks and center medians. Councilmember Graves stated she is interested in discussing the next 15 years capital improvement plan, and potential significant changes in how assessments are handled, as well as discuss franchise fees, as suggested by Mr. Boganey. Councilmember Graves stated, in the past, the City Council has set a cap or percentage over which they would not go. She added it sets a good framework for City Staff to work with, and bring other options for the City Council to consider. She noted City Staff has provided support for the City Council in making good sound budget decisions in the years that she has been involved. She noted, however, she knows this year is different, and she would be interested in getting additional information. Mayor Elliott stated he is looking at the budget from a “zero based budgeting” perspective, where everything is assessed based on the current budget. He added this is a best practices method that a lot of institutions use. He noted it is incumbent upon us to really analyze the budget. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she has trusted the recommendations of City Staff for many years. She added, due to the pandemic and the financial crisis that many families face, the City must ensure that money is spent the best way possible. She noted she appreciates improvements that are being completed on the City’s infrastructure, and she is hesitant to delay projects, but agreed it would be prudent to take a look at what can be delayed at least one budget year. Mr. Boganey confirmed that projects could be delayed. He added the point of his original comment was that as a matter of routine, delay could be bad decision-making. He noted, however, the City Council can decide to delay projects. Commissioner Kpaleh asked whether City Staff can provide a report showing actual expenditures and life spans for each of these projects. He added, if projects are rated, it would be helpful to review which projects are more urgent than others. Mr. Cote stated agreed to provide information that is used to determine which projects should be moved forward. Mr. Boganey agreed. Commissioner Kpaleh stated he believes this information will help the City Council understand which projects should move forward, and which can wait. 7/20/2020 Page 9 Councilmember Graves stated she assumes that a project assessment provided by City Staff would not be simply an abstract number on a scale of 1 to 10 with no related information or data, and some projects may not be a good investment right now. She added some projects should be considered from a regional perspective, or social and environmental context. She noted some parks may have already had some improvements done or may be located in a smaller community. She requested that City Staff provide information about these types of considerations when they offer their assessments. Councilmember Ryan stated, with all the factors that go into property taxes, 5% of the levy does not compute to 5% of a residents’ City portion of the property tax. He added the 5% calculation does not amount to very much money. He stressed the importance of keeping that scale in mind. Councilmember Ryan stated it would be unwise to defer projects to get 5% less on the levy, considering the long list of projects, which would put the City right back to what is critical. He added the City’s street utility replacement plan was stretched to 30 years due to the amount of bonded debt the City could reasonably carry, and because of what was needed to fill that gap. Councilmember Ryan stated he echoes the comments of Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson, that he places a lot of trust in recommendations made by City Staff. Councilmember Graves stated, to add to Councilmember Ryan’s comment, she has found it helpful in the past the way (former Finance Director Nate Reinhardt) would present information, giving a breakdown of the percentage points for increases for the City budget and how it breaks down for a family of four. She added it is helpful because it makes it more real when making a decision. She requested that Mr. Ebensteiner offer that kind of data as part of the upcoming presentations. Mr. Boganey confirmed that is the kind of information that will be provided by City Staff at future budget discussions. Mayor Elliott stated he would like to acknowledge all the staff members and everyone who took the time to join the meeting. He added he appreciates the time and effort that goes into this process, especially in this time of economic calamity. He apologized if his earlier comments sounded coarse, as his intention was to make the point that there needs to be some hard work done on the budget this year. He noted everyone will work together as a team to figure it out. FUTURE BUDGET DISCUSSIONS -None. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Elliott adjourned the meeting at 8:23 p.m. 07/22/20 -1- DRAFT MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA WORK SESSION JULY 22, 2020 CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council/Economic Development Authority (EDA) met in Work Session called to order by Mayor/President Mike Elliott at 6:00 p.m. The meeting was conducted via Webex. ROLL CALL Mayor Mike Elliott and Councilmembers Marquita Butler, April Graves, Kris Lawrence- Anderson, and Dan Ryan. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Police Chief Tim Gannon, City Clerk Barb Suciu, and City Attorney Troy Gilchrist. FOLLOW-UP TASK FORCE REPORT AG’S WORKING GROUP: POLICE-INVOLVED DEADLY FORCE ENCOUNTERS Police Chief Tim Gannon reviewed recommendations for local municipalities, broken into five major categories: community healing and engagement; prevention and training; investigations and accountability; policy and legal implications; and officer wellness. Community healing and engagement – local and tribal law enforcement should provide effective communication and trauma-informed training to all staff that communicate with the public and the media. Law enforcement should implement models for training to reduce additional trauma – this includes how to treat people, demonstrate empathy, and listen. Local law enforcement should seek feedback from their communities on performance and interactions. Chief Gannon stated he has reviewed a collaborative learning effort from Cities United who published a training for mayors. He added he has not reviewed League of Minnesota Cities training. Prevention and training – the State of Minnesota should provide incentives to implement co- responder or crisis response. Technology solutions should be explored and piloted to increase dispatcher/law enforcement access to information. Access to training should be provided for law enforcement officers, including de-escalation training; body-worn camera and simulator scenarios; crisis intervention; and mental health conflict management. Training the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement (NOBLE) is recommended. Chief Gannon stated he fully supports this, and it is an important initiative that should be funded. 07/22/20 -2- DRAFT Investigations and accountability - use body-worn cameras proactively and engage the public in reviews of body-worn camera practices and policies. Customized models of community involvement should be implemented. Police agencies should adopt use of force policies and make “sanctity of life” a core organizational value. Officers should be required to intervene when appropriate and safe, and report incidents of unreasonable force to supervisors. Officer wellness - Peace officers should receive confidential mental health and wellness check ins every 3 years, and also after a significant involvement in an incident. Chief Gannon stated the Police Department’s current policy, based on a program from Lexapol, an organization that designs location-specific policies, and reads “The use of force by law enforcement personnel is a matter of critical concern to both the public and to the law enforcement community. Officers are involved on a daily basis in numerous and varied interactions and, when warranted, may use reasonable force in carrying out their duties. The Police Department recognizes and respects the value of all human life and dignity without prejudice to anyone. RECOMMENDATIONS AND ACTION STEPS Chief Gannon stated the Police Department is not doing everything on the Attorney General’s list of recommendations. He added some training they requested is not sponsored, but it will be shortly. He noted community healing training is not something that the Department has available, although they get media training, and go through camera trainings. Trauma-informed interviewing techniques will be coming shortly. Chief Gannon stated the Minnesota Cities’ training for Mayors, “Managing Critical Incidents” is a very thorough training program and can be provided for Mayor Elliott if he wishes to pursue that. He added training for officers to reduce trauma will be pursued when it becomes available, although it does not address racial trauma. He added the Department can pursue follow-up efforts with citizens about how the officers are perceived. Chief Gannon stated the Police Department uses the Vitals app for dispatchers and officers. Chief Gannon stated body-worn camera footage is reviewed after every use of force, to ensure compliance with Department policy. Software was purchased a few years ago that has hundreds of pre-loaded scenarios including de-escalation. Officers undergo a weeklong Crisis Intervention Training, and 27 of the 49 sworn officers have completed this training. The Department is working on getting 100% compliance. Additionally, officers are required to complete POST-approved cultural diversity training and in-service training from people with disabilities, including most recently from the Autism Society. NOBLE training is 2-4-hour presentations given by members of NOBLE, that would be beneficial training to bring to the Police Department, as they address citizenship, law literacy and engagement, and reporting and management of law enforcement abuse. Chief Gannon stated he fully supports a specialized unit with the BCA to conduct officer-involved shooting investigations. He added the body-worn camera audit that was recently completed can 07/22/20 -3- DRAFT be discussed in a community forum, which could also include a policy review and compliance report. Chief Gannon stated the City’s Multi-Cultural Advisory Committee (MAC) is an example of a community engagement model that increases communication opportunities. Chief Gannon stated Department policies and trainings will be reviewed to ensure that language reflects sanctity of life as a core value, and the importance of de-escalation. Chief Gannon stated the agency is small, with 49 sworn officers, and supervisors and officers are closely monitored by Divisional Commanders. He added a tracking program from Benchmark Analytics is used by some agencies has the ability track use of force, complaints and training requirements. He noted this would be a good tool to use to ensure that officers’ benchmarks are being followed and tracked. Chief Gannon stated the Department currently follows all BCA-mandated reporting requirements, including those related to deadly force and pursuit reporting. All sworn officers are required to receive 8 hours of annual first-aid training through North Memorial, the City’s ambulance service. Chief Gannon stated racial stop data is currently being collected. He added he is open to preparing complaint and use of force data and findings in a yearly or mid-year report, to promote transparency, openness and accountability, Chief Gannon stated officers undergo confidential mental health and wellness check-ins every three years, and after significant events. He added this is not included in policy, but funding is included in the budget as needed for mental health services. He noted the legislative update includes a mandate for confidential mental health check-ins and peer counselling requirements. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated, due to the high numbers of suicide among police officers, whether mental health check-ins should be done more frequently than every 3 years. She added that seems too long, and a lot can happen in three years due to the stress of the job. She noted that is something to consider. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked what Polco stands for. Chief Gannon stated he is not sure, but it is an online web-based survey. Chief Gannon stated he believes 3 years is a minimum time requirement for mental health check- ins. He added some other agencies are doing yearly drop-in check-ins that are as minimal as possible, which makes it a simpler process. He noted the Department will be incorporating that plan. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated informal drop-ins would probably be less intimidating for officers. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson thanked Chief Gannon, adding his presentation was very good. 07/22/20 -4- DRAFT Councilmember Graves stated she likes the idea of re-engaging the community in the discussion regarding body worn cameras, to review policies and procedures and have a community dialogue. She added there might be ways to use actual footage as examples, and have officers who were involved speak about it, as a teaching and healing tool. She noted she has said in the past it is important to involve the community, and those who are closest to the pain, to give them an opportunity to talk about what works and what doesn’t work. This could also be an opportunity for officers’ training to build relationships and healing within the community. Councilmember Graves stated she would like to know what the requirements are for being a part of MAC, as that could be exclusionary. She added there might be ways to make MAC more inclusive, and to increase the diversity of the voices at that table, to better reflect those in our community. Chief Gannon stated MAC members might hear about the background process from other community members. He agreed it would be beneficial to enlarge the scope of the people on the MAC. Councilmember Graves stated she would like to have EIP information shared with the City Council, perhaps quarterly. She added she understands that it directly informs the work of the Police Department but could also be a good tool for transparency and accountability, beyond the Police Department. Councilmember Graves stated she would support specific language in policy about officers being encouraged to report excessive use of force by other officers, without fear of retaliation, or similar language. Some officers have reported not only social isolation or retaliation, but potential loss of jobs or the need to quit, due to pressure. Chief Gannon stated the Department has a separate policy that addresses that type of harassment and retaliation. He agreed it would be well-placed, to have it in this policy as well. Councilmember Graves stated, with regard to the BCA investigative group taking over investigative services, it is important to know who they are and what their bias may be. She noted this is part of the reason that the concept of a police/citizen complaint review committee is appealing to many people. Councilmember Graves stated, with regard to the use of the word “reasonable”, it could be subjective. She added what might be reasonable to someone might not be reasonable to someone else. She noted there is murkiness within some of the language that makes it difficult to understand, and in some cases, how something is deemed reasonable when it should not be. She added she is curious about the criteria and how that is decided. Chief Gannon stated some of that is addressed in the #8cantwait review, related to Supreme Court rulings that are used to make standards as objective as possible, with regard to use of deadly force as a guide for prosecutors. 07/22/20 -5- DRAFT Councilmember Graves stated she is connected to people that do racialized trauma training and organizations for which she can provide referrals. She added, in her personal experience, sometimes trainings in cultural competencies and racial bias can be intellectualized, but in a crisis situation, people do not always think that way. She noted this can be true for police officers because of their traumatic jobs, and also for racialized communities that have had a lot of trauma, generationally and historically. She stressed the importance of looking into trauma trainings that do not stop at intellectual understanding, as that can make a big difference. #8CANTWAIT Chief Gannon reviewed the eight elements of the #8CantWait initiative, sponsored by Campaign Zero. 1. Ban choke holds and strangle holds – Chief Gannon stated the Police Department does not train in this as an arrest and control mechanism. He added there is legislation being put together to ban choke holds as a matter of policy. Deadly force may be authorized if a civilian or officer is fighting for their lives, but can only be used when it is authorized, and not as an arrest or control technique. 2. Required de-escalation where possible – Chief Gannon stated the Police Department already uses time, distance and de-escalation techniques, and he totally supports this. 3. Require warning before shooting – Chief Gannon stated a verbal warning can be given 99% of the time, but there may be situations where someone is actively firing at an officer, and giving a verbal warning would put them in jeopardy. He added the police officers give a warning before shooting if feasible. 4. Requiring exhaust all alternatives before shooting – Chief Gannon stated the police officers use all other alternative tools available to them before resorting to lethal force. 5. Require officers to intervene with other officers and report to supervisors – Chief Gannon stated that requirement is currently in the department policy, and fully supported by the Brooklyn Center Police Department. 6. Shooting at moving vehicles – Chief Gannon stated this requirement is banned in all cases. He added there may be situations where there are no other alternatives, but it is not an effective method, and easier to get out of the way. 7. Require establishment of force continuum – Chief Gannon stated the “force continuum” details escalation of force. He added he has been a police officer for 26 years, and force continuum models were used in the 1990s. He noted agencies have moved away from this model as it does not adhere to the constitutional rulings of Graham V. Connor (1989) and other Supreme Court cases that define how officers can use deadly force, and are used to develop policies. Chief Gannon stated he has documentation and literature that he can provide on this issue for the City Council’s review. He added one document, written by a law group, strongly recommends that continuum should not be used by law enforcement agencies, and notes that the Justice 07/22/20 -6- DRAFT Department no longer requires continuum because it is an outdated model. He noted the concept of steps that an officer can take during escalation is appropriate, but demanding or requiring it does not promote discretionary, reasonable, and objective decision-making practices. Continuum may in fact dictate that an officer can use more force than necessary. 8. Required Comprehensive Reporting – Chief Gannon stated he totally agrees with that, as whatever information can be shared with the community should be shared. He added the Police Department’s entire policy is on the City website and can be viewed at any time. He noted he supports sharing information fully. Councilmember Butler thanked Chief Gannon for his report. She added it seems that there has been an uptick in crime, and she thanked the Chief for keeping the City safe. She asked if someone who wants to make a complaint about an interaction with a police officer, whether they have to go into the Police Department to make that complaint. She asked whether the City has considered having a committee outside of the Police Department to do complaints oversight. Chief Gannon stated a review of the Police Department complaint process will be provided to the City Council at their Monday, July 27, 2020 Work Session. This will include a review how complaints are accepted, and complaints data for the past 5 years. Larger agencies have police/civilian complaints oversight, but Brooklyn Center’s volume of complaints is very low, and most agencies of this size would not have that type of oversight group. Citizens are welcome to make a complaint for any issue at any time, and the Police Department makes every effort to remove any barriers from making a complaint. Police employees can mail out a complaint form if someone does not want to come in to get a form. Councilmember Graves she understands what Chief Gannon is referring to, when the word “all” is used in several areas of the policy. She added there is room for nuance in some of the policies, and she agrees that there are some things that are stated in policy that Police Officers do not do except in extreme circumstances. She noted language could be added to some of these recommendations. She added, for instance, there is specific language regarding officers giving a verbal warning before shooting, and within that policy, down the line, when it would be reasonable. Chief Gannon stated the term that is used is “severely restricted”. He added using the word “all” is a deal breaker, because it puts an officer in violation of policy. He noted the term “severely restricted” gives officers some discretion and the right to act if there is no other way forward. Councilmember Graves stated she would not want the police to feel like they could not act because of the word “all” in the policy. She added she would like to at the policy carefully to see if there is any language missing. She noted most of the City’s policies are in good alignment, but there is that gray area when determining what is “reasonable”. She noted the use of force continuum can be helpful because it explains more. Councilmember Graves stated police should have some discretionary ability in a crisis situation. She added she would support a ban on chokeholds, to specifically state that it is not a sanctioned restraint move. She noted there could be some language regarding whether an officer is defending their own life. 07/22/20 -7- DRAFT Chief Gannon agreed, adding that will be the next step as it is a legislative mandate that can be adopted into the Department’s policy. He noted he foresees that happening in the very near future. Councilmember Graves stated she made a suggestion to consider EIP, and requiring that complaints include information about demographics, context around the complaint, and also if there were any settlements. She added she does not think the City needs to create a new oversight committee for complaints, but there should be more transparency with the City Council, MAC and the community. She noted there are different ways to do that, using Polco to share potential reports the Department is working on, and reporting on the EIP. Councilmember Graves stated this has been a good informative process, and she is grateful to Chief Gannon for the work he and the officers have put into it. She added she is excited to continue to get better at this and increase the safety of everyone. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked how long it might take to get all the officers trained and certified in crisis intervention and mental health crises. She added 27 of the 49 sworn staff are trained, which is 55%. Chief Gannon stated, in a normal year, 8-10 officers can be certified, and there is an ongoing re-certification process as well. He added some officers will still be trained this year, but that has been delayed due to COVID. He noted there will be another training coming that is a week-long collaboration. Councilmember Ryan thanked Chief Gannon for the excellent presentation, with a great amount of information for the City Council to digest. He added, in communications with residents, there is not a lot of understanding about these matters, and he generally refers people to Chief Gannon or a Command Officer. He noted, with time and information, the City Council will be able to better inform the public. He thanked Chief Gannon and expressed his appreciation of Chief Gannon and the Police Officers, and how hard they work to keep residents safe. Mr. Boganey stated he would like to offer a suggestion for the City Council’s consideration. He added City Staff can provide updates in 30 days at a City Council Work Session, with additional reactions or specific ideas related to tonight’s comments, suggestions and feedback. The City Council can indicate whether there is consensus on any of the modifications that have been proposed. City Staff can incorporate initiatives or modifications and report back to the City Council in 90 days to monitor progress of the changes that have been agreed to. Mayor Elliott stated he would like to make a comment. Tonight is a reminder of the awful murder of Mr. George Floyd. For 8 minutes and 46 seconds, Minneapolis Police Officer Derek Chauvin knelt on George’s neck until the life went out of his body. Onlookers pleaded with the officer, but he persisted. We all saw the video, which has sparked outrage around the world, and jolted people out of a slumber, deep in racism and systemic oppression. These systems are statewide, nationwide, and worldwide, and even in our beloved City of Brooklyn Center. There is the urge to say that was Minneapolis, and it was not here, but we are reminded that all the United States is Minneapolis because of the historic nature of policing in this country, with its roots deep in slave- catching. 07/22/20 -8- DRAFT Mayor Elliott stated Mr. Floyd’s death has sparked calls for reimagining public safety and oversight. In his time as Mayor, and on this City Council, he has not seen oversight of the Police Department in earnest. He has seen a general attitude that the police are doing fine, and whatever the Chief recommends is good by us. That is an attitude that exists in the City Council. Therein lies the difference in how black and brown people feel about policing in this country, and how white brothers and sisters feel about policing in this country. This is not news to anybody. For a black or brown person to see police in their rearview mirror causes instant anxiety. We have heard about black parents giving their children “the talk”, what to do so you can make it home alive. Mayor Elliott stated he has a question for the City Council, his colleagues. Do we as a Council know whether there are any complaints against our Police Department? Do we as a Council know whether there are any overpoliced areas in Brooklyn Center? Do we as a Council know who is stopped and arrested in our city? Do we as a Council know how our community is impacted by policing? How many officers do we really need? How well is our Police Department performing? Are officers per thousand and number of calls really meaningful measures? Do cultural and racial bias training work, and how effective are they? Mayor Elliott stated real oversight is the City Council’s responsibility, and no longer assume that all is well. He added he is happy that the City Council is ready to lead and perform oversight of the Police Department. The community is crying out that policing in America is not working for black and brown people. This moment and murder of George Floyd calls for an immediate and thorough assessment of and reforms in policing in every community, led by the community, and political leadership. Mayor Elliott stated the goal is not policing. Our goal is public health and safety in the community. He added the City Council must take Mr. Boganey’s suggestion in advisement. He noted the City Council has received the book that they are going to read and take that suggestion under advisement and reflect on the way forward. Mayor Elliott stated it is reasonable to assume that people who are oppressed by systems that have been put in place, including policing systems, will bear the burden for reforming such a system. This moment calls on all of us to really commit to reform and commit to looking deeply at what is in place. It is difficult and time-consuming work, but he is grateful to his fellow Councilmembers who are committed to this work. Councilmember Graves thanked Mayor Elliott for the reminder, adding she has been talking about policing, transparency, and accountability for the entire time that she has been on the City Council. She added she has talked about it, asked questions, and shared resources with Chief Gannon. She noted she is excited to see the Police Department Complaints report on Monday at the upcoming City Council meeting. Councilmember Graves stated she has not co-signed on whatever Chief Gannon recommends. She agreed there is room for improvement. She added she has often asked about budget choices. She noted this conversation is proof that we want to see better local policing, and although she does not have all the answers to the Mayor’s questions, the City Council has reviewed the number of 07/22/20 -9- DRAFT complaints at least once, and will get more information on Monday. She expressed her gratitude in moving toward having more accountability to give the City Council a bigger picture. Councilmember Graves asked Mayor Elliott whether there is anything he would like to add to the discussion tonight. She added she feels that the City Council have come up with several different ways to move forward and build on policies and close gaps where they exist, between recommendations from the Attorney General and comments from the community. She noted there is space for discussion with community members, and the report on demographics on Monday will inform the City Council and the community regarding the further work that is to be done. Councilmember Graves stated Mayor Elliott should provide specific suggestions for efforts that he feels are not being made by the City Council right now, by having this discussion and getting reports from the Police Department that have been compiled to improve transparency and reporting. She added she feels that Mayor Elliott is not giving the City Council the credit that is due for the work that is being done right now, to get to this point. She noted she has been pushing for information on criminal justice and policing but stressed the importance of noting that sometimes the timing is not right, and what pushes people to action is a catalyst. Councilmember Graves stated she has had her own experiences with the Police Department. She added someone she cares about was arrested last night. She wants Mayor Elliott to know that she is taking it seriously, and she is excited and optimistic about these discussions and that the City Council is in a good place to take this to the next level. Mayor Elliott stated he wanted to note that his remarks accounted for that this particular attitude is not universal within the City Council. He added he knows Councilmember Graves has asked for information from the Department to do oversight and he appreciates that she made that clarification. He noted the City Council does not have all the answers, and he gets calls from residents with questions, and he was speaking broadly about the role of the City Council in providing oversight. Mayor Elliott stated he attended a League of Minnesota Cities training panel, at which the question was asked, what is the oversight responsibility of the City Council for the Police Department. He added a City Manager stated, “it stops at passing the budget”. He added the City Council has oversight and should see information about complaints. He noted the only data the City Council has that he is aware of is the number of people that have been shot, but beyond that he does not have much to go on. Mayor Elliott stated other communities are farther ahead, and Brooklyn Center has a long way to go. The City Council is open to doing deep work, assessment and reform. His criticism was of the past, not of the present. The current City Council is moving in the direction of doing oversight. The goal is not policing, but rather a safe and healthy community. Councilmember Graves stated Chief Gannon had suggested getting feedback from the community. She added she would like to ensure that the City is using the database of people that have had direct interaction with the Police Department. She noted, since the database is already in use, hopefully that is information that can be shared with the City Council sometime soon. 07/22/20 -10- DRAFT Chief Gannon stated the key people we want to have contact with are residents in the community who have contact with Brooklyn Center Police Officers. Chief Gannon stated, regarding Councilmember Butler’s request for notifications from the Police Department about incidents, that he and Mr. Boganey are reviewing this process, and that information can be sent out to the City Council. He added the City Council will be able to provide information and be a source of information for citizens. Councilmember Butler stated she appreciates that as she got many phone calls last night, and she did not know what was going on. Mayor Elliott stated the City Council can obtain any additional information they want from the Police Department they just need to ask for the information. He added that is the City Council’s role as the oversight body for the Police Department in Brooklyn Center. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Graves moved and Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson seconded adjournment the City Council Work Session at 7:35 p.m. Mayor Elliott stated this is a long route that will take years, but things will get better, and the ultimate vision for the City is a safe and healthy community where all people are thriving. He added policing is not a goal, but a way of achieving the outcome of a safe and healthy community Motion passed unanimously. 07/27/20 -1- DRAFT MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA STUDY SESSION JULY 27, 2020 CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Study Session called to order by Mayor Mike Elliott at 6:00 p.m. The meeting was conducted via Webex. ROLL CALL Mayor Mike Elliott and Councilmembers Marquita Butler, April Graves, Kris Lawrence- Anderson, and Dan Ryan. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Deputy City Manager Reggie Edwards, Community Development Director Meg Beekman, Police Chief Tim Gannon, City Clerk Barb Suciu, and City Attorney Troy Gilchrist. CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION OF AGENDA ITEMS AND QUESTIONS Councilmember Ryan asked that item 6. C. Resolution Supporting Federal Legislation Recognizing June 19th, known as Juneteenth, as a National Holiday, be moved to Council Consideration item 10. A. Mayor Elliott asked that Work Session Discussion item 1. Police Department Complaint Process and Findings to City Council meeting Agenda 7. A. The consensus of the City Council was to move these two items. DISCUSSION OF WORK SESSION AGENDA ITEMS AS TIME PERMITS BROOKLYN BOULEVARD LAND USE CORRIDOR STUDY UPDATE City Manager Boganey introduced Community Development Director Meg Beekman. Ms. Beekman stated the developer was going to join the meeting to discuss this item around 8:30 p.m. and asked if ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP (LITTER AND TRASH NUISANCE) Development Director Meg Beekman stated over the past few years, the City Council has expressed concerns about litter and trash scattered throughout the business areas in the city. With the thawing of winter snow that exposed covered litter and the onset of COVID-19 with the discarding of masks and gloves exacerbate issue. Additionally, staff has seen an increase in the amount of litter on commercial properties and throughout the city. An increase in vacant commercial properties further added to the problem along with an increase in illegal dumping. 07/27/20 -2- DRAFT Meg Beekman stated there has been clean up of 44 illegal dumping’s since January just on EDA- owned and EDA-adjacent properties. Commercial property managers are feeling overwhelmed with the increase in litter, combined with fewer staff due to the pandemic and recent civil unrest. Cub Foods and Walmart for example have reported being down over 20 percent of their normal staff from people who aren’t coming into work or have quit. Meg Beekman stated the current acts of environmental stewardship include clean-up days; citizen volunteer clean-ups; shopping cart collecting on 8 to 12 shopping carts on average daily (Cub & Walmart); 1-on-1 business meetings and drafting voluntary clean-up action plans (Cub & Walmart); commercial property owners education and outreach; almost daily sweeping of Xerxes Avenue for garbage; Prescription Landscape removes litter out the center island on Bass Lake Road at Shingle Creek Crossing weekly; and the bus stops are picked up two to three times a week with the emptying of garbage and litter pick up. Meg Beekman stated staff conducted some research and there were three lessons learned. The first one included a behavioral change such as shopping and getting directly into a car; more eyes on the public spaces in the city; or curfew and parent supervision requirement. The second one was structure; staffing for clean up and monitoring of areas; ambassador clean up and welcome program; or unified business ownership of clean up such as a business association, business clean up district of something along that nature. The third one was mindset, such as aesthetically pleasing and pride filled space design, publicly established expectations of cleanliness or viewed as one unified business area. Meg Beekman stated going forward there were some assumptions made such as the litter and trash issue is beyond the capacity of the City to address alone; the core of the problem is the behavior of people who litter for various reasons; City current efforts are not sufficient to resolve the issue or problem; the City can be aesthetically pleasing without the scattering of litter and trash, and transient visitors or travelers present unique challenges with regards to littering and trash. Deputy City Manager Reggie Edwards added the strategy for that problem is to get people into the mindset that there is stewardship, and this is their space. He added some type of education approach is needed. Dr. Edwards stressed the importance of cleaning and maintaining areas quickly in a staged approach, when looking at resolving this problem. ADJOURN STUDY SESSION TO INFORMAL OPEN FORUM WITH CITY COUNCIL Mayor Elliott adjourned the Study Session at 6:45 p.m. 07/27/20 -1- DRAFT 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 JULY 27, 2020 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 6:45 p.m. The meeting was conducted via Webex. ROLL CALL Mayor Mike Elliott and Councilmembers Marquita Butler, April Graves, Kris Lawrence- Anderson, and Dan Ryan. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Community Development Director Meg Beekman, City Planner Ginny McIntosh, Police Chief Tim Gannon, City Clerk Barb Suciu, and City Attorney Troy Gilchrist. Mayor Mike Elliott opened the meeting for the purpose of Informal Open Forum. Joy Anderson stated she is a 30-year resident of Brooklyn Center. She added she has heard that the City intends to broadcast Wi-Fi in the City parks. She expressed strong objection to having internet access in the parks and insisted that this initiative be stopped immediately. Ms. Anderson stated apparently a park has been identified for a pilot program. She added the City’s parks are special places where people can go to enjoy themselves, to decompress and to play. People go to the parks to be with nature, to renew themselves with the energy that nature provides. By injecting Wi-Fi into the parks, the City will be negatively impacting the natural environment, and the people who visit the parks. She noted that putting Wi-Fi in parks is a horrible idea. Ms. Anderson stated she understands that there are people in Brooklyn Center who do not have access to the internet. She added she knows the public library is currently closed, but there is internet access on the sidewalk and parking lot at the library. She noted internet access is available at 2 Caribou Coffee locations in Brooklyn Center, on their patios and in their parking lots. She has spoken with the store managers. Ms. Anderson stated internet access could be made available at City Hall and the Community Center. She added the City could offer hot spots for residents who need them. She noted, under no circumstances, should the City be flooded with Wi-Fi. She expressed concern that the City Council consistently votes against nature preservation. She asked that the City Council hear what she is saying and immediately stop this initiative. 07/27/20 -2- DRAFT Mr. Boganey stated he received an email, which was also directed to the City Clerk, from Randy Christensen, 7001 Regent Avenue No. He added Mr. Christensen requested that the City's Vision Statement and Mission Statement be read aloud during the Open Forum: Vision Statement: "We envision Brooklyn Center as a thriving, diverse community with a full range of housing, business, cultural and recreational offerings. It is a safe and inclusive place that people of all ages love to call home, and visitors enjoy due to its convenient location and commitment to a healthy environment." Mission Statement: "The mission of the City of Brooklyn Center is to ensure an attractive, clean, safe, and inclusive community that enhances the quality of life for all people and preserves the public trust." Mayor Elliott asked when the Vision Statement was written. Mr. Boganey stated he believes it was written 3-4 years ago. Councilmember Graves asked what this person is speaking to specifically, by requesting that the City’s Vision and Mission Statements be read aloud. Mr. Boganey stated he is unsure as no further description was included. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked, as a point of clarification, whether Wi-Fi is available at the Community Center and at City Hall. She added she thought the City Council had discussed that at a recent meeting. Mr. Boganey stated internet access has been available in City Hall and the Community Center for five years or longer. He added City Staff were exploring the possibility of expanding internet access into the parking lots around City Hall, but that did not go forward. He noted there may be some internet access in the parking lots, but it would be very limited. Mayor Elliott asked whether Wi-Fi access in City Hall parking lot is an option. Mr. Boganey stated it would be necessary to cover a significant portion of parking lot. Mayor Elliott stated there might be cheaper solutions for public Wi-Fi. Councilmember Graves asked whether extending existing Wi-Fi is more feasible than installing new Wi-Fi in a new area, like a park. Mr. Boganey stated the answer is probably yes. He added the rationale for the pilot was to determine whether there is value in having Wi-Fi in a park setting, because the City’s parks are within walking distance of virtually every residence. He noted Wi-Fi can be extended into the parking lot at City Hall. Councilmember Graves asked about the park adjacent to City Hall. Mr. Boganey stated the pilot program was going to be at Fire House Park because it is near the Fire House’s existing Wi-Fi. He added he is unsure whether it would be more expensive to add Wi-Fi in Centennial Park. He noted the issue would be how much internet access to provide within the park. 07/27/20 -3- DRAFT Mayor Elliott closed the Informal Open Forum at 7:00 p.m. 2. INVOCATION Mayor Elliott gave an Invocation in honor of Madeleine Roche, a member of the Brooklyn Center community who died recently. She was the mother of former City Councilmember Tim Roche, with whom Councilmember Ryan served. She was a very important woman in the community who lived her life in an exemplary way. Madeleine Roche was born in Quebec, Canada, and went to school in rural Quebec with First Nation people. Her father was a lumberjack. She moved to Ottawa when she was 16 years old and taught herself English. She went to Labrador, Canada, where she met her husband, Joe, at a Naval base. She was a nurse, and Joe was a pilot. Joe and Madeleine had 8 kids. Madeleine helped people in need, and she loved how diverse the City of Brooklyn Center had become. Mayor Elliott stated he was fortunate enough to be invited to Madeleine’s funeral this past week. She was buried at Mound cemetery. As the current President of CEAP noted, “Madeleine had the gift of community organization, and believed that neighbors help neighbors”. Madeleine dedicated her life to helping her neighbors, as one of the founders of CEAP. Mayor Elliott stated he worked with Madeleine on the CEAP Board to build the CEAP building in Brooklyn Center, which also houses School District and County Services. Madeleine’s family gathered at her funeral, celebrating her life. She accomplished so much, and meant so much to her family, as well as her extended Brooklyn Center family. She transformed the lives of so many people, and many more will continue to reap the benefits of her life’s work. Her influence has truly sent a ripple that will reverberate into the universe. On behalf of the citizens of Brooklyn Center, he thanked Madeleine and her family for all her contributions. Mayor Elliott requested a Proclamation and presentation in honor of Madeleine Roche at the City Council’s next meeting, working with CEAP and the Roche family to put that together. He added Madeleine Roche’s life was an example of what it means to bring community together, helping one another. 3. CALL TO ORDER REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Regular Session called to order by Mayor Mike Elliott at 7:02 p.m. 4. ROLL CALL Mayor Mike Elliott and Councilmembers Marquita Butler, April Graves, Kris Lawrence- Anderson, and Dan Ryan. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Community Development Director Meg Beekman, City Planner Ginny McIntosh, Police Chief Tim Gannon, City Clerk Barb Suciu, and City Attorney Troy Gilchrist. 07/27/20 -4- DRAFT 5. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 6. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Graves seconded to approve the Agenda and Consent Agenda, as amended, to add Agenda Item 7a, Police Department Complaint Process, from the Work Session Agenda, and removal of Agenda Item 6c, Resolution Supporting Federal Legislation Recognizing June 19th, Known as Juneteenth, as a National Holiday, for consideration as Agenda Item 10a, and the following consent items were approved: 6a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • July 13, 2020 – Study Session • July 13, 2020 – Regular Session • July 13, 2020 – Work Session 6b. LICENSES MECHANICAL LICENSES AAirgate Htg & A/C Inc PO Box 1649 Maple Grove, 55311 Air Comfort Heating 19170 Jasper St Anoka, 55303 Archer Plumbing LLC 6521 42nd Ave N Crystal, 55427 Midwest Heating & Air Conditioning 26355 Tucker Rd Rogers 55374 Sedgwick Heating 1408 Northland Dr, Ste 310 Mendota Heights, 55120 Street Plumbing Inc 11084 River Hills Dr #5 Burnsville, 55430 Superior Heating A/C & Electric 3731 Thurston Ave NW #108 Anoka, 55303 Vector Services 712 Vista Blvd, Ste 102 Waconia 55387 SIGNHANGER'S LICENSES Albrecht Sign Company 7775 Main St NE Fridley, 55432 DeMars Signs Inc 410 93rd Ave NW Coon Rapids, 55433 07/27/20 -5- DRAFT RENTAL INITIAL (TYPE III – one-year license) 5913 York Ave N Jefferson Dennis III INITIAL (TYPE II – two-year license) 2401 54th Ave N Brittney Lundeen II RENEWAL (TYPE IV – one-year license) 6312 France Ave N TMC Management Corp RENEWAL (TYPE III – one-year license) 5313 62nd Ave N Chao Vang & Doua Yang ‐ missing CHF Cert 5300 France Ave N IH3 Property IL LP ‐ missing CPTED RENEWAL (TYPE II – two-year license) 3206 Thurber Rd Mains'l Properties RENEWAL (TYPE I – three-year license) 6343 Dupont Ave N Daniel Yesnes 6424 Marlin Dr Charles Bright ‐ met requirement 6c. RESOLUTION SUPPORTING FEDERAL LEGISLATION RECOGNIZING JUNE 19TH, KNOWN AS JUNETEENTH, AS A NATIONAL HOLIDAY This item was considered as Agenda Item 10a. Motion passed unanimously. 7. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS/RECOGNITIONS/DONATIONS 7a. POLICE DEPARTMENT COMPLAINT PROCESS Police Chief Gannon introduced Commander Garrett Flesland, a 20-year veteran of the Police Department in charge of the Investigative Division which includes Professional Standards and Training. He added Commander Flesland has prepared a presentation regarding the Police Department complaint process. Commander Flesland reviewed data regarding complaints that the Department has fielded over the past 5.4 years, including incidents reported to the Police and self-initiated actions taken by Officers. The Police Department was asked earlier this year about the number of times the City has paid out money to resolve lawsuits related to citizen complaints. Commander Flesland stated there have been an average of 30,000-40,000 calls for service each year. This review will cover the period from January 1, 2015 through May 31, 2020, during which there were 198,967 calls for service. Most of these calls for service involved more than one officer on the scene, which increases the total number of interactions between staff and community members. 07/27/20 -6- DRAFT Commander Flesland stated the term “concern” is used to refer to complaints made about employees, including Internal Affairs investigations (IA), Minnesota Department of Human Rights investigations, lawsuits, and POST Board (Minnesota Board of Peace Officer Standards and Training) complaints. The Department received three POST Board complaints, and all three were incomplete complaints from the same citizen, directed at another agency. Commander Flesland stated there were 52 total concerns over 5.4 years for 49 sworn staff, which is less than .2 concerns per officer per year. In looking at the concerns, 23% have come from external sources, initiated by community members, and 39% were from internal sources, initiated by supervisors or peers. On average, there was one complaint for every 5,200 interactions based on 200,000 calls for service. He noted, in his opinion, this number could easily be doubled or tripled and still be on the conservative side. Commander Flesland stated the most common complaint from community members was rudeness. The most common complaint from within the Department was driving. The average was just over 7 complaints per year, or .4 per officer, assuming complaints are evenly distributed among staff. Each complaint was classified with one of the following dispositions: unfounded (28%); exonerated (19%); not sustained or insufficient evidence (14%); sustained (39%); or policy failure. 47% of all complaints were false or actions were justified. Commander Flesland stated one IA investigation has been resolved, and final disposition is sustained. One Minnesota Department of Human Rights complaint was closed with no probable cause. One complaint to the Minnesota Department of Human Rights is pending, as they have not responded to the Department’s requests for information. There have been six lawsuits during the 5.4-year period. Four of the six lawsuits, or 67%, were dismissed, and the City paid a $2,500 deductible to the League of Minnesota Cities, the City’s insurance company. One of the four lawsuits did not reach the deductible, and $1,631 was paid. One lawsuit resulted in payment of $825,000, with the City paying only the deductible. There is one potential lawsuit from July 11, 2019, but no formal complaint has been filed in that case. In terms of payments from the City, since January 2015 there has been one IA that resulted in an un-sustained finding due to lack of evidence. The City agreed to pay the complainant $3,000 rather than going through the court process. Commander Flesland reviewed complaints by specific officer over the last 5.4 years. He added the numbers can be misleading as some complaints involve multiple officers. The officer with the most concerns, Officer Boe, has 7 concerns, but 3 of the concerns are from the same event that transitioned to an IA and was part of a lawsuit. Additionally, some officers have duplicate entries. Commander Flesland stated 20% of officers have been named in an IA investigation in the last 5.4 years. There has been 1 human rights complaint for every 99,000 interactions, with 5% of officers named in an investigation. There has been 1 lawsuit for every 33,000 transactions, with 8 officers named in lawsuits in the last 5.4 years. 17 officers, or 35% have not been named in any complaint. 07/27/20 -7- DRAFT Mayor Elliott asked how the time frame of 5.4 years was decided. Commander Flesland stated 5 years and 4 months covers the tenure of Police Chief Gannon. He added Chief Gannon became chief in the middle of 2015, although he was Acting Chief before that. Chief Gannon stated the major lawsuit occurred before he became Chief, but the settlement happened after he became Chief. He added this information was included for transparency reasons. Mayor Elliott stated he would like to see data that goes back further than 5.4 years. He added he would like to see as much data as is available. He added, in terms of complaints, Councilmember Butler’s question at the last meeting was what happens when a complaint is filed, where does it go. Commander Flesland stated that varies because anyone in the Police Department can accept a complaint. He added there is an online complaint form that can be downloaded and printed. He noted hard copies of the form are available in City Hall. Ideally, a supervisor will field the initial interaction and make the first contact to get as much information as possible. Complaints are immediately fielded to the Sergeant. Commander Flesland stated often people do not end up making a complaint, due to misunderstanding, or policy and procedural issues. If the person wants to move the formal complaint forward, it is documented and reviewed by a Sergeant, and the person will meet with the Commander to do an initial review. If the complaint is serious, it is determined to be an Internal Affairs investigation. Often, Body-Worn Cameras have made it possible for the Police Department to review the complaint immediately. Commander Flesland stated, as an example, there was a complaint of excessive use of force. He added he reviewed the video and did not see any evidence of force. He invited the complainant to view the video, but the complainant refused to view the video and did not pursue the complaint. Commander Flesland stated the Police Department continues to review and document all complaints and takes them very seriously. He added staff are proud of the Police Department in terms of the work that is done in the community, and their accomplishments. Complaints are documented, reviewed by multiple supervisors, and completed in a transparent and professional manner. Mayor Elliott asked what role Commander Flesland plays in fielding complaints. Commander Flesland stated he directly supervises 8-9 detectives, and reviews complaints made against those detectives. Complaints against patrol officers are forwarded to the Police Chief, and then assigned to him, if an IA investigation is warranted, and he gathers evidence to support allegations. Commander Flesland stated he oversees most of the IA investigations that are reviewed by his peers and Chief Gannon. Mayor Elliott asked whether any internal investigation during the 5-year period resulted in disciplinary action. Commander Flesland stated three investigations were sustained, as there was a preponderance of evidence that a policy had been violated, and disciplinary action was taken. 07/27/20 -8- DRAFT Mayor Elliott asked whether disciplinary action is issued by Chief Gannon. Commander Flesland stated that depends upon the severity of the discipline. He added suspensions are reviewed by the City Manager. Mayor Elliott asked whether any complaints have been filed with the Minnesota Department of Human Rights, either by the Police Department or an individual. Commander Flesland stated he is not aware of any complaints that were forwarded to the Minnesota Department of Human Rights. He added the Police Department is required to notify the POST Board if a complaint could potentially impact a staff member’s ability to hold a valid license. He noted, likewise, complaints made to the POST Board are forwarded to the Police Department, and complaints are forwarded to other investigating agencies if it is believed that they are criminal complaints. Mayor Elliott asked how complaints that are received by email or mail are kept, and how long they are kept. He asked what data practices are used by the Police Department uses. Commander Flesland stated he would have to do some research on that issue, to be provided to Mr. Boganey. He added data practice law prohibits the Police Department from reviewing details of complaints that are not sustained or are exonerated. Councilmember Graves thanked Commander Flesland for his presentation. She asked whether demographic information is taken from complainants, including gender, race, age, and other identifying information. Commander Flesland stated that information is not collected. He added this issue came up during the Work Session, and after thinking about it, he would be concerned about asking for that type of information from complainants. Commander Flesland stated, in anticipation of this question, he reviewed infographics on the six lawsuits that the City has had over the past 5.4 years. He added, of the complainants, there were three men and three women: 1 Asian male, 1 black male, and 1 white male; two black women, and 1 other woman. He noted the Police Department can review adding this data collection to their process in the future, but he cautioned that requesting this information could make complainants uncomfortable and could hinder the first point of contact. Councilmember Graves stated she does not disagree with this assessment but adding there might still be a way to collect that information. She added it could be a question that they can answer voluntarily. She stressed the importance of finding ways to best serve the City’s diverse community. Councilmember Graves asked what types of complaints become IA investigations. She added she is thinking about complaint legitimacy evaluation and documentation. She asked what policy exists around being able to report the use of excessive force by your fellow officers without retribution. She asked if reports are evaluated for legitimacy, and what would happen if your complaint was against your supervisor. Commander Flesland stated, as a Sergeant, he reviewed Body-Worn Camera video to determine whether it was a legitimate complaint. He added he would voice concerns if he felt it was a credible complaint within the context of Police Department policies. He noted complaints received from 07/27/20 -9- DRAFT members of the public about excessive force with no definitive evidence may not be credible, as 47% of complaints are deemed unfounded or exonerated, and do not lead to discipline. Commander Flesland stated retaliation in any form is not allowed. Officers are ordered to report retaliation, and such conduct will not be tolerated. He added if he has a complaint about his superior, he will take that to a higher-level employee, like the City Manager. He noted there are many other people in the Department to talk to if you have a concern about your supervisor. Councilmember Graves stated one approach worth looking at is how to review whether officers working as partners have more complaints than another average partnership. She added officers may struggle with certain types of interactions and could be placed with a partner who is better in that type of social context. Commander Flesland agreed, adding new officers have a 4.5-6-month field training period during which they ride with 3 different partners. He stated they are cleared for solo patrol for the remainder of the first year as soon as they are deemed safe to do the job and represent the Police Department and the City, and a mentor is assigned to them. Commander Flesland stated officers on the same shift are identified in pairs to work together and review topics. He added the Department creates an environment for them to be able to talk, and ask questions, and get comfortable with their new role. He noted the Leadership Team discusses concerns about behaviors from a certain officer or group of officers. Commander Flesland stated there are many 20-year veterans in the Police Department, and opportunities are created for them to pair up with new officers to provide support and information. He added Covid-19 has made it difficult for officers to meet in proximity and make that support happen, but at some point, the officers will have those opportunities again. Commander Flesland stated Councilmember Graves is correct as far as using lessons that the senior officers have learned, sometimes the hard way, to help new officers so they don’t have to go through those same challenges. Councilmember Graves stated she appreciates that, and in her own experience, some new officers might have wisdom about the community, depending upon their age, that older veterans may not have. Commander Flesland agreed, adding more experienced officers can learn a lot from young cops who grew up in the area, and about technology. He added the police officers learn from each other all the time. Councilmember Graves stated perhaps there could be a threshold policy related to the IA investigation process or specific types of incidents that happen within a certain period that would trigger an assessment or conversation, or extra training. She added this could be an accountability measure that would result in an assessment on a particular officer’s behavior. Commander Flesland stated he would caution against getting too restrictive with regard to a threshold, in terms of requiring actions based on complaints. He added the Police Department is relatively small, and Department leadership has a good handle on what is going on, completes regular evaluations, and frequently conducts file reviews to see if there are issues or complaints 07/27/20 -10- DRAFT that could be opportunities for learning and mentoring. He noted complaints can vary in many ways, including validity, and should be evaluated on an individual basis. Councilmember Graves stated she appreciates Commander Flesland’s responses to her questions. She added she agrees complaints should be handled on a case-by-case basis, and not have a specific regimen. She noted, however, the top complaint was rudeness, which is not necessarily going to be a serious complaint and is subjective. One person’s definition of rudeness might be quite different from someone else’s definition. Councilmember Graves stated, with regard to rudeness complaints, if the Police Department receives multiple rudeness complaints over a period of time, it could be indicative of something that should be reviewed. Chief Gannon agreed, adding the volume of complaints is low, but it would be possible to pick out patterns of behavior. He added disciplinary action is always accompanied by some form of remedy or additional training. He stressed the importance of bringing officers back in line with expectations. Councilmember Butler thanked Chief Gannon and Commander Flesland for their report. She added she appreciates that there are multiple ways of making a complaint. She noted she was under the impression that people must come into the police station to make a complaint. Councilmember Butler asked whether an audit is completed on this system, that is done by someone outside the Police Department. Commander Flesland stated information is submitted annually to the POST Board related to complaints and disciplinary action. He added he is not aware of another group that conducts audits. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson requested clarification regarding the slide that shows a graph outlining complaints by specific officer. She asked how there can be a lawsuit when no lawsuit was cited. She added, for example, Officers E, H and N have not any complaints against them. Commander Flesland stated some lawsuits are initiated but dismissed. He added one case was based on force, and it was reviewed by a supervisor in the Police Department who determined it was not a violation. He noted the person was arrested several months later and initiated a lawsuit. Councilmember Ryan thanked Commander Flesland for his very thorough presentation. He added he is glad to see the Department is tracking complaints. He noted he appreciates that there are multiple avenues to contact the Police Department to enter a complaint. Mayor Elliott asked where complaints are kept. Commander Flesland stated some complaints are kept in a locked cabin in the Police Department, and other are stored electronically on the City network, in protected folders. Mayor Elliott asked whether paper copies have been made electronic. Commander Flesland stated the City is trying to go paperless, but the Police Department generates a lot of paper. He added he is unsure whether the plan is to get everything electronic, or to retain paper documents. 07/27/20 -11- DRAFT Mayor Elliott asked who has the responsibility of securing and keeping documents. Chief Gannon stated the Police Department has begun the process of scanning IAs and maintaining electronic documents. He added he has access as well as the Department Administrative Assistant, who files all complaints and submits them to the POST Board, which is a required mandate. Mayor Elliott asked whether complaints were reviewed in preparation for this presentation. Commander Flesland stated he reviewed summary documentation. Mayor Elliott asked Chief Gannon whether there are applicable data retention requirements. Chief Gannon stated sustained discipline cases are kept in individual personnel files. He added he would have to do some research about how complaints are kept and provide an answer. City Attorney Troy Gilchrist stated his office would be happy to work with Chief Gannon and his staff to pull that documentation together. Mayor Elliott asked whether Chief Gannon is aware of complaint files from more than 10 years ago. Chief Gannon stated, for the purposes of this presentation, the past 5.4 years were reviewed. He added they can go back further, as all data is maintained at the POST Board level. Mayor Elliott requested that Mr. Gilchrist work with the Police Department to review the complaint process and how records are kept. He stressed the importance of understanding the City’s position in terms of complaints, as the City Council goes through hearings about policing. Mr. Gilchrist stated the Data Practices Act specifies the time period that cites are required to keep documentation and records. He added the City has the discretion to retain documents longer than required. He noted the State data retention policy is 7 years. Mayor Elliott asked whether the City Councilmembers have any objections to retaining currently stored records as they are, related to complaints and discipline. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked how long the Mayor wants to retain documents. She added the Police Department might not have sufficient storage space. She noted the State requires 7 years retention. Mayor Elliott stated he would like to retain current records for the next 2 years. He asked whether storage space is an issue. Chief Gannon stated storage is not an issue, and records can be kept as long as legally required or longer if requested. He added records can be kept until the Mayor is satisfied with what you are looking for. Mayor Elliott stated he would like to request a time frame for maintaining all current records as is for the next two years, and that the City Council be notified if there is going to be a purging of records. Mr. Boganey stated, if the City Council desires, City Staff will not purge any records for the next two years. 07/27/20 -12- DRAFT Councilmember Graves stated she does not have a problem with retaining records for the next two years and doing a reassessment at that time. She added the community would benefit from having complaints related to use of force kept on file for a longer time. Mayor Elliott asked what languages the complaint forms are available in. Commander Flesland stated the documents on the City website can be translated into many languages. He added he is unsure if the paper form is available in Spanish as well as English. He agreed to look into that and get the information to Mr. Boganey Mayor Elliott stated Brooklyn Center has a diverse population, more diverse even than Minneapolis and St. Paul. He added the City of St. Paul has a police/civilian Internal Affairs Review Commission (IARC) made of up 9 St. Paul residents that reviews cases and makes disciplinary and policy recommendations to the Police Chief related to conduct complaints, subject to the Minnesota Peace Officer Discipline Procedure Act. He noted the IARC is essential to the trust that exists between the Police Department and the community they serve. Mayor Elliott stated the IARC has forms available in many different languages, including Hmong, Somali, Spanish and Vietnamese. He added this type of mission does more toward transparency and trust between the community and the Police Department. He noted he would like to propose having something like that in Brooklyn Center. Chief Gannon stated he would defer to Mr. Boganey. He added that type of Commission is usually funded by the City, and there would be a funding issue with that. He noted he is not prepared to give an answer on this issue at this time. Mayor Elliott asked, putting the funding issue aside, whether this is something the City could do. Mr. Boganey stated he would not be opposed to it. He added he would want to review St. Paul’s Commission as well as other citizen review boards, as there are others across the country, and some work well but some do not. He stressed the importance of evaluating all the options, determining whether there is added value, and bringing all the facts and information to the City Council for review and consideration. He noted he would be happy to put together a review. Mayor Elliott agreed, adding he has already started to compile data. He asked whether the general concept is something Mr. Boganey would be in favor of. Mr. Boganey stated it depends on many factors. He added if it is done well, and the City Council agrees that it will add value, then it absolutely can be done. Councilmember Graves stated this concept aligns well with the City Council’s previous discussions about including voices of those closest to the pain, being inclusive, and getting community input. She added she would like to look at what other cities have done, and review possibilities in a strategic and thoughtful way. She noted looking at the city’s framework and possible alternatives in tandem might be a good way to approach it. Councilmember Graves asked for clarification with regard to potential backlog of rape kits, and sexual assault cases that have been referenced in the press. She asked what the Brooklyn Center Police Department’s policy is regarding the processing of rape kits. 07/27/20 -13- DRAFT Chief Gannon stated sexual assault cases are very rare. He added the Department’s policy is that these types of cases are sent to the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA) for immediate processing. He noted there is no backlog of these cases within the Agency. Councilmember Graves thanked Chief Gannon for that information. She added she hopes the Police Department continues to advocate for victims of sexual assault. Mayor Elliott thanked Commander Flesland and Chief Gannon for their presentation. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS -None. 9. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS 9a. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-061 REGARDING THE RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 2020-006 SUBMITTED BY MATT DURAND FOR APPROVAL OF A SITE AND BUILDING PLAN AND ISSUANCE OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A STANDALONE CAR WASH ON BUILDING SITE E WITHIN THE SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING PUD (1080 SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING) City Planner Ginny McIntosh reviewed Planning Commission Application No. 2020-006 for a Special Use Permit for a stand-alone car wash in Shingle Creek Crossing. She provided background on the case, including a request from the developer, Frank Gatlin, in May 2020 for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) amendment to Shingle Creek Crossing that would allow certain sites to transition from restaurant use only to allow for development of the proposed car wash. She added that PUD amendment request was approved but not the carwash itself. She noted tonight’s request is for approval of a 3,667 square foot stand-alone car wash and related site improvements on Building Site E. Ms. McIntosh stated the developer, Frank Gatlin, originally sought to locate the car wash on Site R or T near the Sears building, but Sears would not allow a car wash on those sites. She added ultimately Site E was identified as the most appropriate of the available sites in Shingle Creek Crossing. Ms. McIntosh reviewed specific aspects of the application, including car wash design, parking, and traffic. She added Kimley-Horn provided a traffic study, and estimated a total of 300 car wash trips per day, with 32 trips occurring between 2:15-3:15 p.m. She noted that is consistent with standards for this particular type of use. Ms. McIntosh stated City Staff determined that there is sufficient space for stacking of 13-14 vehicles in each of three lanes. Access would be tight for garbage and delivery trucks, and City Staff has requested that a proposed median be removed, and the drive aisle reduced by 2 feet. City Staff has also requested that a landscape buffer be maintained. The applicant has confirmed that trash is picked up on Friday mornings, and there are no concerns about access or blockage. Each 07/27/20 -14- DRAFT car wash takes 1.5 minutes, with three car washes in the tunnels, and with full car wash and vacuum cars are expected to be on site for 10-15 minutes. The model is designed to be quick and easy. Ms. McIntosh stated 17 parking stalls required, which is what the applicant is providing in the site plan. Building Site D will retain 48 parking spaces; however, parking in the PUD is communal and averages out, and City Staff is not concerned about parking on Site D. Ms. McIntosh stated, if this application is approved, the PUD Master Plan will need to be updated with all changes. Ms. McIntosh stated additional documentation may be required for noise related to vacuums, and approval from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) may be required for collection of debris from the underground pits, and would be written into the Conditions for Approval. Employees in Building D, who are currently using the trash enclosure on Site E, would need to ensure that they have sufficient trash enclosures and screening. Issues in the PUD related to trash and litter have been noted in the Staff Report. Ms. McIntosh stated City Staff have reviewed the proposed landscaping plan and are encouraging the applicant to look at opportunities for year-round landscaping. She added the applicant is encouraged to provide landscaping on the east side of the property near Shingle Creek, to enhance the natural spaces and provide additional stormwater management. Ms. McIntosh stated both the Planning Commission and City Council have expressed concerns about impacts to the daylit portion of Shingle Creek. City Staff have provided additional documentation on the daylighting of Shingle Creek, in terms of stormwater and gray water. She added the gray water will be sent to the sanitary sewer treatment plant in St. Paul operated by the Metropolitan Council. She noted the stormwater will enter the onsite infiltration system by curb and gutter and will be routed south to an infiltration pond and under Highway 100 before entering Shingle Creek in Centerbrook Golf Course. She noted water from the car wash tunnel will not be collected as stormwater. Ms. McIntosh stated water, soap and particles under the car wash tunnel will enter a settling tank filtration system, and debris will be collected on a regular basis by maintenance crews. Ms. McIntosh stated the proposed plans were reviewed by the Assistant City Engineer, Hennepin County, the Metropolitan Council, and no concerns about impact were noted. Ms. McIntosh stated, prior to the Planning Commission meeting, public notice was posted, and notification sent to nearby property owners. Responses were initially received from two residents and two businesses. The first resident responded via email, and was excited about having a car wash, and suggested that the express lane be closed on trash day. The second resident’s comment was received through Request Tracker, and they noted that the car wash should not be allowed on Shingle Creek. City Staff contacted the resident and provided a copy of the Staff Report, after which the resident responded that the application sounds better than it seemed before and noted there are many downsides to holding out to planning. 07/27/20 -15- DRAFT Ms. McIntosh reviewed comments received during the public hearing at the July 9, 2020 Planning Commission meeting. The first resident stated the City cannot seem to build or support a restaurant in the area, and a car wash is a good choice. The second resident stated he is looking forward to having a car wash in Brooklyn Center, as he would like to keep his dollars in Brooklyn Center rather than travel to get car washes. Another resident stated he is still concerned about the visual aspects of the proposal, and less than overjoyed about the location so close to Shingle Creek. Ms. McIntosh stated comments were received from Bank of America and TCF Bank, and both were supportive of the car wash. Ms. McIntosh stated the Planning Commission engaged in a lengthy discussion and had many questions for the applicant and developer. Commissioner Koenig requested that City Staff provide background information regarding the history of the Shingle Creek Crossing PUD for the new Commissioners, as it was the first meeting for almost the entire Planning Commission. Frank Gatlin joined that meeting and was able to provide information and updates on the PUD history. Ms. McIntosh stated the Planning Commission had comments including one Commissioner who was insistent about looking at water reclamation systems, and questions about extracting debris from the site. A Commissioner asked the applicant about his history with Holiday Station Stores and car wash operations. There were questions from Commissioners about impacts to Shingle Creek and water quality. Ms. McIntosh stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of Planning Application No. 2020-006 on a 6-1 vote. Ms. McIntosh stated City Staff requested a review from the Watershed District, who provided a memo after reviewing the plans and confirmed their agreement with City Staff’s assessments. She added, in summary, the Watershed District indicated that the proposed project is consistent with Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission rules regarding stormwater mitigation and runoff. Ms. McIntosh stated City Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution approving Planning Commission Application No. 2020-006 for approval of site and building plan, and issuance of a Special Use Permit to operate a stand-alone car wash on Building Site E within Shingle Creek Crossing Planned Unit Development, also known as 1080 Shingle Creek Crossing, based on findings of fact and submitted documentation, as amended by the conditions of approval in the Resolution. Ms. McIntosh stated representatives of Gatlin Development and Kimley-Horn had joined the meeting, as well as the applicant, Matt Durand, and the Assistant City Engineer. Councilmember Butler stated her main concern was the environmental impact of the project, as car washes use chemicals, and the staff presentation cleared that up for her. She added she has been very focal about trash in Shingle Creek Crossing, and people clean out their cars at car washes, which could lead to more trash in the area. She added the City has been promised that the cleanliness of the area will be improved, but that has not happened, and she does not have faith 07/27/20 -16- DRAFT that this will be handled any differently. She noted she would prefer something else on the site but acknowledged the feedback of the Planning Commissioners. She expressed her support of moving the application forward. Councilmember Ryan expressed his appreciation for Councilmember Butler’s concerns and ongoing efforts to press for real solutions for the littering and trash in Shingle Creek Crossing. He added he appreciates that this proposal was thoroughly vetted by City Staff. Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2020-061 Regarding the Recommended Disposition of Planning Commission Application No. 2020-006 Submitted by Matt Durand for Approval of a Site and Building Plan and Issuance of a Special Use Permit for a Standalone Car Wash on Building Site E Within the Shingle Creek Crossing PUD (1080 Shingle Creek Crossing). Discussion during motion: Councilmember Graves stated she also had reservations about environmental issues and the overall site. She added she appreciates that the developer was willing to compromise and work with the City Council to focus on a change of use for this particular site in the PUD, and not a grouping of sites. She noted the application passed environmental review requirements, and planning requirements. Councilmember Graves stated she had noted that she would like to see an ice cream shop or food trucks, although that is not part of the proposal. She added, in addition to the environmental stewardship that will be executed, it will be important to make it a welcoming space in the community. She noted families love going to car washes, and this site could offer a positive experience that is community and family friendly. She expressed her support for the proposal. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she appreciates the comments of her colleagues. She added she is glad this will be a nice service entity within the City, and she is satisfied by the appearance of the elevations and the environmental concerns. She expressed support for the car wash. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated hopefully this business will take pride in their appearance and its staff will maintain the exterior to high standards. Mayor Elliott stated he supports having a car wash in Brooklyn Center, but he has concerns about this location as there are better locations for a car wash in Brooklyn Center. He added he would prefer to see a nice sit-down restaurant with views of the daylit Shingle Creek and beautiful scenery. He noted Brooklyn Center must continue to press for the kinds of businesses, like restaurants, ice cream shops and other local businesses, that will create an environment that residents can enjoy, and not settle for whatever we can get, which is what this project feels like. He expressed concern that, if all the City can get is a car wash, the City is in trouble. 07/27/20 -17- DRAFT Mayor Elliott stated he does not support the proposal and will be voting against it. He added he is happy that the Shingle Creek Watershed does not have any concerns, and that the Pollution Control Agency will be reviewing the plans as well. Mayor Elliott voted against the same. Motion passed 4-1. Consideration of a Motion to Adjourn Mayor Elliott asked whether the remaining Work Session items could wait. Mr. Boganey agreed. Mayor Elliott called for a motion to adjourn. Councilmember Butler moved to adjourn. Councilmember Ryan stated there is still another Agenda Item, 10A, Resolution regarding Juneteenth. Mayor Elliott seconded the motion to adjourn so it could be voted down. Motion to adjourn failed 4-0 (Councilmember Graves did not respond). 10. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS 10a. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-060 SUPPORTING FEDERAL LEGISLATION RECOGNIZING JUNE 19TH, KNOWN AS JUNETEENTH, AS A NATIONAL HOLIDAY Mayor Elliott read in full a Resolution supporting federal legislation recognizing Juneteenth as a national holiday. Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2020-060 Supporting Federal Legislation Recognizing Juneteenth as a National Holiday. Motion passed 4-0 (Councilmember Graves did not respond). 11. COUNCIL REPORT -None. 12. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded adjournment of the City Council meeting at 9:24 p.m. Motion passed 4-0 (Councilmember Graves did not respond). C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:8 /10/2 0 2 0 TO :C ity Council F R O M:C ur t Boganey, C ity M anager T H R O U G H :D r. Reggie Edw ards , D eputy C ity M anager BY:A lix Bentrud, D eputy C ity C lerk S U B J E C T:A pprov al of L icenses B ackground: T he following bus ines s es /pers ons have applied for C ity licens es as noted. Each bus ines s /person has fulfilled the requir ements of the City O rdinance gov er ning respec4ve licens es , s ubmi5ed appropriate applica4ons, and paid pr oper fees . A pplicants for r ental dw elling licenses are in compliance with C hapter 12 of the C ity C ode of O rdinances , unless comments are noted below the property addr es s on the a5ached rental r epor t. Entertainment L icens e Earle Brown H eritage Center 6155 Ear le B rown D riv e Brooklyn C enter, 5 5 4 3 0 H ospitality A ccomodaons L icense C ountry I nn & S uites 2550 F reew ay Blv d Brooklyn C enter, 5 5 4 3 0 M e chanical L icenses A quarius Water C ondi4 oning 3180 C ounty D r L i5le C anada, 55117 C omfort ma5ers 18071 Ter ritor ial R d M aple G rov e, 5 5 3 6 9 Farr P lumbing 2525 Nevada Ave N G olden Valley, 5 5 4 2 7 M aster M echanical 1027 G emini R d Eagan, 55121 Van K irk H ea4ng & A ir 4505 C rosstown B lvd Ham L ake, 55304 I ntoxicang and S unday L iquor L icense I rie Vybz Jamaican Res taurant 6056 S hingle C reek P kw y Brooklyn C enter 55430 AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip4on Upload D ate Ty pe Rental C riter ia 7/7/2020 Backup M aterial 08-10-2020 Rentals 8/4/2020 Backup M aterial Page 2 of 2 b.Police Service Calls. Police call rates will be based on the average number of valid police calls per unit per year. Police incidences for purposes of determining licensing categories shall include disorderly activities and nuisances as defined in Section 12-911, and events categorized as Part I crimes in the Uniform Crime Reporting System including homicide, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, theft, auto theft and arson. Calls will not be counted for purposes of determining licensing categories where the victim and suspect are “Family or household members” as defined in the Domestic Abuse Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section 518B.01, Subd. 2 (b) and where there is a report of “Domestic Abuse” as defined in the Domestic Abuse Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section 518B.01, Subd. 2 (a). License Category Number of Units Validated Calls for Disorderly Conduct Service & Part I Crimes (Calls Per Unit/Year) No Category Impact 1-2 0-1 3-4 units 0-0.25 5 or more units 0-0.35 Decrease 1 Category 1-2 Greater than 1 but not more than 3 3-4 units Greater than 0.25 but not more than 1 5 or more units Greater than 0.35 but not more than 0.50 Decrease 2 Categories 1-2 Greater than 3 3-4 units Greater than 1 5 or more units Greater than 0.50 Property Code and Nuisance Violations Criteria License Category (Based on Property Code Only) Number of Units Property Code Violations per Inspected Unit Type I – 3 Year 1-2 units 0-2 3+ units 0-0.75 Type II – 2 Year 1-2 units Greater than 2 but not more than 5 3+ units Greater than 0.75 but not more than 1.5 Type III – 1 Year 1-2 units Greater than 5 but not more than 9 3+ units Greater than 1.5 but not more than 3 Type IV – 6 Months 1-2 units Greater than 9 3+ units Greater than 3 Property Address Dwelling Type Renewal or Initial Owner Property Code Violations License Type Police CFS * Final License Type ** Previous License Type *** 2403 54th Ave N 2 Family 1 Unit Initial Brittney Lundeen 0II IIN/A 6019 Colfax Ave N Single Initial Alice Teamah Cooper 1 II II N/A 3307 63rd Ave N Single Renewal Rosemond Coleman ‐ met requirements 0 I 0 I III 2107 70th Ave N Single Renewal Xiong Lin / Infinite Property 1 I 0 I I 6018 Camden Ave N Single Renewal Crystal Brummer / Brummer Realty 9 III 0 III I 3612 Commodore Ave N Single Renewal IH3 Property Illinois LP ‐ missing cpted 4 II 0 II IV 1112 Emerson La Single Renewal Mark Ronea / Bodhi Tree ‐ met requirements 1I 0 IIV 6349 Halifax Dr Single Renewal Qiang Fang 1 I 0 I II 6012 Kyle Ave N Single Renewal James Hager 1 I 0 I II 6900 Newton Ave N Single Renewal FYR SFR Borrower ‐ met requirements 2 I 0 I IV 7024 Newton Ave N Single Renewal Troy Phingsten 1 I 0 I I 5712 Northport Dr Single Renewal Cindy & Raymond Scherbing 0 I 0 I II 3007 Ohenry Rd Single Renewal IH3 Property Illinois 6 III 0 III I 5836 York Ave N Single Renewal Courtney Thao Tran 0 I 0 I I 5918 Zenith Ave N Single Renewal Traci Austin & Dylan DeMarais 0 I 0 I II * CFS = Calls For Service for Renewal Licenses Only (Initial Licenses are not applicable to calls for service and will be listed N/A.) ** License Type Being Issued *** Initial licenses will not show All properties are current on City utilities and property taxes Rental Licenses for Council Approval on August 10, 2020 C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:8 /10/2 0 2 0 TO :C ity Council F R O M:C ur t Boganey, C ity M anager T H R O U G H :D or an C ote, P ublic Works D irector BY:C y nthia M aj ors, P ublic Wor ks A dminis tra,v e Technician S U B J E C T:Res olu,on D eclaring a P ublic Nuis ance and O rdering the Removal of D ead Trees at Cer tain P r oper ,es in Brooklyn Center, M N B ackground: T he a3ached r es olu,on repres ents the official C ity C ouncil ac,on required to expedite remov al of diseas ed trees that w ere recently marked by the City Tree I ns pector. The City has maintained a policy of removing and properly dis pos ing of diseased trees in order to pr ev ent tree dis eas es from s preading throughout the community. T he r emoval of dis eas ed trees is defined in C ity O rdinance C hapter 20-202 and 19-105. A lthough the C ity has his torically focused on D utch E lm disease, other trans mis s ible dis eas es and infesta,ons ar e addres s ed as w ell. P roperty owner s ar e given the opportunity to remov e the dis eas ed tree on their own or enter into an agreement to allow the City to remove the dis eas ed tree. W here an agreement w ith the property owner is executed, a minimal administra,ve charge of $50 is applied to the cos ts as s ociated w ith the tree removal. A ?er a diseas ed tr ee is declared a public nuis ance by the City Council, another C ompliance No,ce will be prov ided to the pr oper ty owner allow ing addi,onal ,me, at leas t five (5) days , for v oluntary correc,on, again providing an op,on for an agreement w ith the City. I f the property ow ner does not correct the viola,on or enter into an agreement, the City w ill r emove the diseased tree. A n administra,ve abatement s ervice charge w ill be imposed based on the cos t of the abatement, with a minimum charge of $150. B udget I ssues: T he C ity's shar e of the cos t of remov al for dis eas ed trees within the public r ight-of-w ay and on C ity property is included in the 2020 budget under the P ublic Works Fores try opera,ng budget. The cos t of remov al for dis eas ed trees located on private property is the responsibility of the res pec,ve property ow ner, and if unpaid, is s pecially asses s ed to the pr oper ty. S trate gic Priories and Values: S afe, S ecure, S table C ommunity AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip,on Upload D ate Ty pe Res oluion 8/5/2020 Resolu,on L e3er Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. _______________ RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DEAD TREES AT CERTAIN PROPERTIES IN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, Brooklyn Center City Code Section 20-202 and 19-101 thru 19-106, declares any dead tree a public nuisance and provides for abatement by the City if not corrected by the property owner; and WHEREAS, removal of dead trees and abatement of the public nuisance is necessary to prevent the hazard and to protect the safety of the public in neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, a Notice to Abate Nuisance and a Dead Tree Removal Agreement has been issued to the owners of certain properties in the City of Brooklyn Center giving the owners ten (10) days to remove dead trees on the owners’ property; and WHEREAS, the City can expedite the removal of these dead trees by declaring them a public nuisance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The dead tree at the following address is hereby declared to be a public nuisance. Property Address Tree Type Tree Number 6918 Halifax Ave N Maple 12 2. After ten (10) days from the date of the initial notice, the property owner(s) was notified of the council action regarding the determination by the City Council declaring the dead tree a public nuisance. 3. The property owner(s) will receive a final written notice providing five (5) business days in which to contest the determination of the City Council by requesting, in writing, a hearing. Said request shall be filed with the City Clerk. 4. After five (5) days, if the property owner fails to request a hearing, the tree(s) shall be removed by the City. The cost of abatement shall be recorded and become the personal responsibility of the owner of record. If unpaid, the costs shall be specially assessed to the property in accordance with city codes and Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429. RESOLUTION NO. ______________ August 10, 2020 Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Council/E D A Work S ession V I RT UA L meeting being conducted by electronic means in accordance with Minnesota S tatutes, section 13D.021 P ublic portion available for connection https://zoom.us/j/96610478372? pwd=eF J mMkprMkNV V mF2S kN0YnJ MMFlF Zz09 A ugust 10, 2020 AGE NDA AC T I V E D I S C US S IO N I T E M S 1.Environmental S tewardship (L itter and Trash Nuisance) 2.Housing P olicy Discussion 3.Brooklyn Center Beautification and P ublic Art Master P lan 4.C A R E S A C T F unding A ppropriations P E ND I NG L I S T F O R F UT URE WO RK S E S S IO NS 1.Pending I tems City-wide S ewer Access Charge Policy - 8/24 Council P olicy for City Charter requirement of Mayor's signature on all contracts - 8/24 Tobacco Regulations - 8/24 Highway 252/694 Update - 8/24 Strategic P lans for years 2018-2020 and 2021-2023 Council's Retreat Follow up NO A H P reservation P rogram Review Special Assessment Policy Earle Brown name Vehicle Tow Policy Citizen's Review Committee Organic Recycling MEMOR ANDUM - C OUNCIL WOR K SESSION DAT E:8/10/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, C ity Manager T HR O UG H:N/A BY:Meg Beekman, C ommunity Development Director and Dr. R eggie Edwards , Deputy C ity Manager and Acting C S UBJ EC T:Environmental S tewardship (Litter and Tras h Nuisance) Recommendation: - S taff recommends that the C ouncil hear a presentation on C ity efforts that are underway and planned to address the issue of litter and trash scattered throughout business areas and thoroughfares in the C ity. S taff recommends that the C ouncil provide direction to staff regarding the creation of new or amending policies or ordinances. Background: O ver the pas t few years, the C ity C ounc il has expres s ed c onc erns about litter and trash sc attered throughout busines s areas in the C ity. In Marc h 2020, the thawing of winter s now that expos ed c overed litter and the onset of C O VI D-19 with the dis carding of masks and gloves exac erbated the issue of litter and tras h. An inc reas e in vacant commerc ial properties further added to the problem. In addition, the c ity has seen a s teep inc reas e in the number of illegal dumpings. T his has affected parks , rights-of-way, EDA-owned land, as well as commerc ial properties . C ode Enforcement along has overs een the c lean up of 44 illegal dumpings s inc e January just on EDA-owned and EDA-adjacent property. C ommercial property managers are feeling overwhelmed with the increase in litter, c ombined with fewer s taff due to the pandemic and recent civil unrest. C ub F oods and Walmart for example have reported being down over 20 perc ent of their normal staff from people who aren’t coming into work or have quit. T he C ounc il c harged staff with developing strategies to address the issue of the ongoing litter and tras h problem. S taff firs t identified c urrent meas ures taken to keep busines s areas as litter and trash free as possible, whic h inc lude the following: C lean-up days C itizen volunteer clean-ups S hopping cart c ollecting on average 8 to 12 shopping c arts per day, mostly Wal-Mart Knoc k & Talk c ode enforcement S weeping of Xerxes Avenue almos t daily for garbage P res cription Landsc ape takes litter out of the center is land on Bass Lake R oad at S hingle C reek C ros s ing weekly. Bus stops are pick up 2-3 times a week, empty garbage and litter pick up. In spite of thes e efforts , litter and tras h continue to be a problem. In moving forward to meet the c harge of the C ouncil, staff developed strategies with the following as s umptions in mind: T he litter and trash issue is beyond the capac ity of the C ity to addres s alone At the c ore of the problem is the behavior of people who litter for various reasons C urrent C ity efforts are not sufficient to res olve the issue or problem T he C ity can be clean and appear aes thetic ally pleas ing without the s cattering of litter and trash Transient visitors or travelers present unique challenges with regards to littering and trash At the outset of this effort, it was critical to clearly and succ inc tly articulate the problem of “the nuisance of litter and shopping carts discarded throughout business areas and thoroughfares” prior to c ompleting the charge. W hile bus inesses may and have been enablers of littering by providing disposable litter pac king or lac k of rec eptac les for trash, the problem was or is not a problem with bus inesses caretaking of their property. C ode Enforcement s taff s pends a signific ant amount of time communic ating with and educ ating commerc ial property managers on the need to keep up their properties. Inspec tors s weep primary commerc ial c orridors daily. It is es timated that approximately .75 F T E of C ode Enforcement time is spent on commerc ial properties . During the pandemic, this amount of time was signific antly reduc ed due to staff primarily working from home; however, all ins pections s taff are bac k to normal hours now. C ommercial property managers generally have been respons ive to complaints when they are brought forward. Most c ommercial properties have dedic ated s taff to do daily litter pick-up in parking lots and s urrounding boulevards ; however, they report being overwhelmed by the amount of litter and frequency of finding it. S trategies: S taff conduc ted res earch to gather understanding of ideas and s trategies employed in private, public and non- profit s ectors to maintain c lean and as cetically pleasing in high-foot traffic public spac es (i.e. malls , college campus es , nationally known museums , hotels , and parks and cities ). S taff framed the strategies in three areas inc luding; patterns of behavior, struc ture, and mindset based upon a well-establis hed s ystemic problem solving methodology. R es earch finding revealed the following example s trategies: Behavior – S hopping and getting directly into a car High sets of eyes on the public s pace (i.e. other cus tomers, c ameras , s taff, etc.) C urfew and parent s upervis ion requirement S tructure – S taffing for c lean-up and monitoring Ambas s ador c lean up and welc ome program Unified busines s ownership of clean-up (i.e. bus iness as s ociation, bus iness clean up district, etc .) Mindset Aes thetic ally pleas ing and pride filled spac e design P ublic ly es tablished expectations of cleanliness Viewed as one unified bus iness area In addition, attac hed are memos prepared by the C ity Attorney that address the regulatory s trategies available to the C ity to addres s litter and trash enforcement and clean up. T he C ode Enforc ement proc es s to address a complaint, whether a c omplaint that has been c alled in or one identified through proac tive sweeps , generally inc ludes the following steps : Ins pect to verify complaint is a violation Notify property owner/respons ible party of violation and issue a correc tion order providing a c ertain amount of time (us ually 7 days ) to remedy the violation. F ollow-up ins pection. If violation remains a s econd c orrection order may be is s ued providing another s et amount of time (us ually another 7 days ). Depending on the nature of the violation, it may be eligible for abatement. In which c as e the property owner/respons ible party is notified that an abatement is in proc es s . T he C ounc il then mus t declare the violation a public nuis anc e and order the abatement. If the violation c ontinues after the C ouncil action, staff will initiate and c onduct an abatement. Acc ording to the C ity Attorney, there may be options to expedite this process; however, property owners are allowed due process, and any expedited proc es s will still require time for property owners to correc t the violation thems elves prior to abatement. F urther, the nature of litter is that the violation c hanges from day-to- day as parking lots are cleaned up and new litter is dropped, calling into ques tion the ability for the C ity to initiate an abatement on a new violation. O ne solution might include alloc ating a greater amount of C ode Enforc ement time to c ommercial properties. S ome c ities have dedic ated code enforc ement staff that foc us on commerc ial areas. T he purpose of the inc reas es staff would not necessarily be to inc reas e c ode enforcement actions, since mos t busines s es c omply when complaints are brought to their attention, but rather to focus greater attention on relations hip building and educ ation efforts around the issues assoc iated with property upkeep. As staff prepared to bring forth pilot s trategies in three key areas including: 1. C reating value based s paces (s ense of pride) 2. Developing of litter and trash prevention meas ures 3. Employing clean-up actions P ilots in the three areas mentioned were develop jus t before the onset of C O VI D-19 and the budgetary impac t, thereof. S taff will c ontinue to seek implementing the pilot strategies ; however, they will need to reconfigure in light of C O VI D-19. As mentioned above, that the issue litter and trash was exacerbated by the thawing of winter snow that exposed covered litter and the ons et of C O VI D-19 with the disc arding of mas ks. In respons e to the immediate need of maintaining cleanliness in the C ity busines s areas s taff are exploring c ode-enforc ement and staff c lean-up options . T hese s trategies would apply to the s hort-term need of c lean-up during an unprec edented pandemic. T hes e measures would not be intended to res olve the issue of trash and litter nuis anc e in the long-term. Policy Issues: Does the C ouncil have ideas or direc tion to staff regarding c reation of new or amending policies or ordinanc es pertaining to litter and trash nuisance? S trategic Priorities and Values: Enhanc ed C ommunity Image AT TAC HME N T S: Desc ription Upload Date Type Enforcement P rocedures Under Exis ting C ode 7/21/2020 C over Memo BC Beautification — G arbage on private property 7/21/2020 C over Memo 1 625999v1BR291-4 Kennedy Troy J. Gilchrist 470 US Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis MN 55402 (612) 337-9214 telephone (612) 337-9310 fax tgilchrist@kennedy-graven.com http://www.kennedy-graven.com & Graven C H A R T E R E D Also: St. Cloud Office 501 W. Germain Street, Suite 304 St. Cloud, MN 56301 (320) 240-8200 telephone MEMORANDUM To: City of Brooklyn Center Working Group - Trash in Commercial Areas From: Troy Gilchrist Date: December 9, 2019 Re: Enforcement Procedures Under Existing Code As mentioned in the memorandum I provided the City dated September 17, 2019, the issue of trash is currently addressed in two chapters of the City code – Chapter 7 on garbage and Chapter 19 on public nuisances. Because the City could utilize either procedure, I will briefly describe the process to take an enforcement action under both. The following focuses specifically on the general trash situations we have been discussing and does not attempt to address emergencies or situations where the property owner is not known. I also offer some comments on both procedures and set out some possible approaches to more specifically address this issue going forward. CHAPTER 7 Prohibition/Requirement Code Section Code Language or Summary 7-104 “No person may throw, scatter or deposit, or cause or permit to be thrown, scattered or deposited any refuse, handbills, or other littering materials upon or in any public or private lands, bodies of water, vehicles or structures within the City. Every person must maintain his or her premises and abutting sidewalks and boulevard areas free of refuse litter.” 7-105, subd. 1 “Any accumulation of refuse on any premises not stored in containers which comply with this ordinance, or any accumulation of refuse on any premises for more than one week is hereby declared to be a nuisance.” 2 625999v1BR291-4 Abatement/Enforcement Code Section Code Language or Summary 7-105, subd. 1 “A nuisance may be abated by order of the officer charged by the city manager with enforcement of this section, and the costs of abatement may be assessed against the property on which the nuisance was found as provided in this section.” 7-105, subd. 3 The designated enforcement officer must provide written notice to the owner by mail or in person that: • Specifies the nature of the nuisance and ordering the nuisance to be abated; and • Specifies the steps to be taken to abate the nuisance and the time, not exceeding ten (10) days, within which the nuisance must be abated. 7-105, subd. 3 If the owner fails to clean up the property by the date indicated in the order, the city must provide the owner and occupant a written notice to the owner by mail or in person that provides at least 10 days’ notice of a hearing before the city council. 7-105, subd. 3 After providing the owner an opportunity to be heard at the hearing, the city council may “order that the nuisance be abated by the City.” 7-105, subd. 3 The section does not specifically talk about what the city does to abate, but presumes the city carries out the city council’s order to abate the nuisance. 7-105, subd. 3 “The city clerk must prepare and mail a bill to the property owner for the amount of the costs incurred by the City in abating a nuisance, including administrative and other related expenses.” 7-105, subd. 3 The bill is due and payable upon receipt, and if it is “not paid by the September 1 next following the abatement of the nuisance, the costs of abatement may be levied against the property pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429.” Comments • While the condition of allowing refuse to exist on property is prohibited, the abatement process is tied to conditions which are declared to be a nuisance. Under Section 7-105, a public nuisance only exists if refuse has accumulated for more than one week. • The continuously changing nature of this problem will make it difficult to pin down a specific condition that exists for more than a week to trigger this nuisance abatement process. Section 7-105 appears to contemplate a static condition of refuse on property rather than the more fluid condition of garbage being dropped, picked up, dropped again, possibly blowing in from other areas, etc. 3 625999v1BR291-4 • The abatement procedure itself does not provide for a swift resolution of the situation in that in entails a 10-day period in which the owner must abate the nuisance. If the person fails to correct the condition, city abatement does not occur until after there is notice and a hearing before the city council. • This process does provide for the eventual abatement of the condition by the city and assessing the costs incurred. CHAPTER 19 Prohibition/Requirement Code Section Code Language or Summary 19-102 • “Garbage includes all putrescible animal, vegetable or other matter that attends the preparation, consumption, display, dealing in or storage of meat, fish, fowl, birds, fruit, or vegetables, including the cans, containers or wrappers wasted along with such materials.” • “Rubbish is nonputrescible solid wastes such as wood, leaves, trimmings from shrubs, dead trees or branches thereof, shavings, sawdust, excelsior, wooden waste, printed matter, paper, paper board, paste boards, grass, rags, straw, boots, shoes, hats and all other combustibles not included under the term garbage.” 19-103 “It is hereby declared to be a public nuisance to permit, maintain, or harbor any of the following:” • “Garbage not stored in rodent free and fly-tight containers, or; garbage stored so as to emit foul and disagreeable odors, or; garbage stored so as to constitute a hazard to public health.” • “Accumulations of rubbish as defined herein.” Abatement/Enforcement Code Section Code Language or Summary 19-105 “When any nuisance is found to exist, the health officer of the City shall order the owner or occupant thereof to remove the same, at the expense of the owner or occupant, within a period not to exceed 10 days, the exact time to be specified in the notice.” 19-105 The owner may appeal the order as provided in Sections 12-1202 and 12- 1203 (see below). 19-105 If the owner fails to comply with the order, “[c]ompliance orders may be executed and special assessments levied by the City under the same 4 625999v1BR291-4 circumstances and following the same procedures as are set forth in Section 12-1206.” 12-1206 The city must provide the owner at least 10 days’ notice of a hearing before the city council. 12-1206 After providing the owner an opportunity to be heard, the city council adopts a resolution to have the city correct the deficiency. 12-1206 “The cost of such remedy shall be a lien against the subject real estate and may be levied and collected as a special assessment in the manner provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, but the assessment shall be payable in a single installment.” Appeal 12-1202 To appeal, the owner must, within 5 days of issuance of the order, file a written appeal with the department of planning and inspection along with a filing fee. A timely filing stays any further enforcement action. 12-1203 The city provides the owner at least 5 business days’ notice of a hearing before the city council (sitting as the board of appeals), which must be held within 30 days of when the appeal was filed. 12-1203 The section references the council hearing the appeal and “taking into consideration any advice and recommendation from the advisory housing commission.” This suggests the appeal should be sent to the commission for review and advice before the hearing. 12-1203 “The board of appeals may reverse, modify, or affirm, in whole or in part, the compliance order and may order return of all or part of the filing fee if the appeal is upheld.” Comments • The city would likely need to rely on garbage not being stored in a proper container as a basis for the nuisance here since showing an accumulation of rubbish may be difficult to sustain. • This process relies on the city’s health officer taking action, which I am not certain is an accurate reference to a current position within the city. • This abatement process involves the same 10-day notice and a hearing before the council before the city can act to abate the condition on its own. As such, it does not provide an efficient method for addressing an on-going, dynamic trash problem. 5 625999v1BR291-4 • Overall, this strikes me as a more useful process to address the situation than the abatement procedure set out in Chapter 7. Though as pointed out below, it would be helpful to have language in the code that specifically addresses these types of situations. Possible Abatement Options/Approaches • The city can utilize either of the above procedures to address the parking lot trash issue, but neither option is a long-term solution as they involve too much time to be an effective solution. Realistically, they will only work to address the situation if the businesses determine they want to avoid being the subject of such abatement procedures. • The city can explore amending its code to more specifically address this on-going trash issue on commercial properties. This would allow the city to develop language with these specific situations in mind rather than attempting to make provisions drafted with static conditions in mind apply to these more fluid situations. • One approach we could explore is to establish an expedited abatement procedure for repeat offenders. Expedited procedures exist for addressing emergencies, but I believe we can establish a process whereby the city council declares a business a repeat offender (and so has previously been through the abatement process) and authorizes the city to utilize an expedited process of giving notice and then taking action to abate if the property is not cleaned up by a certain date. We could attempt to set out this approach in a second or third abatement order issued by the city council for a particular property, but an expedited procedure will be more legally defensible if it is set out in the code. • Another option would be to consider an administrative penalty procedure to address these situations, rather than a traditional nuisance abatement procedure that is ran through the city council. I have not thought through exactly how to structure this process, but it would be processed at a staff level and appeals handled through a hearing officer instead of the city council. • A practical issue that could result if the city develops an expedited abatement process is that a business may end up relying on city staff as its parking lot clean up crew. If the city does wish to explore amending its code, we will want to keep this potential in mind and think of ways to try to avoid that outcome. Please feel free to let me know if there are any questions or if you would like additional information on any of the issues discussed in this memo. 593723v1BR291-4 Kennedy Josh Devaney 470 US Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis MN 55402 & Graven (612) 337-9285 telephone (612) 337-9310 fax jdevaney@kennedy-graven.com http://www.kennedy-graven.com C H A R T E R E D ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED MEMORANDUM To: Brooklyn Center City Council and Staff From: Josh Devaney, Troy Gilchrist Re: BC Beautification — Garbage on private property Date: July 15, 2019 Issue: What options does the City of Brooklyn Center have to address the on-going concern of businesses not picking up trash on their property? The City may use its pre-existing ordinances to enforce beautification, either through an abatement action or by passing a resolution adopting an administrative penalty for violations of the ordinances. Other cities in Minnesota generally provide for one or both of those options in their ordinances, with differences mostly appearing in how they assign responsibility to the property owner. An additional option could be for the City to take beautification responsibility on itself through the use of a special services district. I. Pre-existing Ordinances Currently, Brooklyn Center has two chapters in its code which address the issue of litter on private property. Each has its own enforcement mechanisms, but both may be cumbersome to use to address widespread and/or frequent violations. 593723v1BR291-4 Chapter 7 First, Section 7-102 has a requirement in subdivision 1 that the “owner of any premises” must “provide and keep on such premises sufficient containers for the storage of refuse accumulated on the premises between disposal or collection.” Subdivision 1 also requires that “[a]ll refuse on any premises must be stored in required containers.” Subdivision 4 requires that waste containers “must be maintained in a reasonable clean condition at all times” and cannot be permitted to be tipped over. Section 7-104 prohibits the scattering or depositing of litter on public or private lands and provides that “[e]very person must maintain his or her premises and abutting sidewalks and boulevard areas free of refuse litter.” Section 7-105 defines as a nuisance “[a]ny accumulation of refuse on any premises not stored in containers . . . or any accumulation of refuse on any premises for more than one week.” An abatement process is outlined in Section 7-105 where notice must be served on the owner identifying the nuisance, steps to take to abate it, and give a time (less than ten days) for the owner to take those steps. If the owner fails to do so, notice will need to be provided again for a hearing (at least ten days in advance) at which the owner can be heard. The city council can then order that the nuisance be abated by the City and costs be billed to the property owner. Chapter 19 In Section 19-103, it is “declared to be a public nuisance to permit, maintain, or harbor . . . [g]arbage not stored in rodent free and fly-tight containers . . . [or] accumulations of rubbish.” Just as in Chapter 7, there is an abatement process outlined in Section 19-105. The difference in Section 19-105 is that it states that a party can appeal the abatement order to the city council under the process outlined in 12-1202 and 12-1203. Those sections have a slightly 593723v1BR291-4 different process involving a written appeal, filing fee, and only five business day notice for a hearing. The General Nuisances portion or Chapter 19, which Section 19-103 is under, also has a penalty provision in Section 19-106, stating that “[a]ny person violating any of the provisions of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to a find of not more than $1,000” and/or up to 90 days of imprisonment. Each day the violation exists constitutes a separate offense. Administrative Penalty An additional enforcement option exists in the form of an administrative penalty. Under Section 18-204 of Brooklyn Center’s Code, “[a] violation of any provision of the City Code may be designated by resolution as an administrative offense, which may be subject to an administrative citation and civil penalties.” Therefore, the administrative penalty program can be used as an alternate means of enforcing the above Code provisions, if a resolution is adopted to that end. This may make enforcement actions much less of a burden. II. Ordinance Provisions Used by Other Cities Most cities in Minnesota have a similar ordinance structure to Brooklyn Center where they provide for abatement, administrative penalty, or both. Frequently the biggest difference is in what manner they opt to make owners responsible for trash on their property. Below is a small sampling showing some of those ways. Bloomington makes it a misdemeanor to have trash on a property not in the appropriate trash receptacle and states that an administrative penalty may be applied for such a violation. (Bloomington City Code, §§ 10.05, 10.14.02). 593723v1BR291-4 The City of Brooklyn Park has a system very similar to Brooklyn Center’s Chapter 7, in which an owner or occupant has the duty to maintain their property free of litter, and removal of litter can be effectuated through a notice-abatement process. (Brooklyn Park City Code, § 94.05). Violations are misdemeanors, but there is no administrative penalty provision as in Bloomington. (Id., § 94.99). Rochester’s Code states that open areas – defined as those not enclosed by a structure – must be maintained clear of garbage and debris and that anyone who allows garbage and debris to remain on their property have created a nuisance and are subject to a notice-abatement process. (Rochester City Code, §§ 7-3-21, 8-3-7). Eagan, Edina, and Maple Grove all find that garbage not stored in appropriate containers constitutes a public nuisance and may be cured by abatement. III. Special Service District Rather than place the duty of maintaining cleanliness on the owner and then trying to achieve compliance through issuing penalties, the City can establish a Special Service District (SSD) and take on the responsibility itself, with the cooperation of the businesses, using funds collected as service charges from businesses in the district. An SSD is a “defined area within the city where special services are rendered and the costs of the special services are paid from revenues collected from service charges imposed within that area.” Minn. Stat. § 428A.01, subd. 4. A special service is either a service not ordinarily provided or an increased level of a service already provided. Id. at subd. 3. Under Minn. Stat. § 428A.08, an SSD may be established if owners of 25% of the land area of the property that would be subject to the district and 25% of the net tax capacity of the property that would be subject to the district file a petition requesting a public hearing on the 593723v1BR291-4 SSD. The City may then adopt an ordinance to establish the SSD and begin supplying the special services and collecting service charges. Should the City wish, it may also create and appoint an advisory board for the special service district which would Minneapolis’s Downtown Improvement District (DID) and its associated “ambassadors” who walk the streets, clean the sidewalks, and offer directions to visitors is an example of an SSD. One limitation of these services is that, as extensions of the City, they only operate to the extent the City has authority. Therefore, street and sidewalk cleaning services can be provided without issue, but cleaning private parking lots or property would not be a service that could be offered without first securing consent of the property owner. Since consent isn’t compulsory, charging for services that are not equally provided could result in affected landowners filing objections to their inclusion in the special service district. Minneapolis gets around this by offering its graffiti removal service, which it does for sidewalks under the service charge, to private property owners at an additional cost. If the City is providing litter removal as part of a special cleaning service offered in the SSD, it could similarly allow businesses to opt in to allowing their private property, viewable from the right of way, be cleaned in this manner for an additional charge. MEMOR ANDUM - C OUNCIL WOR K SESSION DAT E:8/10/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, C ity Manager T HR O UG H: BY:Meg Beekman, C ommunity Development Director S UBJ EC T:Hous ing P olic y Dis cus s ion Recommendation: Background: Overview Housing and the polic y is s ues related to hous ing have become s ome of the most pressing and important matters fac ing c ommunities today. F or mos t s uburban communities , hous ing c ompris es a s ignificant majority of a cities land us e and tax bas e. Maintaining and preserving a s afe, quality, and des irable housing s toc k is critical to a c ommunity's long term economic health and res ilienc y. F urther, a divers e housing s toc k which offers a wide range of hous ing c hoic es and pric e points ensures that a community can be res ilient through economic ups and downs as well as provide housing options for a divers e population throughout their lives. In addition to maintaining a quality and diverse s upply of hous ing, communities are more and more becoming focus ed on c onc erns regarding livability and acc es s ibility of hous ing. T he Twin C ities M etropolitan Area is currently experience record low vacancy rates. According to M arquette Advisors’ midyear report from August 2019, the average vacancy rate across the seven-county metro area is 2.3 percent. Experts agree that a balanced rental market will typically see an average vacancy rate of around 5 percent. T he effect of low vacancy rates over time is increasing rents, a growing interest from outside investors, and landlords in a position to be choosier about who they rent to. B rooklyn C enter ’s Current R ental Housi ng T he result of the regional trends described above are being felt in B rooklyn Center. Vacancy rates in the community remain lower than the regional average, hovering around 2 percent. T his is common in communities with more affordable rental units. T hirty-seven percent of Brooklyn C enter's housing stock is comprised of rental units. Of the C ity’s single-family housing, about 8 percent are rental. Nearly 100 percent of the multi-family housing in Brooklyn C enter are one and two bedroom units built between 1961 and 1971, and nearly all of it is naturally occurring affordable housing (N O AH). Average rents in B rooklyn Center are naturally occurring affordable because the market rents, based on the age and condition of the units make them affordable at around 50 percent AM I in the metropolitan area. Rents in Brooklyn C enter are lower than the regional average. Approximately 90 percent of all of the housing units in Brooklyn C enter is N O AH . W hile N O AH properties are affordable, they can be at risk of being lost as market demand increases and rents continue to go up. T hey can also experience disinvestment over time, causing deterioration, loss of value, and most importantly poor quality or unsafe living situations if they are not properly inspected and maintained. At present 4.1 percent of all units are legally binding, or subsidized affordable units. 10.9 percent of rental units are legally binding affordable. S ubsidized affordable units are housing units that are required to maintain an affordable rent regardless of shifts in market demand. Due to their financing structure, they also must be maintained to a certain minimum standard. One of the goals of affordable housing advocates is to preserve existing N O AH properties by converting them to legally binding affordable units through N O AH preservation programs. With the construction of Sonder H ousing, Real E state E quities will be adding 270 units of legally binding new affordable housing units to the city. T hese will be the first new construction multi-family housing units built in B rooklyn Center since 1971, and will increase the percentage of legally binding affordable units to 6.6 percent of all units and 17.1 percent of rental units. The C i ty's 2040 Comprehensi ve P lan i denti fi es several broad housi ng goals 2040 Housing & Neighborhood Goals: P romote a diverse housing stock that provides safe, stable, and accessible housing options to all of Brooklyn Center ’s residents. Recognize and identify ways to match Brooklyn C enter ’s housing with the C ity’s changing demographics. E xplore opportunities to improve the C ity’s housing policies and ordinances to make them more responsive to current and future residents. Maintain the existing housing stock in primarily single-family neighborhoods through proper ordinances, incentive programs and enforcement. E xplore opportunities to incorporate new affordable housing into redevelopment areas that promote safe, secure and economically diverse neighborhoods. In addition to these goals, the 2040 Comprehensive P lan identifies implementation strategies as well as resources and tools for achieving its housing goals. T hese are contained in Chapters 4 and 9, of the Housing and Implementation chapters respectively (attached). Backgro und In April 2018, the City Council discussed several possible policies to address affordable housing issues. T he memo from that discussion is attached to this report. B ased on that discussion, C ouncil directed staff to move forward with a Tenant P rotection O rdinance, and in D ecember 2018, it was adopted. In M arch 2020, T he C ity C ouncil discussed housing policy as it centers around two distinct topic areas: 1) Housing choice - W hat is the composition and condition of the current housing stock? W hat are the current market demands for housing? H ow does the city's housing stock relate to the market, and does the city have enough and the right type to meet current and future need? 2) Affordable housing policies - W hat can the city do to improve livability and accessibility to quality affordable housing for residents? W hat best practices exist to support an effective approach to addressing the need for affordable housing in the community? What policies are most effective to prevent displacement? At the work session the C ouncil considered a work plan that would take a comprehensive review of the City’s housing policy approach related to these two distinct topic areas and provided direction to staff. T he staff report from that meeting is attached. At that meeting, the City Council expressed support to explore a N O AH preservation program and a mixed- income housing policy (or inclusionary housing policy) as part of the City’s strategy to create stable, quality housing for all incomes in the community. T he purpose of this discussion is to provide information on these two policy programs to the Council and get direction on how to proceed. Financial Implicatio ns o f H o using P o licy As part of Staff's research Ehler's was asked to analyze the impact of these programs on the C ity's tax base. T hey will provide a presentation at the work session with an overview of their analysis with greater detail on housing finance and how it relates to these two housing policy approaches. In B rooklyn Center, multi-family residential development does not generate high enough rents to cover the cost of construction. T herefore, any new multi-family development would very likely require some form of gap financing in order to be feasible. T here are different ways that developers can fill financial gaps: Federal low-income housing tax credits (L I H T C) State and/or C ounty grant sources State loan/mortgage programs L ocal Tax Increment F inancing L ocal Tax Abatement L ocal fee waivers L and use/zoning concessions Some of these sources require various forms of affordability and others do not. C ity required mixed-income requirements increase financial gaps, which must be filled by local sources. E hlers analyzed the cost per unit to construct new affordable units based on their affordability level and the length of time the affordability would be required. T his cost represents the likely gap to the project created with the inclusion of those units. T hey will discuss this in more detail during their presentation, but below is a table representing the results of their analysis. M ixed-I nco me Ho using Po licy A M ixed-I ncome Housing P olicy will prepare Brooklyn C enter to meet the needs for housing choices throughout the community as the City continues to grow. I t also aligns policy with other cities in the region and provides local developers with clear and consistent expectations of development in the community. A M ixed-I ncome Housing P olicy provides for a value exchange between the local developer and the community, providing affordable housing for residents while the developer receives a new project in their portfolio. K ey components of the M ixed-I ncome Housing P olicy include: A pplicability – T he policy will identify when it will apply. D ifferent cities have different standards as to when this trigger point occurs. Brooklyn P ark’s policy for example applies to all developments that add or create ten or more residential rental units and that receive: - C ity or E D A financial assistance - Master or amended P U D (would require a change of city ordinance) - Zoning C ode Amendments (would require a change of city ordinance); - Or Comprehensive P lan Amendments A ffo rdability requirements – T he P olicy would state what the affordability requirements are. S ome mixed income policies have options which allow developers to choose how many units, or at what affordability. P roviding options allows flexibility within a project. Below is an example of what that could look like. S ome mixed-income policies also allow developers to pay a fee to the city instead of providing units within their developments. F unds paid to the city are then used to create affordable housing elsewhere, either by funding a N O AH preservation program or funding the construction of new affordable units in other locations. E dina’s mixed-income policy is an example of one that provides this option. Options (choose one)Min. Number of Units Required Affordability S tandard 5%Affordable for HH at 30% AMI 10%Affordable for HH at 50% AMI 15%Affordable for HH at 60% AMI A ffo rdability perio d – T he policy will state how long the affordability is required for. 15-20 years is fairly common in these types of policies. Distribution of affordable units – T he polic y would typic ally s tate that the affordable housing units s hould be cons is tent to the market rate units in quality of c onstruc tion and finis h, with units intermixed within the s ame development. Non-discrimination – T he policy would typically state that developments covered by this P olic y must not dis criminate against tenants who pay rent with federal, state, or local public assistanc e, inc luding, but not limited to rental as s is tance, rent s upplements, and Hous ing C hoice Vouchers . Other considerations - M ixed income policies can also include other types of incentives to encourage or assist the developer with supplying the affordable housing. For example, one of the most expense aspects of construction that adds cost to projects, and thus drives up rent, is enclosed or underground parking. R educed parking requirements can have a significant effect on construction costs. T he C ouncil could consider including parking stall reductions as an additional incentive to providing mixed-income units. F inancial Impact Any mixed-inc ome polic y will likely have a financ ial impac t on propos ed rental hous ing developments . T he table below s hows possible financing “gaps ” at different ranges of affordability. T hese numbers are bas ed on a project that includes 150 units with a mix of studios, 1, 2, and 3-bedroom units and rents for $1.75 per s quare foot. T he table als o shows equity contributions at a level where the expec ted rate of c as h-on-cash return is at 9.5 percent. T he cash-on- cash return is an indic ator of what a developer would desire bas ed on risk to produc e the hous ing development. O ther factors c ould weigh into the decision on the developers equity contributions , s uc h as tax s avings and long- term c as h flow, which c ould impact the amount of equity a developer would be interes ted in inves ting. T he debt figures reflec t the maximum amount a private lender would likely lend to the project based on the c as h available to repay debt. Note these numbers represent a sample project and every development project has several variable fac tors that impact development sources of funds and costs including land c os ts, development c os ts and labor. N ote that certain funding sources bring their own affordability requirements above and beyond what might be included in a mixed-income policy. For example, T I F housing districts require 40 percent of the units to be affordable at 60 percent AM I or 20 percent of the units to be affordable at 50 percent AM I. Also note that other local funding sources can be stacked together to provide a financial package to help close financing gaps. C ompliance S imilar to a development agreement, affordability requirements for the development would be outlined in an Affordable Hous ing P erformance Agreement signed by the C ity and developer. T he P erformance Agreement would include the location and number of affordable housing units, rental terms and occ upancy requirements , timetable for compliance, affordability res tric tions and any other terms the C ity requires .To ens ure compliance with the P erformance Agreement, the C ity would require the property owners/managers to c onduct annual inc ome c ertific ations for hous eholds living in affordable units whic h would be reviewed by C ity s taff every three years . T he income qualific ation proc es s would follow the Hous ing and Urban Development (HUD) inc ome c ertific ation proc es s . S taff would monitor compliance and the C ity could c harge the property owner a fee to c over s taff expens es related to monitoring. T his would likely become part of the rental licensing process, but is not currently a function of the program. What are other Ci ti es i n the regi on doi ng to promote mi xed-i ncome or i nclusi onary housi ng? T he polic ies and prac tic es to promote mixed-inc ome and affordable hous ing vary from c ity to c ity. A number of other cities in the region have adopted mixed-income hous ing polic ies or use them in prac tic e. Brooklyn P ark adopted a mixed-inc ome polic y in 2018, which was largely bas ed on polic ies adopted by the C ity of S t. Louis P ark and the C ity of G olden Valley. C ities with known mixed-inc ome polic es or practices are listed below: S t. Louis P ark Edina G olden Valley Minneapolis S t. P aul Eden P rairie C haska N ext S teps S taff will move forward bas ed on the direction provided by the C ity C ouncil this evening. If the C ouncil choos es to move forward with adopting a mixed-income policy the next s teps would be: Drafting a mixed-inc ome polic y and bringing it bac k to C ity C ounc il for cons ideration Implementing the polic y N OAH P reservation P rogram As the C ity has done engagement for the 2040 C o mp rehens ive P lan and the O p p o rtunity S ite, many dis cus s ions have oc curred with renters around the community related to hous ing. O ne theme from these dis cus s ions has been a concern that the C ity’s foc us is to o muc h o n new c o ns truc tion o f affo rd ab le hous ing in the future on the O p p o rtunity S ite, and not enough on imp ro ving the exp erienc es and cos t of living of exis ting renters today. In fac t, preserving exis ting affo rd ab le ho us ing c an b e much for effic ient and c o s t effective than b uilding new affordable ho using. Many cities are develo p ing NO AH preservation programs with that go al in mind. A pres ervation program c an be s et up in various ways , but es s entially ho w they wo rk is to incentivize exis ting NO AH p ro p erty o wners into s etting as ide a perc entage o f rental units as legally b inding affo rd ab le units for a s et period of time. T he S tate o f Minnes ota provid es a p ro p erty tax break fo r sub s id ized rental p ro p erties und er the Lo w Income R ental C las s ificatio n P ro gram (LIR C ), commonly referred to as the "4d " p ro gram. 4d is one o f S everal tax classific ations the S tate of Minnes o ta ap p lies to rental property. C las s 4d property is taxed at a class rate of 0.75%, ap p ro ximately 40% les s than o ther c las s ificatio ns . No n-sub s id ized properties are eligib le for the 4d tax classific ation when a property meets two conditions : 1. T he property owner agrees to rent and inc ome restrictions s erving hous eholds at 60% of the AMI or below. 2. T he p ro p erty rec eives financ ial assistanc e fro m fed eral, s tate o r loc al government req uiring rent and inc ome res tric tions . At least 20% o f the units must meet the inc o me req uirements. T he 4d tax s tatus applies o nly to the rent/inc o me-q ualifying units . T he ap p licatio n deadline to Minnes o ta Hous ing is Marc h 31 of each year for taxes payable the following year. In order to d o this , the C ity would create a NO AH p res ervatio n fund. I t is estimated that the T I F 3 Housing F und will have a balance when T I F 3 dec ertifies at the end of 2021. T hes e fund s c ould be us ed to seed a NO AH preservation fund . S taff wo uld wo rk with exis ting rental p ro p erty o wners to p ro vide a modes t subs idy for building rehabilitation o r c ap ital imp ro vements, whic h would then be combined with a 4D tax c las s ification benefit to p ro vide a property tax b reak, currently amounting to 40%. I n exchange, the property owner would agree to set as id e certain units as affordable for a s et period of time. T he res ult is the preservation o f NO AH units through a legally b inding c o ntract. S taff has drafted a p ro p o s ed NO AH P reservation P ro gram whic h is attached to this report for disc ussion purpos es . Savi ngs to Rental P roperty Owners(Cost to O ther Taxpayers) Non-4d ap artments have a tax c las s rate o f 1.25%. Units c las s ified as 4d have a tax class rate of 0.75% (fo r the firs t tier). A bill that would red uc e the class rate fo r affo rd ab le rental hous ing fro m 0.75% to 0.25% was introduc ed at the Legis lature this year. W hile it didn't pass this s es s ion, it c o uld b e reintro d uc ed in future s es s ions. T his would increase the s avings per unit that a land lo rd c ould ac hieve, increas e the inc entive to partic ipate in the program, als o increasing the impac t on a c ity’s tax bas e. Example O ne: 50-unit building valued at $4,627,000 Non-4d property taxes estimate $4,627,000 x 0.0125 = $57,837.50 4d property taxes (all units ): $4,627,000 x .0075 = $34,702.50 S avings $23,135 ($462/unit) Example Two: 50-unit building valued at $4,627,000 Non-4d property taxes estimate: $4,627,000 x 0.0125 = $57,927.50 4d property taxes (all units ): $3,453,000 x .0025 = $11,567 S avings $46,360 ($927.21/unit) Brooklyn C enter 2020 C ertification of MN Low-Income R ental C lassific ation Addres s Total Units Q ualify P ercent P roperty Name 6130, 6138 BS 6200 F ranc e Ave N 23 100%Ewing S quare Townhouses 7256 Unity Ave N 112 100%Unity P lace 6121 Brooklyn Blvd 158 100%T he S anctuary at Brooklyn C enter 6915 Humboldt Ave N 50 100%Lynwood P ointe 6920 & 6910 Humboldt Ave N, 1302 & 1308 69th Ave N 128 100%C arrington Drive Total:471 Another way to analyze the affec t of a NO AH P res ervation program is on overall tax bas e. O ne example to illustrate this is if the C ity were to have a goal of eventually inc luding 20 perc ent of its rental units in the pres ervation program. T his would equate to 868 units. At pres ent there are 471 units already included in the 4d program with another 270 under c onstruc tion. T his would mean focus ing on adding an additional 127 units into the program. Assuming the tax rate reduction remains at 40 perc ent, the average unit will s ee a tax savings of $600 per year. T his would work out to be an annual property tax reduction from these multi-family units of $76,200. In addition to the annual property tax reduction, the program would include a one-time upfront incentive in the form of a matching grant that property owners would use for c ommon capital improvements to the building. Minneapolis provides very little inc entive. S t. Louis P ark provides more. F or Brooklyn C enter, S taff would propos e a matc hing grant up to $1,000 per unit not to exceed $25,000 per property to enc ourage c ommon area improvements and energy improvements to buildings. T his would encourage partic ipation as well as improvements to properties that would benefit all renters in the building. C urrent 4d P roperties in the C ity 4d P rograms in other C ities Minneapolis, S t. P aul, S t. Louis P ark, Bro o klyn P ark and Edina have approved 4d p ro grams. All programs are mo d eled after the p ro gram develo p ed by the C ity of Minneap o lis . T he p ro grams offer a mo d es t-sized grant and 4d property tax s tatus in exc hange for preserving affordability. Brooklyn P ark's program is als o paired with available financ ing to enc ourage nonp ro fit b uyers to purchas e NO AH properties to preserve them. It was through this program that they assisted the acquis ition of Huntington P lace by Aeon. Income Limits Benefits Time Limit Building S ize Other Minneapolis 20% of the units at 60% AMI $150 applic ation fee G rant of $100/unit Max grant=$1,000 10 years 2+Energy as s es s ment and improvements enc ouraged R ent increases for exis ting tenants <6% annually S t P aul 20% at 60% AMI (preferenc e to 50%) $150 application fee G rant of $100/unit 10 years 2+R ent increases for exis ting tenants < 3% annually Max grant= $1,000 S t Louis P ark 20% at 60% AMI $150 applic ation fee G rant of $200/unit Max grant=$6,000 10 years 3+R ent increases for exis ting tenants <5% annually Energy as s es s ment required Energy improvements enc ouraged Edina 20% at 60% AMI G rant of $100/unit Max G rant for Energy improvements $30,000 15 years 4+R ent increases for exis ting tenants < 6% annually Energy Assessment and Improvements Encouraged Area M edian Income R ent L imits - 2020 ---- Maximum Gross R ents by B edroom Size (4/1/2020) 0 1 2 3 4 50%AMI 905 970 1163 1344 1500 60%AMI 1086 1164 1396 1613 1800 70%AMI 1267 1358 1629 1882 2100 Bec ause rents in Brooklyn C enter are naturally more affordable, this program has the opportunity to be effective to lock in a percentage of units at 50-60 perc ent AMI now, before rents inc reas e to the point of being unaffordable. T hus preventing dis placement before it oc curs . F urther, becaus e landlords would not need to nec es s arily reduc e rents to partic ipate in the program, the barrier of entry is low, making it more likely to be s uc cessful. K ey C omponents of a N O AH P reservation P rogram Applicability - Different programs inc lude eligibility for different s ized buildings . To begin the program s taff would rec ommend focus ing on properties with five units or more. Affordability - Most c ities follow the state mandated 60 percent AMI affordability. Becaus e rents in Brooklyn C enter are on average more affordable, staff would recommend starting the program with the goal of ac hieving rents affordable at 50 percent AMI. If the C ity finds it too diffic ult to entic e property owners to participate at the lower affordability, the program could be reviewed. Affordability P eriod - Most c ities' programs provide an affordability requirement of 10-15 years . Eligibility - T he polic y would include eligibility in terms of which properties c ould apply for the program. S taff would recommend allowing Type I and I I rental licens e properties only to apply, as these properties have demons trated they are well maintained and are not experiencing deferred maintenanc e is s ues. N ext S teps S taff has begun drafting a NO AH P reservation program whic h is attac hed for disc ussion purpos es this evening. Based on the disc ussion this evening staff will make c hanges to the program and bring it back to C ouncil for c onsideration. Policy Issues: Mixed-Income Housing P olicy Disc ussion 1) Does the C ity C ouncil want to move forward with a mixed-inc ome housing policy? 2) If so: - W hen would it apply? - W hat affordability choices would the C ouncil like to offer? - W hat duration s hould the affordability be for? - Are there other incentives the C ouncil would like to c onsider with the program? NO AH P res ervation P rogram Dis cus s ion 1) Does the C ity C ouncil want to move forward with a NO AH P reservation program? 2) If so: - W hat c onsiderations or c onc erns does the C ouncil have about the draft program prepared by S taff? - W hat duration should be c onsidered in terms of affordability? - W hat should be the goals of the program in terms of perc entage of rental units to include in the program? - Is the C ity C ounc il c omfortable with an affordability level of 50% AMI? S trategic Priorities and Values: R es ident Ec onomic S tability AT TAC HME N T S: Desc ription Upload Date Type DR AF T NO AH P res ervation P rogram 8/4/2020 Bac kup Material March 9, 2020 Work S es s ion Memo 8/4/2020 Bac kup Material April 4, 2018 Work S ession Memo 8/4/2020 Bac kup Material LI R C G uide 6/23/2020 Bac kup Material C hapter 4 - Hous ing and Neighborhood 8/3/2020 Bac kup Material Brooklyn Center 4d affordable housing incentive program Due to recent housing, economic and demographic trends, Brooklyn Center is experiencing an affordable housing need. Already burdened low- and moderate-income tenants are increasingly paying more than 30 percent of their income on rent and utilities. At the same time, many rental property owners are faced with increased operating and maintenance costs, as well as market opportunities to increase rents. In response, the city is offering incentives for rental property owners to reduce property tax liability, improve energy efficiency and address conditions of aging buildings, if present. The goal is to preserve affordability, reduce energy use and enhance healthy homes to support tenants and strengthen the bottom line for property owners. Benefits to property owners Qualified market rate building owners that agree to keep a minimum of 20 percent of units per building affordable to households making 50 percent of area median income (AMI) for XX years will receive: • XX-year eligibility for 4d property tax rate, which provides a 40 percent tax rate reduction on qualifying units.* • City pays the first year fee for the Minnesota Low Income Rental Classification (LIRC) application, also known as 4d tax classification ($10 per unit) • Up to $1,000 matching grant per affordable unit, capped at $25,000 per property to be spent on common improvements • Free energy efficiency and healthy homes assessments available to buildings with five or more units. • Utility rebates for energy efficiency and healthy homes improvement identified in the free assessment • Reduced renter turnover • Lower maintenance and operating costs, if owners take advantage of opportunities to make energy efficiency improvements to properties *Minnesota Statute 273.128 provides that qualifying low-income rental properties, including those enrolled in the Brooklyn Center 4d incentive program, are eligible for 4d tax classification. According to state statue, the first tier of valuation ($150,000 per unit in 2020) on 4d rental properties is taxed at a rate 40 percent less than 4a and 4b rental property. The actual reduction in property taxes may be slightly higher or lower than 40 percent. Eligibility guidelines Owners of market-rate multifamily properties that meet the following criteria: • At least 20 percent of rental units in a building are affordable to households whose family income is at or below 50 percent of the area median income (AMI). • Existing tenants in units that have program-compliant rents do not need to be income qualified. • Income qualification for tenants is determined upon initial occupancy. Increased income of tenants in affordable units will not violate program requirements. • Buildings that have at least five rental units; licensed rental properties with license types I or II that are in good standing with no active code compliance violations. • Buildings can include units with owner occupants, but only rental units are eligible for 4d tax status. The city will receive and review applications on an annual basis. The city expects to accept applications January through late February. Properties will be selected based on city goals of preserving housing affordability in neighborhoods throughout the city, subject to the availability of city grant funds. Note: The city reserves the right to deny applications for the 4d incentive program if the owner or property manager applying owns or manages other properties with outstanding code compliance issues. Process and program requirements Step 1 (required) • Property owners submit a 4d program application and rent roll and sign a participation agreement with the city. The participation agreement includes a commitment to accept tenant-based assistance and affirmative fair marketing, and prohibits involuntary displacement of existing tenants. • The city will draft and record a declaration against the property that limits the rents and incomes on the qualified units for XX years (a recorded document is required for 4d tax classification status). The declaration also limits rent increases to no more than once in a 12- month period, unless the unit is turning over to a new tenant. • The city will provide a matching grant to each 4d property in the amount of up to $1,000 per affordable unit, capped at $25,000 per property. This funding is intended to help property owners common area capital and health, safety and energy efficiency improvements to properties. Owners must certify to the use of the funds for the property. • Property owners will select the percentage of their building units to restrict, with a minimum of 20 percent. • Property owners will sign a 4d application once declaration is filed. • The city will submit a signed 4d application, application fee and declaration to Minnesota Housing on behalf of the property owner for their first year only. Owners are responsible for submitting annual applications to Minnesota Housing to renew 4d tax status. See “Annual Owner Compliance” for additional information. Step 2 (required) • Owners of 5 or more unit buildings can sign up for the Multifamily Building Efficiency Program through Xcel Energy and CenterPoint Energy, and complete a free energy assessment by Energy Insight Inc., to receive an energy report of recommended improvements. Benefits to owners: • A free energy assessment, including free direct install of low-cost improvements such as LED lights and faucet aerators. • Qualification to receive rebates for energy efficiency project expenditures if improvements result in at least 15 percent energy savings. Step 3 (encouraged) Following a free energy assessment, meet with the city and Center for Energy and Environment (CEE) to discuss energy efficiency improvements and available rebate packages. Property owners can choose from a variety of energy efficiency, weatherization or healthy homes improvements and may qualify for utility company subsidies and rebates that can cover between 25 percent and 90 percent of costs. Benefit to owners: • Public recognition for your partnership with the city • Financial assistance to help cover the cost of energy efficiency upgrades Modifications to declarations • The declaration for the 4d program commitments runs with the property. Anyone buying and selling 4d property should contact Jesse Anderson at janderson@ci.brooklyn-center.mn.us to complete an assignment, assumption and consent form transferring the declaration to the new owner. • Any other changes to the declaration, such as revisions to the Exhibit B document specifying which units in the building are restricted, should also contact Jesse Anderson. What does annual compliance involve? To continue to receive 4d status, property owners are required to submit: • An annual 4d application to Minnesota Housing • An annual report to the City of Brooklyn Center 2020 rent and income restrictions, Brooklyn Center 4d Affordable Housing Incentive Program *2020 program rent and income limits based on 50 percent of the Twin Cities area median income (AMI). Rent and income restrictions are adjusted annually, typically in the spring. Type of unit 50 percent area median income (AMI) Studio/efficiency $905 1 bedroom $970 2 bedroom $1,163 3 bedroom $1,344 4 bedroom $1,500 5 bedroom $1,655 MEMORAN DUM - COUN CIL WORK SESSION DAT E:3/9/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, C ity Manager T HR O UG H:N/A BY:Meg Beekman, C ommunity Develo pment Directo r S UBJEC T:Housing P olicy F ramework (45 minutes) Recommendation: - C onsider the proposed housing policy framework, and p rovide direction rela ting to housing efforts. Background: Housing and the policy issues related to hous ing have become some of the most pres sing and important matters facing communities today. F or mo st suburban communities, housing comprises a signific ant majority of a cities land use and tax base. Maintaining and preserving a safe, quality, and desirable hous ing stock is critic al to a co mmunity's long term economic health. F urther, a divers e housing stock whic h offers a wide range of housing choices and price po ints ens ures that a community can be resilient through economic ups and d owns as well as provid e housing options for a diverse population throughout their lives . In addition to maintaining a quality and divers e supply of ho using, communities are more and more becoming foc used on conc erns regarding livab ility and ac ces sibility of housing. T he Twin C ities Metropolitan Area is currently experience record low vacancy rates. According to Marquette Advisors’ midyear report from August 2019, the average vacancy rate across the s even-county metro area is 2.3 percent. Experts agree that a balanced rental market will typically see an average vacancy rate of around 5 percent. T he Twin C ities has been experiencing record low vacancy rates for several years now as are many metro areas throughout the nation. S evere housing shortages are being caus ed from spikes in construction costs, combined with unprecedented demand for rental housing as millennial and baby boomer generations are finding similar des ires for lifes tyles that offer more mob ility and convenience o ver the debt and maintenance of home ownership . In ad dition, as the cost of living out pac es incomes, for many families, home ownership may feel out of reach, and renting b ecomes the only choice. T he effect of low vacancy rates o ver time is increasing rents, a growing interest from outs ide investors , and landlords in a position to be choosier about who they rent to. T his has borne out throughout the Twin C ities Metropolitan Area, with the average rent inc reasing nearly 8 percent year over year to a current unprecedented $1,254 per month. In addition, the Metropolitan C ouncil continues to see a reduction in the number of landlords accepting S ection 8 vouchers. According to the Metropo litan C ouncil, landlords are citing the increased interest for their units from non-voucher ho lders as the primary reas on for the change. Yet another impact of the increasing value of rental property is the growing number of inves tors p urchasing C lass B o r C lass C rental p roperties, which are renting for naturally affordable rents, making c osmetic improvements, and increasing rents so that the units are no longer affordable. According to the Minnes ota Hous ing P artners hip, the sales of apartment buildings in the metro area jumped 165 percent between 2010 and 2015. O ften the change in ownership will also c ome with a c hange in policy related to criminal history, acc eptance of S ection 8 vouchers, or minimum income requirements, resulting in existing tenants b eing dis plac ed from the p roperty. Bro o klyn C enter’s C urrent Rental H o using T he result of the regional trends described above are being felt in Brooklyn C enter. Vacancy rates in the community remain lower than the regional average, hovering around 2 percent. T his is common in communities with more affordable rental units. 35 perc ent of Brooklyn C enter's hous ing stock is compris ed of rental units. O f those, about 8 percent are single family homes . T he C o mmunity Development Department is preparing a summary report on the rental licensing program which includes a deeper analys is of rental hous ing in the C ity. T his will be pres ented as part of a separate memo. According to the Metrop olitan C ouncil, the following table indicates what is considered affordable rents in the Twin C ities Metropolitan Area: *Rents include tenant-paid utilities According to the C ensus American C ommunity Survey indicates average gross rents in Brooklyn Center: Average rents in Broo klyn C enter are considered naturally occurring affordable because the market rents, bas ed on the age and c ondition of the units make them affordable at around 50 percent AMI in the metropolitan area. R ents in Brooklyn C enter are lower than the regional average. App roximately 90 percent of all of the ho using units in Brooklyn C enter are cons idered naturally occurring afford able housing (NO AH). While NO AH properties are cons idered affordable, they can be at risk of being los t as market demand increas es and rents continue to go up. T hey can also experience disinvestment over time, causing deterioration, loss of value, and most importantly poor quality or unsafe living situations. At pres ent only 3.7 perc ent of units are cons idered legally-binding, or subsidized affo rdable units. S ubsidized affo rdable units are housing units which are required to maintain an affordable rent regardless of shifts in market demand. Due to their financing structure, they also are required to be maintained to a certain minimum standard. O ne of the goals of affordable housing advocates is to p reserve existing NO AH properties b y converting them to legally binding afford able units through NO AH preservation pro grams. With the c onstruction of S onder Housing, R eal Es tate Equities will be adding 270 units of legally-bind ing new affordab le housing units to the c ity. T hese will be the firs t new co nstruction multi-family hous ing units built in Brooklyn C enter sinc e 1971, and will increase the perc entage of legally-binding affordable units to 6 percent. The City's 2040 Comprehensive Plan identifies several broad housing goals 2040 H ousing & Neighborhood Goals P romo te a diverse hous ing stock that provides s afe, stab le, and accessible housing o ptions to all of Brooklyn C enter ’s residents. R ecognize and identify ways to match Brooklyn C enter ’s housing with the C ity’s changing demograp hics. Explore opportunities to improve the C ity’s housing policies and ordinances to make them more res pons ive to current and future residents. Maintain the existing housing s tock in primarily single-family neighborhoods through proper ordinances, incentive programs and enforcement. Explore opportunities to inc orporate new affordable hous ing into redevelopment areas that promote safe, s ecure and economically diverse neighborhoods. In addition to these goals , the 2040 C omp rehensive P lan id entifies implementation s trategies as well as res ources and tools for achieving its housing goals. T hes e are contained in C hapters 4 and 9, of the Housing and Implementation chapters respectively (attac hed). Issue Identificatio n As engagement related to the comprehensive plan and various redevelopment sites have occurred throughout the c ommunity over the past few years , a number of issues, concerns, and priority areas have bubb led up related to housing. Many of these issues are identified in the 2040 C omprehensive P lan. As it relates to housing polic y within the C ity of Brooklyn C enter, these issues c an be categorized into two distinct topic areas: 1. Housing choice - What is the c omposition and condition of the current housing s tock? What are the current market demands fo r housing? How does the c ity's housing s tock relate to the market, and does the city have enough and the right type to meet current and future need? 2. Affordable housing policies - W hat can the city do to improve livability and accessibility to quality affo rdable hous ing for res idents ? W hat best prac tices exist to s uppo rt an effec tive approach to addres sing the need for affordable hous ing in the c ommunity? W hat polic ies are mo st effective to prevent d is plac ement? In o rder to address these to pic areas related to housing, staff is proposing a framework plan which takes a c omprehens ive review of the C ity's housing polic y approac h, with an emphasis in key focus areas based on priorities iss ues which merit sp ecial attention. T he overall review would include identifying those housing issues which are currently surfacing in the community and prioritizing those which are most pressing. I ssues which have broadly been identified that merit special attention include: Mitigating and p reventing d is placement of existing residents as the c ommunity redevelops Tenant protections C reating and expanding home ownership op portunities F air hous ing policy Maintenance and preservation of single family housing s tock Expand ing hous ing options Housing Po licy Framewo rk In o rder to gather data and to identify the needs for additional housing choice in the community, staff is reco mmending working with a cons ultant to complete a housing study. A p ropos ed s co pe of work for the housing study is attac hed to this memo. T he s tudy would include an analysis of regio nal trends effecting Brooklyn C enter's housing, the city's existing housing s tock, current rent trend s, market demand and gaps analysis. T he housing study is also proposed to include a tenant and home owner survey in order to ascertain whether residents are satisfied with their current housing options, and what also proposed to include a tenant and home owner survey in order to ascertain whether residents are satisfied with their current housing options, and what housing choices they anticipate needing/wanting over time. T he results of this analysis will assist with guiding land use and policy decisions as it pertains to housing stock and choice. As it relates to the needs around affordable housing, policy approaches fall into one of three categories: 1) C onstruction of new legally-binding units ; 2) P reservation of NO AH units; 3) Tenant protections In April 2018, the C ity C ouncil discussed several poss ible policies to addres s affordable housing iss ues . T he memo from that discussion is attached to this report. Based on that disc uss ion, C ouncil directed s taff to move forward with a Tenant P rotection O rdinance, and in December 2018, the c ity ad opted one. Additional policies which addres s affordable housing topic s are describ ed below. S taff is s eeking direc tio n on which po licies C ouncil would like to move forward with, would like additional informatio n on, or would like to wait on. Inclusionary Hous ing P olicy (C reation P olic y) – T hese are a collec tion of policies whic h would either encourage or require new affordable units to b e included as part of new market-rate res idential development projects whic h receive public subs idy or other d is cretionary C ity approvals . F requently it is in the form of a req uirement that a percentage of units be affordab le in a new residential development in exchange for public s ubsidy of the project. New developments such as thos e in the O pportunity S ite would be required to inc lude a certain numb er of affordable units . Inclusionary Ho using policies ensure that new affordable units are added as market-rate units are built, thus ens uring mixed-income co mmunities . C ities such as S t. Louis P ark and Minneapolis have found that in higher rent developments, a certain p ercentage of affo rdable units c an b e required without increasing the need fo r additional public subsidy. T his is due to the higher than average market rents , which o ff-set the affordable units. In Brooklyn C enter, as is true in communities with lower average rents, the cost of the affordable units would require additional public subs idies in order for a project to be financially feasible. Brooklyn P ark recently adopted an Inc lusionary Hous ing P olicy. As p art of their analysis they concluded that any amount of includ ed afford able would create a financial gap in the p rojec t and require subs idy. T he policy acknowledges this and projects will b e looked at on a project by projec t bas is to determine if the gap can be financed. C ommunity input on the O pportunity S ite has identified many community benefits and goals for the redevelopment in addition to affordable housing; affordable commercial space, a cultural center, civic s pace, event sp ace, and a recreation center to name a few. All of these us es wo uld require public s ub sidy in s ome form or another, not to mention the infrastructure need s of the s ite. Identifying afford able housing as a singular or primary goal of the development through an inclus ionary hous ing polic y inevitably elevates it above other community goals for the s ite. NO AH P reservation P ro gram (P res ervatio n P olicy) – A preservation pro gram can be set up in vario us ways, but essentially how they work is to incentivize existing NO AH property owners into setting aside a percentage of rental units as legally b inding affordable for a set period of time. T he C ity would create a NO AH pres ervation fund and identify additional funding sources to grow it. S taff would work with exis ting property owners to provide a modest s ubsidy for building rehabilitation, which would then be combined with a 4D tax class ification, als o known as the Low Income R ental C lassification P rogram (LIR C ), to provid e a property tax b reak, c urrently amounting to 40%. T he res ult is the preservation of NO AH units through legally binding contract. T he tax break would be propo rtional to the percentage of units which would be affordable, and not apply to the entire building. T he LI R C /4D statute d efines eligible properties as those which meet two conditions: the owner of the property agrees to rent and income restrictions (serving household s at 60% AMI or below) and receives “financ ial as sistanc e” from federal, state or local government. T his pres ents the possib ility of creating a “Local 4D” program in which qualifying properties receive the 4D tax break in return for agreeing to conditio ns which meet certain local government policy goals . T he reduc tio n in property taxes would no t dec rease the C ity’s revenue from property taxes, as the funds would be distributed to all other properties; however, it would reduce that pro perty’s share of loc al property taxes. T he amount of the tax break is a limiting factor as it equates to around $80/unit per year; however, the program may be an incentive for a property owner in a community where the market rents are already c onsidered affordable, since they would not need to depres s their rent rates. T he city is estimated to have approximately $320,000 of Housing T IF #3 funds when T IF #3 decertifies at the end of 2021. T hese funds could be used to seed a NO AH p reservation fund. NO AH preservation is a more c ost efficient fo rm of creating legally binding affordable units compared with new cons truction, and ensures families are not displaced from their homes . A NO AH preservation program, combined with efforts to support tenant protections could be highly effective at address ing community conc erns about displacement. F urther, staff could begin to work on setting up such a program in the near term, and begin to identify p otential funding sources for it. F air Housing P o licy (Tenant P rotection P olic y) - T itle VI I I of the C ivil R ights Act establishes federal policy for providing fair housing throughout the United S tates. T he intent of Title VI I I is to assure equal housing opportunities for all citizens. Further, C ities as a recipient of federal community development funds under Title I of the Housing and Community D evelopment Act of 1974, is obligated to certify that it will affirmatively further fair housing. T he city of Bloomington's Fair Housing P olicy is attached as an example. Many other cities within Minnesota have Fair Housing P olicies that are written very similar to B loomington's. At present Brooklyn Center does not have a Fair H ousing P olicy. I t is staff's recommendation that this be addressed in the near term, and that the H ousing Commission be tasked with reviewing and recommending a policy to be adopted by the C ity. R eview R ental Licensing through the lend of Tenant P rotections (Tenant P ro tection P olic y) - Nearly a third of the City's housing units are rental. With vacancy rates hovering near 3 percent, tenants are not in a favorable position when it comes to negotiating with landlords on lease terms or other accommodations. N early all of the City's multi-family residential is considered naturally occurring affordable housing (N O AH ). T his is primarily due to its age and condition. Brooklyn C enter hasn't had new multi-family housing constructed since 1971, and so this particular housing type, like most in the City, is aging. M aintenance varies significantly depending on ownership, as does the quality of property management. T herefore, it is important to continue to monitor the City's N O AH properties through a robust rental license program. However, when the rental license program was established tenant protections was not the focus of the program. A review of the City's ordinances, policies, and procedures through the lens of tenant protections would ensure that the program is serving residents as effectively as possible. C ommunity engagement strategies would be necessary to identify problems and potential solutions. Suggested engagement strategies include lis tening s ess ions with tenants and landlords; and engaging stakeholders s uc h as Homeline, Hous ing Justic e C enter, AC ER , etc s ess ions with tenants and landlords; and engaging stakeholders s uc h as Homeline, Hous ing Justic e C enter, AC ER , etc C ity s taff have met with AC ER , Homeline, and the Housing Justice C enter and d is cussed some of the iss ues affecting Brooklyn C enter res idents already. In additio n, the city's housing inspec tors spend a significant amount of time interacting with tenants and landlords and understand the complexities of the is sues. T hese resources can be drawn upon to further explore ways to make adjus tments to the C ity's ord inances, policies, and procedures to ens ure existing residents are provided safe, s ecure, s table housing and tenants are afforded protections under the law. S taff's rec ommendation is to move forward with reviewing the city's current polic y and ordinance, and to begin to implement impro vements. Tenant input could be incorporated into the tenant survey that is part of the housing stud y. S ingle F amily Housing S tabilization (P reservation P olic y) - Approximately 86 percent of Brooklyn Center's single family housing stock is more then 40 years old. T his is a significant portion of the City's housing, therefore it is important to track the condition of these older homes as they are at-risk of deferred maintenance. At the same time, well maintained older homes can be an important source of entry-level housing. When considering the type and age of housing in Brooklyn Center, the 2040 Comprehensive plan recommended the following programs: Housing s tudy to ass ess the condition of the C ity's housing stock Home O wnership P rogram Assistance P rogram Down P ayment As sistanc e Home O wners hip Education Additional Low or No C ost Home impro vement funding S taff reco mmends moving forward with a review of the city's single family housing programs. T he first part of whic h would be inco rporated into the hous ing study. R eview of Additio nal Best P rac tices to Mitigate and P revent Displacement - Ho using S tudy and Impact Ass essment - As was mentioned above, staff is recommending moving forward with a housing study in the near-term. Because issues around the impact of significant development on the city's existing housing, particularly around displacement and gentrification, have been raised in the community, staff is proposing to include within the housing study an impact assessment to evaluate the potential impact of the Opportunity Site in this way. T he study would include a literature review of existing research on the topic of displacement and gentrification as it may pertain to Brooklyn Center, as well as case studies and best practices from other places that the community might draw from. T he study, as the scope is currently proposed, would assist with providing an informed basis from which policy decisions can be made. T he outcome of the study would allow us to identify additional policies and best practices which may forward the city's priorities around housing policy. Implementation Housing policy is both an urgent and important need in the community; ho wever, staff c apacity is als o limited to ad dress thes e is sues in a timely manner. S ome items identified above c ould be und ertaken immediately such as the ho using study and the creation of a fair housing policy. A NO AH preservatio n program may be a policy whic h could als o be addres sed in the near-term. O ther items will take longer to addres s such as reviewing of the city's rental licensing ordinance. T he C ity of Brooklyn P ark currently fac ilitates a hous ing stakeholder group with many of the s ame s takeholders which Brooklyn C enter would very likely ask to particip ate in similar conversatio ns. R ather than hold a sec ond meeting each month, Bro oklyn P ark s taff has suggested the two c ities combine efforts with the group. T his also offers the opportunity to share research and resources on topics which are likely to be of a similar nature in terms of hous ing is sues. It may also be valuable to create subject specific Housing Task F orces , over time, as each housing area is addres sed. T his can be vetting as wo rk progresses . Not only would this allo w greater community engagement, but also ensure that as various areas of focus are under review (i.e. tenant protections, single family preservation, multi-family preservation) that the right people are at the table to provide inp ut and expertise. T hough, inevitably, task forces and co mmittees take considerable s taff time to facilitate and manage. Ensuring that any engagement that is done is intentional and on topics where input is warranted is critical. S taff has identified 5 key areas to address over the next 18 months. Other priority areas may arise through continued engagement which would require an adjustment to this framework. Tentative Time Line 1. Q 1 2020 F air Hous ing P olicy 2. Q 1 2020 Housing S tudy and Impact Assessment - G aps analysis and identify best practices for anti-displacement 3. Q 2 2020 NO AH P reservation program 4. Q 4 2020 Tenant P rotections 5. Q 1 2021 S ingle F amily Housing S tabilization Next Steps S taff reco mmends moving forward initially with the Hous ing C ommission undertaking the review and d rafting of a F air Ho using polic y, which would then go to the C ity C ouncil fo r final c onsideration. In addition, staff would recommend proc eed ing with the hous ing study and impac t as ses sment as the initial step . Policy Issues: W hat housing-related iss ues /topics do you see rising to the surface in the community? Are there any major elements you see needing to be addressed in the housing study in order to create a thorough baseline as sess ment of the C ity's housing s tock? S hould staff begin wo rking with the Housing C ommiss ion on developing a F air Hous ing P olicy? Do you have any questions /concerns with the framework for a Housing P olicy P lan as it has been laid out? Is the C o uncil comfortable with mo ving forward with the housing stud y and gaps analys is ? Is the C o uncil comfortable with mo ving forward with the housing stud y and gaps analys is ? S trategic P riorities and Values: R es ident Economic S tab ility, S afe, S ecure, S tab le C ommunity ATTAC HME N TS: Description Upload Date Type Housing F act S heet 11/19/2019 Backup Material April 9, 2018 - C ity C ounc il Memo - Affo rdable Housing P olicy 11/19/2019 Backup Material Housing S tudy S c ope of Work 11/19/2019 Backup Material Example Housing G aps Analysis 11/19/2019 Backup Material C hapter 4 - Ho using 6/10/2019 Backup Material C hapter 9 - Implementation C hapter 10/22/2019 Backup Material F air Hous ing P olicy Example 8/16/2019 Backup Material Dis trib ution of Naturally O ccurring Affordable Housing Buildings in Hennepin C ounty 11/20/2019 Backup Material R E VIE WE RS : Dep artment R eviewer Action Date C ommunity Development S uc iu, Barb Approved 3/4/2020 - 2:38 P M MEMORANDUM – COUNCIL WORK SESSION Our Vision: We envision Brooklyn Center as a thriving, diverse community with a full range of housing, business, cultural and recreational offerings. It is a safe and inclusive place that people of all ages love to call home, and visitors enjoy due to its convenient location and commitment to a healthy environment DATE: April 9, 2018 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Jesse Anderson, Deputy Director of Community Development THROUGH: Meg Beekman, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Affordable Housing Policy Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider providing direction to staff regarding potential affordable housing policies for the City. Background: In May of 2017, the City Council received copies of emails forwarded by Councilmember Butler from African Career and Education Resource Inc. (ACER) requesting an opportunity to come before the City Council to discuss concerns about the need for affordable housing in Brooklyn Center. In addition Mayor Willson was in contact with a representative of Community Action Partnership of Hennepin County (CAPHC) regarding the same topic. On July 10, 2017, by consensus the City Council directed staff to invite representatives from ACER and CAPHC to a future work session to present information and have a dialogue on the issue of affordable housing. On August 14, 2017, the City Council received a presentation from ACER and CAPHC regarding the topic of affordable housing. At the presentation ACER and CAPHC advocated that the City consider adopting policies that would address the region’s need for affordable housing, protect tenants, and help preserve naturally occurring affordable housing. The Council directed staff to bring the subject back to a future work session for discussion. Regional Housing Trends: The Twin Cities Metropolitan Area is currently experience record low vacancy rates. According to Marquette Advisors’ midyear report in August 2017, the average vacancy rate across the Twin Cities metro was 2.4 percent. Experts agree that a balanced rental market will typically see an average vacancy rate of around 5 percent. The impact of low vacancy rates over time has increased rents, a growing interest from outside investors, and landlords in a position to be choosier about who they rent to. This has borne out throughout the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area as rents have gone up throughout the region. The average rent at the end of July 2017 had increased 3.1-pecent year over year. In addition, the Metropolitan Council is seeing a reduction in the number of landlords accepting Section 8 MEMORANDUM – COUNCIL WORK SESSION Our Vision: We envision Brooklyn Center as a thriving, diverse community with a full range of housing, business, cultural and recreational offerings. It is a safe and inclusive place that people of all ages love to call home, and visitors enjoy due to its convenient location and commitment to a healthy environment vouchers. According to the Metropolitan Council, landlords are citing the increased interest for their units from non-voucher holders as the primary reason for the change. Yet another impact of the increasing value of rental property is the growing number of investors purchasing Class B or Class C rental properties, which are renting for naturally affordable rents, making cosmetic improvements, and increasing rents so that the units are no longer affordable. According to the Minnesota Housing Partnership, the sales of apartment buildings in the metro area jumped 165 percent between 2010 and 2015. Often the change in ownership will also come with a change in policy related to criminal history, acceptance of Section 8 vouchers, or minimum income requirements, resulting in existing tenants being displaced from the property. The region is also seeing a loss of smaller-sized rental properties (1-4-units). This is due, in part to single family properties converting back into owner-occupied as the market recovers from the recession, but also a growing number of local investors purchasing smaller properties and flipping them. While some of the proposed policies would impact single family rentals, the primary focus of affordable housing advocates and media attention has been on larger properties (40-units or greater). Affordable housing advocates have identified potential policies designed to address these issues. The policies fall into one of three categories; 1) preservation policies designed to preserve naturally occurring affordable housing and prevent it from being flipped; 2) tenant protection policies designed to prevent or mitigate displacement; and 3) creation policies designed to create new, legally-binding, affordable housing that will replace the naturally occurring affordable housing that is being lost. Brooklyn Center’s Current Rental Housing: According to the Metropolitan Council, the following table indicates what is considered affordable rents in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area: # of Bedrooms 30% AMI 50% AMI 60% AMI 80% AMI Efficiency $474 $791 $949 $1,265 1-Bedroom $508 $848 $1,017 $1,356 2-Bedroom $610 $1,017 $1,220 $1,627 3-Bedroom $705 $1,175 $1,410 $1,880 4-Bedroom $786 $1,311 $1,573 $2,097 *Rents include tenant-paid utilities According to the Metropolitan Council, the following table indicates average rents in Brooklyn Center: # of Bedrooms Survey 5-Year Avg Efficiency $730 $744 1-Bedroom $869 $801 2-Bedroom $1,019 $925 3+ Bedroom $1,281 $1,147 MEMORANDUM – COUNCIL WORK SESSION Our Vision: We envision Brooklyn Center as a thriving, diverse community with a full range of housing, business, cultural and recreational offerings. It is a safe and inclusive place that people of all ages love to call home, and visitors enjoy due to its convenient location and commitment to a healthy environment Brooklyn Center currently has 834 rental license holders. 713 of those are for single family homes. 71 of the licenses are for 2-4-unit properties. 24 are for properties with between 5 and 39 units. 27 licenses are for properties with greater than 40 units. There are approximately 4,300 rental units in the City. The average rents in Brooklyn Center are considered affordable for those making around 50 percent of the Area Median Income. Of the 11,608 total housing units (both rental and owner-occupied) in Brooklyn Center, 89.5 percent are naturally occurring affordable housing. There are currently 402 Section 8 voucher holders in the City. Brooklyn Center currently has five apartment building that are legally-binding affordable housing, Ewing Square Townhomes (23-units), The Crest Apartments (69-units), Unity Place (112-units), Emerson Chalet Apartments (18-units), and The Sanctuary (158-units). Also, Lynwood Apartment (50-units) is currently applying for Certified Low Income Status, which would make it a legally-binding affordable property. This equates to 3.7 percent of the City’s housing stock is legally-binding affordable housing. Anecdotally, a recent phone survey of 34 Brooklyn Center landlords found a current average vacancy rate of 1.3 percent. Rents in Brooklyn Center are currently very affordable compared to the region. Low rents may be contributing to the low vacancy rates. If the vacancy rates are in fact below 2 percent, and they remain that low over time, it would be reasonable to expect rents to increase. However, given the current low rents, even an increase in rents of 20-30 percent would result in rents still considered affordable for those making 60-80% AMI. Affordable Policy Options: Section 8 Ordinance (Tenant Protection) - Prohibiting discrimination against Section 8 voucher holders and other recipients of government programs. The policy would prohibit landlords from denying any tenants’ application based on the applicant receiving government assistance. • Staff surveyed 34 Brooklyn Center apartments and found that 50 percent indicated that they do not accept section 8 vouchers. • Minneapolis recently adopted this ordinance, which allows applicants who feel they have been discriminated against to seek damages through the city’s department of Civil Rights. • The City of Minneapolis has an active lawsuit filed against them by 55 apartment owners over the legality of this ordinance. The lawsuit argues the mandate conflicts with state law and unfairly forces them to comply with requirements of federal housing voucher programs for low-income residents. It also says the law violates the Minnesota Constitution because it reduces their property values, forces landlords to enter into contracts and represents an unnecessary government intervention in their businesses. Landlords also claim that this could cause landlords to increase rent and/or application criteria as to price out Section 8 vouchers. Staff feels that if the ordinance is upheld by the courts, it could be a useful tool to ensure residents are not discriminated against based on their source of income; however additional review would be necessary related to the enforcement of the ordinance. Staff MEMORANDUM – COUNCIL WORK SESSION Our Vision: We envision Brooklyn Center as a thriving, diverse community with a full range of housing, business, cultural and recreational offerings. It is a safe and inclusive place that people of all ages love to call home, and visitors enjoy due to its convenient location and commitment to a healthy environment recommends that the City monitor the Minneapolis lawsuit then review pending the outcome. Notice of Intent to Sell (Preservation) – Rental property owners must give advanced notice prior to the sale of a rental property. This gives a preservation buyer an opportunity to match the purchase price. It would also give service providers additional time to relocate residents who would be displaced as a result of the sale. • Landlords would be concerned about delaying the closing of a property sale, which could have a negative effect on price. Preservation companies such as Aeon have expressed concerns that this could increase the competition for these properties, and thusly increase sales prices. • Enforcement would be difficult because the penalty would come after the sale has occurred. If the property has sold, the seller no longer has ties to the property so enforcing a citation could be challenging and may not be a deterrent. In a workgroup in St. Louis Park landlords stated that if there was a $1000.00 citation for selling without notice, they would likely still sell the property and pay the citation. • It is unclear who the seller would need to notify of their intent to sell and what would be done with that information once it was known. Who would decide what buyers could have access to the information? Who would be responsible for disseminating the information? • It is possible that this ordinance would dissuade investors, who may opt to purchase property in cities that do not have the additional requirements. • St. Louis Park is looking at an alternative ordinance related to tenant transition/protection would address the need for additional time to relocate tenants. Staff recommends that the city consider other options such as the tenant transition ordinance. Tenant Transition/Protection Ordinance (Tenant Protection) – This would require a new owner of a naturally occurring affordable housing property to pay relocation benefits to tenants if the new owner increases rent, rescreens existing residents or implements non-renewals without cause within 3 months after the purchase. The ordinance has the effect of freezing lease terms for 90 days after the sale of a property. The purpose is to allow tenants three (3) months to relocate if necessary. • This ordinance wouldn’t interfere with the sale of naturally occurring affordable housing, however; it would provide assistance to the tenants if necessary. • The ordinance would require new buyers to notify tenants within 30 days if substantive changes to the lease are forthcoming, giving tenants time to relocate if necessary. • St. Louis Park adopted the Tenant Protection Ordinance in March of 2018. • The policy could dissuade potential apartment buyers from buying in Brooklyn Center, who may opt to purchase a property in a city without this policy. Staff recommends that the City review this policy further to determine the legality of it, the enforcement mechanism, and what the specific impacts in Brooklyn Center might be. MEMORANDUM – COUNCIL WORK SESSION Our Vision: We envision Brooklyn Center as a thriving, diverse community with a full range of housing, business, cultural and recreational offerings. It is a safe and inclusive place that people of all ages love to call home, and visitors enjoy due to its convenient location and commitment to a healthy environment Just-Cause Eviction (Tenant Protection) – Also known as Just-Cause Non-Renewal, this would require a landlord to provide a reason if they were going to not renew a tenant’s lease that was expiring. Currently landlords must provide a just cause for eviction, which a tenant can appeal in court. There is no appeal process available to tenants who lose their housing due to non-renewal of lease. • Landlords see this as taking away a valuable management tool for dealing with problem tenants and have the unintended consequence of increasing the number of evictions filed and strengthening screening standards. • When St. Louis Park conducted their meetings with landlords and the Multi-family Housing Association, this ordinance received the strongest opposition. • The enforcement of this policy would be through the court system and would require a tenant to take legal action against their landlord via a lawsuit. • Of the 34 landlords surveyed by staff, the majority of evictions or non-renewals are the result of non-payment of rent or criminal activity. • The intent of this ordinance would be to protect tenants from being non-renewed in the event a new owner wants to empty a building in order to do a substantial renovation with the goal of increasing rents. Staff recommends that the City consider other options such as the tenant transition ordinance to protect tenants. Inclusionary Housing Policy (Creation) – These are a collection of policies that could be adopted by the city which would either encourage or require new affordable units to be included as part of new market-rate residential development projects which receive public subsidy or other discretionary City approvals. Frequently it is in the form of a requirement that a percentage of units be affordable in a new residential development in exchange for public subsidy of the project. • New developments such as the Opportunity Site would be required to include a certain number of affordable units. • Inclusionary Housing policies ensure that new affordable units are added as market-rate units are built, thus ensuring mixed-income communities. • Cities such as St. Louis Park and Minneapolis have found that in higher rent developments, a certain percentage of affordable units can be required without increasing the need for additional public subsidy. This is due to the higher than average market rents, which off-set the affordable units. In Brooklyn Center, as is true in communities with lower average rents, it is likely that the cost of the affordable units would require additional public subsidies in order for a project to be financially feasible. If the Council would like to move forward with this police staff would recommend reviewing the feasibility of future development if an affordable housing policy is adopted. 4D Tax Breaks (Preservation) – Also known as the Low Income Rental Classification Program (LIRC), Minnesota provides a property tax break, currently amounting to 40%, to subsidized rental properties under LIRC, commonly referred to as the 4D program. There is the potential, MEMORANDUM – COUNCIL WORK SESSION Our Vision: We envision Brooklyn Center as a thriving, diverse community with a full range of housing, business, cultural and recreational offerings. It is a safe and inclusive place that people of all ages love to call home, and visitors enjoy due to its convenient location and commitment to a healthy environment however, to extend 4D eligibility to certain currently unsubsidized affordable properties, without changing current law. This is because the LIRC/4D statute defines eligible properties as those which meet two conditions: the owner of the property agrees to rent and income restrictions (serving households at 60% AMI or below) and receives “financial assistance” from federal, state or local government. This presents the possibility of creating a “Local 4D” program in which qualifying properties receive the 4D tax break in return for agreeing to conditions which meet certain local government policy goals. • A government agency would need to provide a financial contribution to a rental apartment with a low income agreement placed on the property. The property could then be eligible to apply for 4D status. This would allow a landlord to make physical improvements to the property in exchange for affordable rents. • The reduction in property taxes would not decrease the City’s revenue from property taxes, as the funds would be distributed to all other properties; however, it would reduce that property’s share of local property taxes. • The amount of the tax break is a limiting factor as it equates to around $80/unit per year; however, the program may be an incentive for a property owner in a community where the market rents are already considered affordable, since they would not need to depress their rent rates. • Hennepin County is looking into a rehabilitation program for rental properties which would function similarly to the CDBG housing rehabilitation program, but be County funded. • The City could also look at funding a program for rental housing rehabilitation. Staff recommends working with the County to determine the feasibility of a County-led program. The City could also review EDA or TIF 3 Housing funds to determine the availability of funds for a city program that would provide rental housing rehab assistance in exchange for a 5-10 year affordability requirement. This could be set up as a per unit matching forgivable loan. Other Policies/Programs • Identify buildings that are at-risk of being flipped. Reach out to owners of at-risk buildings and gauge their short and long-term plans. Help connect them with preservation buyers on a case-by-case basis. • Comprehensive Plan – the City is in the process of updating its Comprehensive Plan. If the preservation and/or creation of affordable housing are a priority for the City, it should be reflected in the City’s Comprehensive Plan. • Education – Work with the Metropolitan Council to provide education on Section 8 voucher programs to dispel some of the negative perceptions of the program. Policy Issues: Does the Council believe that the information presented indicates a need for additional policy actions to address the concerns raised regarding affordable housing and the protection of tenant rights? MEMORANDUM – COUNCIL WORK SESSION Our Vision: We envision Brooklyn Center as a thriving, diverse community with a full range of housing, business, cultural and recreational offerings. It is a safe and inclusive place that people of all ages love to call home, and visitors enjoy due to its convenient location and commitment to a healthy environment Does the Council require additional information regarding these issues before concluding if further policy actions are necessary? Which policies if any would the Council want brought back for further consideration? Which policy does the council consider a higher priority? Strategic Priorities: • Resident Economic Stability Attachments: US Census Bureau Data Metropolitan Council Land use Chart August 14, 2017 Council Work Session Memo August 14, 2017 Council Work Session Minutes Housing Strategies Table Presented at Previous Work-Session Mixed-Income Housing Policies among Neighboring Cities Table Phone Survey of Brooklyn Center Apartments Phone Survey of Brooklyn Center Single Family Property Management Companies: US Census Bureau Data: Metropolitan Council Land Use Chart: Housing Strategies Table Presented at Previous Work-Session Mixed-Income Housing Policies among Neighboring Cities City Policy/Program Type Affordability Requirements Affordability Period Opt-out (alternative) options Enforcement Tool Other Notes St. Louis Park (2015) • City financial assistance for new developments creating at least 10 multi-family units or renovation of an existing multi-family development with at least 10 units. • 18% of total units in the development required at 60% AMI or 10% of units required affordable at 50% AMI. • Families may remain in the dwelling unit as long as the income does not exceed 120% AMI. • 25 year minimum (considering an increase). • Subject to City Council approval: o Dedication of existing units o Offsite construction near public transit o Participation in construction of affordable units by another developer within the City • Affordable Housing Performance Agreement between City and Developer prior to Zoning Compliance Permit being issued. • Implemented 2015 – 6/7 new developments triggered policy with 1,073 units and 281 affordable units produced. • No development has used an opt-out option. • Units must be located within the development and distributed throughout the building unless approved by City Council. Edina (2015) • Re-zoning or Comprehensive Plan Amendment for all new multi-family development of 20 or more units. • 10% of all rentable area at 50% AMI or 20% of all rentable area at 60% AMI. • 15 year minimum. • Dedication of existing units equal to 110%, must be equivalent quality. • New construction at a different site. • Participation in construction of affordable units by another developer within the City. • Land use restrictive covenant. • PUD ordinance states development must consider affordability. • City will consider incentives for developments with affordable housing including: Density bonuses, parking reductions, TIF, deferred low interest loans from the Edina Foundation, and Tax Abatement. Golden Valley (policy approved in 2017; ordinance in coming months) • Market rate residential development with 10 or more units and receive: o Conditional Use Permit (ord.) o Planned Unit Development o Zoning Map Amendment (ord.) o Comprehensive Plan Amendment o Or Financial Assistance • 15% of total project units at 60% AMI or 10% of project units at 50% AMI. • Families may remain in the dwelling unit as long as the income does not exceed 120% AMI. • 20 year minimum. • Equal or greater amount dedication of existing units. • Affordable Housing Performance Agreement. • Mix of policy and ordinance. • City will consider incentives including: • Minimum in 33% reduction in required parking spaces • Minimum of 10% density bonus Brooklyn Park • New market rate residential development with 10 or more units and receive: o Planned Development Overlay (ord. required) o Zoning Map Amendment (ord. required) o Comprehensive Plan Amendment • Or Financial Assistance • 15% of units at 60% AMI or 10% of units at 50%AMI or 5% of units at 30%AMI • 20 year minimum. • Consider an alternative proposed by developer. • Affordable Housing Performance Agreement. • Mix of policy and ordinance. • Units must be located within the development and distributed throughout the building unless approved by City Council. Minneapolis (2002) • City-assisted housing projects of 10 or more units. • City-assistance includes TIF, condemnation, land buy downs, issuance of bonds to finance project, pass-through funding, and other forms of • Varies based on funding source but generally is either 20% of units at 60% AMI or 20% of units at 50% AMI (AHTF) • 15 year minimum. • None. • Only 1-2 projects have taken advantage of the incentive program since 2002. • Currently engaging a consultant to develop an effective system. direct subsidy. • Density bonus and parking reduction incentive Saint Paul (2014) • City/HRA assisted rentals and homeownership. • Rental development in selected zones – density bonus incentive • Rentals – 30% of units affordable to households earning 60% AMI, of which at least one third will be affordable to 50% AMI, and at least one third will affordable to 30% AMI. • Rental - 10 year minimum . • Development Agreement • Voluntary/incentive density bonus is not being used so policy is currently being revised. Minnetonka (2004) • City Assistance • Voluntary/incentive based for all developments. • Rentals – 10% of units at 50% AMI for all developments, 20% of units at 50% AMI if using TIF funding. • 30 year minimum. • Considered on a case by case basis. • Development Agreement. • Produced over 500 affordable units since 2004. Eden Prairie • City Assistance • Using a voluntary/incentive based approach for all developments; exploring adopting a policy. • City subsidy – 20% of units at 50% AMI. • Voluntary/incentive – starts at 10% of units at 50% AMI. Woodbury (2012) • Voluntary/incentive based – density bonus policy • 20% of units at 80% AMI or negotiated. • 15 year minimum. Chaska • All developments that need City approval • 30% of units at 80% AMI. Forest Lake (2014) • Voluntary/incentive based – density bonus policy • Negotiable • 15% density bonus, flexible parking requirements. Phone Survey of Brooklyn Center Apartments: Apartment Name number of Units number of vacant units Rent for a studio Rent for a 1 bedroom Rent for a 2 bedroom Rent for a 3 bedroom Rent for a 4 bedroom Do you accept section 8 Has rent increased over the past 2years? How much has rent increased? Most common reason for Eviction or non-renewal 4819 Azealia 12 0 750 800 no new yes $15-50 non-renewal 5207 Xerxes 12 0 0 Ave: $750 Ave $850 Yes yes 8% Disturbance 5240 Drew 10 0 845-950 yes no police calls for service The Avenue 36 0 755 929 1075 no yes 5% each month non-payment Beard Ave 24 0 $895 1 fl-$1025, 2-3 fl $1075 Yes (Typically don’t meet criteria) yes 100 - 2bd - 1bd 75 smoke in units, police calls (pattern) Brookside Manor 90 0 garden - $750 2- 3 floor $800 yes yes $20 police calls, disturbance, non-payment Carrington Dr 128 0 $735 $835-855 $945-975 no yes $50 disturbance, illegal activity, cleanliness, non-payment The Crest 122 3 for end of march $755 $935 yes yes 50 non-payment, crime free addendum Crossings - 6201 Lilac - 55+ 81 4 (0 in past few years) 1181-1275 (1bd + den 1081 1190-1750 No (inherited) yes 2-5% rarely - non-payment Crossings - 6125 Lilac - 55+ 65 1150 Earle Brown Farm 120 1 845-920 1010-190 No new ones yes 3% increase disturbance, non-payment Emerson Chalet 18 0 737 870 yes no non-payment, 3 strikes Gateway 252 3 775 850-875-895 995-1045 no yes 50 late payment, police calls, unit maintenance Granite City 72 0 849 949 1139 yes yes 34-55 smoking Granite Peaks 54 0 849 949 1139 no yes 34-55 non-payment Humboldt Courts 36 1 750 900-995 no yes 75-95 non-payment Lynwood - mark 50 0 895-925 1050-1190 yes Yes 2-4% non-payment of rent Melrose Gates 217 0 919-949 1129-1159 1159-1189 2bd+1.5ba 1209-1249 2bd+2ba no yes 100 non-payment River Glen 128 0 900 975-1000 1250 yes yes 50-75 non-payment/late rent Riverwood Estates 84 2 929 999-1050 no yes 40 lease violation Ryan Lake 22 1 800 800-1000 yes yes 75 non-payment Summerset 36 3 700 800-850 1150-1200 yes yes $50 non-payment, lease violations Twin Lake North 276 3 950+ 1105-1225+ yes yes 5% non-payment, behavior Unity Place 112 2 904-909 970 yes yes 30 non-payment Victoria Townhomes 48 4 1340-1400 no yes 40-60 tenant not renew Phone Survey of Brooklyn Center Single Family Property Management Companies: Management Agency number of Units number of vacant units Rent for a studio Rent for a 1 bedroom Rent for a 2 bedroom Rent for a 3 bedroom Rent for a 4 bedroom Rent for a 5 bedroom Do you accept section 8 Has rent increased over the past 2years? How much has rent increased? Most common reason for Eviction or non-renewal Prosperous 40 0 1050 1250 1450 1550 yes yes 2-3% non-payment Urban homes 2 1300 1400 1500 Yes NA Juliana Koi 2 1 1350 no yes 50 NA Kathleen Freitag 4 0 1235-1325 1410-1450 no no non-payment; destruction of property Tyang 1 0 1150 no no NA Michelle Nyarecha 1 0 1170-1250 yes no non-payment; police violations Nazeen 2 0 1000 1200 no yes 5% NA Tracy Hinkemyer 7 1350-2000 no no NA Dan tan 4 0 850-950 yes no non-payment drugs, noise     o o      o  o o  o  o    o  o      o  o o  o  o    o  o          DRAFT CHAPTER 4: Housing & Neighborhood Comprehensive Plan 2040 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-1 INTRODUCTION This Chapter evaluates Brooklyn Center’s existing housing stock and plans for future housing needs based on household projections, population projections, and identified needs communicated through this planning process. As required in the City’s 2015 System Statement prepared by the Metropolitan Council, understanding and planning for the City’s housing stock is a critical part of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan (Plan). The City’s planned land use includes three residential categories and residential components of new mixed-use designations which together account for approximately half of the City’s land use area. Residential land use will continue to be the largest land use in the community. A diverse housing stock that offers neighborhood stability combined with access to open space, goods and services is essential to a healthy, sustainable, and resilient community. It protects the community’s tax base against market fluctuations; it builds community pride and engagement of existing residents; it helps the community’s economic competitiveness by assisting Brooklyn Center businesses with employee attraction and retention; it provides options for existing residents to remain in the community should their life circumstances (e.g., aging-in-place) change; and it offers future residents access to amenities and levels of service that support a stable and supportive housing and neighborhood environment. The first part of this Chapter focuses on the existing housing stock. It summarizes important information regarding the overall number of housing units, the type of units, their affordability, and the profile of their residents. These sections are a summary of more detailed socio-economic data which is attached to this Plan as an Appendix and serves as a supporting resource to this Chapter. Understanding the existing housing stock is key to determining what types of housing products may be demanded over the next 10-20 years and where they should be located. In conjunction to the statistical or inventory information collected, this Chapter includes a summary of community, stakeholder and policy-maker feedback related to housing and neighborhoods heard throughout this planning process. Additionally, this Chapter addresses the projected housing needs during the planning period and presents some neighborhood and housing aspirations as identified by the City’s residents and policy-makers. The final section of this Chapter links projected housing need to practical implementation tools to help the City achieve its housing goals and identified strategies. The list contained in this Chapter is not exhaustive but provides a starting place from which the City can continue to expand and consider opportunities to meet current and future resident needs. HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-34-2 ASSESSMENT OF EXISTING HOUSING SUPPLY Overview of Brooklyn Center’s Residential Neighborhoods The City of Brooklyn Center’s residential neighborhoods are diverse and include a variety of housing types from single-family neighborhoods to large-scale apartment complexes. Although the City originally incorporated as a village in 1911, it wasn’t until the Post-World War II era that the City began to develop on a large scale in which entire blocks and neighborhoods were constructed with tract housing, suburban streets, and neighborhood parks. Like much of the region’s first ring suburbs, Brooklyn Center took on the role of a typical bedroom community where residents could get to their jobs in the downtown, stop for groceries at the retail center, and go home and park their cars in their garages for the evening. This pattern of development can be seen throughout the region, but Brooklyn Center had one significant difference for many decades – the regional mall known as Brookdale. The prominence of the mall and its surrounding commercial district played a major role in how neighborhoods were built and developed, which influenced neighborhood patterns and housing types. Even though the mall is now gone, it continues to have lasting effects on the existing housing types and neighborhoods and will influence future housing as described in subsequent sections of this Chapter. For example, in the decades that the mall and regional retail center was operational much of Brooklyn Center’s multi-family and apartment development was concentrated near the mall and its surrounding commercial district and provided a transition to the surrounding single-family neighborhoods. Therefore, even though the mall no longer exists, the apartments developed around the periphery of its retail area in the 1960s continue to be in high demand and provide a critical source of housing for many households. 2040 Housing & Neighborhood Goals »Promote a diverse housing stock that provides safe, stable, and accessible housing options to all of Brooklyn Center’s residents. »Recognize and identify ways to match Brooklyn Center’s housing with the City’s changing demographics. »Explore opportunities to improve the City’s housing policies and ordinances to make them more responsive to current and future residents. »Maintain the existing housing stock in primarily single-family neighborhoods through proper ordinances, incentive programs and enforcement. »Explore opportunities to incorporate new affordable housing into redevelopment areas that promote safe, secure and economically diverse neighborhoods. * Supporting Strategies found in Chapter 2: Vision, Goals and Strategies HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-54-4 While related to housing age, the size or square footage of single-family homes also plays a significant role in the demographics of a community. Changes to family structure, technology, and other factors alter housing preferences over time, which can lead to functional obsolescence of homes and result in reduced home values because they no longer meet current buyers’ expectations. Brooklyn Center’s single-family housing stock is fairly homogeneous and the overwhelming majority of homes in every neighborhood are less than 1,500 square feet – and in many areas less than 1,000 square feet. This is a relatively modest single-family housing size, and, therefore, the single-family housing stock lacks diversity, which results in lack of choice for current and prospective residents. At the same time, these homes offer an option for small families, single and two-person households, and first time homebuyers. Because the majority of the City’s single-family housing stock is relatively small, older, and of a homogeneous type as compared to newer larger homes or neighborhoods with more housing variety, housing prices in Brooklyn Center tend to be affordable. Also, given the similar age, size and styles of many of the homes, housing in the community has a fairly consistent price-per- square foot. Affordability in the existing housing stock can be a positive attribute that has the potential to provide long-term stability to residents and neighborhoods. However, as shown in the Background Report residents of Brooklyn Center also tend to have lower median household incomes, which can mean residents may struggle to pay for large-scale capital investments in their homes such as replacing windows or a roof. Additionally, within the region some communities with similar single-family stock to Brooklyn Center have experienced pressure for tear-downs and major remodeling, and that market trend has yet to reach the City. While that trend may eventually impact the community, at the present time the change and growth impacting the single-family neighborhoods is mostly related to the evolving demographics within the community. This change presents different considerations and challenges because it is not necessarily physical growth or changes to homes and neighborhoods. Instead the community is challenged with how to manage larger numbers of people living within a household such as growing numbers of multi- generational households. The following sections identify and inventory the existing housing stock in the community including single-family, attached and apartment uses. Each of these housing types serve a different role in the community, but each type is an important part of the City’s neighborhoods. A summary of the City’s existing residential types and neighborhoods are as follows: Single-Family Residential Single-family residential neighborhoods are the dominant land use within the City and single- family detached homes comprise nearly 63 percent of the City’s housing stock. The City’s single-family detached neighborhoods were developed surrounding higher density and higher intensity land uses that included the former regional retail center and the major freeway corridors of I-94 and Highway 100. Most of the single-family neighborhoods are developed on a grid system with traditional ‘urban’ size lots. Exceptions of some larger lots are interspersed within the traditional block pattern and along the Mississippi River where a pocket of residents have views and/or frontage of the river corridor. The 1950s were the peak decade for housing construction in the City; a period in which owner- occupied housing predominated. While other housing types began to emerge post 1950s, the demand for single-family detached housing continued through 1980 as the remaining land in the community developed. Given the period in which the majority of Brooklyn Center’s housing stock was built, nearly the entire single-family detached housing stock is more than 40 years old. This is a major concern because at 40 years of age exterior components of a building including siding, windows, and roofs often need to be replaced to protect its structural integrity. Because the City became mostly built-out by the late 1970s, nearly all of the City’s housing stock falls into this category, which means the City must be cognizant of potential issues and proactively monitor the situation to ensure neighborhoods are sustainable into the future. HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-74-6 Multi-family Residential Nearly one third (29 percent) of the City’s housing units are in multi-family residential buildings located throughout the community. Nearly all of these buildings were constructed in the 1960s and 1970s, and are primarily located on major roadways or corridors, and surrounding the former regional retail areas. This means these buildings are nearly 50 years old or older. Just as noted within the single-family neighborhoods, the potential for deterioration and need for significant investment in these aging buildings can pose a threat to the quality of the City’s housing stock if the buildings are not properly maintained, managed and updated. There has been some maintenance and management of the multi-family housing stock, and a few complexes have even incorporated modest upgrades to the interiors. In fact, the City has started one large-scale rehabilitation of a building that would bring higher-market rate rental options to the community once completed. However, this is one project and despite these improvements the City’s multi-family housing stock continues to be one of the most affordable in the region with some of the lowest rental rates in the metropolitan area. Many of the multi-family areas are near major corridors and are adjacent to high intensity uses that do not necessarily support or serve the residential use with the current development and land use patterns. As a result, many of the multi-family areas do not feel like an incorporated part of the City’s neighborhoods. As discussed in subsequent sections of this Chapter, the City is planning for redevelopment in or adjacent to many of the existing multi- family areas that will hopefully reinvigorate and reconnect the existing multi-family uses into a larger neighborhood context. Existing Single-family Neighborhood Perspectives Described in this Planning Process Throughout this planning process policy-makers and residents alike expressed the desire to maintain the affordability of the existing single-family neighborhoods but acknowledged the current challenges of helping residents maintain their structures, blocks and neighborhoods in the face of compounding maintenance due to the age of the City’s neighborhoods. In addition to the physical condition of the structures, residents and policy-makers also acknowledged that as the City’s population and demographics become increasingly more diverse new residents are changing how existing homes are being occupied and, therefore, it would be valuable for the City to evaluate it’s ordinances and policies to ensure they align with the needs of residents. The demographic considerations are identified in subsequent sections of this Chapter, but it is worth noting that the demographic changes can have a significant impact the character of existing single-family residential neighborhoods. Most recognized this as a positive change, but also acknowledged and stated that the City must figure out how to pro-actively address some of these changes to protect the existing neighborhood fabric. For example, multi-generational households are becoming increasingly more prevalent within the City’s single-family neighborhoods which can impact how rooms within a home are used, how many cars may be present at the home, and how outdoor spaces and yards may be used. Closely related to the demographic changes in the community is the City’s aspiration to promote and maintain neighborhood stability. This objective emerged repeatedly throughout this planning process as residents and policy-makers expressed the desire to identify strategies to help promote and encourage sustainability, resiliency and accessibility within the single-family neighborhoods. In part this objective is the result of several years of turnover within the single- family neighborhoods as long-term residents begin to age and move onto other housing options, new residents and families are moving into the neighborhoods. This life-cycle of housing is common, but the City wants to find ways to ensure new residents want to stay in their homes, their neighborhoods, and the community long-term and invest in making the City a better place for generations to come. HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-94-8 Housing Stock Statistics The following existing housing stock characteristics support the previous neighborhood descriptions through more detail. This information, coupled with the previous description, provides a valuable baseline from which the City can evaluate and plan for the future of its housing stock. Total Housing Units According to data from the Metropolitan Council and the City of Brooklyn Center, there are 11,603 housing units in Brooklyn Center as of 2017. As a fully developed community, new residential development in Brooklyn Center has been limited since the late 1980s. According to the Metropolitan Council, around 100 new housing units have been built since 2000 and these homes were primarily small infill locations or small redevelopment opportunities. Housing Tenure (Owned and Rented Units) Nearly 40 percent of the community’s residents rent, and the majority of those renters live in apartment buildings which are integrated throughout the community. The Background Report in the Appendix includes maps illustrating the location of rental housing and demographics of renters. Given that a significant portion of the City’s population lives in apartments, the age of such structures becomes critically important to the overall health of the housing supply. The majority of the apartments were constructed prior to 1979 with the bulk of the units being constructed between 1966 and 1969. This means that the majority of the apartments is more than 50 years old, and that structural deficiencies and major capital improvements may be required in the relatively near term in order for the structures to remain marketable. Multifamily Neighborhood Perspectives Described in this Planning Process Throughout this planning process the City’s residents were vocal about the existing multi-family options available in the community and the lack of diversity within the multi-family housing stock. Without a full inventory of all available multi-family units it is difficult to confirm some of the anecdotal comments heard throughout the process, but nevertheless it is important to consider since residents’ testimony provides valuable insight into the existing housing stock. Several residents indicated that there are few options available for larger multi-family units with at least three (3) bedrooms, making it difficult to find stable living options for families with more than two (2) children. Residents also communicated a desire to have housing options that were closer to supportive retail, commercial and services so that they could walk, bike or easily use transit to meet their needs. Despite these challenges, the City’s parks, trails and open spaces were viewed as an integral and important part of their quality of life. Similarly, to the single-family neighborhoods, the community’s aspiration to create a stable, accessible, and economically diverse multi-family housing stock was established as a short and long-term priority. Though not discussed at length during this planning process, it is widely known and understood that resident turnover, including evictions, is a serious problem that is most concentrated within the multi-family neighborhoods of the City. While this Chapter does not attempt to fully evaluate the causes for turnover and eviction in these neighborhoods, it does acknowledge it as a significant challenge and issue which shapes the character of these areas of the community. Turnover, including evictions, changes how residents feel about the community whether the City is directly involved or not. It has lasting affects on how safe people feel within a community, how invested in an area they want to become and how willing they are to contribute and reinvest in the City. For these reasons, it is imperative that the City tackle these issues and create a more stable, and integrated living environment so all residents feel a part of a neighborhood, and the larger community. 11,603 Brooklyn Center housing units as of February 2017 - Sources: Metropolitan Council 40% of community residents are renters - Sources: Metropolitan Council; US Census; SHC HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-114-10 Approximately 86 percent of Brooklyn Center’s housing stock (over 10,000 units) is more than 40 years old. This is an overwhelming portion of the City’s housing, and it is therefore important to track the condition of these older homes as they are at-risk of deferred maintenance. This can rapidly result in critical structural problems. At the same time, well-maintained older housing can be an important source of entry-level housing because of its relative affordability when compared to newer construction. Table 4-1. Year Built Housing Type Related to housing tenure is housing type. Due to Brooklyn Center’s peak time of housing development in the 1950s, the housing type is predominantly single-family detached homes. As of 2017, there are 8,270 units (71 percent) of single-family housing (attached and detached) and 3,333 (29 percent) classified as multi-family housing. The type of housing structure can influence not only affordability but also overall livability. Having a range of housing structures can provide residents of a community options that best meet their needs as they shift from one life stage to another. For example, retirees often desire multi-family housing not only for the ease of maintenance, but also for security reasons. Multifamily residences are less susceptible to home maintenance issues or burglary concerns because of on-site management. For those with health concerns, multi-family residences often have neighbors that can also provide oversight should an acute health problem occur. The majority (63 percent) of Brooklyn Center’s housing stock consists of detached single-family homes. This is above the proportion found in Hennepin County (55 percent) or throughout the metropolitan area (59 percent). Nevertheless, the City’s housing stock is diversified, with many multi-family units in large structures, as well as a significant number of single-family attached units. More detailed data are included in the Background Report in the Appendix. Year Built The age of the housing stock is an important characteristic of the community particularly as it relates to potential structural obsolescence and other limiting factors which correlate to housing values. As described earlier, much of Brooklyn Center’s single-family housing stock was developed post-World War II between 1950 and 1963 and many of the homes in this age range were dominated by rambler architectural styles. As shown on Map 15, entire neighborhoods were all constructed in a relatively short period of time which strongly defines a neighborhood pattern. As shown, most of Brooklyn Center was developed on a fairly regular grid pattern and does not reflect a ‘suburban’ development pattern. This is positive from the perspective that transportation and transit connections should be easier to improve, where necessary, because of the relatively dense population of the neighborhoods. However, aging neighborhoods can present a challenge as major systems (i.e. roof, siding, windows, HVAC, etc.) reach the end of their useful life. This can be particularly difficult if residents are unable to reinvest and maintain their properties, which leads to deferred maintenance and the potential for more significant problems that would become widespread across entire neighborhoods. 71% of housing units are single-family - Sources: Metropolitan Council; US Census; SHC 86% of housing stock is more than 40 years old - Sources: US Census; SHC HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-134-12 Map 4-1. Estimated Market Value of Owner-Occupied Housing Housing Affordability The Metropolitan Council considers housing affordable when low-income households are spending no more than 30 percent of their income on housing costs. Households are considered low-income if their income is at or below 80 percent of the metropolitan area’s median income (AMI). The housing stock in Brooklyn Center is affordable relative to other communities in the Twin Cities region. According to the Metropolitan Council, 93 percent of the housing units in 2017 in Brooklyn Center were considered affordable. Moreover, only a small portion (5 percent) of this housing is publicly subsidized. Therefore, most housing is privately-owned and pricing is set by the market. According to the Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors, there were 480 home sales in Brooklyn Center in 2017 with a median sales price of $186,125. This was roughly 25 percent lower than the Metro Area median sales price of $247,900. For rental housing, according to CoStar, a national provider of real estate data, the average monthly rent for a market rate apartment in Brooklyn Center in 2017 was $981 compared to the Metro Area average of $1,190.Brooklyn Center Broo klyn Park Columbia Heights Crystal Fridley Robbinsdale Minneapolis - Owner-Occupied Housing by Estimated Market Value 1/5/2018 .1 in = 0.55 miles Brooklyn Center County Boundaries City and Township Boundaries Streets Lakes and Rivers Owner-Occupied Housing Estimated Market Value, 2016 $243,500 or Less $243,501 to $350,000 $350,001 to $450,000 Over $450,000 Source: MetroGIS Regional Parcel Dataset, 2016 estimated market values for taxes payable in 2017. Note: Estimated Market Value includes only homesteaded units with a building on the parcel. $186,125 2017 median home sale price in Brooklyn Center $247,900 2017 median home sale price in the Metro Area - Source: Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors, HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-154-14 The high rate of affordability is largely due to the prevalence of smaller and older homes in the single-family neighborhoods, and the age and level of improvements within the multi-family rental neighborhoods. Such small sized properties are typically less expensive because they have significantly less living space than newer homes (average construction square footage has increased each decade since the 1950s). Age and level of update and improvements within the apartment stock, coupled with the average number of bedrooms in the rental units is impacting the relative affordability of the multi-family units. The condition in both the single-family and multi-family housing stock is what is known as Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (NOAH), because the physical characteristics of the properties are what makes them affordable rather than the affordability being established through a legally binding contract. Although there is a high rate of affordability for existing units, the Metropolitan Council identifies a need for additional affordable units in any new housing construction added to the community through 2040. This condition would most likely be achieved by a legally binding contract, or some other financing mechanism as new affordable housing product would be difficult to achieve without some assistance given construction and land costs. Of the 2,258 projected new housing units, the Metropolitan Council establishes a need of 238 units to be affordable to households at or below 80 percent AMI to satisfy the regional share of affordable housing. Although nearly all of Brooklyn Center’s housing stock essentially fits within the criteria as naturally occurring affordable housing, there are some observable trends that would suggest the price of housing in Brooklyn Center could rise in the coming years. Most recently in 2018 the City’s for-sale housing median home sales price surpassed the pre-bust pricing. While the median remains below the regional median, it does indicate growing demand and increased pricing. Significant areas of redevelopment identified on the Future Land Use Plan, including the former regional mall (Brookdale) location, present opportunities for higher-market rates for new housing added. These opportunities have the potential to create a more economically diverse housing stock within the City, which is relatively homogeneous at the time this Plan is written. Given these opportunities, it is important to continue to monitor the City’s NOAH stock, and to evaluate and establish policies to incorporate legally binding and protected affordable housing as redevelopment occurs. This is a careful balancing act that requires concerted and direct monitoring, study, and evaluation in order to ensure an economically diverse, sustainable and resilient housing stock for the long-term success of the community. Table 4-2. Existing Housing Assessment Total Housing Units1 11,608 Affordability2 Units affordable to households with income at or below 30% of AMI Units affordable to households with income 31% to 50% of AMI Units affordable to households with income 51% to 80% of AMI 460 4,451 6,029 Tenure3 Ownership Units Rental Units 6,911 4,697 Type1 Single-family Units Multifamily Units Manufactured Homes Other Housing Units 8,275 3,333 0 0 Publicly Subsidized Units4 All publicly subsidized units Publicly subsidized senior units Publicly subsidized units for people with disabilities Publicly subsidized units: all others 553 22 0 531 Housing Cost Burdened Households5 Income at or below 30% of AMI Income 31% to 50% of AMI Income 51% to 80% AMI 1,691 1,406 895 1 Metropolitan Council, 2016 housing sock estimate. Single-family units include single-family detached homes and townhomes. Multifamily units include units in duplex, triplex, and quadplex buildings as well as those in buildings with five or more units. 2 Metropolitan Council staff estimates for 2016 based on 2016 and 2017 MetroGIS Regional Parcel Datasets (ownership units), 2010-2014 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy data from HUD (rental units and household income), and the Council’s 2016 Manufactured Housing Parks Survey (manufactured homes). Counts from these datasets were adjusted to better match the Council’s estimates of housing units and households in 2016 as well as more current tenure, affordability, and income data from eh American Community Survey, home value data from the Federal Housing Finance Agency, and rents from HousingLink’s Twin Cities Rental Revue data. 3 US Census Bureau, 2012-2016 American Community Survey five-year estimates; counts adjusted to better match the Council’s 2016 housing stock estimates. 4 Source: HousingLink Streams data (covers projects whose financing closed by December 2016) 5 Housing cost burden refers to households whose housing costs are at least 30% of their income. Source: US Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2010- 2014 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data, with counts adjusted to better match Metropolitan Council 2016 household estimates. HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-174-16 Cost Burdened Households Cost burden is the proportion of household income spent toward housing and utilities. When lower income households spend more than 30 percent of their income toward housing and utilities this burden is considered excessive because it begins to limit the money available for other essentials such as food, clothing, transportation, and healthcare. According to data from the Metropolitan Council, 4,114 (35 percent) Brooklyn Center households at or below 80 percent average median income (AMI) are considered cost-burdened which means they spend more than 30 percent of household income on housing costs. This percentage is well above the metro area rate of 23 percent. Half of these Brooklyn Center households are lower income households who earn at or less than 30 percent AMI. The high incidence of cost burdened households is correlated with younger wage earners, lower-wage jobs, and a high proportion of older households, many of which are in retirement and no longer working. FUTURE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES Projected Housing Need As referenced in Chapter 3: Land Use & Redevelopment and the following Table 4-4, the Metropolitan Council’s 2015 System Statement forecasts that Brooklyn Center will add approximately 4,169 new residents and 2,258 new households through 2040 and identifies the following affordable housing allocation to be accommodated between 2020 and 2030. Table 4-3. Affordable Housing Need Allocation At or below 30% AMI 103 31 to 50% AMI 0 51 to 80% AMI 135 Total Units 238 Source: 2015 System Statement - Metropolitan Council Housing Challenges inform Housing Needs The Metropolitan Council’s System Statement identifies approximately 10% of the planned housing units for some level of affordability as identified in Table 4-3. As described in other chapters of this Plan, for the first time since the post-World War II housing boom the City is expected to add a significant number of new households. These new households have the opportunity to provide a more diverse housing stock, and add to the options of available for existing and new residents in the community. Redevelopment can reinvigorate and revive KEY DEMOGRAPHICS Age Profile of the Population The age profile of a community has important ramifications on demand for housing, goods and services, and social cohesion. Tables and figures illustrating the City’s age distribution are presented in the Background Report in the Appendix. Unlike the broader region, in which the population continues to age rapidly, Brooklyn Center’s population grew younger between 2000 and 2010, and has stayed relatively stable since 2010. This is largely due to a significant increase in people age 25 to 34, many of which are starting families and having children. Increases in the number of young families place demands on schools, housing affordability, and the types of retail goods and services needed. The median age of residents in Brooklyn Center in 2016 was 32.8, which is consistent with the 2010 median age of 32.6. This is younger than 2000 when the median ages was 35.3. With such a young population, it is expected housing units may turn over more frequently. But, as of 2016, more than 60 percent all households have been living in their homes for more than five (5) years. More data about geographic mobility of households is found in the Background Report in the Appendix. Household & Family Type Changing family and household structures can also have a profound effect on housing and other community needs. For example, decreasing household size has a direct impact on the amount of housing a household needs. As mentioned, the presence of children not only impacts local schools and parks, but also the types of retailers that can be supported and the nature of housing demanded. Since 2010, the number of households with children in both single-parent and married couple households has been growing significantly. Meanwhile, the trend among households without children, especially married couples (i.e., empty-nesters) has been on the decline. The percentage of households with children is approaching 40 percent, which is well above the rate in the County and the metro area. 32.8 Median age of Brooklyn Center residents - Sources: US Census, SHC HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-194-18 • The City has discussed developing a more formal housing action plan to better understand the needs of its residents. The plan would work to better understand cost-burdened households, eviction rates and policies, home-ownership racial disparities, and gaps in the housing stock. • Continuing to revise, enhance and modify its policies and ordinance to respond to residents needs. This includes monitoring best-practices in the region, being agile and open to changes and enhancements. As an example of this type of ordinance or policy response the City recently adopted a Tenant Protection Ordinance that is aimed and protecting the City’s residents ability to maintain stable, safe housing. The City’s projected housing needs are complex, and are likely to become more complicated as redevelopment occurs. However, the City intends to continue to prioritize discussion and action around creating safe and stable housing throughout the City. The following sections specifically address the new housing expected to be develop in this planning period. The new and redevelopment areas should be considered collectively with the City’s existing neighborhoods to ensure an incorporated, integrated approach to the City’s neighborhoods is achieved to create a dynamic community for generations to come. areas of the community with vibrant, experience-rich areas that will benefit everyone in the community. The City is excited for redevelopment to create a dynamic central hub of activity in the community, but also acknowledges that it must be balanced with strong assessment, planning and appropriate protection of its existing housing stock to ensure neighborhood sustainability and stability in all areas of the community. New housing stock brings the possibility of adverse impacts to existing single-family and multi-family properties if proactive steps are not taken to protect existing naturally occurring affordable housing (NOAH), single-family neighborhoods, and multi-family properties. The City’s policy makers throughout this process discussed and acknowledged that bringing new market-rate, amenity rich housing products could have deleterious affects specifically on existing naturally occurring affordable housing if a plan to protect affordability is not implemented. This is a huge concern as resident stability through access to safe and healthy housing is one of the City’s adopted strategic priorities. If proper tools are not in place there are no protections to keep rents reasonable for residents and to maintain reasonably priced for-sale housing as redevelopment takes holds. One of the positive aspects of the City’s identified redevelopment areas is that the land proposed for redevelopment does not contain existing housing. In a fully-development community this is unusual for a large redevelopment area, and is positive because no residents will be displaced as a result of the City’s redevelopment aspirations. However, even though residents will not be displaced directly, indirectly, redevelopment could increase the desirability of activities such as flipping single-family homes and converting NOAH multi-family properties for higher-rents. To address some of these concerns an extensive list of high-level tools have been outlined in Table 4-5 of this Chapter. The City recognizes that this chapter is only the start of an ongoing conversation, and it is the City’s policy-makers intent to continue to be proactive, and to collaborate with non-profits and advocate for a broader regional approach to housing affordability. In addition to the tools identified in Table 4-5, the City is also continuing conversations about: • Viability of a non-discrimination ordinance related to Section 8 acceptance. Adjacent Cities, including Minneapolis, have attempted to include ordinances in their tool-kit addressing this issue. While the issue is currently in court, Brooklyn Center will continue to monitor the process and may consider adoption of a similar ordinance depending on its outcome. HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-214-20 Future Residential Uses in Planned [Re] Development Opportunity Areas Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) is a new land use and redevelopment concept in the City that focuses on existing and planned transit as a major amenity and catalyst for redevelopment. While previous planning efforts have acknowledged the presence of transit in the community, none have embraced it as an opportunity for redevelopment. As this portion of the City redevelops, the location of future transit enhancements has the potential to attract significant new housing development. Therefore, this is where guided densities are the highest. This is purposeful because the area has exceptional visibility and access from Highway 100 and I-94, and will be served by two transit stops (one being a transit hub) for the C-Line Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and the potential future D-Line BRT. The C-Line BRT is planned to open in 2019 and will mimic the operations of LRT (light rail transit), offering frequent transit service that will connect residents to the larger region. To best support the C-Line, and future D-Line, the City has planned to reinvigorate and re-imagine this central area of the community as a more livable, walkable, and connected neighborhood within the City. In addition, the potential for desirable views of Downtown Minneapolis could result in pressure to build taller structures in this area. Any development of this area should also be seen as an opportunity to support commercial users, improve multi-modal service and access, and allow safe, pleasant, and walkable connections to transit, parks, and other community destinations. As this area evolves, the desirability of this area as an amenity-rich livable area is likely to improve. As change occurs, the housing within the area is likely to be at market rates adding to a more economically diverse housing stock than is currently available in the community. This would add more housing choices in Brooklyn Center, and it could also support a mix of both market rate and affordable units; provided proper policies are developed to ensure legally binding affordable housing is incorporated into development plans. Communities oftentimes explore policies such as inclusionary zoning as redevelopment accelerates which may become an appropriate consideration in the future, but is likely not to be the best approach given current market conditions. However, in the future if significant increases in the market occur it may warrant further discussion in the City. Regardless of the policy tool (whether regulatory or incentive based) selected, consideration will need to be given to working with any future developer in a possible partnership with the City to help deliver affordable units as part of redevelopment. As described within the Chapter 9: Implementation, the City will continue to explore proper methodology and policies to ensure an economically diverse housing stock is created as housing continues to evolve in the community. New Housing Opportunities in this Planning Period Recognizing that the land use plan for Brooklyn Center identifies several key areas that are envisioned for new development or redevelopment, this will result in an opportunity to accommodate more housing and increase the City’s number of households. Based on guided residential densities in the development opportunity areas, the City can accommodate the Metropolitan Council’s forecasted households as well as meet the allocated affordable units as shown in Table 4-3 above. As indicated in the Land Use Chapter, depending on how the market responds to these redevelopment areas the City could accommodate anywhere between 2,658 and 3,836 new households by 2040 (Chapter 3: Table 3-5, repeated in the following Table 4-4). Table 4-4. Future Land Use Densities and Projected Acres, Households & Population Future Land Use Density (DU/A)2020 Acres (Res)b HH Popc 2030 Acres (Res)b HH Popc Transit Orient Development 31.01-130 DU/A 9 279 619 26 814 1,807 Neighborhood Mixed-Use 15.01-31 DU/A 13 195 433 19 285 632 Commercial Mixed Use 10.01 – 25 DU/A 8 80 178 15 150 333 High Density Residential 15.01-31 DU/A 212 3,180 7,060 212 3,180 7,060 TOTAL ----3,734 8,290 --4,429 9,832 Source: Metropolitan Council, Thrive 2040 Brooklyn Center 2015 System Statement, SHC. a Acreages assume that some recently redeveloped areas within these land use designations will not experience redevelopment until post-2040 and therefore households are not calculated. Please refer to Map 3-3 that identifies areas planned for change within this planning period. b Note, there are existing households in each of the designations today that would be re-guided for potential redevelopment in the future. This accounts for existing households and those that my potentially develop over the next two years. c Calculation multiplies households by 2.22 persons per household (According to the 2016 ACS (Census), for multi- family units (5+ units in structure) There are three large districts identified in the City with guided land use that allows for significant potential of new development and redevelopment through 2040. These areas have the potential to greatly expand Brooklyn Center’s current housing numbers and choices. Moreover, each opportunity area has the potential to not only provide new forms and types of housing but to catalyze or rejuvenate investment into the City resulting in stronger linkages between neighborhoods and districts that are currently isolated from one another. The following section discusses these areas further. HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-234-22 Commercial Mixed-Use Areas The Commercial Mixed-Use areas generally surround the TOD area and are contemplated for large- scale redevelopment but are equally as focused on supporting business and office users. These areas are generally within one mile of the transit station that serves as a major hub for regional and local transit services, and therefore new housing will still have opportunities to capitalize on this as an amenity. Slightly less dense than the TOD district, these areas may provide exceptional opportunities to introduce multi-family uses such as town homes, row homes, and small lot single-family uses that could cater to larger families and incorporate more units with three or more bedrooms. As indicated in previous sections of this Chapter, the City’s residents expressed a desire to have access to more rental units with more bedrooms and larger square footages. While a detailed market study would likely be needed to confirm the demand for these uses, if we can take the anecdotal information as true, this area has the potential to support those types of uses. As with the TOD district, affordability is likely to become a consideration in any redevelopment within these areas because new construction naturally costs more and as the area redevelops interest and demand is likely to escalate costs. It is therefore important, just as with the redevelopment of the TOD district, that the City evaluate and explore ways to incorporate a range of affordable and market rate opportunities in new developments. Neighborhood Mixed-Use Areas The Neighborhood Mixed-Use is a new land use designation that responds to resident and policy-makers desire to incorporate retail and services into the neighborhood fabric. One of the ways the City can accomplish that objective is to create ‘nodes’ of mixed-uses that include residential uses, but protect key corners for small retailers, shops, or restaurants that create a more vibrant streetscape. The City acknowledges that these areas are less likely to redevelop with any regularity. Therefore, the number of new housing units expected to come on-line in these areas is a little less tangible than in areas with large contiguous redevelopment acres. However, the nodes have the opportunity to provide yet another housing style and type, as these areas are not envisioned for large high-rises or extensive master plans. Instead, these areas are contemplated to have smaller footprints with living units above a small store front or restaurant for example. HOUSING RESOURCES, STRATEGIES & TOOLS Table 4-5 outlines a variety of resources, strategies, and tools to implement Brooklyn Center’s identified housing needs and stated housing goals. There is a wealth of resources available to assist communities in meeting their goals. The following table should be considered a starting point. As the City’s housing needs evolve or become clearer, this set of tools should expand with options. Table 4-5. Housing Resources, Strategies & Tools Housing Goal Tool/ Resource/ Strategy Description Affordability Target Promote a diverse stock that provides opportunities for all income levels Housing Demand Market Study Conduct a market study and gaps analysis to track housing demand. This study and report could double as a marketing and promotional piece about housing opportunities. <30% AMI 51-80% AMI HRA/CDA/ EDA Work with the County HRA and City EDA to protect and enhance existing NOAH in the City. Use Market Studies to help identify opportunities to meet housing needs in the City and evaluate ways to partner with the County and other program providers. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% Site Assembly Consider strategies for assembling sites in high-density or mixed-use districts that would increase appeal to developers. <30% AMI 51-80% AMI CDBG Work with Hennepin County to use CDBG funds to help low-and moderate-income homeowners with rehabilitation assistance. CDBG funds will also be explored for use to support redevelopment efforts that meet the City’s goals towards a diverse housing stock (units and market/ affordable diversity). <30% AMI 51-80% AMI Tax Abatement Consider tax abatement for large rental project proposals that provide unit and income-mix within a single project. The City is particularly interested in projects with market diversity and units of different size to cater to a larger market (singles, families, multi-generational, etc). <30% AMI 51-80% AMI HOME and Affordable Housing Incentive Fund Consider application, and utilization, of HOME and Affordable Housing Incentive fund grants to support a diverse housing stock. The City will prioritize projects that include a unit size and income mix that meets the needs of single-person and families in the City. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI Housing Bonds The City would consider issuing Housing Bonds for projects that include units for large families, particularly in projects with a mix of unit sizes and incomes. However, it should be noted that there are limitations to the city bonding authority and other programs may be more suitable <30% AMI 51-80% AMI Brownfield Clean-up In potential redevelopment areas, explore EPA and MN DEED grant programs that provide funding and assistance with planning, assessment, and site clean-up. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% 4D for NOAH Properties The City will continue use of 4D classification for the purpose of protecting its Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (NOAH) uses throughout the City. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI Pooled TIF Funds Explore the use of TIF housing funds to create a revolving loan program to support the rehabilitation of existing single- family and multi-family NOAH properties. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-254-24 Housing Goal Tool/ Resource/ Strategy Description Affordability Target Identify ways to match housing stock with changing demographic Housing Coordinator Position The City would create a position that would serve as a liaison to existing landlords to help them respond to shifting demographics through training and access to city resources. The position could also serve as a resource for tenants to connect to support services in the event of eviction notices, discriminatory practices, and other issues related to housing access. The position would include coordinating housing programs, including home ownership programs, resident financial literacy programs, with the intent to convert Brooklyn Center renters to successful home owners. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% Referrals Review and update reference procedures and training for applicable staff including a plan to maintain our ability to refer residents to any applicable housing programs outside the scope of local services. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% Preserve LIHTC properties The City will monitor expiring LIHTC properties and work to find solutions to protect and preserve these affordable units to meet the needs and demands of the City’s residents. The City will approach owners with expiring properties to discuss the possibility of 4d program tax breaks <30% AMI 30-50% AMI Explore opportunities to improve City housing policies and ordinance to make more responsive Expedited Application Process Streamline the pre-application process in order to minimize unnecessary delay for projects that address our stated housing needs, prior to a formal application submittal <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% Fair Housing Policy The City will work to incorporate a Fair Housing policy into its ordinances and policies. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% Existing ordinances The City will continue to operate its Rental Licensing Program, and will periodically review and make enhancements to support the City’s residents. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% Update the City’s Zoning to support new land uses The City’s future land use plan provides opportunities to include high density residential uses in the areas identified for redevelopment. The City will update its zoning ordinance, including prepare new zoning districts, to support the housing needs identified in this Housing chapter. <30% AMI 51-80% Maintain existing housing stock in single-family neighborhoods through proper ordinances, incentives and enforcement Foreclosure Prevention In established neighborhoods, a rash of foreclosures, especially in close proximity to one another, can have a deleterious effect on the surrounding neighborhood. Be aware of foreclosures and be able to direct homeowners at-risk of foreclosure to resources that can help prevent foreclosures. http://www.hocmn.org/ <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% Low or No Cost Home Loans Providing low-or no-cost loans to help homeowners repair heating, plumbing, or electrical systems helps preserve existing housing. For example, Minnesota Housing’s Rehabilitation Loan and Emergency Loan programs make zero percent, deferred loans that are forgivable if the borrower lives in the home for 30 years. Minnesota Housing’s Community Fix Up Program offers lower-cost home improvement loans, often with discounted interest rates, remodeling advising, or home energy services, through a trained lender network. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% Home Ownership Program Work with residents to provide education and programs to make home ownership possible, particularly converting existing renters to home owners through supporting down- payment assistance programs. 30-50% AMI 51-80% Code Enforcement The City will continue to operate a robust code enforcement program that includes both complaint-based enforcement and proactive sweeps. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% Vacant Building Program The City will continue to operate its Vacant Building Program that tracks and monitors vacant properties in the City to ensure adequate upkeep and maintenance. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% Explore opportunities to incorporate new affordable housing into redevelopment areas Inclusionary Housing Ordinance If the market strengthens in redevelopment areas to the extent that policies would not deter investment, the City could consider an inclusionary housing ordinance to ensure that affordable housing is a component of any new housing development. Since current market conditions in the City are well below those of adjacent communities, an inclusionary policy may deter short-term investment. The City may want to explore this policy in the future if the market rents rise to levels of at least 80% AMI. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% Livable Communities (LCA and LCA LCDA-TOD) Consider supporting/sponsoring an application to LCDA programs for multi-family rental proposals in areas guided for high density residential and targeted to households of all income levels. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% Tax Increment Financing (TIF) To help meet the need for low-income housing, the City will establish a TIF district in an area guided for TOD and mixed uses. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-274-26 MEMOR ANDUM - C OUNCIL WOR K SESSION DAT E:8/10/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, C ity Manager T HR O UG H:N/A BY:Dr. R eggie Edwards S UBJ EC T:Brooklyn C enter Beautification and P ublic Art Master P lan Recommendation: - S taff recommends that the C ity C ouncil hear the presentation of the B rooklyn C enter B eautification and P ublic Art M aster P lan and provide feedback. Background: In March 2019, the C ity C ounc il rec eived a presentation on the new initiative referred to as the Brooklyn C enter Beautification and P ublic Art P rogram. T he C ity contrac ted with F orecast P ublic Art to provide direction and guidanc e in the city in the development of a Beautification and P ublic Art Master P lan. T he identified needs for the mas ter plan and program were: C ontinue re-c reating a sens e of identity; P rovide a game plan for the beautific ation and public art implementation C oordinate beautification and as cetic efforts of the city (i.e. c ity government, res ident, and busines s es ) Illuminate pride in the c ommunity; Enhanc e ec onomic development assets and opportunity; Enhanc e c ommunity image; P romote targeted redevelopment; F orward res ident ec onomic stability; and Engage res idents and bus inesses in the C ity After a year of development inc luding the following steps : Dis covery (i.e. site vis its, photos of key locations, c ity plan reviews, etc.) Engagement (there were 1032 “touc h points ” with c ommunity members) R eveal (i.e. c ommunity dialogues and event tabling, etc.) P lanning Infrastruc ture F inding Verification R eport During the proc es s the C ity developed demons tration projects including the C ity S treet Banner P roject and the BC C ounts C ampaign (C ens us 2020). In Marc h 2020, due to the C O VI D-19 P andemic the project c am to a s tands till. During the pandemic s taff continued to work with the cons ultant to c omplete drafting of the mas ter plan, whic h is being pres ented to the C ouncil. T he next steps for the proc es s following disc ussion by the C ouncil inc lude: R eview period for the Task F orc e groups; P ublic online review (14 days); P lan amendments and edits bas ed upon reviews ; and F inal pres entation to the C ity C ounc il in S eptember 2020 S trategic Priorities and Values: Enhanc ed C ommunity Image, Inclus ive C ommunity Engagement, S afe, S ecure, S table C ommunity AT TAC HME N T S: Desc ription Upload Date Type Table of C ontents and S ec tions 1 - 4 8/5/2020 Bac kup Material A P lan for Beautific ation and P ublic Art 8/5/2020 Bac kup Material Brooklyn C enter S naps hot P lanning P rocess 8/5/2020 Bac kup Material Key F indings 8/5/2020 Bac kup Material A S hared Vis ion for Brooklyn C enter 8/5/2020 Bac kup Material Implementation 8/5/2020 Bac kup Material Appendix 8/5/2020 Bac kup Material BROOKLYNCENTER PLANNING FOR PUBLIC ART July 2020Prepared by Forecast Public Art 1 1 2 Table of Contents 1. Acknowledgments 3 2. Beautification and Public Art Plan Summary 4 3. Letter from Mayor 5 4. The Role of Arts & Culture in Covid-19 Recovery and Fighting Racial Injustice 6 5. Beautify Brooklyn Center Background 8 Why a Plan? 9 What is Beautification? 10 What is Public Art? 11 Examples of Public Art 12 Why Public Art? 13 Public Art & Healthy City Strategies 14 6. Brooklyn Center Snapshot An Overview of the City 15 Highlights from Comprehensive Plan 17 7. Planning Process Summary of Community Engagement and Research 18 8. Key Findings Strengths 21 Challenges 22 Opportunities (including Map) 24 Values 27 9. A Shared Vision for Brooklyn Center Vision Statement 28 Guiding Principles 29 A Sampling of Possibilities 30 Public Art & Beautification Focal Areas 31 10. Implementation Long Term Goals 38 Short-Term Goals 39 Work Plan 40 Near-Term 41 Mid-Term 44 Long-Range 46 Introducing the Plan to the Community 48 Starting a Public Art Program 49 Funding 50 Governance 51 Management 52 Maintenance 53 Public Art and Private Development 54 Opportunity Site Overview 55 11. Appendix Table of Contents 56 3 Thanks to all who participated in the planning process for this Beautification & Public Art Master Plan! City Council/Mayor Mayor Mike Elliott April Graves Dan Ryan Marquita Butler Kris Lawrence-Anderson City Staff Leads Reggie Edwards, MPA, EdD. Angel Smith, MPA, EdD. Community Task Force Sandy Christensen Carolynne Darling Michael Donnelly Connie Duffney Quinton Johnson Lissa Karpeh Nahid Khan Michaela McCue Corey Mills Heidi Nelson Ron Paine Dianne Sannes Carolyn Sayers Serena Xiong Pang Yang City Staff Team Reggie Edwards, MPA, EdD. Angel Smith, MPA, EdD. Curt Boganey Meg Beekman Ginny McIntosh Tony Gruenig Richard Gabler Todd Berg Jim Glasoe Doran Cote Brett Angell Andrew Hogg Peter Moen Michael Albers Joel Erickson Focus Group Attendees Carolyn Brittany Lucy Michaela Nahid Kellie Mark Alba Fernando Jose Cliff Judy Christine Nora Alexandor Kevin Bryant Survey Respondents 180 Anonymous Participants Interviewees Clare Brumback, CEAP Holli, Kalleah, Jane and Stephanie Ekta Prakash, ACER Alexis Kleinschmidt Nelima Sitati, CAPI Denise, CAPI Matt Oquist, Luther Automotive Kendall Harrell, Caribou Coffee Omar Ansari, Surly Brewing Bob Lux, Alatus Ashley Bisner, Alatus Alex Polinsky, Alatus Sandy Surrette-Lynne, Associated Bank Alex Bisanz, Real Estate Equities Tashie George, Liberian Business Assoc. Jackson K. George, Jr, Liberian Consulate Christy Morrell-Stinson, MIX Mike Brady, Brady Real Estate Bethany Wagenaar, Brookdale Library Marlena Okechukwu, Brookdale Library Jason Seeley, Brookdale Library Krista Hoitomt, Brookdale Library Kevin Lian-Anderson, Brookdale Library Liliana M Tobon-Gomez, Hennepin County Public Health Robert G Luckow, Hennepin Community Works Denise Engen, Hennepin County Laura Fredrick, Hennepin County Joan M Vanhala, Hennepin County Crystal J Myslajek, Hennepin County Jonathan Vlaming, Three Rivers Parks Chia Lee Xiong, Three Rivers Parks Hana Blissett, Farm to School Program Samantha Vang, State Representative Chris Eaton, State Senator Tim Willson, former mayor Bruce Ballinger, Earle Brown Heritage Center Tamika Baskin, Planning Commission Eric Muschler, McKnight Foundation Michael Huber, Blue Cross-Blue Shield Joo Hee, The Alliance Deja Stowers, BLAQ Sam Buffington, Springboard for the Arts Lissa Karpe, Liberian Youth Arts Program Melissa (Nyango M. N. Nambangi), Minnesota African Women’s Association Kellie Hmong, Artspace Projects Cheryl Jechorek, educator Imam Husain, Islamic Center Pastor Smith, Saint Adolphus Catholic Church Edgard Konde, media artist Rebecca Gilgen, Brooklyn Bridge Alliance for Youth Julie Richards, Brooklyn Center’s You th Council Youth Council participants Carly Baker, Brooklyn Center Community Schools Josh Fraser, Principal Jena, BCBS Renee, BCBS Mykella Auld, BCBS Tashawna Williams, instructor Chloe Cotherman, instructor Alexandra Holter, Earle Brown Elementary Megan Grubb, Farm to School Coordinator Terry Peyton, Community Schools Manager Christine Salokar, instructor Student participants Angel Hoglund, Hennepin Tec hnical College Cheryl Clausen, North Hennepin County Community College This plan was overseen by Forecast Public Art, a Twin Cities- based nonprofit. The consulting team included Jack Becker, WItt Siasoco, Ashlyn Crawford and Regine Kennedy (106 Group); and Haila Maize (Bolton & Menk). Acknowledgments 4Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Beautification and Public Art Plan Summary Imagine… Brooklyn Center is known as a place where diverse community members can see themselves in the art that’s part of their daily lives and work together to build their shared home, a home where residents and businesses thrive, actively engage in cultural activities and enjoy their quality of life. The City hosts an inclusive, equitable, people-powered beautification program focused on improving health, wellbeing and thoughtful design throughout the city. - Excerpted from the Vision Statement (page 28) Brooklyn Center is part of a region that is known nationally for its bountiful arts and cultural assets, yet the City is relatively new to fostering the arts and supporting cultural development. A major goal of the City was developing a master plan for beautification and public art, in response to its desire to lift up the beauty and pride of the City and to align such a desire with the rewriting of its Comprehensive Plan. Following a search process, they hired Forecast Public Art, a nationally recognized leader in the field to create this document. During the two years spent developing this plan, we heard from hundreds of Brooklyn Center residents, students, business owners and workers who believe arts and culture play an important role in improving their quality of life. Eight-four percent of people surveyed want to see their City pay more attention to what can be done in their community. They expressed their aspirations for their City, including the following quotes from interviews, focus groups and surveys: • I dream of a BC where neighbors know each other by name; where crime is rare and people pick up trash instead of adding to it; where people care. • Public art gives people a reason to like where they live. • Do something with entrances to the city that distinguishes it and tells me I’m home now. • Students want more art in the city, opportunities they can participate in. • I hope [the City] can develop a special identity that inspires residents and neighbors of the city and is based on the creative talents of its people. • The arts give us a forum to display our differences and similarities, and the opportunity to learn about each other. The City of Brooklyn Center has reached a moment in its history when its exceptionally diverse community—established over the last few decades—is putting down cultural roots. These roots need nourishment and encouragement so Brooklyn Center’s cultural life can grow and blossom. The resulting beautification of Brooklyn Center is a major goal of this planning document, intended to amplify the many voice, tell the many stories, and generate pride and economic vitality. This plan was created to inform and guide cultural development throughout the city, starting with public art, beautification, public space development and environmental stewardship. This planning document provides information about the field of public art today, along with strategies for beautifying public spaces, honoring and celebrating its diversity, enhancing its parks and trails, and taking advantage of opportunities on the horizon. This plan also provides a roadmap for the City, working in partnerships and collaboration with community members and businesses; a framework for connecting ideas and people to a program that enables them to achieve goals identified herein. Today Brooklyn Center, as a community, has the opportunity to shape the kind of cultural support system it needs and desires. Building on its assets and the many supportive partnerships with the private sector, the City can develop support systems to grow a program that suits the needs of its vibrant and diverse community. The results could include a cultural festival, a multi-cultural facility, youth-involved mural projects that tell the stories of the people who live here, and public art that promotes civic pride and authentic community engagement. This plan also acknowledges that we live in uncertain times, confronted by a global pandemic, severe economic hardship and a heightened awareness of our history of systemic racial injustice. Emergency preparedness, crisis management, disaster recovery and radical health services are considered critical components of every city’s toolkit today. Artists, as cultural workers, have become essential service providers, helping communities grieve, heal, and deal with emotional trauma. It has become more evident today than ever that artists are a valuable resource to cities seeking new and innovative ways to raise awareness of issues, promote civic engagement, foster entrepreneurship, inspire collective problem-solving, reduce disparities and bridge cultural divides. Through beautification and public art— thoughtfully planned and professional implemented—civic pride can be boosted, environmental stewardship can be fostered, and the City can build a healthier, more resilient community. The arts are one of the most powerful means for communication and coping we have at our disposal today. They can bring joy and beauty to neglected or uncared for spaces and inspire residents and businesses to engage in the process. And, as this plan points out, creative individuals can help address the health of Brooklyn Center, the wellbeing of the community, and even the mental and physical fitness of its residents—at a time when we most need them. I invite you pour through the pages of this plan and learn how you and your neighbors can work collectively to improve the quality of life for everyone in Brooklyn Center. - Jack Becker, Forecast Public Art 5 Letter from Mayor Mike Elliott Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Pellentesque feugiat interdum velit ac sagittis. Nam pulvinar blandit lobortis. Praesent blandit ultrices ve- hicula. Aenean eu rutrum leo. Donec vel ipsum at lacus varius blandit. In non cursus velit. Proin vitae luctus lorem, euismod efficitur turpis. Mauris ac risus et mauris cursus imperdiet quis non nulla. Donec et eros libero. Donec eget elit sollicitudin, sollic- itudin sapien vel, aliquet nibh. Quisque ante erat, luctus eget augue convallis, consequat interdum erat. Phasellus fringilla varius tortor commodo euismod. Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Pellentesque facilisis consectetur augue vel semper. Quisque porttitor ut risus a scelerisque. Nulla ut magna ut eros laoreet maximus in ut est. In a vestibulum tellus, in finibus neque. Ut elementum rhoncus mauris ac varius. Praesent nec suscipit libero, id finibus libero. Aliquam vulputate ultrices sem, in imperdiet augue convallis ut. Duis tempus malesuada nibh ac volutpat. Maecenas elementum nisl bibendum velit ultricies porta. Nulla dictum risus leo, a varius sem pharetra nec. Sed nec auctor justo, eu pretium nisi. Sincerely, Mayor Mike Elliott NOTE: TH I S I S A COPY PL A C H O L D E R 6 In early March of 2020, as this plan document was getting edited, the rapid spread of the Covid-19 virus led to a global pandemic. Cities around the world were forced to take emergency actions to limit the spread of the virus. Minnesota Governor Tim Walz declared a state of peacetime emergency on March 13th, followed by local emergencies declared in cities throughout the state, including Brooklyn Center on March 17th. All but essential businesses were closed, including Brooklyn Center City Hall, the Community Center, the library, playgrounds and restaurants. The Center for Disease Control (CDC) issued safety guidelines that limited gatherings, isolated at-risk individuals, and recommended “social distancing” to keep individuals from separate households to keep at least six feet apart. Brooklyn Center may have experienced a greater difficulties due to the disproportionate hardship of Covid-19 on its higher rate of lower-income, multi-lingual, renter and transit- dependent residents. The pandemic has caused physical, mental, social and economic hardships. As the New York Times has reported, “Research suggests that those in lower economic strata are likelier to catch the disease. They are also likelier to die from it. And, even for those who remain healthy, they are likelier to suffer loss of income or health care as a result of quarantines and other measures, potentially on a sweeping scale.” The disparities experienced by a large portion of Brooklyn Center’s youth and families in the areas of transit, economic opportunity, health and the impact of Covid-19 are likely to have a The Role of Arts and Culture in COVID-19 Recovery and Fighting Racial Injustice synergistic down-spiraling effect on the City’s underserved populations. By late May, as some restrictions were starting to lift, Minneapolis policeman Derek Chauvin was caught on video murdering George Floyd, an African- American father accused of issuing a counterfeit $20 bill, while other police officers stood by. The video of this tragedy went viral, triggering outrage, protests and rioting—in Brooklyn Center, the Twin Cities, across the country and around the world. In the metro region, dozens of buildings were burned and hundreds of businesses suffered damage, many of them small businesses owned by people of color. With demands to defund the police and undo structural racism on a national level, a racial justice uprising surged, fueling the removal of statues and monuments long considered painful to Black, Brown and Indigenous communities. At the same time, scores of murals and unsanctioned public art began covering boarded-up buildings and storefronts, along with street paintings declaring “Black Lives Matter.” As of this writing in late June, the City of Brooklyn Center and the Twin Cities region are still reeling from the collective trauma, taking stock of this unprecedented moment and sensing hope over the potential for real change to follow. Black, Brown, Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC) are seizing the moment to center conversations around racial justice and shining a light on our country’s systemic racism as another kind of pandemic, one that has been ignored for centuries. Artists are rallying to bring their creative talents and problem-solving abilities to the fore, and avail themselves of needs in the community, including healing, recovery and rebuilding. Hennepin County Commissioners— followed by the City of Minneapolis and the State of Minnesota—recently passed a resolution declaring racism a “public health crisis” and vowed to eliminate racial disparities. Evidence was cited from national and county sources showing racism’s negative impact on the health and development of children and adults who are Black, Indigenous and of color. The City of Brooklyn Center has stated that the health of its residents and its community is of great importance. The City commenced a review of its policing policies and is developing pilot projects intended to stem the tide of mental health challenges and social isolation brought on by Covid-19 and civil unrest. The City began investing in micro-business entrepreneurs, small community non-profits and cultural organizations that provide essentials resources and services, such as preparing food for newly unemployed residents or providing accessible citywide internet access for seniors as well as students. Out of these two health crises— Covid-19 and racial injustice—we can acknowledge several positive outcomes, including:• More people recognize we are all in this together and by working together we can reduce the threat posed by a pandemic;• Public health issues need to be addressed in more intentional and meaningful ways;• Residents need quality public spaces in which we can safely Northeast Minneapolis Justice for George Floyd March 7 connect (following CDC guidelines);• Art can help communities heal and give meaning to our collective grief; and• We need to center BIPOC communities and build trusting relationships to advance racial justice and reduce disparities. Additionally, we know there is no short- term fix for our deep-rooted systemic racism, nor our battle with Covid-19— both will resurface periodically and require safety-mindedness, community triage, healing and recovery. It will also require an openness to change the way we do business, build cities and set policies. Cultural development expert and author Arlene Goldbard has written about racism for many years. “Like every massive collective challenge,” she states in a recent blog post, “racism is not just a legal problem, a moral problem, and an economic problem. It is at bottom a cultural problem, because cultural processes are the primary forces shaping consciousness. In the vast network creating and expressing culture, pernicious ideas often have staying power. And in the fertile soil of a false idea—the easy assumption that “everyone” who matters holds the same beliefs and values—racism becomes normalized. Once normalized, it is hard to uproot, but not impossible. The antidotes are plentiful: awareness, shame, and choice. But we have to use them.” The notion of employing arts and cultural development—including beautification and environmental stewardship—to improve community health and well-being was embraced by many participants in the planning process. As Brooklyn Center—like most cities—faces the challenge of recovering and healing from Covid-19, the enormous damage to the economy, as well as the region’s deep structural racism, the City will need creativity, innovation and meaningful community engagement. This unprecedented situation requires new and creative responses at the City level. According to the University of Florida’s Center for Arts and Medicine, “arts and cultural resources are among the most powerful and readily available resources addressing problems faced by cities, including social isolation among senior citizens, communication with hard to reach populations, meeting the education and developmental needs of children, and crafting plans for safe and equitable recovery and rebuilding. The arts are one of the most powerful means at our disposal today for enabling communication, direct health benefits, and social and economic recovery.” It therefore makes sense for the City to attend to its rich cultural diversity and foster the many manifestations of that diversity, such as storytelling, visual and performing arts, a multitude of crafts and a variety of rituals, celebrations and gatherings that build community. One of the goals of this plan is to raise awareness of the importance of cultural infrastructure as an essential component of healthy communities. What does a healthy cultural infrastructure look like? Among the key ingredients are:• Robust, authentic community engagement, involving City staff and paid community liaisons, enabling real-time community feedback and idea generation systems (such as social media, forums, public-access chalkboards, Little Free Libraries, and more)• Support systems for diverse community cultural expressions utilizing a mix of public and private dollars, involving businesses and philanthropic partners• Professional program management, including City staff oversight, qualified contracted services, inter-agency coordination and robust reporting and evaluation• An active and informed governance structure (Arts & Culture Commission) with diverse representation, able to help the City adopt policies and procedures responsive to changing community needs and concerns• Vibrant gathering places, open-access cultural facilities, user-friendly production spaces and multifaceted programming serving young and old in Brooklyn Center (locally, and in partnership with arts and cultural entities in the region)• Education and training, skill-building and robust communications promoting creative economies, entrepreneurship and jobs in cultural industries In the Work Plan Action Steps section of this plan, Near-Term Tasks identified for 2020 and 2021 (starting on page 41) are intended to inform City staff leading the implementation of this Plan, as well as the members of the City’s future Arts & Culture Commission (whose establishment is recommended as one of the first tasks). These include strategies for advancing Public Art and Beautification Focal Areas (listed on pages 31–37) during the immediate era of healing, recovery and rebuilding as described above. In addition, the Appendix has been updated to include useful resources and links associated with Covid-19 safety and creative workarounds pertaining to arts and cultural work, resources pertaining to dismantling institutional bias and racism, and other relevant and timely content. Among these is a Toolkit for artists and organizations confronting cancellations or delays of projects and events due to the global pandemic, prepared by Forecast Public Art, the creators of this plan. Justice for George Floyd Bannermaking Susan Davies’ Butterflies for Hope 8Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Beautify Brooklyn Center A Plan for Beautification and Public Art Background n 2018, in response to its desire to lift up the beauty and pride of the City and to align such a desire with the rewriting of its Comprehensive Plan,the City of Brooklyn Center determined a need for a Beautification and Public Art Plan to guide efforts aimed at improving the way the City looks, acts and feels, and address a need identified in the plan for deeper community engagement. The City hired Forecast Public Art, a Twin Cities-based nonprofit consulting firm, to create this plan. Over a 14-month period the Forecast team oversaw an in-depth planning process that included collecting data, reviewing plans, engaging hundreds of community stakeholders, mapping strategic locations and opportunities, and identifying implementation strategies. The Farm to School program in Brooklyn Center’s schools teach youth about gardening, food systems and healthy foods. The arts give us a forum to display our differences and similarities, and the opportunity to learn about each other.” – Survey Respondent “ NOTE: All stand-alone quotes throughout this plan are excerpted from comments made by participants in the planning process. 9Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan One of several community engagement planning sessions with residents and City representatives. Why a Plan? •Recreate a sense of identity, enhance the community’s image and grow civic pride. •Identify and locate opportunities for strategic investments in art. •Enable the City to make informed decisions about revising or adopting new policies, procedures, governance and management systems, and identify sustainable funding mechanisms. •Coordinate public and private beautification efforts. •Inform and guide efforts to enhance public improvements and private development efforts. •Advance the economic stability of residents and businesses. •Create opportunities to showcase the City’s rich cultural diversity. •Engage residents and businesses in meaningful and creative ways throughout the City. •Establish a stable, sustainable program, able to withstand changes in staff and elected officials, as well as shifting priorities of the City over time. In addition to the goals for this plan listed on the left, the planning process offered multiple values as well. In addition to helping the City establish systems to develop and support beautification and public art in the community, the process brought people together and fostered dialogues amongst stakeholders in the community. The dozens of in-person gatherings and conversations also helped raise awareness amongst community members about the field of public art, the work of artists and the challenges and benefits of meaningful community engagement processes. An overview of the planning process, and the findings that resulted, begins on page 18. A key goal of the consulting team was to create an actionable plan, one that gets used and referenced as a resource. A good plan can help expand public- private partnerships and leverage both public and private investments that benefit the community. Intended to reinforce and support goals in the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan, this plan is a tool to promote community-based arts and cultural development in Brooklyn Center—with a focus on public art— and guide the work of the City, elected officials and leaders in the community. 10Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Beautification is the process of identifying and enhancing existing aesthetic conditions in the built environment, an area or a city and creating visual improvements. In addition to the beauty inherent in our natural environments, such as the bountiful natural resources found throughout Brooklyn Center and the region, beauty in our built environment has the ability to lift one’s spirits, add value to otherwise drab buildings, increase usage of gathering places and serve to attract visitors, businesses and creative industries. Beauty in public spaces creates an emotional bond that increases community attachment, loyalty, and a sense of belonging. Landscape design, lighting, horticulture, and public art all play an important role in beautification efforts, as does the plan and strategy for ongoing maintenance. Beautification can be framed as a public health issue, one that addresses mental and physical health, social wellbeing, economic health, environmental health and community cultural health. It’s also about attitudes and behaviors ingrained in the minds of residents and business owners. Fostering a sense of ownership and community connection can lead to a greater sense of responsibility. Stewardship of our shared environment is something some people do naturally; for others, it needs to be taught. Behaviors learned at an early age are critically important, however it may be possible to modify the behaviors of offenders so they become good stewards of our streetscapes. These are topics Brooklyn Center and many other cities are taking on. They’re also relevant to this plan. Of course, we all know the adage “beauty is in the eye of the beholder.” It’s important to recognize that the definition assigned to—and value placed on— beautification efforts varies from person to person, as it does from culture to culture and generation to generation. Youth painting Metro bus in St. Louis during a community cultural festival (photo by Jack Becker) Beautification can be framed as a public health issue...”“ What is Beautification? 11Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan What is Public Art? Public art is visible evidence of our shared humanity. For the purposes of this plan, a definition of public art is as follows: Public art is publicly accessible original art that enriches a city and evokes meaning. It can be permanent or temporary, visual or performance- based, installations, events or social engagement activities, artist-designed infrastructure, architectural elements, functional amenities or wayfinding markers. It can tell our stories, improve the look and feel of our built environment, enhance our quality of life and improve the health of our communities. As the diagram on the following page suggests, there are many types of public art and many different functions it can serve. It can be temporary or fixed, visual or performance, social engagement, a festival, fireworks or a light projection on a water tower. The process—often collaborative in nature—is as important as the products that results. Today, artists and communities want public art that goes beyond visually enhancing public spaces; they seek authentic engagement with community members and stakeholders. Responding to predetermined criteria and the context of a specific site, public art can address high-level goals, such as increasing equity and inclusion or reducing disparities. There are more than 700 public art programs around the United States. In the Twin Cities metro area, there are about a dozen programs, including the cities of Minneapolis, St. Paul, Eagan, St. Louis Park, Hopkins, and Eden Prairie, as well as Hennepin County. The Brookdale Library, located in Brooklyn Center, for example, features several art projects funded as a result of Hennepin County’s “percent-for-art ordinance,” adopted for its libraries in 2001. Goals of municipal programs typically include: • Support economic activity • Highlight history and diversity • Engage and support artists • Enrich the aesthetic quality of life • Generate dialogue and community engagement • Increase public awareness of and education about public art • Humanize space Public art is vital to building a dynamic and equitable city for everyone; it encourages dialogues across difference, inspires viewers and participants to engage more fully in their communities and fosters civic pride and stewardship. Public art is more than art in public places. It’s increasingly about creating meaningful experiences for audiences of all types—creative activities that bridge difference and build social cohesion. (See page 82 in Appendix for more information about public art and links to resources.) Youth in Austin, MN, were invited to join in an impromptu music-making event at the city’s annual festival. Photo by Hannah Rosholt An amphitheater in Richfield, features mosaics created with youth from the community with artist Greta McLain Beautification is the process of identifying and enhancing existing aesthetic conditions in the built environment, an area or a city and creating visual improvements...” “Today, artists and communities want public art that goes beyond visual enhancing public spaces...” 12Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Commemorative Memorials & Markers Interactive Art & AudienceActivated Examples of Public Art Wayfinding Elements Functional Street Elements Installations in Vacant Storefronts & on Rooftops Sound Installations Streetside Performances Temporary Streetside Displays Platforms & Stages for Programmed Events Landmarks & Beacons Light Installations & Projections Land Art & Eco-Art Overhead Cables for Art Displays Community Engagement & Social Practice Sculpture New Media & Technology Based Festivals, Parades, & Spectacles Murals, Mosaics, & Wall Treatments Aaron Johnso n- O rtiz m u r a l B e f o r e I Die... by Candy C h a n g N i g h t a n d D a y by Jason Klimoski Gr e t a M c C l a i n & D r e w P e t e r s o n Mu r a l Bi r d s o n a W i r e b y J a c k B e c k e r Aa r o n M a r x a n d J i m B r e n n e r s c u l p t u r e Pi m p M y C a r r o ç a b y T h i a g o M u n d a n o Christopher Lutter- G a r d e ll a I n s t a l l a tion 13Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Public art has the ability to raise awareness and amplify the goals of a city, represent cultures and values, support economic development and improve wayfinding. It can be particularly effective as a strategy to address disparities, promote inclusion, foster racial equity and promote well-being. Public art programs can also support local artists, create jobs, enhance learning opportunities in classrooms and attract cultural tourists. Apart from random pieces of art placed in accessible spaces, public art has the ability to reflect and represent the community in which it’s located. It’s important to note that beautification and public art can increase the value of properties and the built environment, perhaps unintentionally contributing to displacement or gentrification. Today, as more cities are mindful of the challenges inherent in making strategic investments meant to attract visitors, workers and residents, new strategies and methodologies are emerging to help cities avoid unwanted displacement. For example, by focusing attention on lifting local talent and telling meaningful stories of the community—instead of simply plopping artworks into spaces to Why Public Art? Northern Cascade, Ray King Photo: Jack Becker impress outsiders—community members develop a sense of trust and appreciation for City-led efforts. Likewise, in contrast to a top-down approach, in which artists and community members are told what the City plans to do, a community-driven approach is employed, giving voice and power to those most affected by any changes to their neighborhood. These strategies can still add value to public and private investments without leading to unintended consequences, such as displacement. A lot of people have looked down on or overlooked Brooklyn Center for too long. We need something that shows how unique and wonderful this community is. Something iconic and beautiful that people will want to see.” “ 14Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Public Art & Healthy City Strategies The theme of “Healthy City” emerged during the engagement phase of the planning process, offering an opportunity to connect with Brooklyn Center’s efforts to offer healthy lifestyle options for its residents. Going beyond the physical, mental and emotional health of community members, community health is heavily influenced by the policies, systems and built environment in our cities. We live in communities that are designed for living, working and playing—environments like parks, housing, transportation systems and gathering places—that are major contributors to our health. The World Health Organization describes social determinants of health (SDOH) as “the conditions in which people are born, grow, live work and age.” SDOH are the complex circumstances that impact our health. They include intangible factors such as political, socioeconomic and cultural constructs, as well as place- based conditions including accessible healthcare and education systems, safe environmental conditions, well- designed neighborhoods and availability of healthful food. The City’s plan for Brooklyn Boulevard is reflective of these concerns. A growing amount of evidence points to the benefits of integrating community- engaged arts and cultural activities with community development and public health. (See Appendix for Resources and Links.) There are also numerous case studies documenting contemporary public art projects that effectively address both physical and social environments—or ecologies—leading to significant health benefits. Cities in transition, under construction or addressing ill-kept neighborhoods are likely to see a lack of caring along with skeptical attitudes about the future. There are, however, many ways public art can address individual, community and social health objectives. Creating meaningful engagement experiences— efforts that bridge difference—can build a sense of pride, generate social cohesion and promote cross-sector collaboration. Art and engagement can generate optimism and bring the stories of our communities into visible places. The City’s Street Banner demonstration project, utilizing high-traffic corridors to showcase the faces of residents, is a good example. (See Street Banner project in Appendix on page 69.) The number of immigrants living in Brooklyn Center has increased dramatically over the past two decades. An observation about the City’s immigrant population made during the planning process pointed out that “Brooklyn Center is their home. People need to come together and build their home!” Indeed, the notion of “building our home together” could serve as a subtext for the City’s beautification and public art program. Growing evidence points to benefits derived from engaging community members in creating—or co-creating— the physical and social ecology they desire, allowing disenfranchised residents to see themselves in the art they experience in their daily lives. The Knight Foundation’s Soul of the Community initiative surveyed some 43,000 people in 43 cities and found • 70 percent of Americans believe that the “arts improve the image and identity” of their community. • Half of people with college degrees (49%) and a majority of Millennials (52%) and Generation Xers (54%) say they would strongly consider whether a community is rich in the arts when deciding where to locate for a job. • Aesthetics is one of the top three characteristics of why residents attach themselves to a community. • 70 percent of Americans say they experience the arts in a “non-arts” venue such as a park, hospital, shopping mall, or airport. • 72 percent of Americans believe “the arts unify our communities regardless of age, race, and ethnicity.” • 69 percent of the population believe the arts “lift me up beyond everyday experiences.” • 73 percent of Americans agree that the arts “helps me understand other cultures better.” that “social offerings, openness and welcome-ness,” and, importantly, the “aesthetics of a place—its art, parks, and green spaces,” ranked higher than education, safety, and the local economy as a “driver of attachment.” In other words, beautification and public art can help build a sense of belonging, attachment and wellbeing. Recent research claims that “public art decreases stress, increases safety, enhances connectivity and a sense of place by showing evidence of care.” A 2018 study by Americans for the Arts reveals the following statistics: This Home is Not For Sale by Poetry for People and Witt Siasoco 15Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Aerial Photo of Brookdale Mall Brooklyn Center Snapshot The City of Brooklyn Center’s recently adopted the following value statement: While there is little evidence of its pre-settlement era—Mound Cemetery was named for the Native American mounds across the street from the cemetery—for many years, up until the 1950s, Brooklyn Center was made up of truck farms and a vibrant agricultural economy. Vegetables from the area fed communities in the entire Upper Midwest. Post World War II, Brooklyn Center became a first-ring suburb of Minneapolis, well known in the 1970s and 1980s for its enclosed Brookdale Mall, a regional shopping destination. Highly accessible via a network of highways and roadways, most of the city’s neighborhoods were developed Centennial Park Photo: City of Brooklyn Center A Brief Scan of Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Center recognizes this geographic location has been the site of human activity for 10,000 years, occupied by the Wahpekute and the Anishinabe Wakiagun. As recently as 300 years ago it was the home of the Sioux Tribe of the Dakota Nation. Furthermore the City recognizes that historically efforts to develop and redevelop have resulted in disparate impacts and harm to some residents through displacement and exclusion from the benefits of that investment. This has been in part due to the exclusion and under- representation of those residents in the planning process. The City endeavors to reverse these disparities and enhance equitable outcomes by working towards reconciliation, and demonstrating a more responsible means of stewarding redevelopment. between the 1950s and the 1970s. While the city has an urban street grid, enabling good access to transit, much of it is interrupted by state and county highways, large parks and lakes. About 17 years ago, Brooklyn Center’s core began to experience pressure and decline as adjacent communities like Maple Grove and Brooklyn Park began to develop. With market trends in housing and retail shifting, Brooklyn Center suddenly found itself with an abundance of vacant or underutilized properties and a void in the center of the city. The City’s housing stock is highly homogenous; most houses are over 40 years old and will require ongoing maintenance in order to preserve the existing housing stock. In 2019, the City secured developers committed to creating new housing— market rate, senior and workforce housing—the first housing boom in several decades. As of this writing, there are 300 units under construction and 480 in the pipeline. The City’s location—close to downtown Minneapolis—and its abundance of affordable housing stock attracted a very diverse base of residents. Brooklyn Center is now among the most culturally diverse cities in Minnesota, and the most diverse in the Metro Area. Indeed, the diversity of its immigrant community is among the City’s greatest strengths. This distinction, as well as other factors described on page X, present challenges as well as opportunities for local businesses and City government— considerations of great importance to this plan and the long-term health of Brooklyn Center’s cultural life. (See Appendix for data and information) 16Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan A. Growing. The population in 2016 was 31,231, with modest growth projected. B. Racially Diverse. Brooklyn Center is distinctive in its diversity. 60% of the City’s residents are people of color or non-white. C. Young. The City hosts a higher-than- average number of young families; more than 40% of the City’s 11,300 households have children. D. Well Served. Hennepin County provides Public Health services to residents of Brooklyn Center, and works with several social service organizations based in the City. E. Mixed Income. 40% of the population is near or below poverty level (up from 8% in 2000). The median household income in 2019 was $50,000—a third lower than Hennepin County’s median income. F. Employed. Many residents work in manufacturing jobs. Some perform production, skilled craft and administrative support jobs and a small number engage in professional/ technical jobs. The number of residents who self-identify as artists or creative entrepreneurs is unknown. G. Access to Schools. Brooklyn Center is served by four school districts, including Anoka-Hennepin, Brooklyn Center, Osseo and Robbinsdale. Brooklyn Center Schools are STEAM focused, incorporating Arts and creativity into the STEM education model (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math). Students in this School District are extremely diverse: 45% are African American, 25% are Southeast Asian and 30% are Latinx. The District provides after school and summer programs that include community engagement to help students gain real-world knowledge and hands-on experiences. In addition, there are several charter schools throughout the City that serve the community, including Evergreen Park World Cultures Community School, Progeny School and New Millennium Academy, which serves Southeast Asian communities. H. A Spiritual Center. There are many places of worship throughout Brooklyn Center, including churches, synagogues, temples and mosques. Many of these facilities serve as social and community connecting places, and offer opportunities for community engagement. I. Active. Brooklyn Center hosts 24 local parks—one regional park, and a municipal golf course—generally distributed evenly throughout all areas of the City. There are a variety of recreational facilities providing recreation access to all residents, as well as excellent coordination of programs and facilities between parks and schools, and between parks, City and county facilities. Some parks are defined as “special use” (Arboretum, North Mississippi Regional Park and Bob Cahlander) and some are “community destination” parks (Central, Evergreen, Grandview, Kylawn, West Palmer). Most are considered “Neighborhood Parks.” Brooklyn Center Snapshot Based on data obtained from Brooklyn Center’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan and other sources, the following contextual information was collected: The City’s 458 acres of parkland and 21 miles of trails are often located adjacent to existing schools in the community. The trail system provides recreational opportunities as well as interconnectivity amongst neighborhoods. Portions of the system are part of the regional bikeway system, offering alternative transportation options. J. Needs Arts & Culture. The City lacks entertainment and cultural venues, as well as businesses focused on creative work, such as design, architecture, graphic design, environmental design, etc. There are very few studios, exhibition venues, rehearsal or performance spaces, no movie theaters or live music venues. There’s a lack of arts organizations, drinking establishments and sit- down restaurants, however there’s a wealth of chain restaurants and a few hotel bars. K. Developing. The City has partnered with real estate developer Alatus to reimagine and create a vibrant new “downtown” north of the former Brookdale Mall, now referred to as the Opportunity Site. This long-term effort, a mixed-use development with a health-oriented philosophy, is slowly taking shape. Informed by a number of community engagement and public-input sessions and it holds great promise for transforming the heart of the City. L. Accessible. The City is bisected by several high traffic roadways, including state and county highways and municipal streets. While there are numerous challenges created by physically dividing the community and safety issues due to speeding vehicles and lack of dedicated bike lanes, the City benefits from an average daily drive-by population of over half a million vehicles. Brooklyn Center is: Aerial of Bass Lake Rd. and Xeres Ave. N. 17Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan We envision Brooklyn Center as a thriving, diverse community with a full range of housing, business, cultural and recreational offerings. It is a safe and inclusive place that people of all ages love to call home and visitors enjoy due to its convenient location and commitment to a healthy environment.” - From the City’s Vision Statement In 2019 the City adopted its 2040 Comprehensive Plan, in accordance with guidelines established by the Metropolitan Council, the regional governmental agency and planning organization serving the seven-county metropolitan area. A number of priority goals identified in the City’s Comp Plan pertain to or offer opportunities for beautification and public art, as well as arts and cultural development: Deepen inclusive community engagement - Efforts to engage the community will be transparent, responsive, deliberately inclusive, and culturally sensitive. Note: This is a “strategic priority.” Cultivate partnerships - Strengthen opportunities to collaborate with adjacent municipalities, agencies and the County on planning, marketing, transportation and infrastructure initiatives. Improve communications and engagement. Identify opportunities to improve communications and engagement with the community’s residents, business owners and stakeholders. Explore opportunities to utilize technology to make it easier and more convenient for residents to interact with the City. Engage the City’s youth. Explore ways to collaborate with the school districts, nonprofits and the for-profit sectors to engage the City’s youth so that they are invested in the community. Create a vibrant and innovative city center and surrounding neighborhoods. Encourage developers, staff and stakeholders to think big and creatively about redevelopment to create an interesting, vibrant and innovative city center and surrounding neighborhoods. Create unified branding, connections and visual cues. Explore opportunities to create unified branding, connections and visual cues to reinforce Brooklyn Center’s identity and relationship to existing neighborhoods. This includes: a. Use public art and beautification to create community identity - Create a city- wide beautification strategy that includes a process for creating community identity and pride through the use of public art; b. Enhance gateways and entrances - Incorporate more trees and landscaping at the City’s main gateways and entrances; c. Improve streetscapes and design elements - Encourage residents, Highlights from City’s Comphrensive Plan developers and stakeholders to improve streetscapes and design elements; d. Incorporate enhancements in corridors - Identify key pedestrian, bikeway, auto and transit corridors that should incorporate consistent branding and landscape themes; e. Promote Diversity - Promote Brooklyn Center’s diversity through the development of flexible spaces, opportunities for pop- ups and other small business incubators. Enhance the City’s community image, including: a. Promote the City - Promote Brooklyn Center as an exceptional place for businesses, visitors and residents. b. Develop strategies that reflect community - Encourage further enhancement of the public realm through the development of a public art and beautification master plan that reflects the community, its residents and businesses. c. Represent community’s diversity - Explore meaningful ways to represent the community’s diversity through the City’s branding, marketing and visual communications. Encourage reinvestment in infrastructure. Encourage and promote reinvestment in the City’s infrastructure—streetscapes, trails, utilities, etc.—to aid the long-term success of residents and businesses. (This would include investment in maintenance of fixed public art or beautification efforts to ensure longevity.) Increase community participation in parks & rec system. Encourage residents and stakeholders to participate in the park and recreation system planning process. “Improve and maintain quality parks. Explore ways to incorporate design and preservation standards into the City’s ordinances and policies to improve and maintain a high-quality park system. a. Innovate park & rec development - Continue to explore ways to incorporate and plan for innovative park and recreation development as the system is maintained or expanded. b. Creative park design - Encourage creative park design to develop a dynamic and diverse system. Balance function with aesthetics. c. Improve parks/neighborhood connections - Identify ways to use park design as a neighborhood improvement theme, or as a way to complement redevelopment. Maximize access and use of parks. Support efforts to maximize the use and accessibility of the park system by local residents. Grow housing stock thoughtfully. The City will grow its housing stock in a thoughtful way, ensuring new developments are interconnected with existing neighborhoods with access to transit, parks and trails. Note: The City is partnering with a developer to reestablish an economic core where Brookdale Ford and Brookdale Square once stood, north of the former Brookdale Mall—a hub that serves its diverse immigrant community, attracts visitors and improves the City’s economic vitality, community health and cultural life. The above goals, as well as input collected during the planning process, informed the Focal Areas and project ideas, presented on page 31. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 18Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan As the chart on the right indicates, there were 1032 “touch points” with community members during the planning process, including meetings, interviews, tabling at events, on site surveys and online surveys. Many more people learned about the planning process through the City’s newsletter, social media platform and via local media. A concerted effort to seek and obtain diverse perspectives and input throughout the planning process was critical to the plan’s efficacy , as evidenced in the montage of images taken during the planning process. The consulting team conducted a wide variety of activities, including: Listen, Observe, Tour, Inquire, Interview, Survey, Discover, Absorb, Study, Digest, and Note. Several mapping exercises were held, inviting participants to identify sites within the city that they cared about, and ones they felt needed attention or improvement. The mapping exercises helped identify places of concern or in need of attention—the Transit Center, an abundance of vacant parking lots, several large, empty buildings, etc.—as well as places of value and opportunities—the library, City parks and lakes, extensive trails, Centennial Park, the Mississippi River, etc. (See “Mapping the Pros and Cons of Places in Brooklyn Center,” page 20). Planning Process Summary of Community CEAP Event Photo: Jack Becker 19Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan “The arts give us a forum to display our differences and similarities, and the opportunity to learn about each other.” There was also consensus and positive response regarding the concept of the City developing a beautification and public art program of some type, as well as considering larger arts and cultural development goals. Data collected from an online survey provided helpful insights into the community’s awareness, interest and understanding of public art and beautification. (See Appendix, page 58). During the process the consulting team assisted and advised City staff in planning and implementing two demonstration projects: One involved replacing street banners along the City’s major roadways with 230 custom-designed street banners featuring the faces of local youth, adults and elders. The second involved promoting the 2020 Census by projecting messages in multiple languages on two monumental structures: the Crest Apartment building and a City-owned water tower along Highway 100. (See summary of Street Banners and Census 2020 projects on page 69 in the Appendix.) Metro Transit Center Surveys Brooklyn Center Community Center Event Based on information collected during the planning process, the team developed a collection of findings, including Strengths, Challenges and Opportunities, as well a Map identifying locations for beautification and public art opportunities. “[The arts] can help the people of Brooklyn Center grow and prosper] by projecting a positive image [that will] help to dispel some negative stereotypes of the town.” A summary of preliminary short- and long-term recommendations were developed and reviewed by the three planning committees (Community, City Staff and City Council) as well as four City Commissions (Planning, Housing, Parks & Recreation and the Multicultural Advisory Committee). Based on their input, an updated and expanded draft plan was prepared. Brooklyn Center Census 2020 Water Tower Projection “[The arts] create a culture and a brand for the city that tells people who we are and demonstrates [our] values.” 20Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Mapping the Pros and Cons of Places in Brooklyn Center Centennial Park Shingle Creek Park Islands of Peace Park Shingle CreekCrossing Palmer LakeEnvironmental Area Anoka Co RiverfrontRegional Park He nn epi n Ano ka 9 4 N 49th Ave N e v A t d l o b m u H 69th A ve N 63r d A ve N 57th A ve N 65th Ave NFreeway Blvd W L y n d a l e A v e N 66th A ve N Shing l e Creek S h i n g l e C r e e k N e v A t n o p u D 69th Ave N 73rd Ave N 53rd Ave N 55th Ave N N 52nd Ave N e v A t n a yr B N 51st Ave t S h t 6 N 54th Ave N Ju n e A v e N 58th Ave N N 50th Ave 59th Ave N B e a r d A v e N N evA nosremE 65th Ave N N evA xonK X e r x e s A v e N N 48th Ave 61st Ave N 67th Ave N N evA notweN Freeway B l v d 66th Ave N N e v A x afl o C 60th Ave N 62nd Ave N Ericon Dr No b l e A v e N Gr i m e s A v e N 72nd Ave N E w i n g A v e N Summit Dr N St a r l i t e B l v d N E Ea r l e B r o w n D r 62nd Ave N 59th Ave N N e v A x afl o C 65th Ave N N e v A e c n a r F 60th Ave N 53rd Ave N reviR ippississiM 100 This map illustrates many of the places in Brooklyn Center that planning participants identified as a strength (green dots), or an area needing improvement (red dots). Respondents felt these “unhealthy” spaces needed beautification, improved safety or other enhancements. Cenntennial Park Transit Center Community members participating in mapping exercise 21Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Key Findings evident, however, given the decades- long timeframe of the phased effort, it’s important for the City to manage the community’s expectations. Under-recognized History - The City’s past has lots to offer in terms of stories, from its early Indigenous residents, its agricultural legacy and it diverse communities—all of which can inform meaningful public art. Alignment - The mission of the City’s Community Activities, Recreation and Services Department—“Create a sense of community and enrich the quality of life for our residents, patrons and employees by providing a variety of high quality, inclusive programs and services”—aligns well with the overall Strengths goals of beautification and public art goals. The Community Center is a valued hub for community arts and cultural activities, and there have been programs, such as ceramics classes, that suggest room for growth. Likewise, the department’s Rec on the Go offers opportunities for community engagement with the arts. This department, given its active role in programming in the community, is a logical starting point in which to house the City’s public art and beautification efforts. Act locally - The City seeks to invest locally, including funds earmarked for public art and beautification. For example the City hired local photographers and designers to produce the Banner Project. Low hanging fruit - There are numerous efforts underway or planned throughout the City that offer excellent opportunities for incorporating public art or beautification projects, including modestly-scaled projects at schools, parks, upcoming developments, the Transit Center and more. Highly visible - The City benefits from an substantial average daily drive-by population of over half a million vehicles using major freeways and roadways bisecting and encircling the City. Strong partnerships - The City has cultivated many valuable relationships with a variety of entities to achieve its goals and objectives over the past decade, including the library, the county, schools, social service organizations, faith-based organizations, businesses and youth groups, among others. Public-private partnerships are already a way of doing business in Brooklyn Center. Diverse leadership - A few interview participants acknowledged that the City Council, City staff and members of some City commissions have recently begun to reflect the diversity of the City. “[I value] our diversity, commitment to safe neighborhoods with an emphasis on parks and outdoor spaces, and an established, beautiful city.” “We have a very generous, faithful community.” Diversity - The City’s cultural diversity is one of its greatest strengths and distinguishing characteristics, offering opportunities to retell the story of Brooklyn Center as a special place, a home for inclusion and equity. Location, location - The City’s location, close to the core of the Twin Cities, combined with access to several transportation systems, makes Brooklyn Center a desirable place to live or locate a business. School options - Brooklyn Center is home to a variety of elementary and secondary school options, as well as a broad selection of faith-based organizations. Green space - Residents value their access to nature and outdoor activities. The City has a great mix of parks and trails and it makes sense to encourage broader and more diverse use of these resources. New downtown planned - The Opportunity Site offers a once-in-a- generation opportunity for the City to establish a downtown core, a hub of economic, community and cultural activity. The optimism generated by the potential of this development is 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. CEAP Event Photo: Jack Becker 22Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan New methodologies - The City’s previous efforts involving community engagement—asked residents to respond to City-generated ideas—left some participants wanting a more community-driven approach: what ideas do community members have, and what issues would they want addressed by the City? Equity and inclusion - Given the City’s high poverty rate, one in which many residents work 2-3 jobs, the challenge of engaging residents in volunteer activities—to participate in community-building efforts, serve Start-up - The City has not previously invested in a program focused on beautification and public art, nor does it have staff with expertise in the arts. As a new initiative that’s untested, adding an entire program would be difficult in the short term. Capacity - The City’s staff capacity is strained, limiting time that could be devoted to public art or beautification efforts. Inherent risks - City staff are fairly risk averse and somewhat conservative. The field of public art has inherent risks, especially with untried projects. Funding required - The City has limited resources and there are many competing priorities. Policies needed - The City has outdated policies regarding signage that currently restrict the creation of murals. on committee, attend meetings, etc.—may limit the degree to which community members can participate. Language barriers and cultural mores may further complicate inclusiveness in City-led initiatives. Achieving diversity - While City leaders and staff increasingly reflect the diversity of the larger community, there’s a noticeable predominance of representation by African Americans and African immigrants, suggesting a need to seek a more balanced mix of cultural representation. In the case of City commissioners, with the exception of the Multicultural Advisory Committee, there is a predominance of white members and members over the age of 50, suggesting a need for greater age and racial diversity. Talent pool - There’s a lack of artists in Brooklyn Center qualified to professionally participate in public art or facilitate creative community engagement projects. Based on interviews conducted during the planning process, there is a strong interest among creative entrepreneurs in the City to find additional income streams. Unsightly spaces - There are several blighted or abandoned buildings, including the former Target and Sears stores, along with uncared for vacant properties. Graffiti - Unwanted graffiti tagging is a growing problem. Challenges City Hall entry - The entrance to City Hall, including the exterior and interior, is not welcoming and does not convey a sense of what the City values. Littering - There is evidence of undesirable behaviors, such as trash being discarded in parking lots or on sidewalks and in parks. This may indicate a lack of shared responsibility or lack of stewardship for our public realm among residents, visitors or workers. It’s difficult for the community to keep public areas clean. Some local businesses don’t cooperate in cleanup efforts. Note: The City is currently developing a Environmental Stewardship initiative in partnership with local businesses to reduce littering and modify behaviors of offenders. (See Appendix, page 71) “I hope that our community continues to grow both in diverse population but also in its business diversity.” “I hope that we can lower the rate of poverty in a meaningful way.” 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Uneven volunteerism - The extent to which volunteers participate in neighborhood watch or clean up activities is not evenly distributed throughout the City. Some neighborhoods lack organization, which can aid in beautification efforts. Cultural venues - Apart from the library and the Community Center, there’s a lack of indoor and outdoor gathering places, arts and culture venues, entertainment centers, marketplaces and high-quality dining establishments. 23Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Mixed blessing - Top Golf is the most visited entertainment destination Brooklyn Center; and they employ local residents and students. However they are situated in an isolated site by highways, many of their patrons are unaware they’re in Brooklyn Center and those patrons don’t spend additional time or money in the City. Multiple school districts - Brooklyn Center is served by four school districts, including Anoka- Hennepin, Brooklyn Center, Osseo and Robbinsdale. Most of the City’s youth, attending 5th grade or higher, attend schools outside of Brooklyn Center. Local history and the current stories of Brooklyn Center are not part of the curriculum, and the potential for civic pride and hometeam spirit are not available. Spaces and resources - In order to foster cultural development and bring the City’s diverse cultural communities together, locally-based and community-minded arts and cultural facilities are needed. These include performance venues, work spaces, gathering places, markets, etc. Until such time, however, it’s important to note that artists, arts service Brooklyn Center City Hall “I dream of a BC where neighbors know each other by name. Where crime is rare and people pick up trash instead of adding to it. Where people care.” Challenges 16. 17. 18. 19. 24Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Building Optimism - The Opportunity Site, a long-term effort to establish a vibrant, health-oriented downtown for Brooklyn Center, has already begun to build hope and optimism amongst residents and nearby businesses. While signage might help answer questions about what’s coming to the site, public art and beautification strategies can help mitigate the negative image of the site as it currently appears, as well as during the construction phase, focusing the attention of drive- by audiences on temporary, colorful enhancements that convey a sense of excitement about what’s to come. Murals allowed - The City’s sign ordinance can be improved, eliminating restrictions on mural production. Other new policies can be established, leveraging sustainable funding sources and encouraging private sector participation in community-engaged projects. (underway) Grow awareness - Street Banner demonstration project provides a good example of a highly visible community- engaged public art project that generated civic pride and increased awareness and appreciation for public art. The City can mine the results to help educate the broader community. “I would like to see all residents work together to take the time to get to know their neighbors.” Partnerships - The City can strengthen and cultivate partnerships with the County, neighboring cities, Metro Transit, Brooklyn Bridge Alliance for Youth, Three Rivers Park District, the Watershed District, local schools, businesses, Brookdale Library, and others—and pursue opportunities to forge new partnerships. For example, the Police Department can partner with the Brooklyn Center School District’s After School program to teach graffiti offenders how to develop artmaking skills. Note: A pilot project is currently underway. Build on assets - The City can build on its existing programs, add value to its investments and increase the impact of its efforts on communities. These include Rec on the Go, pop-up Saturday Market, Centennial Park and its Memorial Amphitheater, Earle Brown Heritage Center, the Neighborhood Liaison program and more. Opportunities Chuck U ChromaZone Mural Festival “I would love to see North Minneapolis and Brooklyn Center become destinations for interesting food, shops, breweries, dog parks, etc. in the same way NE Minneapolis has.” “We [need] more food options and healthier food options.” Continue demo projects - The City’s efforts to promote the 2020 Census—incorporating a community- wide lighting strategy and creative projections on enormous local landmarks, such as an apartment building and water tower—serves as a sample of potential future projects that can generate positive impressions, attract media attention and make the City more noticeable to motorists. Wealth of opportunities - There are several planned public improvement projects and private developments underway, as well as events and festivals that can involve artists or incorporate public art of some type. These could be temporary or fixed projects which could be managed by City staff, a consultant, or a partner, such as Metro Transit, a schoolteacher, a nonprofit or a business in the community. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 25Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan “To develop a place where community members thrive and others want to come and belong.” like “Brooklyn Center Library & Cultural Center.” After all, Brooklyn Park has its own library. How might this simple name change alter the perception of library patrons, future patrons, and generate civic pride in a tangible way? How might the City capitalize on the media stories such a change would generate? Start from scratch - Developing a brand new program focused on public art and beautification means the City can start with a “blank slate” and isn’t limited in its options or how it’s “been done before.” The City can take advantage of lessons learned by other cities, however, and build the kind of equitable, inclusive, community- minded, health-oriented program it desires. Drive-by visibility - The City benefits from an substantial average daily drive-by population of over half a million vehicles traversing the major freeways and roadways bisecting and encircling the City. With cooperation from MNDOT and the County, and a modest investment of funding, the City can make itself known as a place that creatively markets itself and generates positive impressions. In addition to its water towers, one of which the City used to promote the census in March 2020, there are pedestrian bridges over the highways that can be augmented to promote Brooklyn Center and other opportunities worth considering. (See map of opportunities) Magnetic businesses - Top Golf, a national chain, opened its only Minnesota facility in Brooklyn Center in September 2018, a 65,000 square- foot entertainment complex at the site of a former multiplex cinema near the busiest intersection in the region (Hwys 94, 694 and 100). Top Golf is considered a commercial success, serving thousands visitors per year. The Earle Brown Heritage Center, an event and convention center owned and operated by the City, hosts more than 300 events per year, serving more than 110,000 people, approximately 85% of whom are from outside the area. BC history - Lessons or curriculum can be developed—perhaps in graphic novel form—highlighting the history and current-day stories of Brooklyn Center. This could increase student awareness and appreciation of the City and encourage them to envision what kind of city they want to live in, what stories they want to tell and show them how they can realize their visions. Youth development - Artists skilled in working with young graffiti offenders can partner with the Police Department and local schools to offer after school workshops focused on artmaking using aerosol art, airbrush, and stencil murals, not only as a deterrent, but to nurture the budding creative talent of youth. Note: Brooklyn Center Schools, working with artist Peyton Russell, are pursuing this concept. Incubate local talent - Local artists, fabricators, designers and allied professionals can generate wealth by increasing their capacity to participate in community-engaged public art as well as commissioned projects. In order for the City to continue investing locally in beautification and public art, staff can identify, incubate and promote local talent, and partner with local workforce training programs (such as CAPI’s) and programs that train artists (such as those run by Forecast and Springboard for the Arts. Likewise, Artspace Projects, a regional nonprofit, has the knowledge and expertise to help the City grow and develop cultural spaces and artist live/work buildings. Learn by doing - The City can continue developing and implementing modestly-scaled demonstration projects, such as the Street Banner project and the Census 2020 initiative, helping staff and elected officials grow their understanding around the process and impacts of public art and beautification projects that involve the community. Promote health - Employing the theme of “Healthy City” with a catchy tagline, like “Building Our Home Together” offers many options for connecting beautification and public art efforts with goals identified in the City’s Comp Plan. “Continue to revive with new businesses (quality over quantity) and clean public areas while staying affordable and diverse.” Opportunities Alignment with philanthropy - Focusing efforts on authentic and meaningful community engagement, with equity and social cohesion as goals—in a City with Brooklyn Center’s demographics—has potential to attract investment from regional foundations and corporate philanthropy. Playground potential - Park improvements over the next few years, overseen by the Public Works Department, include building 20 new playgrounds in neighborhoods throughout the City, among other highly visible improvements. Public art can add value to these types of capital investments, and offer opportunities for meaningful engagement with communities. Library as cultural center - The Brookdale Library currently serves as a defacto cultural center for the community, partly due to its sizable meeting rooms, exhibit spaces and programming. According to staff members, there may be opportunities to grow their role in this regard, such as increasing the number of exhibits displayed or arts events hosted. Note: “Brookdale” was the name of the shopping mall that closed in 2010; the name has little meaning for millenials. One idea worth considering is changing the name of the library to something 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 18. 17. 26Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Nort h Mississippi Regional Park - 5114 N Mississippi Dr, Minneapolis E arle B rown Elementary School - 1500 59th Ave N, Minneapolis Dupont Ave N, Minneapolis, Minnes ota , 55430 B rooklyn Cent er High S chool - 6500 Humboldt Ave N , MinneapolisBrooklyn Cent er Police Department - 6645 Humboldt Ave N, Minneapolis P ark Liquor Out let - 6315 Z ane A ve N, Minneapolis W ebber Park Brookdale Park Centennial Park Crystal A irport Shingle Creek Park Palmer Lak e E nvironment al Area Nort h Mississippi Regional Park He nn epi n Ano ka 94 694 94 694 N 49th Ave N e v A t dl o b m u H 63rd Ave N Brookdale Dr N Z a n e A v e N 69th A ve N 57th Ave N 65th Ave N 77th A ve N Freeway Blvd N e v A e c n a r F 66th A ve N Bass Lake Rd N 49th Ave N e v A t dl o b m u H 63rd Ave N Brookdale Dr N Z a n e A v e N 69th A ve N 57th Ave N 65th Ave N 77th A ve N Freeway Blvd N e v A e c n a r F 66th A ve N Bass Lake Rd GG81 252 Shin g l e Cre e k S h i n g l e C r e e k N e v A t n o p u D 69th Ave N 73rd Ave N N e v A e l b o N 53rd A ve N 55th Ave N N 52nd Ave N 43rd Ave 65th Ave N N 51st A ve 83rd Ave N N e v A g ni vrI 54th Ave N 81st Ave N 58th Ave N N 50th Ave 59th Ave N N e v A e c n a r F Memorial Pkwy L e e A v e N N e v A s e x r e X e v A d r a r i G N N 45th Ave N 48th Ave 82nd Ave N 61st Ave N 67th Ave N N e v A yr r e P 66th Ave N N e v A x afl o C M a j o r A v e N U n i t y A v e N N 44th Ave Howe Ln S c o t t A v e N 79th Ave NN e v A n n e P 74th A ve N 72nd A ve N L a k e l a n d A v e N Han s o n Ct N N ev A sem aJ N e v A e c n a r F 62nd Ave N 73r d Ave N N evA setaY 60th Ave N 59th Ave N 65th Ave N 61st Ave N N e v A t n a y r B 65th Ave N 53rd Ave N N evA aineX Shing l e Creek PkwyevA enuJ reviR ippississiM Upper Twin Lake 100 252 City-owned Liquor Stores • Enhancements to parking lots 1 Pedestrian Bridge Over 94/694 • Fabric weaving and lighting on fencing 2 Pedestrian Bridge Over 94/694 into park 3 Pedestrian Crossing Bridge • Fence treatment 4 Pedestrian Bridge Over Highway 100 • Involve students in fencing enhancement Park & Ride Lot • Enhancement to bus waiting area Railroad Bridge Over Highway 100 • Railing enhancements Police Headquarters • Front lawn gathering place (seating, memorial, plantings, etc.) Opportunity Site • Temporary installations, pop-up events during construction • Gateway art/iconic monument feature • Mural park reflecting community diversity • Cultural/art center as part of master plan Public Art Opportunity Corridor Enhancements Needed Earle Brown Days Parade Route • Involve artists with youth to enhance event Art for New Housing Development • Design process underway Summer 2020. Top Golf • Opportunity for fiber art on netting City Hall • Visual enhancements to City Hall and Community Center entrances • Increase cultural programming in park and on Millennium Stage Noteable Gateways Freeway Boulevard • Enhancements to streetscape due to high pass-through traffic • Brooklyns Building façade improvements Sidewalk & Median on Xerxes Plantings and safe crossings with enhancements Brooklyn Center High School •Fence treatment along Humboldt •Farm to school garden enhancements - Shed - Food-related art - Artist in residence West Side of Highway 100 Visual Enhancements • Series of flagpoles • Changing fabric art or select banner art Earle Brown Elementary School Exterior and interior murals Transit Center Undergoing remodeling with art component North Mississippi Regional Park • Entrance enhancements • Art along trails • Wayfinding • Interpretive • Seating • Other 1 2 3 Chipotle Mural on back side of building 2 4 Brooklyn Boulevard History-themed art (2D and 3D) Bass Lake Road Nature-themed art and plantings, carved boulders, etc Primary Corridors and Public Art Opportunities This map identifies a variety of opportunities for public art and beautification efforts throughout the city, as determined during the planning process, several of which pertain to corridors, entry areas, and highly trafficked locations. Transit Center City Hall Pedestrian Bridge over Hwy 100 27Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan In order to create a shared vision for Brooklyn Center’s Beautification and Public Art Initiative, it’s critical to identify motivational factors that inspire and guide the work going forward. The following list was developed within input from a broad and diverse group of community members, stakeholders and participants in the planning process. A. Places of beauty that encourage positive social interactions contribute to our wellbeing and our quality of life. B. Engaging diverse cultural community members in co- creating the physical and social environments in which they can thrive fosters civic pride and increases stewardship of public spaces. C. Public art reflects the values of the community; residents should be able to see themselves in the art that is part of their shared daily life and feel respected and represented. D. If something is worth doing, it’s worth doing well; high quality beautification and public art efforts require adequate time and resources. E. Art and artists play an important role in developing, beautifying and revitalizing cities, as well as promoting economic activity, generating pride, and building community. F. Cultural and community development are as important as economic development. G. Beautification and public art are an important part of any city’s arts and cultural ecology. H. Reduce disparities, remove barriers to participation and uphold values of equity, diversity and inclusion. I. Beautification can elevate property values and attract businesses, artists and creative industries, however it’s critical to avoid displacement and unwanted gentrification. J. Embrace all seasons and consider every neighborhood. K. People enjoy living in a community where they make new friends and learn new things. L. It’s critical to incorporate maintenance and conservation funding into all capital projects. M. Building community is good for business, and good for Brooklyn Center. N. Youth development is critical to Brooklyn Center’s future, and the arts can play a critical role. O. Environmental stewardship contributes to long-term sustainability. P. Ensure representation on decision- making groups is inclusive, including first and second generation immigrants, individuals facing economic challenges, students and other typically underrepresented stakeholders. Q. Education and lifelong learning contribute to a healthy society. R. Artists should be paid for their time; they are small businesses and need support. S. Public art should be a forethought, not an afterthought. T. The wellbeing of leaders, staff and volunteers is critical to long- term sustainability. U. Creativity, innovation and collaboration are essential to thriving, resilient communities. V. Honor history, people and events that came before. W. Professional management, truthful communications, mindful governance, informed decision making and accurate financial reporting are essential to successful operations. X. Balance top-down decision-making with community-driven empowerment. Brooklyn Center Street Banner Values 28Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan A Shared Vision For Brooklyn Center Imagine… Brooklyn Center is known as a place where diverse community members can see themselves in the art that’s part of their daily lives and work together to build their shared home, a home where residents and businesses thrive, actively engage in cultural activities and enjoy their quality of life. The City hosts an inclusive, equitable, people-powered beautification program focused on improving health, wellbeing and thoughtful design throughout the city. Effectively governed, adequately funded and professionally managed, Brooklyn Center’s forward-thinking public art program is recognized nationally as high quality, meaningful and impactful. In the not-to-distant future, thanks in part to the City’s vibrant beautification and public art, people want to move to and open businesses in Brooklyn Center. They invite their friends, families and colleagues to join them. They enjoy living in a community known for its “random acts of beauty” and look forward to community- engaged projects in which they get to participate, meet neighbors and co-create the way their city looks and feels. They make new friends and learn new things. They’re proud of their city—its great gathering places, connective trails and parks, its vibrant social life, its family-oriented arts and entertainment offerings and its thoughtful, high quality public art. Brooklyn Center students engaged in the Farm to School program, led by Hana Blissett Photo: Megan Grubb 29Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Guiding Principles It is critical that the goals identified in this plan are activated through the lens of the following guiding principles, distilled from the list of values identified on page 27: 1. Welcoming, Safe and Accessible 2. Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Sustainability 3. Youth, Family and Community Engagement 4. Citywide, with Regional Mindfulness 5. History of Place and Those Who Came Before 6. Quality Creativity, Innovation and Collaboration 7. Education and Lifelong Learning 8. Health and Wellbeing 9. Adequate Resources and Realistic Expectations 10. Professional Management, Programming and Communications Photo station at the Banner Project celebration, held at Brookdale Library 30Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan What Might Public Art & Beautification Look Like Over The Next 5 Years? Based on what we heard and what we learned, the range of public art and beautification projects resulting from this plan will likely be as varied and diverse as the Brooklyn Center community. If the Shared Vision is realized, then is realized, then many significant outcomes will result. If successful, the City’s diverse residents will work collaboratively to make visible their stories and their shared values. Colorful and joyful gathering places will appear—environments designed to remove the stigma of poverty and honor different cultures. Residents will be able to see themselves represented in public spaces, building on the success of the City’s Street Banner and Census 2020 demonstration projects. There are many ways public art can happen in the future. The following list is just a small sampling of the types of projects that can happen in Brooklyn Center. A Sampling of Possibilities A. The City commissions artists to incorporate art in public improvement projects, such as streetscapes, playgrounds, remodeled public buildings, etc. B. Private developers commission artists to enhance housing, retail or commercial developments—including during the construction phase, to mitigate negative impacts. C. Residents, neighborhood groups and businesses engage artists to develop art projects in public-facing spaces—independently, or with start-up support from the City, through mechanisms such as a micro-grant program. D. Training opportunities are offered to artists— of all disciplines—living in Brooklyn Center to learn how to engage with neighbors and each other to create meaningful projects, generate income, and attract positive media attention. E. Artists are embedded in the City, such as the “Rec on the Go” program, in the Community Center, in schools (engaging both students and educators), in new housing developments, at Brookdale Library and in social service organizations, among others. F. Community members participate in planning and implementing cultural events and festivals, such as World Refugee Day. G. Functional amenities designed by artists are dispersed around the city, such as custom- designed park benches, shade structures and trash can holders, as well as projects in neighborhoods and along trails designed to increase physical activity amongst residents. An example of wind-activated sculptures mounted to streetlight poles, where banners typically are seen. A performance event in Centennial Park Guiding Principles 31Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Based on the above Brooklyn Center Snapshot, findings, overview of the public art field and other contextual information collected during the planning process, the consultants recommend the City of Brooklyn Center strive to go beyond simply placing art in public places or planting more gardens. The potential to build on the City’s assets and capitalize on its opportunities offer the City the ability to gradually—and iteratively—build a forward-thinking, holistic program. As mentioned previously, public art and beautification are part of a city’s larger arts and cultural ecosystem. When combined with community development and infrastructural investments they can contribute to the overall well-being of the community, as well as the physical, mental and emotional health of citizens. It’s important to note that beautification and public art projects supported by the City require an investment of time, money and people. Rather than be viewed as a frill, they should align with and support larger City goals and serve to advance priorities identified by the City. The following Focus Areas include numbers that align with goals established by the City (see page 17) and selected quotes from community stakeholders. The Focus Areas in this section of the plan are accompanied by strategies drafted for consideration and potential implementation by the City. They are not meant to be comprehensive, but offer a starting point to inform the development of projects, process and policies. Focal Areas for Public Art & Beautification Empower Youth “Students want more art in the city, opportunities they can participate in.” COMP PLAN ALIGNMENTS: 1, 2, 4, 9 A. Include youth representation on City’s Arts and Culture Commission. B. Partner with Brooklyn Center Community Schools, including their after school and summer programs, Farm to School program, and other efforts to visually enhance school buildings and property. Consider artists assisting with gardening projects at the High School, like an artful tool shed, benches and colorful plant identifiers. C. Seek to strengthen the voices of youth, empower them to build new relationships and support community change efforts. D. Stress projects that involve students, their parents, family members and neighbors, such as oral history projects, performance events and mural making. E. Consider a role for youth in the effort to plan and construct new playgrounds across the City. F. Invite participation of college students from the region to help research, develop and implement projects. Consider fine art majors as well as design, urban studies, journalism, creative writing, etc. Amplify Voices of Under- served and Under- represented Communities “Revitalization that welcomes everyone who wants a safe and healthy community.” COMP PLAN: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 12 A. Seek partnerships with locally-based social service organizations, State of Minnesota, Hennepin County, the Metropolitan Council and regional foundations. B. Add public art and community engagement skill building to the current mix of workforce training programs offered by CAPI and other local social service organizations. C. Consider projects that raise broad public awareness of issues facing those in poverty, including collecting and sharing stories through a variety of outlets, including spoken word, performance, dance, murals, etc.; creating environments that remove the stigma of poverty—places of color and joy. D. Seek representation by underserved individuals on City’s Arts and Culture Commission or advisory group. Cross Reference City Comprehensive Plan and the Beautification and Public Art Master Plan 1. Deepen inclusive community engagement 2. Cultivate partnerships 3. Improve communications and engagement 4. Engage the City’s youth 5. Create a vibrant and innovative city center and surrounding neighborhoods 6. Create unified branding, connections and visual cues 7. Enhance the City’s community image 8. Encourage reinvestment in infrastructure 9. Increase community participation in parks & rec system 10. Improve and maintain quality parks 11. Maximize access and use of parks 12. Grow housing stock thoughtfully 1.2. 32Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Capitalize on Drive-by Visibility “I would love to see Brooklyn Center become [a] destination for interesting food, shops, breweries, dog parks, etc.” COMP PLAN: 2. 3, 5, 6, 7 A. Seek ways to inform motorists they are in or passing through Brooklyn Center. B. Consider utilizing pedestrian bridges over highways 94 and 100 as opportunities for beautification and branding. C. Seek partnership with Top Golf, the Crest apartment building and other highly visible businesses. D. Mitigate negative impressions of the Opportunity Site from Highway 100. For example there could be a series of tall flagpoles that feature changing art displays, such as large, colorful “flags” with visual motifs reflecting the many cultures found in the community. Add Value to Public Improvements, Private developments & Transit Projects “To me, a healthy Brooklyn Center looks like people living their lives close to home, with less need to go elsewhere” COMP PLAN: 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12 A. Explore options for visually enhancing entrances into the City, including iconic “gateway” art elements as part of the Opportunity Site redevelopment. B. Take advantage of large county or state infrastructure efforts, such as Hwy 252 improvements at 69th Street. C. Consider meaningful ways to engage neighborhoods, families and students in new playgrounds planned over the next three years. D. The Transit Center on Bass Lake Road—the second-busiest in the Metro area—offers opportunities for public art and beautification (currently underway). E. The Park & Ride lot on Brooklyn Blvd and 65th Street could be enhanced to increase wayfinding and the perception of safety. F. Engage artists in plans for updating City Park signs, scheduled to be replaced in five years. Maximize Impact of New Housing Developments “Invest in new, modern housing opportunities for young adults, families and seniors.” COMP PLAN ALIGNMENTS: 2, 5, 8, 12 A. New multi-family housing developments can consider ways to provide more than an apartment and basic amenities, such as laundry, lounge, workout rooms, and party rooms, etc. Consider an artist in residence, working under a barter arrangement with the property owner or manager. The artist can offer workshops, classes, create art to hang in hallways, etc. in exchange for boarding, and add value to the quality of life for residents. B. Public art can enhance the visual impact, increase sense of resident pride in place, and offer community- building programs and activities to improve the quality of life. This could include a co-working space, a playground/bbq facility, social spaces and other unique amenities. Note: Public art in private developments are already underway in Brooklyn Center. Real Estate Equities and Alatus are pursuing strategies to incorporate art in their developments. The City can encourage more of the same, as well as establish guidelines for developers seeking to integrate art into their buildings. (See Public Art & Private Development, page 54) Focal Areas for Public Art & Beautification Brooklyn Center Water Tower Invest in Creative Economy and Entrepreneurship “I hope that our community continues to grow both in diverse population but also in its business diversity.” COMP PLAN: 1, 2, 4, 5, 9 A. Partner with locally-based organizations and businesses aimed at job creation, workforce training and job referrals and offer on-the-job experiences working with artists on public art and beautification projects. B. Add public art and community engagement skill-building to the current mix of professional development and job training programs offered by CAPI and other local social service organizations. C. Consider incubating industries and businesses related to beautification and public art, such as fabrication, design, documentation, landscape architecture, engineering, and other creative maker businesses.etc. D. Support paid apprenticeships, internships, mentorships and other strategies to encourage hands-on learning. E. Consider artist-in-residence in a school, library, a community garden project, Rec on the Go, etc. F. Offer modest micro-grants for projects partnering artists with residents or businesses, as well as leaders of cultural communities or neighborhood groups. 3.5.6.4. 33Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan led effort is intended to offer the community an outdoor market with food, music, games and booths offering crafts, clothing and collectibles, as well as resource tables for services available to the public. Consider street painting, interactive projects, colorful banners, live performances, etc. F. Farmers Market - (Held in the parking lot of Sun Foods). This popular market features fresh produce and brings the community’s diverse population together weekly in the summer months. Certain items, however, are not available since the store doesn’t want competitors for some of its own products. How might performances and visual enhancements animate the space and offer opportunities for sharing stories? G. Memorial Amphitheater - The Recreation Department seeks to increase use of its Memorial Amphitheater in Centennial Park, including more performances, dance lessons, yoga and programming produced by community members. This concept offers a variety of low-cost opportunities to engage the broader community, such as traditional and contemporary ethnic performance groups, touring theater companies, students and amateur performers in the City. Could there be a talent night? Could the Brooklyn Bridge Youth Alliance play a role? Enhance or Expand Upon Existing Cultural Events (Selected List) “Bring communities together through festivals and public art.” COMP PLAN: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 11 A. Earle Brown Days and Parade - (late June; see map on page 26 for parade route on Dupont) The City’s annual summer celebration, now in its 38th year, features a community parade and a market at the Earle Brown Heritage Center. B. National Night Out - (first Tuesday in August; citywide) Intended as a crime prevention tool, this event encourages neighbors to get together and pay attention to their surroundings. The more you know about your neighborhood, the more you can do to keep it safe. C. National Night Out Kick-off Event - (first Monday in August; in Centennial Park) Neighbors meet neighbors and learn about neighborhood safety initiatives and techniques, meet community partners, enjoy food and beverages and join the fun. D. Farm Fresh Fest - (Fridays, July- November; 4-6 pm at CEAP). CEAP’s annual community celebration is an opportunity for neighbors to receive fresh, in-season produce in a warm, inviting festival atmosphere. The event features live music, resource tables and more. E. Pop up Saturday Market (Second Saturday in June-September in a vacant parking lot-TBD). This City- Improve Streetscape Experiences “More city pride. Less crime.” COMP PLAN: 5, 6, 7, 8 F. Art can improve wayfinding and perception of safety for pedestrians and transit users. Artists can create seating, lighting, bike racks and other amenities that enhance the streetscape environment. G. The City can build on its successful street banner demonstration project, support temporary treatment of vacant parking lots and roadside art. Enhance and Amplify Environmental Improvements “[I want BC] to be a clean environment with little crime.” COMP PLAN: 2, 5, 7, 8, 9, 12 A. The City is rich with natural resources, including lakes and streams that are considered “impaired,” such as Shingle Creek. B. Public art can have multiple functions, such as raising awareness of water conditions and water management or restoration; add beauty to stagnant areas of stream; and oxygenate as well. C. Consider ways art may help to mitigate environmental impact concerns of Hwy 252 reconstruction and its proximity to the Mississippi River, and raise awareness of the river as an important asset in the City. D. Seek partnership and support from the Shingle Creek Watershed District. E. Consider other environmental concerns impacting the health of citizens. Focal Areas for Public Art & Beautification 7. 8.9. Cross Reference City Comprehensive Plan and the Beautification and Public Art Master Plan 1. Deepen inclusive community engagement 2. Cultivate partnerships 3. Improve communications and engagement 4. Engage the City’s youth 5. Create a vibrant and innovative city center and surrounding neighborhoods 6. Create unified branding, connections and visual cues 7. Enhance the City’s community image 8. Encourage reinvestment in infrastructure 9. Increase community participation in parks & rec system 10. Improve and maintain quality parks 11. Maximize access and use of parks 12. Grow housing stock thoughtfully 34Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan exhibitions, etc. (See also Opportunities, #13 on page 25) E. Affordable artists live-work spaces are in demand in the region. Repurposing underutilized buildings for artists is an effective way to attract artists to live and work in Brooklyn Center and serve the needs of local artists seeking to work outside the home. Increasing the number of talented professionals in creative fields based in the City could benefit the entire community. Consider barter arrangements of reductions in rent based on the number of hours per month artists engage with community members as part of the City’s innovative program. C. A Multi-Cultural Center is needed long-term as an ongoing hub for community use, and to attract audiences from the region for economic benefit. A freely accessible arts and cultural facility could provide a space for people in the city “to really see themselves”—all of the creative and cultural assets that are hidden in the community. This concept could be combined with a marketplace, a youth recreational facility or an indoor arboretum concept—or all of these combined! Currently many local artists need to leave the area to exhibit, rehearse, perform or create works of art and craft. According to one resident, “There’s a need for some excitement in this area—some positive excitement. It’s a part of the overall scheme of building community, reducing crime, putting young people on the right path and bringing community together.” D. Brookdale Library currently serves as the defacto cultural center for Brooklyn Center. It is practical to consider options for expanding the library’s role as a hub for cultural activities and exchanges with Hennepin County Facilities staff, as well as library programming staff. This could include upgrading meeting spaces to accommodate performances, adding large display cases, supporting artists in residence, hosting traveling Develop new cultural events and arts facilities “Showcase the unique cultures and values that make up our community including business opportunities and community events (that should absolutely include art for expression and more!)” COMP PLAN: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 11 A. World Refugee Day, organized by CAPI, is planned to take place in Brooklyn Center. In addition to performances on the stage, resource tables, youth activities and educational programming, a mural is being planned as part of the event, informed by a community engagement process to identify imagery and themes. B. International Cultural Festival (planning under way) is an event that features talent from the City’s rich cultural community, including food, dance, music, crafts, fashions and more, as well as hands-on activities for youth and families. The City has engaged community stakeholders in the planning process, and hopes to grow this into an annual event. The Earle Brown Heritage Center is a possible venue, however the festival could consider multiple locations. The Festival of Nations program, led by the International Institute of Minnesota, could be a valuable resource, along with the Minneapolis Park & Recreation Board, which launched its own international festival in 2018. Focal Areas for Public Art & Beautification 10. Cross Reference City Comprehensive Plan and the Beautification and Public Art Master Plan 1. Deepen inclusive community engagement 2. Cultivate partnerships 3. Improve communications and engagement 4. Engage the City’s youth 5. Create a vibrant and innovative city center and surrounding neighborhoods 6. Create unified branding, connections and visual cues 7. Enhance the City’s community image 8. Encourage reinvestment in infrastructure 9. Increase community participation in parks & rec system 10. Improve and maintain quality parks 11. Maximize access and use of parks 12. Grow housing stock thoughtfully 35Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Promote The City’s Diverse Cultural Communities and Foster Social Cohesion through Storytelling. “I would like to see all residents work together to take the time to get to know their neighbors.” COMP PLAN: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12 A. Use story-telling as a foundational component of public art strategies, including visual, performing, media arts and events. “Arts-based community engagement practices often begin with storytelling, imagination and interactive activities, so that communities can tap into the cultural identity, knowledge, and experience of its residents.” - Lyz Crane, ArtPlace America B. Involve local historians, elders, residents and business owners (among others) to work with educators and curriculum developers to improve learning about Brooklyn Center—in schools, parks and other public places. Helping students from Brooklyn Center learn about the city could grow awareness, understanding and appreciation for their hometown or the city in which they attend school. Knowledge gained can inform the creation of a variety of community-engaged public art projects throughout the city. Focal Areas for Public Art & Beautification C. Storytelling can inform a variety of public art projects to come, including: • Enhancements to new neighborhood playgrounds • Benches and seating elements along nature trails and in parks • Storytellers embedded in the Rec on the Go program • Exhibits and performances at the library or school auditorium • Raw material for songwriters and musicians (a BC anthem?) D. Brooklyn Center has stories to tell, including history to mine: • The Earle Brown Farm was the first airfield in Minnesota. • The City’s Mound Cemetery was named for the nearby Indian mounds. • The farming community helped feed the entire region, as far away as Chicago. • The Community Center features an indoor Olympic-sized swimming pool. • Earle Brown stories abound, including some controversial ones. • Farrell’s Ice Cream Parlor built the world’s largest ice cream sundae in 1979. Use City-Owned Buildings and Public Spaces for Aesthetic Enhancements and Activities “I hope it can develop a special identity that inspires residents and neighbors of the city, and is based on the creative talents of its people.” COMP PLAN: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 A. There’s a sizable open space with a tree in front of the Police Headquarters on Humboldt Avenue. A placemaking project can be considered to transform the site, with some seating—an intimate story-telling setting. A memorial could be considered, honoring local police who died in service. B. The fence outside the High School’s sports fields on Humboldt could serve as a canvas for temporary art installations. C. The City owns two liquor stores— the only liquor stores in the city, including a new one that recently opened. These are money-making ventures for the City. What role could these play in promoting a healthy city? Art, inside and outside, can play a role. For example, consider enhancing the parking lots to increase people’s sense of safety. These parking lots, as well as other lots in business districts around the City, are problem areas in terms of littering. Consider creative ways to use the extra space in the new store, such as temporary exhibition space, performance space, etc. D. The entrance to City Hall is unwelcoming and lacks character; it could benefit from a temporary facelift, such as a digital mural mounted to the wall surrounding the doorway, as well as enhancements to the lobby area. Among the criteria for the mural design could be: welcoming, multicultural, colorful and photogenic. Temporary exhibits could also enhance hallways and City Council chambers. E. The City-owned golf course, Centerbrook, operates on a fee for service basis. Consider expanding its use as a public venue, hosting fun, family-friendly events, such as a kite-flying contest, outdoor concerts, Frisbee tournaments, Augmented Reality gaming and temporary outdoor art installations. Explore potential uses for the park in the winter, when the course is not in use, such as a giant sledding hill, a cross country ski course, snow sculptures, etc. F. Changing art in City parks and along trails that run through neighborhoods can inspire physical exercise and reward repeat visits. 11.12. 36Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Maximize Communications with Community “I dream of a BC where neighbors know each other by name. Where crime is rare and people pick up trash instead of adding to it. Where people care.” COMP PLAN: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7 A. The City mails 9,000 statements to customers each month. Could the outside of the envelope feature art, or could artful messages be inserted in the form of discount coupons to redeem at the Community Center, the golf course, etc. An art contest could result in art by youth featured each month, along with the story of the artist. B. The City’s monthly print newsletter is an excellent platform in which to promote local talent, including poetry, graphic design, creative writing. C. The City’s website and social media platforms all offer additional opportunities for giving voice to diverse talent in the community, including youth, adults and seniors. Focal Areas for Public Art & Beautification Build Pride and a Sense of Belonging in All 17 Neighborhoods “More city pride. Less crime.” COMP PLAN: 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11 A. In Brooklyn Center, neighborhoods are named after the parks they contain. How can art, beautification and design contribute to distinguishing one neighborhood from another? Consider strategies such as signage, branding elements, playground environments, flower gardens, etc. Stories from each neighborhood’s past, present (and desired future) can inform design guidelines and criteria for public art. Involving residents in the planning, design and creation of such efforts helps ensure a greater sense of stewardship, pride and sense of belonging. Consider utilizing the Rec On The Go program to facilitate the process—perhaps 2-3 neighborhoods per year. Enliven Business Districts “Continue to revive with new businesses (quality over quantity) and clean public areas while staying affordable and diverse.” COMP PLAN: 3, 5, 6, 7, 8 A. Business districts in most suburban cities typically lack character and charm, and their parking areas are uninviting, sometimes trash- strewn and occasionally populated by panhandlers. How might these spaces be transformed into colorful, welcoming spaces? In the short-term, consider stretching cables between light poles to support changing displays of colorful fabric, speakers for music and decorative lighting. See the Environmental Stewardship study summary, on page 81. Consider semi-enclosed walkways, welcoming gathering places with greenery and lush landscaping. Consider mixed uses, combining office, retail, recreation and housing adjacent to green space. A. The Opportunity Site clearly holds the greatest promise for a new kind of downtown core for the City, however it is a long-term effort and should not preclude investments to improve shopping and commercial nodes elsewhere in the community. In fact, it makes it more important, since the Opportunity Site is likely to steal much of the attention and business away from these smaller, neighborhood- oriented nodes. 13.14.15. Cross Reference City Comprehensive Plan and the Beautification and Public Art Master Plan 1. Deepen inclusive community engagement 2. Cultivate partnerships 3. Improve communications and engagement 4. Engage the City’s youth 5. Create a vibrant and innovative city center and surrounding neighborhoods 6. Create unified branding, connections and visual cues 7. Enhance the City’s community image 8. Encourage reinvestment in infrastructure 9. Increase community participation in parks & rec system 10. Improve and maintain quality parks 11. Maximize access and use of parks 12. Grow housing stock thoughtfully 37Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Enhance Thoroughfares & Gateway Entrances “Put us on the map as a contributor to the Metro.” COMP PLAN: 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 The consultants studied the major transit corridors bisecting, encircling and traversing Brooklyn Center, seeking to determine if they convey a distinguishable identity or character and identify what types of opportunities might serve to improve or enhance each corridor. The map above was created to identify major roadways, entranceways and key points of opportunity. While there are many points of entry into Brooklyn Center, some of them offer more opportunities to enhance than others, given the size of available roadside space as well as viewsheds from the motorist perspective. Analysis of the highest traffic roadways is summarized below. A. Shingle Creek Parkway, from 694 to Bass Lake Road, already serves as a spine for a collection of civic and cultural facilities, with growth expected as the Opportunity Site develops entertainment and cultural amenities. As such, this corridor—and adjacent parks and open parking areas—has the greatest potential to host temporary and permanent art installations, outdoor events and large public gatherings. Focal Areas for Public Art & Beautification B. Highway 100 cuts diagonally through the City, terminating at Humboldt Avenue just north of highway 94. The corridor lacks character, but offers viewsheds of the Opportunity Site that may offer valuable visibility once the City’s new downtown takes shape. C. Hwy 694 is essentially a trench cutting through the north half of the City, bounded by sound walls. A couple of pedestrian bridges bisecting the highway offer opportunities to brand the City in creative ways. D. Xerxes Avenue has qualities that that one interviewee referred to as Brooklyn Center’s “Main Street,” accented by a pedestrian median that could serve as a “canvas” to enhance its role in the mix of transit experiences throughout the City. E. Brooklyn Blvd, while dominated by large auto dealerships by 694, offers opportunities to tell stories of the City’s rich agricultural past. (“Brooklyn Center was charming during the truck farming era with Osseo Road, later called Brooklyn Blvd. and its main street, lined with huge elm trees, fields for plants in every color and many rows of water sprinklers.”) How might this corridor’s past inform its future? An ongoing land use study can offer opportunities to identify locations for public art and themes which might connect the community to the corridor. F. Bass Lake Road, essentially a commercial corridor, features a series of enormous power line towers that dominate the landscape. On the street level, which is not very pedestrian friendly, a wide landscaped trench down the middle of the corridor offers opportunities for visual enhancements, such as natural features, giant boulders and creative lighting that could dramatically transform the character of this corridor into something unique. Could some huge boulders be carved to resemble faces of residents? G. Highway 94 is the primary freeway connecting Brooklyn Center with downtown Minneapolis. As such, it plays an important role in forging impressions of the City. Since late 2018, when Top Golf opened, it became an instant landmark, one that suggests boldness and attraction, as if a circus came to town. How might the giant netting offer a “canvas” to further express the exciting potential of the City? 16. Cross Reference City Comprehensive Plan and the Beautification and Public Art Master Plan 1. Deepen inclusive community engagement 2. Cultivate partnerships 3. Improve communications and engagement 4. Engage the City’s youth 5. Create a vibrant and innovative city center and surrounding neighborhoods 6. Create unified branding, connections and visual cues 7. Enhance the City’s community image 8. Encourage reinvestment in infrastructure 9. Increase community participation in parks & rec system 10. Improve and maintain quality parks 11. Maximize access and use of parks 12. Grow housing stock thoughtfully 38Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Plan Implementation Based on the Vision for Brooklyn Center’s Beautification and Public Art Program— informed by the Values and Guiding Principles— the following set of goals have been identified: Support beautification and public art efforts by the Brooklyn Center community and City government according to the following aspirations: 1. Foster civic pride and community health by: • Creating and activating meaningful public gathering places • Enhancing connective trails and parks, and increasing usage by all • Nurturing a vibrant cultural life that encourages collaboration and community building • Offering family-oriented arts and entertainment and high quality public art experiences 2. Increase the number of residents who become active stewards of Brooklyn Center and feel motivated to care for the City’s public spaces. 3. Increase the number of volunteers seeking to participate in fun and impactful beautification projects with artists, such as: • Painting safety crosswalks or decorative murals with neighbors • Creating neighborhood-themed benches in each park • Planting roadside flower beds and enhancing community gardens • Clean-up projects that result in found-object sculptures • Helping youth to enhance new playgrounds that give each a distinctive personality 4. Grow the number of residents desiring engagement in public art activities that enhance their quality of life, including: • Immigrant community members • People living in multi-family dwellings • School groups and youth • Individuals stigmatized by poverty 5. Increase participation and leadership by locally based artists, residents and businesses, by: • Supporting professional development and training for artists • Providing opportunities for affordable live-work space • Promoting artist-in-residence at schools, the library, housing developments and social service organizations. 6. Leverage private investments from charitable foundations and partners to warrant expansion of the program. (See funding options on pages 49–50) 7. Build a professionally managed program that is valued by the community, one that can evolve as a support system for larger arts and cultural development efforts, such as: • Annual festivals, parades and special events • A community cultural center, with theater, gallery and rehearsal space • A shared studio space or live/work space facility Long-Term Goals Jack Becker facilitating a focus group session at the Seal Hi Rise apartments. 39Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Short-Term Goals (2020–2022) 1. Oversee Launch of Plan within the community, including: • Development of a communications plan • Involvement of City Council and Staff in sharing information and listening to feedback and ideas from community 2. Establish an Arts and Culture Commission to guide further planning, advise City on: • Investments • Decision making around opportunities • Development and evaluation of demonstration projects • Development of policies, governance practices and procedures • Selection Committee member recruitment for projects • An “evaluation scorecard” to measure impacts of projects • A system for decision-making, documentation and record-keeping 3. Build capacity of City staff to manage projects—intentionally and iteratively over time—employing informed decision-making with expert guidance. Start small, producing modestly scaled projects in which quality results are likely, learn from the results and grow from there. Take into account the following strategies: • Build on the strengths, assets and partnerships already in place. • Effectively and professional staff the BCACC. • Take advantage of low-hanging fruit, such as projects already planned or budgeted, including public improvement efforts and private developments. • Recognize that every project is a demonstration project, not unlike the street banners, light projections, and community celebrations. What can be learned that can help improve the next project? • While focusing on near- term modest projects, begin considering future long-range efforts—4-5 years out—with time to develop concepts, generate funding, and ensure impactful results. For example: • The City will replace Park signs in 5 years; consider something more customized that reflects the neighborhoods that share the name of their park. Beyond the sign itself, is there an opportunity to do something more significant about manifesting the neighborhood’s identity? • Encourage residents, businesses, schools, community groups, developers and others to initiate independent or partnership projects. Consider incentives, such as micro-grants and matching funds. • Engage public art consultants and curators to assist with project management, gradually building City staff capacity and independence. 4. Consider a range of funding mechanisms to support projects as well as an ongoing program. See list under Program Implementation on pages 49-50. 5. Consider a range of both program administration and project management options for implementing projects and related tasks, including: See list under Program Implementation. 6. Reference Overlay Map and Focus Area Project Concepts to identify areas of opportunity, such as: • Temporary pop-up strategies utilizing available properties that are accessible to the public. • Artist embedded in rec on the Go • Other ideas listed in the Plan 7. Facilitate informed decision-making by staff and BCACC using the Prioritization Checklist (See Appendix, page 80) 8. Support partnership efforts that can result in projects not paid for or managed by the City, such as: • Art for the Transit Center remodeling by Metro Transit • Hennepin County Public Health’s effort with Hmong community • A mural for World Refugee Day 9. Involve community members to help develop projects for consideration by BCACC, such as: • Storytelling that helps inform public art projects • Talent scouting to surface artists in community 10. Maintain City Team as a resource to assist with program incubation and development with representatives from City department offering support, ideas and coordination. 11. Consider incentives to grow interest in the program, such as: • Micro-grants to support artists partnering with community members to generate bottom- up ideas and projects with technical assistance from City staff • Technical assistance for projects generated by the private sector 12. Host educational events, training sessions and social activities for local talent and help them learn about the program and how they can participate. 13. Grow the community engagement skills and effectiveness of Neighborhood Liaisons. 14. Develop community education strategies to broaden awareness, understanding and appreciation of contemporary public art and beautification efforts, especially ones that enhance livability. • Start by sharing the story of the Street Banner Project, with quotes from participants and observers, followed by a story about how and why the City is working to develop a program to build on such efforts. 40Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Work Plan This Beautification & Public Art Master Plan recognizes that arts and cultural development are new to the City of Brooklyn Center. As such, the starting point for implementation of this plan focuses on establishing foundational infrastructure, such as governance, funding, project management, communications, and capacity building at the staff level. In addition, it is critical to begin informing and educating key stakeholders, elected officials, City staff, as well as the broader community. Likewise, it is essential to identify and grow the number of talented, creative residents, workers, students and design professionals throughout the city and offer them opportunities to learn, gain experience and generate revenue streams; growing the City’s creative economy is one of the goals of this plan. Given the pandemic-related challenges—Covid-19 and institutional racism— being faced today by the Brooklyn Center community, near-term programming pertaining to arts, culture, beautification and public art requires additional, careful consideration. Given this plan’s focus on addressing the health of the City, arts and cultural projects should be considered as part of a larger effort to address healing, equity and well-being amongst local residents and businesses. This Work Plan section is intended to identify high priority strategies, outline tasks for implementation, and identify Focus Areas in the plan that pertain (described in more detail on pages 31–37). Strategic areas for each section of the Work Plan include: 1. Governance 2. Program/Project Management 3. Funding/Finances 4. Community Engagement 5. Communications and Education 6. Public Space Development 41Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan input and feedback. Advisors and selection committee members may be encouraged to serve on the Commission in the future. Note: Involving volunteers in leadership roles is a valuable form of community engagement; it is critical to maintain professional relationships and good communications. WHO: Staff person, with City Team, Commissioners, and advisors FOCUS AREAS: (TBD) RANK: H (High) 2. PROGRAM/PROJECT MANAGEMENT Ensure professional program and project management, including City staff oversight, qualified contracted services, inter-agency coordination and robust reporting and evaluation. • With input from Commissioners, identify priority projects to implement, including those identified in this plan (starting with locations identified on the Opportunities Map). Note: Prioritize pandemic recovery public art and beautification projects that help residents heal, grieve, feel safe, become informed, and feel connected (with each other and the City). Reference Prioritization Process in Appendix on page x). • Provide Commissioners an overview of projects produced during the planning process, Near-Term (2020-2021) Work Plan Action Steps 1. GOVERNANCE Maintain an active and informed Arts & Culture Commission with diverse representation, able to help the City adopt policies and procedures responsive to changing community needs and concerns. • Establish inaugural Brooklyn Center Arts & Culture Commission, following City protocols to ensure a fair and equitable process. Ensure representation from City Council, the Multicultural Advisory Committee, youth and residents with strong interest/ experience in arts and cultural production. Include non-resident members with valuable expertise. Develop “job description” for commissioners (See sample of process steps in Appendix, page 107). • Develop Commission’s charter with involvement from newly recruited commissioners. Charter should outline purpose, goals, and procedures for meeting and decision making. Establish committees, staffing and meeting protocols, as well as record-keeping, documentation and program evaluation methodologies. Ensure chair, co-chair and secretary are elected and briefed in terms of their roles and responsibilities. • In addition to Commissioners, develop and maintain volunteer advisors, project selection committees (with expertise specific to each project), and the City Team, composed of representatives from City Departments (to assist with program incubation and development, offer ideas and assist with coordination). Advisors may be project specific or offer general including Street Banners, Census Projections, planning of cultural festival, and others. Inform Commissioners of projects underway, such as the Transit Center Art project (and planning done to address safety and good health practices during construction phase, as well as social distancing at bus stops, etc.), youth mural project, Hennepin Health’s project with the Hmong community, and other efforts in process. • Determine feasibility of future project implementation, based on human and financial resources available, as well as timing and appropriateness, due to pandemic- era conditions. Consider engaging public art consultants and curators to assist with project management, combined with hands-on training for City staff to grow familiarity, skills and abilities. Note: Consider creating a diagram of City assets and private sector relationships, with annotations to help Commissioners gain understanding of what’s been done and what’s possible going forward. Then add a layer of potential public-private partnerships or relationships to build. • Develop work plan for each project—once selected for development or implementation— including timeline, budget, personnel, artist selection, permitting needs, communications, documentation and evaluation, etc. Note: consider prioritizing short-term, low-cost pop-up projects that involve one or more private sector partners and offer safe community engagement strategies. Consider engagement via phone, mail, social media, outdoor with distancing, etc. • In addition to internally generated project ideas, with input from Commissioners, invite and respond to project ideas from the community, external requests for support, aid in securing site permissions, exhibition space, virtual forums, etc. Note: Build and maintain regular communications with community, such as monthly emails, flyers promoting opportunities, inserts in water bills, etc. (see Communications section) • Maintain quality record-keeping. Record and monitor all external requests and establish a system for efficient response time, transparent communications. Note: Relationship-building will be essential to growing a positive image and pro-active identity for the program, and the City; representatives of the program should convey a welcoming and helpful persona. WHO: Staff person FOCUS AREAS: (TBD) RANK: H (High) 42Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 3. FUNDING/FINANCES Provide support systems for diverse community cultural expressions utilizing a mix of public and private dollars, involving businesses and philanthropic partners • Work with appropriate staff and elected officials to identify funding mechanisms to support priority projects, as well as community engagement efforts, communications about program, and education/training for artists, program stakeholders and community members. Consider funding sources from various City department, general operating budgets, capital improvement funds, etc.—for projects, contracted support, program operations, etc. • Pursue investments from private sector partners, such as philanthropy, federal and state sources, civic groups, area businesses, sponsorships, etc. Develop an ongoing method for researching and vetting a wide variety of potential sources, new initiatives, and one-time grants to support needs of the program and specific projects. Consider staff time, contracted services. Note: Start out by asking for support at least once every quarter. Seek input from development specialists, be selective and prioritize; it is impractical to pursue all prospective opportunities. • Establish and maintain accounting and financial management procedures and systems appropriate to the program, following protocols and methods approved or used by the City. Provide quarterly financial reports to the Commission as part of regular agenda. Help commissioners gain a working knowledge of program budgets and reports, allowing them to make informed decisions and recommendations. WHO: Staff person FOCUS AREAS: (TBD) RANK: H (High) 4. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Ensure robust, equitable, authentic community engagement, involving City staff and paid community liaisons, enabling real-time community feedback and idea generation systems • Establish working relationship with City’s new Community Engagement (CE) specialist and gain understanding of this job within the City. Share this plan and provide briefing around the goals and objectives to be achieved in 2020-2021. Introduce CE specialist to Arts & Culture Commissioners and discuss shared goals, objectives, and strategies for partnering on priority projects, and explore ways artists could help specialist CE goals. Consider developing a shared database of local leaders from diverse cultural communities, school districts, business associations, etc. • Engage Commissioners in conversations and strategy work sessions to determine effective methods for meaningful and authentic community relationship building, such as partnering with social service organizations, the library, educational institutions, places of worship, etc. Consider healing and recovery strategies identified in this plan, such as artists participation in renovating the Transit Center, developing creative health messaging using social media platforms that are heavily trafficked by residents (such as Facebook, Instagram, Next Door, etc.), hosting online forums, installing public-access chalkboards and Little Free Libraries, etc. Note: Remain open to new ideas and approaches, given the fast- changing nature of community interactivity; recognize that funding will be critical to ensure long- term engagement efforts; work in tandem on public outreach and communications to avoid duplication of efforts and potential confusion by community members. • Incorporate community engagement language in criteria of projects supported by the City, ensuring stakeholder input during planning, design and implementation. Likewise, seek project outcomes that involve community participation, interactivity, and “real time” feedback considerations. Note: Reference Appendix section on safe practices during Covid-19 recovery, CDC guidelines, and creative workarounds. • Identify ways to involve community members in generating art and beautification ideas, identifying talent to spotlight, and individuals to involve in collaborative projects. Note: Consider storytelling projects as a starting point. This could include youth interviewing seniors to learn the stories of Brooklyn Center and translate them into murals, booklets, plays, songs, videos, and other forms of art that can be shared broadly. WHO: Staff person FOCUS AREAS: ___ RANK: ___ Near-Term (2020-2021) Work Plan Action Steps 43Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 5. COMMUNICATIONS AND EDUCATION Education and training, skill-building and robust communications promoting creative economies and jobs in cultural industries • Oversee the launch of this plan with help from the City’s communications specialist. Reference “Introducing the Plan to the Community” on page 48. The launch should be part of larger internal and external communications plans to grow awareness and familiarity of this plan, and key content elements. Internal audiences include City Council members, City staff, Arts & Culture Commission members, and members of other City commissions. External audiences include residents and businesses, nonprofits and associations, among others. Note: Each audience member has their own learning style and is coming from a different place in terms of awareness, understanding and appreciation of arts, culture and beautification; there is no singular method for imparting knowledge. Consider focusing on youth as a starting point, and by extension, families and neighborhoods. Consider further engagement with participants in the Street Banner project, building on their experience and the resulting sense of pride. • Provide educational resources and learning opportunities for Arts & Culture Commission members of artists and creative professionals, the field of public art, and the contents of this plan. Likewise, grow their familiarity with the City’s efforts to reduce the spread of the virus, support vulnerable communities and review policing practices, etc. Explore ways artists can assist during Covid-19 recovery, recognizing artists are adept translators of information across language, cultures, and sectors. They communicate in ways that are emotionally engaging, memorable, and personally and culturally relevant—rendering health information more likely to stimulate behavior changes. Artists and arts organizations provide trusted platforms for urgent messages and can reach larger and different audiences than health departments and government agencies. Their partnership and assistance in health communication is vital. • Explore ways to employ artists to make public health messaging more memorable and actionable through performances, artworks, and activities delivered online and in socially distanced formats. Employ artists to help ensure that Covid-19 information is relevant and available across diverse communities, cultural differences, and social norms. Note: If assistance is needed to find artist- partners, engage the Minnesota State Arts Board, the Regional Arts Council, Forecast Public Art, Juxtaposition Arts, Springboard for the Arts, and other organizations to make connections. • Launch the development of a database of artists, creative professionals, cultural organizations, etc. to use as an ongoing resource in communications, announcing opportunities, conducting a needs assessment, and offering education and training opportunities. Note: This is a long-term effort, but it can start by utilizing data collected during the planning process for this plan. See survey responses in Appendix. Recognize that artists based in Brooklyn Center may not be familiar with community- engaged public art practices. Therefore, the City should be open to employing artists from the larger Twin Cities region, keeping in mind opportunities to impart their knowledge with local emerging artists via apprenticeships, workshops, and mentoring. Likewise, help local talent take advantage of regional resource organizations, such as Forecast and Springboard, offering training programs and resources to artists. WHO: Staff person FOCUS AREAS: (TBD) RANK: H (High) 6. PUBLIC SPACE DEVELOPMENT Develop vibrant gathering places that generate pride and environmental stewardship, including open-access cultural facilities, user-friendly production spaces and outdoor spaces with multifaceted programming serving young and old in Brooklyn Center (locally, and in partnership with arts and cultural entities in the region) • During recovery from Covid-19, identify and work with partners to maximize use of public spaces for safe access to food, health resources, employment, social infrastructure, environmental stewardship and more. Consider ways to work with communities most impacted by the virus to move more everyday life and everyday needs outdoors (such as open-air markets, outdoor classrooms, etc.). Note: Reference Environmental Stewardship document in Appendix and familiarize Commissioners with its contents; consider ways to activate public spaces to influence the behaviors of careless residents and visitors discarding litter or dumping trash in business districts and along thoroughfares. • Maximize available resources and prioritize partnering on projects planned or underway, such as enhancement of private developments, replacement of playgrounds, and the planning of a cultural facility. Potential allies include governments, residents, businesses, nonprofits or nongovernmental organizations, and people from a range of specialties. Note: Assume this is a long-term process; forge alliances with people and organizations with energy and enthusiasm for making healthier places, people who can create links and raise awareness. Prioritize projects that offer multiple benefits WHO: Staff person FOCUS AREAS: (TBD) RANK: H (High) Near-Term (2020-2021) Work Plan Action Steps 44Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Mid-Term (2022-2023) Work Plan Action Steps 1. GOVERNANCE Maintain an active and informed Arts & Culture Commission with diverse representation, able to help the City adopt policies and procedures responsive to changing community needs and concerns. • Continue to grow the awareness, understanding and appreciation of public art and beautification amongst Commissioners via field trips, guest lectures, hand-on workshops, studio visits, online resources, etc. (See Resources and Links in the Appendix) • Evaluate the effectiveness of the Commission over its first two years, including identifying gaps in expertise needed on the Commission. In addition to expertise, gaps may include gender, ethnicity, age, sexual preference, etc. Perform exit interviews with outgoing Commissioners to gain insights and feedback that will help improve effectiveness and efficiencies. • Update job description for Commissioners, with input from members and advisors. • Review, update, amend and edit the Commission’s charter and consider other ways to improve governance. Note: Seek input from City staff who manage other commissions. • Oversee effort to recruit new members for the Commission. Utilize a staggered term for Commissioners to ensure overlap of experienced members with newcomers. Involve a sub-committee of Commissioners to lead the process of identifying and recruiting new members. • Oversee communications about openings on the Commission to ensure the community is aware of the opportunity to get involved. WHO: Staff person FOCUS AREAS: ___ RANK: ___ 2. PROGRAM/PROJECT MANAGEMENT Ensure professional program and project management, including City staff oversight, qualified contracted services, inter-agency coordination and robust reporting and evaluation. • Build capacity of the designated City staff coordinator of this program through professional development. This may include conferences, webinars, online resources, and networking with program managers in the region. Review documents in the Appendix pertaining to public art program management. • Determine what types of changes to programs, if any, are warranted, based on the status of the City’s Covid-19 recovery efforts, updated CDC guidelines, etc., and make appropriate revisions to criteria used to inform project feasibility and implementation. • Review and evaluate past projects. Identify improvements needed, or gaps that exist, such as which audiences may not have been served by the program, what types of art and artists were not represented, which locations in City lacked programming, etc. Use the information to inform planning and future efforts. Note: Focus on seeking a balance, ensuring equity, and growing impact of programming. • Consider growing the scale of projects. This may include larger budgets, more extended timelines, more permanent projects, or events that are (hopefully) now allowed to take place. WHO: Staff person FOCUS AREAS: ___ RANK: ___ 3. FUNDING/FINANCES Provide support systems for diverse community cultural expressions utilizing a mix of public and private dollars, involving businesses and philanthropic partners • Review and evaluate funding and financial management systems and practices utilized during the first two years and recommend improvements to increase impact and efficiencies. • Explore ways to grow support from both public and private sources. Consider longer-term grant opportunities, such as the NEA’s Our Town program (a federal funding program), larger grants from area foundations, such as McKnight and the Minneapolis Foundation, and corporate sponsorships for larger events, such as a cultural festival or a new cultural facility. • Seek input and advice from experts in the areas of development, fundraising and sponsorship • Consider ways to secure City funding for ongoing staffing needs, consulting help and overhead. Note: Project funding is secondary to maintaining professional program management, which, in turn, can leverage project support. WHO: Staff person FOCUS AREAS: ___ RANK: ___ 4. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Ensure robust, equitable, authentic community engagement, involving City staff and paid community liaisons, enabling real-time community feedback and idea generation systems • Review and evaluate community engagement efforts and practices utilized during the first two years and recommend improvements to increase impact, authenticity and efficiency. With input from Commissioners, determine degree to which projects or engagement activities met goals and objectives (according to each project’s listed 45Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan goals, anticipated outcomes, etc.). Take into consideration changes in health and safety guidelines issued by the CDC and the State of Minnesota. Note: It’s important to recognize that lessons are learned from every project undertaken—for artists, audiences, project managers and committees—as well as projects that went unrealized; take stock of the lessons learned in Brooklyn Center and apply knowledge gained to iteratively improve future efforts. • Explore ways to grow engagement efforts, including the number of residents and businesses who participate in projects or share their ideas, input, and feedback. Note: Any effort to make improvements will benefit from good record-keeping throughout the lifetime of a project. • Seek input and advice from professionals in the field of equitable and authentic community engagement, particularly as it pertains to growing civic pride, bridging difference and reducing disparities. Note: Community engagement, as a professional practice, is constantly evolving and requires monitoring on a regular basis. Consider recruiting advisor or Commissioner with such skills. • Consider new approaches and invite fresh ideas, from a variety of perspectives: residents, artists, community cultural leaders, and others. Note: This should be part of a robust communications plan. WHO: Staff person FOCUS AREAS: ___ RANK: ___ 5. COMMUNICATIONS AND EDUCATION Education and training, skill-building and robust communications promoting creative economies and jobs in cultural industries • Review and evaluate communications and education efforts undertaken during the first two years, with input and comments from a variety of perspectives (Commissioners, program participants, partner entities, recipients of e-news, etc.) and recommend improvements or modifications. Update communications plan. Note: If program doesn’t have a website, consider developing and maintaining one, integrating social media communications. • Explore ways to grow education, training and skill-building for artists and creative professionals in the City and develop strategies to attract artists from the larger region. Note: Encourage collaboration across sectors, across disciplines, etc. to expand the pool of talent involved in the program. Seek input and advice from experts in the areas of education, training and communications. Consider recruiting advisor or Commissioner with such skills. WHO: Staff person FOCUS AREAS: ___ RANK: ___ 6. PUBLIC SPACE DEVELOPMENT Develop vibrant gathering places that generate pride and environmental stewardship, open-access cultural facilities, user-friendly production spaces and multifaceted programming serving young and old in Brooklyn Center (locally, and in partnership with arts and cultural entities in the region) • Review and evaluate efforts to enhance the creation, programming, use and stewardship of public spaces in the City over the past two years and recommend improvements to increase impact and efficiencies. Consider changes in pandemic- related CDC guidelines as they pertain to programming in public spaces, design and use of cultural spaces, etc. • Continue efforts to develop a cultural festival and a new cultural facility. Consider artist live/workspace, shared production facilities, co-working spaces for cultural organizations, etc. • Seek input and advice from experts in the areas of cultural space design and development, such as Artspace Projects, based in Minneapolis. • Cultivate partnerships with shared interest in environmental stewardship, such as Three Rivers Park District, Mississippi River Watershed District, Hennepin County, and environmental groups. • Continue to further the City’s Environmental Stewardship initiative in partnership with various City departments and private sector partners. Update strategies, based on what has worked to date, as well as promising new practices in the field. WHO: Staff person FOCUS AREAS: ___ RANK: ___ Mid-Term (2022-2023) Work Plan Action Steps 46Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Long-Range (2024-2025) Work Plan Action Steps 1. GOVERNANCE Maintain an active and informed Arts & Culture Commission • Continue cultivating familiarity of the public art field amongst Commissioners. Develop strategies in which Commissioners learn from each other and inform program staff. • Develop standardized orientation packet for incoming Commissioners, designed to bring them up to speed and get engaged within a few months. Note: Consider a “buddy” system in which veteran Commissioners mentor new recruits. • Develop ongoing evaluation systems to measure the effectiveness of the Commission, allowing staff to obtain useful insights and feedback to inform improvements to the governance of the program. • Continue to review and update the Commission’s charter as needed to ensure the appropriateness and timeliness of this guiding document. WHO: Staff person, with Commissioners FOCUS AREAS: ___ RANK: M (Medium) 2. PROGRAM/ PROJECT MANAGEMENT Ensure professional program and project management • Build capacity of the designated City staff coordinator as the budget allows, including an administrative assistant. Determine appropriateness of program as if fits within its department, with input from City Team and City Manager. • Update program plans based on past successes and availability of resources. • Continue to review and evaluate past projects, identify improvements needed, or gaps that exist. • Continue to grow and diversify the types of projects undertaken. WHO: Staff person FOCUS AREAS: ___ RANK: ___ 3. FUNDING/FINANCES Provide support systems for diverse community cultural expressions • Update as needed the funding and financial management systems in place and recommend improvements to increase efficiencies. • Continue exploring ways to grow support from both public and private sources. • Hire a development and sponsorship consultant, as opportunities to grow support become evident. • Seek ongoing City funding for annual festival and one major commission each year. Note: This assumes the program is considered a major success by the community and elected officials, and resources can be secured. WHO: Staff person FOCUS AREAS: ___ RANK: ___ 4. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Ensure robust, equitable, authentic community engagement • Continue reviewing and evaluating community engagement efforts and practices and recommend improvements to increase impact, authenticity and efficiency. • Explore ways to grow engagement efforts, including ideas suggested as options in the plan, such as employing artists in residence with cultural liaisons, etc. • Expand efforts to incorporate public art as part of private developments, including the Opportunity Site, remodeled City facilities, and streetscape improvements. • Consider offering microgrants to residents to enhance front yards, decorate for holidays, work with neighbors on cleanup projects, etc. WHO: Staff person FOCUS AREAS: ___ RANK: ___ 47Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 5. COMMUNICATIONS AND EDUCATION Education and training, skill-building and robust communications • Update communications plan, as needed. • Expand education for community members lacking awareness of program and the field of public art. • Expand training for artists seeking to learn creative community engagement techniques. WHO: Staff person FOCUS AREAS: ___ RANK: ___ 6. PUBLIC SPACE DEVELOPMENT Develop vibrant gathering places foster environmental stewardship, open-access cultural spaces and multifaceted programming • Update plans and strategies based on developments and impacts over the previous two years. • Grow annual cultural festival as a regional destination as budget and staff capacity permit. • If new cultural facility is opened, grow public programming to attract more artists and creative professionals to work in the City. • Grow artists’ involvement in City’s Environmental Stewardship initiative. Consider sponsoring an annual Stewardship Artist Fellow as part of the program. • Grow programming in City parks and along trails, fostering greater connectivity. WHO: Staff person FOCUS AREAS: ___ RANK: ___ Long-Range (2024-2025) Work Plan Action Steps 48Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Introducing the Plan to the Community Putting this plan into action requires thoughtful consideration and intentional action steps. Please review the Implementation Strategies and Action Steps provided in the Annual Work Plan above. The first phase, prior to commencing program implementation steps, is sharing the plan with the community and helping everyone understand what it is, how it developed, why it’s important and how it will benefit the City and the community. A communications strategy will be helpful. For example, the City should determine who needs to know and what messages are critical to share. Should the plan “final draft” be shared with residents prior to being adopted by the City Council? If so, is input desired and helpful? If it’s after the City Council adopts the plan, what’s the message to residents? Can they still get involved, offer input, join a committee, etc.? Either way, the information needs to be accessible and understandable, and community members should not be concerned that they didn’t get to have input; engaging the community on an ongoing basis, and adjusting/improving the program accordingly should be a key message of the plan. Here are some basic steps to consider: • Create a brief story about the plan, not more than four pages, articulating the key findings and recommendations. This story could be told in the City’s newsletter, which reaches a very broad audience. If possible, design the content as a four-page insert that can also be printed and distributed separately. This way, it could be easily distributed by schools, places of worship, Rotary meetings, at the library, inserted into others’ publications, etc. • In-person presentations and conversations are important to include in the launch of the plan. For these, develop a PowerPoint based on the content in the handout. Presentations should ideally be presented by City staff accompanied by an elected official (a mayor or City Council representative). Each City Commission should be briefed, as well as community groups and other groups the City typically convenes to share important information. • Convey that community on an ongoing basis, and that improvements to the program is built into its structure. Develop feedback systems and periodic open meetings to cultivate the City’s deepened relationship with community members. Seek feedback and input, and invite participation. Consider periodic surveys and other methods of gauging residents’ interest, obtaining their concerns and ideas, and inviting their comments and connections. Invite people to indicate their personal interest in participating in some way, such as serving on a committee, helping youth build an art project, referring artists to the program, etc. • Create a set of digital assets to promote the plan via social media platforms, such as Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter. These assets typically synthesize content from the handout copy, paired with an image from the plan. For example, there could be an image of students painting a mural near their school with the message: “Learn how the City’s new Beautification & Public Art Plan encourages youth to participate in shaping a healthy Brooklyn Center.” A hotlink takes the viewer to the online draft of the summary and the plan. Consider segmented audiences, such as education, business, faith, neighborhood residents, youth, regional grantmakers and cultural leaders. 49Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Starting a Public Art Program The City of Brooklyn Center is a relatively young suburban City, so it is not surprising that it has not yet established an arts and culture program or a structured public art program. An advantage of developing a new program from scratch is being able to take advantage of what has worked and what hasn’t among the hundreds of other public art programs across the country. For example, the definition of public art has expanded over the past two decades to include a wide array of creative possibilities; instead of simply plopping art in public places, public art is more process-oriented, taking into account the context of each site. Most cities today are limited to “percent for art” funds drawn solely from Capital Improvement Project budgets (CIP), which can only be used to fund permanent art, not temporary projects, events or community engagement efforts, which is among the hottest trends in the field today. As more cities adopt diversity, equity and inclusion policies they need to overhaul their art selection methodologies with more diverse representation on committees and diversify the artists in their collections. An important emerging trend is connecting arts and community development efforts with health and wellbeing goals. (see page 82 for more information about this trend.) Today, cities are increasingly concerned that their public art dollars are going to more qualified out-of-state artists. They want to cultivate and train their local talent pool, yet they lack funding mechanisms and capacity to support such efforts. And, since private developments influence the perception and experience of public space, cities increasingly seek to encourage developers to include public art in their projects. All of these factors indicate the need for an orchestrated approach guiding Brooklyn Center’s public art and beautification efforts. Likewise, it’s clear that the field of public art is continuing to evolve, as new technologies emerge and cultural developments occur. Current events and emerging social issues also influence trends in the field. For a survey of recent developments and trends in public art, see the Links and Resources listed on page 82 in the Appendix. Funding Considerations There are many options available to cities seeking to fund public art and beautification efforts. It’s important to note that funding is needed for both program operations as well as project implementation. It’s helpful to identify cost centers, including the following: • Program management and administration• Project coordinators• Fees for artists• Production expenses• Communications• Documentation• Evaluation• Community education• Training and professional development for artists• Development and Fundraising (grant writing, sponsorship procurement, benefits)• Dedication events and community celebrations• Festivals, parades, special events, fireworks, etc. 50Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan There are many funding mechanisms currently being employed by cities throughout the US. The City of Brooklyn Center should consider the following options for both project and program support: PERCENT FOR ART: Many cities have adopted a “percent-for-art” ordinance or policy that typically draws 1-2% of the CIP fund. Keep in mind that CIP funds are usually restricted to capital building projects, and cannot be used for many types of public art or beautification projects. As an ordinance, there is no need to request funds each year; it is automatic. GENERAL FUND ALLOCATION: For many cities supporting arts and cultural programs, annual allocation from general fund dollars can support events, staff, residencies, etc. These could take various forms, such as: • Direct allocation or appropriation: funds set aside for public art out of the capital budget or general fund determined annually or biannually; use of funds can vary, depending on source and pre-determined restrictions, including administration, education, events, and promotion.• Department allocation: funds set aside by operating departments for projects situated within their jurisdiction; typically, these include public works, parks, and community services. BONDS: Bond issues associated with capital improvement programs can be used for cultural facilities for a limited duration of time. COMBINATION: The City of Duluth, MN, established a “municipal arts fund” and a “community arts set-aside” of one percent of the cost of all new building construction projects costing in excess of $5,000. Upon the approval of any such project, an amount equal to the set-aside is transferred by the City treasurer from the general fund to the municipal arts fund. However, in the event the project was funded in part by another entity, the City can seek to secure an additional one percent of such entity’s contribution to the project for the municipal arts fund. PERCENT FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT: The City of St. Louis Park collects fees from private developers to pay for public art to be commissioned for a public-facing area of the development. Nationally there are more than 30 cities engaging private developers in supporting public art. While Minnesota cities are prohibited from mandating participation— ”exaction” fees—cities like St. Louis Park simply “encourages” participation. (See more on Public Art and Private Development overview, page 54) SALES TAX: Cities can designate a percentage of sales taxes or conservation taxes. The City of St. Paul established a STAR Program using ⅛ of one percent sales tax—authorized by the State in the early 1990s. The program offers grants in two categories: Cultural STAR and Neighborhood STAR. DESIGNATED FUND: Establish a long- term fund, perhaps in partnership with a community foundation. This could be a donor-advised fund at a Community Foundation, such as the Minneapolis Foundation. The Public Art Endowment in Greensboro, NC, offers “buy-in” from community members, who may be fans of public art and wish to participate in educational programs and meet-the-artist events. TOURISM: Regional tourism dollars—or an annual project grant—in partnership with the Northwest Minneapolis Tourism Assn. Seek alignment with the Association’s program goals, such as increased visitor traffic or increased media coverage for the region. CORPORATE SPONSORS: The City already benefits from a modest amount of support from local businesses, Lions Club, Rotary and other private underwriting. Public art and beautification projects are often considered desirable, high-visibility efforts that attract sponsorship. Consider strategies to build and cultivate relationships with companies based in Brooklyn Center, and develop a list of ways corporate investments can be acknowledged and promoted, such as: • Signage with logos• Media releases• Events with sponsor acknowledged or allowed to speak to audience• Acknowledgment in City’s Newsletter, at City Council meetings, etc.• Other (to be negotiated with sponsors) GRANTS: There are several opportunities to obtain charitable foundation grants, government grants and investments from County, Met Council and State programs. Likewise, these funds may be in partnership with nonprofit organizations seeking to fund projects within the CIty: • Hennepin County got a grant from SHIP (State Health Improvement Program) toward Hmong project in Centennial Park. An event is planned featuring health, art, medical advice, etc. to help reduce diabetes in Hmong families.• CAPI can apply for grants to develop leadership in the community—training artists in community engagement, artful hands-on workshops and storytelling. • The Shingle Creek Watershed District funds demonstration projects that raise awareness of water health and stewardship, as well as pilot projects, such as the Wenk Engineering water oxygenation art projects supported in Shingle Creek in 2015.• AARP offers grants in MN, as well as National Community Challenge grants.• Other sources, such as McKnight Foundation, Bush Foundation, and the Minneapolis Foundation are listed in the Resources and Links section of the Appendix (page x). Funding 51Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan The City of Brooklyn Center utilizes Commissions and Committees to aid elected officials and staff in making informed decisions and remain connected to members of the community. To help guide the City’s investments and decision-making regarding arts and culture, a governance group is likewise needed. Since there is a need for citywide governance of arts and cultural topics and issues—of which beautification and public art are important components—the consultants recommend the City establish a Brooklyn Center Arts & Culture Commission (BCACC). If a Committee is preferred in the short-term, please note that future references to the “Commission” or “BCACC” in this document may be applied to the Committee. Either way, it’s critical to commit staff time to support the BCACC’s work, including communications, meeting organization, meeting minutes and more. Building the City’s capacity to manage and govern a public art program will take time and commitment. Recognizing the potential for arts and culture to be a key component of Brooklyn Center’s revitalization, this plan recommends starting now to develop these management roles. As a longer term strategy, the City should consider a public-private partnership infrastructure to support robust arts and cultural development. A public-private partnership—pairing BCACC and the City with a non-profit organization—can be established to administer and coordinate the range of art and culture opportunities in the community. This combination allows for a greater variety of public art activities to be supported and managed, and a greater amount of private sector support to be leveraged. This will help ensure that both BCACC and the growing arts and cultural community are actively engaged. At its best, public art serves a common good, enlivens shared spaces, strengthens community bonds and connects to our sense of humanity. A belief in the significance of these outcomes informs those who commission and create art in the public realm. This is useful to keep in mind when recruiting members of BCACC. In order to offer a wide range of advice and perspectives, its membership roster should include educators, arts professionals, businesspersons, place- based designers, community developers, neighborhood representatives and elected officials with a passion for Brooklyn Center’s heritage, identity and diverse cultures. A more heterogeneous membership would enable BCACC to assume a more active role in achieving its mission. Having a council member serve on the BCACC and act as a liaison with the Council is an important consideration. The consultant recommends the City maintain the City Team—formed during the planning phase—as a group that meets regularly to help guide and nurture the program, increase connectivity and foster collaboration amongst departments. Governance From a structural standpoint, it may help to determine a “home” for the program, however it’s critical that the program work collaboratively with all City departments. (Insert graphics showing different structures) 52Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan The administration of Brooklyn Center’s Beautification & Public Art program involves both paid City staff and volunteers engaged in a variety of activities. The designated City staff administrator oversees the program and works with the Arts & Culture Commission and various committees to implement objectives on an annual basis. This administrator, or program manager, is essentially the steward of the Beautification & Public Art Master Plan. S/he is charged with guiding its implementation in a professional manner. The Work Plan section of this plan provides guidance on action steps to take, enabling the program manager A public art administrator manages the development and implementation of public art in their communities. They do this through the management of public art programs and the facilitation of public art projects and artworks. They work with artists, community members, local decision-makers, representatives of municipal agencies and other stakeholders to ensure public artworks are designed, installed and maintained. They play a key role in each stage of a project’s lifecycle and are responsible for the administrative and management tasks within public art programs. Their days may include site visits to understand how an artwork may be installed in a location, project meetings to go over details of artworks in progress, interest meetings with community members, public relations events, and engagements with artists among others. Throughout their day, public art administrators may interact with artists, representatives of municipal agencies, local politicians, community members, private developers, media, and more. No two days look the same for most public art administrators. Each day is different and can range widely depending on the projects they are working on. - From an Overview about Public Art Administrators, published by Americans for the Arts. For additional guidance on the work performed by public art administrators, see the full document in the Appendix. to establish an annual work plan. As a critical starting point for Brooklyn Center’s program, the program manager is charged with establishing the Brooklyn Center Arts & Culture Commission as the governance group authorized by the City to make decisions, provide advice, and work closely with the program manager in realizing implementation of the plan. As the program budgets and staffing needs increase in size over time, project managers may be added to oversee specific large-scale projects or long-term efforts. These individuals may be salaried employees of the City or contracted independent consultants. Support staff Management may be needed as the program grows, with access to offices, a computer, a copier, supplies, etc. Many public art programs contract for services from outside vendors, including art consultants, conservators, curators, marketing/public relations firms, writers/researchers, photographers, and planners. Some contract with non- profit agencies to provide management services for their public art programs. Managing public art programs involves establishing and maintaining effective relationships with various public agencies and stakeholder groups, such as public works, street maintenance, the city attorney, regional arts organizations, artists, and many others. Effective management is best accomplished by a staff person familiar with the City’s bureaucracy and systems. It’s important to note that changes in personnel, leadership, and fund allocations can affect the long-term success of any program. Note: Additional program management considerations, including gift policies, overseeing inter-agency agreements, and contracting with artists, are referenced in the Appendix, along with sample documents. Brooklyn Center Census 2020 Planning Meeting 53Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Public art collections are growing nationally and so are the costs of maintaining them, from preventative actions to emergency repairs. Funding sources for maintenance vary from capital budgets and general funds to state heritage preservation funds and private donations. The amount of funds spent annually on maintenance or conservation varies, depending on the number of artworks in a city’s collection, and the extent to which the artworks are exposed to unhealthy environments (this includes acidity in the air, salt from ice removal, or potential vandalism). A common strategy for funding maintenance is a set-aside, either from the capital budget—up to 10- 15% of the art allocation—or from general funds on an as-needed basis. As the “owner” of the art, the City is contractually obligated for maintenance and conservation. The responsibility for finding funds for maintenance and repairs is the city’s, however it is critical to employ professional conservators as city maintenance crews typically don’t have the expertise and will inevitably prioritize the expense lower than other projects. As Brooklyn Center begins to commission permanent works of art—art that becomes the property of the City—maintenance will become a bigger issue. It’s important to note that temporary projects, such as the Street Banner project, also require maintenance Maintenance during the time they are on display. Criteria for temporary projects, as well as permanent ones, should require projects to be durable and low maintenance. One way to ensure projects keep maintenance costs to a minimum is to hire a conservator to review the designs of proposed projects in advance of approval for fabrication. Conservators can make recommendations for modifications to the design that will save money in the long term. Maintenance budgets naturally increase as more artworks are commissioned. Financial hardship has forced many programs to limit their expectations of how long a project can reasonably last and establish clearer deaccessioning criteria (allowing for the removal of an artwork). Some works will be moved into storage while future restoration funds are sought, and some will require disposal. Indeed, if the cost to repair or replace is beyond the reach of current budgets, and outside help does not materialize, it makes sense to consider removing problem works. These are hard facts that most public art programs have to deal with sooner or later. Jungle Animals Climbing Christopher Tully Brookdale LibraryCensus 2020 Light Projection 54Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Beautification and public art are increasingly desired by private developers to add value to their investments and offer advantages in a competitive marketplace. As such, several cities in the US have established “percent-for-private development” ordinances, requiring developers to contribute a percent of project construction budgets to commissioning art for public-facing areas of the development, such as plazas, entryways, planters, bike racks, landscaping and more. The City of St. Louis Park, MN, for example, has successfully cultivated partnership arrangements with private developers over the past 15 years, leveraging more than $600,000 of investment in public art that benefits the residents of the development as well as the larger community. Whether or not cities establish an ordinance, they can negotiate with developers and create design guidelines that encourage participation on some level. Introducing developers early on to the potential benefits of public art considered early in their design process can reap rewards. Public art, for example, can engender a sense of pride and stewardship amongst residents, leading to word of mouth marketing and better cared-for rental units. Cities can encourage private property owners and developers to voluntarily participate in public art and beautification initiatives. This participation may take a variety of forms. The City may provide assistance to property owners in the selection of artworks of significance to the general public. When the property owner requests assistance, the City evaluates the request and determines how best to collaborate to assist in the selection of an artist and/or artwork. Private property owners may wish to include a public art consultant or public artist on their design team early in the overall project design process or add public art to their facilities in a variety of ways. It’s important to note that the acquisition of permanent works of public art requires a commitment by the property owner to preserve, protect, and permanently display the work of art in its original condition at the time of installation, as described on page 53. The routine maintenance, conservation, and preservation of the work of art will be the responsibility of the facility owner. There are similar considerations for the staging of temporary art installations and performance-based works, similar to maintenance procedures for architectural elements used to host a seasonal farmer’s market, for example, or the care and maintenance of the City’s Rec on the Go materials and equipment. Public Art and Private Development NOTE: TH I S I S A IMAGE P L A C E H O L D E R NOTE: TH I S I S A IMAGE P L A C E H O L D E R 55Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Opportunity Site Overview NOTE: OPPORTU N I T Y S I T E C O P Y AND IMA G E S T O G O H E R E 56Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Appendix 1. Community Engagement Summary* *Notes from Meetings, Interviews, Focus Groups, surveys, etc. available upon request 2. Demonstration Projects Case Studies - Street Banners Project 3. Demonstration Projects Case Studies - Census 2020 Project 4. Environmental Stewardship Report 5. Public Art Typologies 6. Notes on Community Engagement 7. Additional Project Ideas for Brooklyn Center 8. Prioritization Tool 9. Resources & Links 10. Site Analysis Tool 11. Public Art Administrator Overview 12. Arts Facilitation During Crisis and Uncertainty 13. Mobilizing Arts and Cultural Assets in Response to Covid-19 14. Covid-19 Response Resources for the Arts 15. Sample Public Art Policy 16. Sample Percent for Art Policy 17. Why Public Art Matters 57 68 69 70 72 74 77 79 81 82 87 92 93 96 100 105 108 57Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Brooklyn Center Beautification and Public Art Master Plan Overview of Community Engagement Phase March 6, 2020 Community Engagement Process Creating a relevant and responsive Beautification & Public Art Plan depends on broad and meaningful participation from community members, residents, artists, business and community leaders, and other stakeholders. Over the course of the planning process, the City of Brooklyn Center and the Forecast Public Art project team worked with several community members by hosting pop-up events, participating in a public art demonstration project utilizing street banners, administering an online survey, conducting focus groups, and one-on- one interviews. The Forecast Public Art project team and the City of Brooklyn Center worked alongside a Community Task Force, a City Team Task Force and City Council/Mayor Team to ensure that a broad perspective of ideas, input, and expertise were reflected in the Plan. The consultant team completed over 1,000 points of engagement with a wide variety of community members in various venues. •Meeting four times with three planning committees—Community, City staff and City Council (36) •In-person surveys at the Transit Center, Library and pop-up Saturday Market (70) •One-on-one telephone and in-person interviews (42) •Two Online surveys (140 total) •Listening sessions with groups representing education, youth, social services, library and government (80) •Multicultural community forum at CEAP (50) •Dialogues with four City Commissions/Committees (48) •Tour neighborhoods, commercial areas and major roadways with City staff (4) •Meet with apartment dwellers at Crest and the Twin Lake North (35) •Tabling in conjunction with City-led gatherings (460) •Mapping exercises to identify sites of concern and opportunity throughout City (55) •Postcard-making, art activities and idea generation with residents (30) •Support demonstration projects (attend planning meetings, offer advice, connect with artists) 1.Community Task Force The 15-member Community Task Force was convened in an effort to capture an array of community input. The committee is comprised of community members who have a connection to Brooklyn Center, the arts, and showed an interest in the Beautification and Public Art Master Plan. Community Task Force Members Sandy Christensen* Carolynne Darling Michael Donnelly* Brooklyn Center Beautification and Public Art Master Plan: Community Engagement Overview 1. Community Engagement Summary (page 1 of 11) 58Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan *Not in attendance but contacted via email The Community Task Force met three times over the course of the planning process (plus one joint meeting with the other teams) and discussed an array of topics and ideas through presentations, workshop activities, and group discussions. The meetings were facilitated by the Forecast Public Art project team and were generally well attended with at least half of the members attending. Community Task Force meeting discussions and activities are listed below: Community Task Force Meeting Summaries Community Task Force Meeting 1 – April 2019 ●Introduce team to Public Art and Beautification ●Discuss goals of the plan ●Identify focus group candidates and review list of questions ●Develop internal and external communications processes Community Task Force Meeting 2 – May 2019 ●Discuss key take-aways ●Discuss vision and goals of the plan ●Understand geographically where Task Force members live with a mapping activity ●Vision and goals Activity Community Task Force Meeting 3 – October 2019 •Review high level Summary of Plan components Connie Duffney Quinton Johnson* Lissa Karpeh Nahid Khan Michaela McCue Corey Mills Heidi Nelson Ron Paine Dianne Sannes Carolyn Sayers Serena Xiong* Pang Yang* Brooklyn Center Beautification and Public Art Master Plan: Community Engagement Overview 1. Community Engagement Summary (page 2 of 11) 59Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan •Discuss expectations regarding next steps and implementation strategies •Discuss final “joint” meeting with other Task Force teams •Feedback provided for next draft Notes from the Community Task Force Meetings are available upon request. 2.Brooklyn Center City Team Task Force The City Team was made up of Brooklyn Center City staff. The team met three times over the course of the planning process (plus one joint meeting with the other teams) and discussed an array of topics and ideas through presentations, workshop activities and group discussions. The meetings were facilitated by the Forecast Public Art project team. Task Force meeting discussions and activities are listed below: City Team Task Force Meeting Summaries City Team Task Force Meeting 1 – May 2019 ●Introduce team to City staff and scope of work ●Overview about Public Art and Beautification ●Mapping Exercise City Team Task Force Members (Staff) Reggie Edwards Angel Smith Meg Beekman Ginny McIntosh Tony Gruenig / Richard Gabler Curt Boganey Todd Berg Jim Glasoe Doran Cote Brett Angell Andrew Hogg Peter Moen Michael Albers Joel Erickson Brooklyn Center Beautification and Public Art Master Plan: Community Engagement Overview 1. Community Engagement Summary (page 3 of 11) 60Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan ●Develop current and future stakeholders to involve ●Update on Street Banner demonstration project City Team Task Force Meeting 2 – August 2019 •Overview about Arts and Health studies and examples •Cut Sheet exercise – Review selection of projects, share selections and reasons why •Survey hand out regarding What Makes a Healthy Brooklyn Center •Expand list of key stakeholders planning team should interview City Team Task Force Meeting 3 – October 2019 •Review preliminary high-level draft of Plan •Discuss and suggest edits and changes to draft Notes from the City Team Task Force Meetings are available in upon request. 3.City Council Study Sessions The City Council and Mayor held three Study Sessions. The group met three times over the course of the planning process (plus one joint meeting with the other teams) and discussed an array of topics and ideas through presentations and group discussions. The meetings were facilitated by the Forecast Public Art project team. City Council Study Session discussions and activities are listed below: Meeting 1 August 2019 ●Introduce team to City staff and scope of work ●Overview about Public Art and Beautification ●Input collected regarding current and future stakeholders to involve ●Update on Street Banner demonstration project Meeting 2 September 2019 •Overview about Arts and Health studies and examples •Overview of organizational structures utilized by municipal arts programs •Update on community engagement and Task Force meetings to date Meeting 3 October 2019 City Council Task Force Members Mayor Mike Elliott April Graves Dan Ryan Marquita Butler Kris Lawrence-Anderson Brooklyn Center Beautification and Public Art Master Plan: Community Engagement Overview 1. Community Engagement Summary (page 4 of 11) 61Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan •Review preliminary high-level Plan outline •Discuss merits of utilizing “Healthy City” or “Community Health” as a theme •Collect feedback and suggestions for additional steps to take Joint Meeting NOTE: In November 2019, a joint meeting of the Community Task Force members, City Team members, the mayor and two City Council members met to review, compare notes and offer feedback. •Introductions, with community members sharing their experience to date •Overview of the updated preliminary Plan Outline (Process, Findings, Recommendations, etc.) •Collect feedback, such as “deepen community engagement with communities of color.” •Update on next steps for the Plan, and the Street Banner demonstration project. 4.One-on-One Interviews Between October 2019 and February 2020, Jack Becker conducted more than 40 one-on-one interviews with community stakeholders (via phone or in-person). The participants and interview questions are listed below. Participants: Social Service Organizations CEAP CAPI ACER Lions Club Businesses Luther Automotive Caribou Coffee Surly Brewing Alatus (developer for Opportunity Site)  Associated Bank (Community Reinvestment Program manager) Real Estate Equity developer Liberian Business Assn. Liberian Consulate of MN “The Global Mix” (MIX) Brooklyns Building developer Hennepin County Brooklyn Center Beautification and Public Art Master Plan: Community Engagement Overview 1. Community Engagement Summary (page 5 of 11) 62Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Brookdale Library Hennepin County Community & Economic Development, Community Works, Hennepin Health Three Rivers Park District State Government State Rep Samantha Vang State Senator Chris Eaton City Government Earle Brown Heritage Center BC Housing Commission BC Planning Commission Parks and Recreation Commission Multicultural Advisory Committee Block Watch Coordinator Former Mayor Tim Willson Philanthropy McKnight Foundation Blue Cross Blue Shield (Foundation, Center for Prevention and Ride Share program) Nonprofits / Arts / Artists The Alliance BLAQ Springboard for the Arts Liberian Youth Arts Program Minnesota African Women's Association Artspace Projects Education / Youth Brooklyn Bridge Alliance for Youth Brooklyn Center's Youth Council BC School (educators and students) Hennepin Technical College North Hennepin County Community College Worship Imam Husain Islamic Center Jehovah Jireh Ministries Saint Adolphus Catholic Church Interview Questions (selected): •What does a healthy Brooklyn Center look like? •How might arts and cultural activities in the public realm help improve the lives of residents and businesses in Brooklyn Center, and make the city healthier? •How can we identify and lift up the creative talent that exists in Brooklyn Center? •What role might you or your business play in a future program designed to build civic pride and contribute to BC residents’ sense of belonging? •What have you observed—positive or negative—about the City that we should take into account as part of this plan (what works and doesn’t work)? Brooklyn Center Beautification and Public Art Master Plan: Community Engagement Overview 1. Community Engagement Summary (page 6 of 11) 63Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan •Who else should we contact for input? Notes from the interviews are available in upon request. Please note the names of interviewees have been removed to provide anonymity. 5.Presenting and Tabling at Special Events Celebrating at community events was a meaningful and interactive way to receive community input. This was also an opportunity to inform and educate community members about the master planning process and ultimately reach more people. The following is a list of special events the project team attended: ●Sanctuary Senior Living - Postcard exercise ●Brooklyn Center Community Center – Postcard exercise ●Mapping Exercise (at LISC workshop for Opportunity Site – Brookdale Library; City staff meeting, Community Task Force session) ●CEAP – Postcard exercise Documentation from the Special Events are available in upon request. 6.Community Cultural Conversations (One at CEAP in January 2020 and two at apartment buildings in February 2020) Organized by City staff and assisted by Forecast team members Jack Becker and Witt Siasoco, the first event attracted a diverse mix of 50 community members. Utilizing the World Café meeting method, the group divided into tables of 6-8 and wrote responses to a sequence of three questions posted on the wall. Jack provided a brief overview of public art and beautification, and presented a range of examples. He also updated the gathering on the planning process and timeline. Witt created an artwork on site during the meeting, capturing comments and topics raised in response to questions asked. The second conversation took place at The Crest Apartment building; and the third conversation took place at Twin Lake North Apartments. The three questions were: •What does a Healthy Brooklyn Center look like? •How could public art or beautification improve the quality of life in Brooklyn Center? •What are ways to meaningfully and authentically engage Brooklyn Center’s diverse population in beautification and public art/cultural efforts? Feedback and images from the Open House events are available upon request. 7.Focus Groups Brooklyn Center Beautification and Public Art Master Plan: Community Engagement Overview 1. Community Engagement Summary (page 7 of 11) 64Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Two focus groups held at the Brookdale Library in September 2019 brought together interested members of the community to discuss their perspectives about public art, the role of artists, and considerations for leadership in public art programming. Participants: •September 19: Four attendees •September 21: Five attendees Focus group discussions: •Sharing Perspectives: What does a Healthy Brooklyn Center look like? •How can public art address needs of the City, and what roles can artists play in the process? •Innovative leadership and extreme engagement; public art program directions and considerations. Results: Participants’ responses varied, but there was consensus around cultural diversity and access to outdoor activities as markers of a healthy Brooklyn Center. Similarly, they identified that public art can help achieve a healthy community through events and cultural sharing (e.g., festivals, music events, food-centered events). The markers for success included inclusive participation, more pride and happiness among residents, and community-based, family- friendly art throughout the City. Feedback from the Focus Groups is available upon request. 8.On-Site Surveys at Transit Center, Library and Pop-Up Saturday Market: (70 total over 3 days) Prompts and Questions Asked: ▪Write one or two words that sum up Brooklyn Center’s identity today. ▪What are your hopes or dreams for the future of Brooklyn Center? ▪What public places in Brooklyn Center would you be proud to show someone that has never been to Brooklyn Center? ▪List some places in Brooklyn Center where you would like to see public art. ▪Please list any artists or creative individuals (or businesses) that might help make public art happen in Brooklyn Center? ▪In which neighborhood in Brooklyn Center do you live or work? Feedback from the Focus Groups is available upon request. 9.On-Line Surveys (two separate surveys asking same set of questions) Surveys were another method of collecting input from the community. A link to the survey was provided through a variety of ways. The survey questions gathered information about familiarity and importance of public art, and encouraged participants to share their ideas. ●Total responses: Brooklyn Center Beautification and Public Art Master Plan: Community Engagement Overview 1. Community Engagement Summary (page 8 of 11) 65Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan ○Online survey responses: 75 for Survey #1 and 65 for Survey #2 ●Selected survey questions and summary of responses for Survey #1: Brooklyn Center Beautification and Public Art Master Plan: Community Engagement Overview 1. Community Engagement Summary (page 9 of 11) 66Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Brooklyn Center Beautification and Public Art Master Plan: Community Engagement Overview 1. Community Engagement Summary (page 10 of 11) 67Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan All responses and details regarding surveys are available upon request. Brooklyn Center Beautification and Public Art Master Plan: Community Engagement Overview 1. Community Engagement Summary (page 11 of 11) 68Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan NOTE: Case Stu d y c o p y f o r S t r e e t Banners a n d C e n s u s 2 0 2 0 will go he r e . 69Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 2019 Street Banner Project locations Banners to be Installed Spring 2020 2020 Census Initiative - Light Projections Demonstration Projects Developed and Produced During the Planning Process Centennial Park Shingle Creek Park Shingle Creek Crossing BROOKLYN CENTER SHINGLE CREEK ¨§¦94 ¨§¦694 ¨§¦94 N 49th Ave Sh i n g l e C r e e k P k w y Fron t a g e R d N evA ecnarF 57th Ave N Fron t a g e R d Fro n t a g e R d UV100 keerC elgnihS N evA gnivrI N 50th Ave 54th Ave N 55th Ave N 53rd Ave N N evA tnomerF N evA ecnarF Kn o x A v e N 65th Ave N X e r x e s A v e N B e a r d A v e N Ju n e A v e N evA drariG N N 52nd Ave N evA semaJ 63rd Ave N N evA nagoL evA tnomerF N N evA drariG N 51st Ave 64th Ave N N 46th Ave46th Ave N Ohenry Rd 59th Ave N 60th Ave N 61st Ave N 62nd Ave N 58th Ave N Ericon Dr evA tnecniV N Bro o k l y n D r evA neeuQ N N evA werD evA nneP N Mumf o r d R d E w i n g A v e N evA nrubhsaW N evA llessuR N evA nadirehS NN L i l a c D r Su m m i t D r N J o h n M a r t i n D r 51st Ave N Ad m i r a l L n N Broo k v i e w D r S h i n g l e C r e e k X i n g Ea r l e B r o w n D r N 48th Ave N 47th Ave N evA gniwE N evA sexreX 59th Ave N 53rd Ave N N 51st Ave 60th Ave N Ryan Lake Up p e r T w i n L a k e 34 35C&36 !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!( !(!( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( Demonstration Projects Developed and Produced During the Planning Process 2019 Street Banner Project locations Banners to be Installed Spring 2020 2020 Census Initiative - Light Projections Images of street banners, banner making, photo sessions, and census projectionsTwo demonstration projects—led by City staff—were implemented during the planning process, including a custom street banner project and a light projection project promoting participation in the 2020 Census. Installed Summer 2020 Street Banners Census 2020 Night Projections Census 2020 Night Projections Street Banners 70Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan   City of Brooklyn Center Report on Environmental Stewardship in Business District Areas & Thoroughfares July 2020 Over the past few years, residents and City staff members have expressed concern about increasing amounts of litter and trash left scattered in parking lots and areas surrounding businesses in the City. In March 2020, the thawing of winter snow exposed litter once again and, with the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic, the amount of trash increased due to the discarding of masks and gloves, exacerbating the problem. An increase in the number of vacant commercial properties, combined with a steep increase in the number of illegal trash dumping added to the problem. This has affected the overall environment of the City’s parks, rights-of-way, land owned by the City’s Economic Development Authority (EDA), as well as commercial properties. The City’s Code Enforcement program has overseen the cleanup of 44 illegal dumpings during the first half of 2020 on EDA-owned and EDA-adjacent property alone. During the pandemic, commercial property managers reported feeling overwhelmed by the increase in litter, combined with having fewer staff to help, due to the pandemic and recent civil unrest. Several of the City’s larger anchor stores have seen staff reduced by more than 20% due to employees who were unwilling to come to work or simply quit their jobs. The City has undertaken several efforts to manage the problem, including organizing cleanup days with volunteers, collecting stray shopping carts, “Knock & Talk” code enforcement, hiring contract litter removal and cleaning trash at bus stops. In spite of these efforts, the buildup of litter and trash continues to be a problem. To improve environmental stewardship in Business District areas and along thoroughfares, City staff studied the situation from a variety of angles. Several assumptions were made during the process: •The City would look more aesthetically pleasing without litter and trash •The problem is beyond the capacity of the City to address alone •At the core of the problem is the behavior of people who litter for various reasons •Current City efforts are not sufficient to resolve the problem •Transient visitors and motorists passing through present unique challenges While businesses may and have been enablers of littering by providing disposable packaging or lacking on-site trash receptacles, the problem is less about businesses caretaking their property. Most commercial properties have dedicated staff who pick up litter in parking lots and surrounding boulevards, 4. Environmental Stewardship Report (page 1 of 2) 71Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan however, they report being overwhelmed by the volume of litter and frequency of littering. Prior to the rise of the Covid-19 pandemic, the City conducted research, gathered data, and gained an understanding of strategies employed in other cities—work done in private, public and non-profit sectors to maintain clean and aesthetically pleasing public spaces with high foot traffic, such as malls, college campuses, museums, hotels and public parks. The strategies suggested there were three problem-solving methodologies, including Patterns of Behavior, Structure, and Mindset. Research finding revealed the following sample strategies: Behavior •Shopping and getting directly into a car •Having a large number of eyes on public spaces (by other customers, cameras, staff, etc.) •Establishing curfews along with parent supervision Structure •Staffing for cleanup and monitoring •Ambassador clean up and welcome program •Unified business ownership of cleanup (such as business association, business cleanup district, etc.) Mindset •Aesthetically pleasing and pride-filled space design and public art •Publicly established expectations of cleanliness (including signage) •Viewed by users as one unified business area The City developed three interconnected strategies to improve environmental stewardship in Business District areas and along thoroughfares: 1.Create value-based spaces (to instill a sense of pride and value) 2.Develop litter and trash prevention measures (including incentives for people to dispose of trash properly instead of tossing it on the ground) 3.Employ cleanup actions (including immediate removal of trash to avoid perception it is acceptable behavior) The solution to the City’s unsightly trash problem—and plans to grow a shared sense of environmental stewardship in the community—requires a coordinated partnership involving residents, visitors, business owners and the City. Stewardship of our shared environment is everyone’s responsibility. While execution of these strategies was slowed by the pandemic and civil unrest, which also delayed completing the City’s Beautification & Public Art plan, it is expected that implementation of this plan—once adopted—in conjunction with concerted community engagement efforts and intentional, long-term partnerships will begin to reverse the situation. 4. Environmental Stewardship Report (page 2 of 2) 72Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 5. Public Art Typologies Public Art Overview Public art is visible evidence of our shared humanity. It is vital to building a dynamic and equitable city for everyone; it encourages dialogues across difference and inspires viewers and participants to engage more fully in their communities. As a field and a professional practice, it’s constantly evolving and expanding as artists of all disciplines explore the world outside of traditional venues and private studios. And, as more artists participate in cross-sector collaborations—with community developers, place-based designers, city planners, social service organization and others, they realize the potential impacts public art can have on our built environment, our social infrastructure, the health of communities and our quality of life. Beyond murals, monuments and memorials, public art today can assume a multitude of forms. It can be visual or performance-based, fixed or ephemeral, community engagement or outrageous spectacle. To better understand how community interacts with public art, it may help to categorize it into five groups: art in public space, art as public space, art in the public interest, art as platform, and art as experience. Types of Public Art a)Art in Public Space “Art in space” is commonly found in the public sphere, but does not necessarily serve a function, nor does it explicitly reflect the public’s desire. Artworks placed in public are typically selected by curators or committees composed of art professionals or donors. Occasionally, the public embraces free-standing art in space, like the popular Cloud Gate (2006) by Anish Kapoor in Chicago’s Millennium Park. Frequently, these works thrill the art world, but fail to evoke positive public responses because the work is selected without input from people who frequent the space. b)Art as Public Space “Art as public space” refers to art that encompasses the design of entire public spaces; it transforms the ordinary benches we sit on, the land we walk on, and the bridges we cross. These types of projects typically result from collaborations with an artist, architect, landscape architect, community developers or site owner. This type of creative placemaking— a nationally recognized trend—greatly benefits from community stakeholder engagement in the early planning and design phase, and is mindful of the social health needs of the community. For example, Lorna Jordan’s Water Works Garden features mosaic-covered seating elements 73Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 5. Public Art Typologies in an intimate grotto invites contemplation, hosts storytelling events, and offers a unique wedding environment. c)Art in the Public Interest “Art in the public interest”—as defined by Miwon Kwon in Sitings of Public Art: Integration versus Intervention, 2002—is designed and sometimes constructed collaboratively with other artists and/or community participants. The artist invites the community into the process and the resulting work may reflect their desires, interests and experiences. Community engagement in the planning, design, creation of public art effectively empowers stakeholders to co-create the public realm they desire. This often generates civic pride and fosters greater stewardship of public art and shared public spaces. d)Art as Platform “Art as platform” is infrastructural art that enables the activation of public spaces through arts and cultural programming. Proven effective at generating a “buzz” or bringing diverse people together, these platforms include, but are not limited to: an outdoor amphitheater offering a stage for a wide variety of performances; cables stretched high above a streetscape providing a support system for fabrics, lights and audio speakers; a large digital video monitor displaying multiple types of presentations, public service announcements, audience-generated imagery and more; or a collection of ground-level concrete pads hosting rotating sculpture displays. Such platforms and other infrastructural elements enable flexible, yet meaningful community cultural programming and contribute to the vibrancy and vitality of public spaces. e)Art as Experience “Art as experience” is public art that taps into the trend of participatory culture; it’s not seen as art we can consume, like art in a gallery; it’s art we all can produce or at least contribute to its creation. Many kinds of public art are not meant to be passively observed; they’re designed to offer immersive experiences. They may be fleeting, such as a flash mob event, festival, or a parade, or they may evolve slowly over time and reward repeated visits. Topiary art, for example, is meant to grow slowly into its intended form or perhaps decompose over time. Interactive experiences with art, such as art that responds to the physical movement of audience members, or require physical activation of the work to reveal its meaning, inspire further public space exploration and discovery. The types of public art listed above offer direct benefits to public realm developments, as well as the public-facing surfaces of the privately-owned built environment throughout the entire city. Note: This information was first developed by Forecast for the Ford Site development in St. Paul 74Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Notes on Community Engagement Ways to Engage For examples of artist-led community engagement toward specific health goals, visit Forecast Public Art’s website, including: https://forecastpublicart.org/portfolio/health/ Who and How to Engage •General Brooklyn Center Community o Bring engagement to the community (where gatherings already happen) ▪National Night Out ▪Neighborhood Clubs / Block Clubs ▪VFW meetings ▪Church gatherings ▪School events ▪Halloween ▪Voting ▪Other •Business Community o Grow sense of ownership in the Beautification & Public Art program o Learn how they engage their customers and the community in other ways o Add value to their developments/properties •Cultural Communities in Brooklyn Center o Research and showcase the diverse cultures in the city by telling their stories o Make cultural leaders and groups feel welcome and needed •Local and Neighboring Artists o Make effort to find artists and attract them to do work in Brooklyn Center ▪For example, a micro-grant program would attract artists and bring fresh ideas to the City. o Consider creating an artist services program, like Springboard’s Ready Go Art, and Open Eye Theater’s Driveway Project. •Reference Forecast’s website for more case studies. Strategies to Help Plan Engagement •Tool Idea: Partners and Constituents – Create a constituency “constellation” map •Develop Social Infrastructure – Build upon strategies for creating welcoming public spaces at the Opportunity Site 6. Notes on Community Engagement (page 1 of 3) 75Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan ! From “Artists at the Community Development Table,” by Roseann Weiss, for Americans for the Arts Events vs. Engagement Engagement goes back to the notion of active listening, co-creation, and co-conception. Artists can go where people are gathered. They can look into all corners of the community to build relationships without preconceived expectations. A single event does not constitute community engagement. However, a single event or short-term project done well can lead to continuing engagement. Here are other points to keep in mind: ▪A focus group is research, not community engagement. ▪An interview with one elder is not engagement. ▪Outreach is not engagement. ▪If the product is the purpose, it’s social practice. ▪If the process is the purpose, it’s community art. Engagement is complex work. It can’t be done from a desk or a studio. Engagement is not something simple you can put into a box. Community-engaged Public Art Project Example: An interactive public art project that can take note of the mood of a community and let others know! “Public Art That Displays the Public Mood” (excerpted from weburbanist.com) What if the message of a work of public art is turned back to residents who then get to express their feelings? Residents of Waterloo Estate towers in Sydney, Australia, were given a uniquely visible voice in 2015 amidst city plans to change the neighborhood. The #WeLiveHere2017 project gave 500 residents in two 60-story towers “mood lights” so they could express their views on the proposed future of their home. 6. Notes on Community Engagement (page 2 of 3) 76Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan “#WeLiveHere2017 celebrates the community of Waterloo before a large-scale redevelopment changes the area forever,” explain the project’s creators, “bringing with it swathes of high- density private dwellings and an uncertain future for the thousands of existing residents.” An estimated 3,600 elderly and low-income residents will be moved out of the way when a new metro station is added and associated reconstruction complete. Indirectly, the lighting lends a voice to people living in vulnerable low-rise structures below, which are the most likely to be demolished and replaced. “We chose the Matavai and Turanga towers to represent the whole estate as they are the tallest and most visible,” explained one local resident of the project. “They were purpose-built for elderly residents, and I don’t think I’ve met anyone living there who is under the age of 65.” “By telling the stories of this inner-city community, the project empowers residents to participate in a collective statement of presence: a beacon to the place and the people.” It is also “a dynamic platform to generate valuable discussion around the importance of public and affordable housing, and the right of every person to a home.” There is also a personal element to this approach — each light represents an individual and creates a spot of bright color to help people remember that, even if it looks a bit dreary on the outside, there is someone living in a tower. The project has now wrapped up, and it remains to be seen how much it will impact development in the area, but it is certainly an intriguing template for would-be protesters in urban settings well worth looking at. 6. Notes on Community Engagement (page 3 of 3) 77Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Additional Project Ideas for Consideration (Ideas suggested by residents or local organizations, as well as consulting team members) DIY Fridays at Brookdale Library The Brookdale Library already hosts this program, and perhaps it could be expanded. Here’s how they promote it: “Calling all makers! Get creative and crafty at the library on Fridays. Try out new projects using our materials, or bring your own project in progress. Discover new creative skills, experiment with new materials, and have fun! Something different every week.” Foreign Exchange Children from households of different cultures trade places for a week. Run program just like a foreign exchange program for students. It makes sense to find a program in the region that actually runs foreign exchange programs and ask them to develop a pilot in Brooklyn Center. “Shoot Back” Photography Story-Telling Project Downtown Kalamazoo tried this type of public art project and collected nearly 600 photos. City Snaps collected 594 photographs of everyday life from July to October, 2019, inviting the public to pick up and use disposable cameras. BC Sister City Artist in Residence Brooklyn Center could host an artist from its Sister City, Garowe, Somalia, to live and practice his/her art for 3-4 months (or longer). The artist could be offered an open-access storefront studio space in which to engage with community members, exhibit art, give public presentations, etc. A stipend would be offered for travel and meals, a local family could host the artist as a guest, and an honorarium would be provided. The artist would create at least one public art project, such as a mural, a set of street banners, a performance at Centennial Park, an exhibit at Brookdale Library, etc. Street Painting Festival Chalkfest at Arbor Lakes became an instant success. Many locals suggested Brooklyn Center should do its own version. Hire a team of artists to produce a series of temporary, large-scale street paintings or chalk drawings on vacant blacktop lots, perhaps at the Pop-Up Saturday Market site or other empty parking lots in the Opportunity Site, prior to construction. Here’s an example of one creative street painting project: https://www.annabellepopa.com/cast- into-the-deep Chat Bench Chat Bench, a simple idea developed in England, is a concept for combatting isolation and loneliness. A sign is placed on specific benches, indicating this is a bench where people sit who are “Happy to chat. Sit here if you don’t mind someone stopping to say hello.” Let’s Beautify This! Kenmore’s “Let’s Beautify This” program, which generated GoFundMe support from community members, is easily replicable. Mobile Talk Show Pittsburgh’s TalkPGH project is a mobile TV station that travels to neighborhoods and invites residents to be guests. Micro-grants Micro-grants for temporary public art interventions around city, like this one in St. Louis Park. This program is also useful for attracting artists to work in your city. 7. Additional Project Ideas for Brooklyn Center (page 1 of 2) 78Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Story Walk A Story Walk can be installed along the City’s trails, with signs holding sequential pages of children’s books spread out 100+ yards apart. If possible, involve local authors and illustrators, and have meet-the-author event at library. Consider multiple languages and business sponsors, as well as partnership with Hennepin County Library. Student Art Exhibitions This idea features a juried High School art competition, with student art displayed at City Hall or the library (or both). Many cities have done similar projects, such as this one in Kenmore, WA . For Brooklyn Center, the exhibit could have theme around what makes a healthy community. In addition to visual art, it could include video, poetry, songwriting, performance, etc. Interactive Chalkboard Murals Candy Chang developed “Before I Die” murals in different languages you can download inexpensively and install in a variety of locations. Intergenerational Dance Hall This is only one of the events developed by Kairos Alive!, a regional nonprofit arts organization. It’s a revival of the dance hall as the community intersection of artistic, physical and social involvement—designed for all ages and abilities, with elders at the center. Featuring live music, these intercultural events promote arts participation, health education and community well-being. Tiny Business Consortium + Incubator Most artists are tiny business owners. Sharon Rowe, author of The Magic of Tiny Business, says, “Those involved in tiny businesses are quietly changing the norm. They are where the magic is happening, where new ideas get a chance to take root and create new markets. They are businesses—only tiny, like how Etsy started.” Charleston Rhizome is an inter-generational, multi-racial, grassroots collective; a local network of artists, business owners and community youth connected by shared values, collaboration, mentoring and apprenticeships and meaningful story sharing. They are working to connect and promote tiny businesses in Charleston and address economic and workforce development in traditionally under resourced communities. Their aim is to contribute to the cultural narrative of their town, challenging the status quo and creating meaningful employment across generations. They are making space for direct collaboration, encouraging the idea of reciprocity as a mode for social change. More Inspiration Visit Forecast Public Art’s website for more examples of projects that may be a good fit for Brooklyn Center. 7. Additional Project Ideas for Brooklyn Center (page 2 of 2) 79Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 8. Prioritization Tool (page 1 of 2) Prioritization Tool: Considering Opportunities and Possibilities for Brooklyn Center Given that fact that most public art and beautification opportunities involve people, time and money, it will be critical for the City and its partners to review, evaluate and prioritize projects that are timely, actionable and worthy of investment. In order to make an informed decision about which projects, strategies or concepts the City should allow or support in some way—or prioritize as “critical” versus “maybe” or “not a good fit” —it’s important to establish a process that is fair and transparent, building on the vision, goals and considerations provided in this Plan. As recommended, the City should establish a Brooklyn Center Arts & Cultural Commission (BCACC) to govern, uphold and guide the implementation of this Plan. Utilizing an agreed- upon set of criteria, an established meeting and review schedule and decision-making process will be critical. This overview is meant to serve as a starting point to achieve this objective. What questions and criteria can be used to prioritize ideas proposed for Brooklyn Center? Criteria will vary somewhat, based on the different types of ideas considered, as well as the context of the moment. For example, a temporary event has different goals and intended outcomes than a new work of permanent public art. Likewise, the reuse of an existing building for a cultural center requires different considerations than those used in planning a new building. And, during the recovery from the global pandemic, CDC safety guidelines are important to take into account. These criteria are also meant to aid in the development of evaluation methodologies pertaining to completed projects and accomplishments. The BCACC, with help from the City Team of staff members, should establish reporting and evaluation procedures and use them to keep the City Council, partners, funders and other key stakeholders updated and informed. An BCAC Program Annual Report should be considered as a format for packaging and sharing such information. As part of any review process in which new ideas are being considered, Forecast recommends the BCACC adopt a simplified, standardized form on which basic information can be provided —to be filled out by whomever is proposing a project or idea. This form would provide space for names of key project personnel, an overview of the concept, a budget (proposed sources and uses of funds), schedule of key steps to be taken, location(s) affected, and a list of goals and objectives. A simple score sheet, with criteria listed, would make it easier to compare and rank projects. Following review, the Commission would discuss top-ranking projects and then further prioritize projects or ideas for possible approval, funding recommendations and subsequent implementation and monitoring requirements. Criteria may include: A.Extent to which project meets perceived needs in the community, aligns with goals in this Plan and is considered appropriate. B.Funds available or likely to be secured for project or activity. C.Amount of City staff time required to assist, and availability of staff during proposed timeline. Consider potential for volunteer or contract help during the time period identified. D.Ability of proposed project manager or outside consultant hired to manage project. E.Extent to which project aligns with the City’s vision, goals and objectives. F.Timing of proposed project. Is it ready to go; a long-term effort; or something to ramp up to? G.Is the project feasible, given existing spaces, infrastructure, equipment and resources? 80Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan H.Extent to which the project aligns with or complements other efforts or is supportive of other priorities. I.Project’s potential impact on intended audiences, including community members. It’s important to consider both the quantity of people impacted and the potential quality of the intended impact(s). J.Extent to which the project places future burdens on budget or staff capacity. K.Extent to which the project involves or impacts existing City partnerships. If the idea is about adding new partner, additional criteria should be developed. L.Extent to which the project is a stand-alone project or intended to coincide with or complement another event/activity. How does this activity/event/project fit with already scheduled programming? Note: During the healing, recovery and rebuilding phase of the Covid-19 pandemic, it is critical to review projects with additional criteria. Likewise, it is important to collect input from Indigenous, Black and People of Color (IBPOC) members of the community to add criteria reflecting their needs, concerns and aspirations for racial justice, equity and community-led community development. 8. Prioritization Tool (page 1 of 2) 81Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan Resources & Links (selected) Public Art, Beautification and Placemaking (organizations, articles, websites) •Project for Public Spaces, and one of their useful essays: What Makes a Successful Place? •Public Art Network, plus numerous resources, such as Best Practices Goals and Guidelines •Forecast Public Art •Springboard for the Arts •Artspace Projects •New England Foundation for the Arts (NEFA) offers services and resources, such as Public Art Learning Grants for New England artists •Policy Link, and one of their many offerings: Cultural Equity Resources Arts Community and Wellbeing Resources and Reports •World Health Organization (WHO) Report on Arts and Public Health •University of Florida Center for Arts and Medicine, plus their White Paper on Arts and Health •Blandin Foundation’s Nine Dimensions of Healthy Community: ! Potential Funding Sources (not comprehensive) •Metropolitan Council: The Livable Communities grants for engagement and public art as part of development and redevelopment projects •Metropolitan Council: The Park Equity Toolkit and grant program •Blue Cross Blue Shield Center for Prevention •The McKnight Foundation •Metropolitan Regional Arts Council (MRAC) •Minnesota State Arts Board (MSAB) •National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) •Associated Bank •The Bush Foundation •Rotary Club of Brooklyn Center •Brooklyn Center Lions Club •Brooklyn Center Business Association •The Knight Foundation •The Kresge Foundation •The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation 9. Resources & Links (page 1 of 1) 82Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 10. Site Analysis Tool (page 1 of 5) Copyright © 2017 Forecast Public Art, St. Paul, Minnesota. All rights reserved. Owned or controlled and licensed by Forecast Public Art. Unauthorized copying, reproduction, republishing, uploading, posting or transmitting or duplicating of material is prohibited. Site Analysis + Specificity In the advent of land art in the 1970’s and large scale public art installations, site specificity has long been defined as works of art or projects that take into account, interface with, or are otherwise informed by the surrounding environment. Like the definition of public art, we like to define “site” in a much broader sense. One way to think about it is: where and how will the artwork be situated? This includes the physical location and limitations of a site, historical meaning, and cultural context to name a few. Where is the site within a city? Where is the artwork sited within a park? Where does the artwork sit in the history of the people who currently inhabit the site in where it’s located? It’s much more than just the geographical or physical location [but that’s still an important part]. Physical Locational Analysis Part 1: Need/Want Your project will probably require some very specific site conditions. There will also be conditions that you would like to have but are not imperative to the success of the project. Consider the following conditions and determine what you need or want for your project. Access to electricity Cover from inclement weather Access to water Flat ground Access to public toilets Garbage/recycling Parking ADA compliance Lighting Wifi/cell service Flat wall Seating High visibility/usage Other? Conditions NEEDED Conditions WANTED 83Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 10. Site Analysis Tool (page 2 of 5) Copyright © 2017 Forecast Public Art, St. Paul, Minnesota. All rights reserved. Owned or controlled and licensed by Forecast Public Art. Unauthorized copying, reproduction, republishing, uploading, posting or transmitting or duplicating of material is prohibited. Part 2: Actual Site Now that you have a list of conditions that you want and need, think about a site that might fulfill some of the items in the “need” category. Go to the site and use the following questions as a guide to determine if the site is conducive to the success of your artwork. Site: Location: Address: Site Owner & Contact: What is in/on the site now? What infrastructure exists in the site? What natural elements are present? What borders the site? What is adjacent to it? What are the site’s boundaries? Who owns the site? Who manages it? 84Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 10. Site Analysis Tool (page 3 of 5) Copyright © 2017 Forecast Public Art, St. Paul, Minnesota. All rights reserved. Owned or controlled and licensed by Forecast Public Art. Unauthorized copying, reproduction, republishing, uploading, posting or transmitting or duplicating of material is prohibited. Are there people using the site? What are they using in for? Would your artwork benefit the people already in the space, or would it hinder their use of the space? Close your eyes. What do you hear? What do you smell? What do you feel? What materials are being used here? Is there sun or shade? Is that important for your project? Where do these conditions exist? Circle the conditions that this site has: Access to electricity Cover from inclement weather Access to water Flat ground Access to nearby public toilets Garbage/recycling Parking ADA compliance Lighting Wifi/Cell service Flat wall Seating Visibility Other? 85Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 10. Site Analysis Tool (page 4 of 5) Copyright © 2017 Forecast Public Art, St. Paul, Minnesota. All rights reserved. Owned or controlled and licensed by Forecast Public Art. Unauthorized copying, reproduction, republishing, uploading, posting or transmitting or duplicating of material is prohibited. Draw + Diagram + Sketch Draw one sketch and one diagram of your observation. A diagram is an abstract drawing that shows movement and relationships in space that is often in plan view. A sketch is a life-like drawing that captures a moment in time and space that is often in perspective view. Drawing is one of the best tools for site analysis! Depending upon the project/your artwork, there are other site factors that may come into play and have an affect on your design: Wind direction Sunlight Microclimate Flood plain Stormwater runoff Look at your list of needs and wants and compare those to the conditions that exist on the site [that you’ve circled above]. Is this site a good match? Why/why not? Part 3: Off Site Locational Research Now that you have a good idea of the physical conditions of the site you are considering, think about the history of the site and the cultural context of the site and your work. Use the following questions as a guide: What used to be on the site? What has happened on the site in the past? Is this a site of meaning for people? If so, assess if your project really fits within that meaning. If it doesn’t, it might be worth considering a new site. What is going to happen on the site in the future? What people care about the site? Are there people invested in the past or the future of the site that you should be talking to? Who lives, works, plays, worships, studies, or visits this place? 86Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 10. Site Analysis Tool (page 5 of 5) Copyright © 2017 Forecast Public Art, St. Paul, Minnesota. All rights reserved. Owned or controlled and licensed by Forecast Public Art. Unauthorized copying, reproduction, republishing, uploading, posting or transmitting or duplicating of material is prohibited. Part 4: Off Site Cultural Contextualization Use the following questions as a guide to determine how and where your project is situated culturally. What issue does your artwork investigating, and where does your work fit within that issue’s arc/narrative? Does it create a new narrative? How are you defining community for this project? What is your connection to that community? If you do not have a connection to that community, why are you the person to do this project? What are the values and attitudes that are influencing your project? How does your artwork reflect these values and attitudes? How does it question them? How does it oppose them? ***Be aware of cultural appropriation. “Cultural appropriation is the adoption of certain elements from another culture without the consent of the people who belong to that culture. …cultural appropriation typically involves members of a dominant group exploiting the culture of less privileged groups. Quite often, this is done along racial and ethnic lines with little understanding of the latter’s history, experience, and traditions.” From Nadra Kareem Nittle’s piece titled Introduction to Cultural Appropriation, found here: https://www.thoughtco.com/cultural-appropriation-and-why-iits-wrong-2834561 References: Cole, Nicki Lisa, Ph.D. "Definition of Cultural Appropriation." ThoughtCo, May. 16, 2017, thoughtco.com/cultural-appropriation-definition-3026068. Nittle, Nadra Kareem. "Introduction to Cultural Appropriation." ThoughtCo, Sep. 13, 2017, thoughtco.com/cultural-appropriation-and-why-iits-wrong-2834561. 87Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 11. Public Art Administrator Overview (page 1 of 5) 88Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 11. Public Art Administrator Overview (page 2 of 5) 89Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 11. Public Art Administrator Overview (page 3 of 5) 90Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 11. Public Art Administrator Overview (page 4 of 5) 91Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 11. Public Art Administrator Overview (page 5 of 5) 92Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 12. Arts Facilitation During Crisis and Uncertainty 93Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan MOBILIZING ARTS AND CULTURAL ASSETS IN RESPONSE TO COVID-19 ADVISORY BRIEF FOR STATE AGENCIES AND LEADERS: Immediate action is needed to stop the spread of COVID-19 and to address the pandemic’s short and long-term economic, health, and social impacts. State arts and cultural resources are among the most powerful and readily available resources for addressing critical problems faced by states, including social isolation among senior citizens, communication with hard to reach populations, meeting the education and developmental needs of children, and crafting plans for safe and equitable recovery and rebuilding. This unprecedented situation requires new and creative responses at the state level. The arts are one of the most powerful means at our disposal today for enabling communication, direct health benefits, and social and economic recovery. This brief is intended for governor’s offices and state agencies including public health, education, mental health, community and economic development, aging, human, social and family services, and disability services. COMMUNICATION Artists are adept at translating information across language, cultures, and sectors.1 They communicate in ways that are emotionally engaging, memorable, and personally and culturally relevant—rendering health information more likely to stimulate behavior changes. Artists and arts organizations provide trusted platforms for urgent messages, and can reach larger and different audiences than health departments and government agencies. Their partnership and assistance in health communication is vital. Examples: In response to Ohio governor Mike DeWine’s request for messages that would engage Ohio youth, Proctor & Gamble hired Tik Tok influencer Charli D’Amelio to create a #DistanceDance that urged young people to #StayHome. It has been viewed over eight billion times. At the national level, the CDC is modeling arts-based health communications with its Watching Hands: Artists Respond to Keeping Well initiative. TAKE ACTION: Á Employ artists to make state public health messaging more memorable and actionable through performances, artworks, and activities delivered online and in socially distanced formats. Á Employ artists to help ensure that COVID -19 information is relevant and available across diverse communities, cultural differences, and social norms. Á If you are not sure how to find artist-partners, engage your state arts agency to make connections. Copyright © University of Florida Center for Arts in Medicine, 2020. 1-2 Citations can be found here. 13. Mobilizing Arts and Cultural Assets in Response to Covid-19 (page 1 of 3) 94Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 13. Mobilizing Arts and Cultural Assets in Response to Covid-19 (page 2 of 3) SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY The COVID-19 crisis presents opportunities for states to recognize and address social determinants of health, and to reimagine and reinvent systems that have left marginalized populations more vulnerable than others to poor health outcomes. Artists are critical agents of this change, as they are adept at imagining possibilities, holding space for difficult conversations, and driving social and cultural transformation.4 In addition, the arts and culture sector represents a significant component of state economies.5 There are clear economic benefits to investing in your state’s creative workforce, and the resulting arts-health partnerships will advance critical objectives for both public health and community revitalization. Examples. The state of Colorado, among others, has appointed arts agency representatives to serve on its task force for recovery and economic redevelopment. The City of Austin harnessed the power of the arts and artists to shape political transformations taking place as a result of newly drawn council districts. TAKE ACTION: Á Include state arts agencies and other cultural sector representatives in governors' task forces designed to drive recovery and address the public health, educational, and economic effects of COVID-19. Á Engage and pay artists to help you think outside the box when imagining and rebuilding systems, infrastructures, and social fabrics. Á Partner with trusted arts organizations and/or hire artists to facilitate recovery discussions and planning sessions with community members. Á Use storytelling and public art works to convey your commitment to issues such as anti-racism, social justice, equity, and inclusion in the recovery process. Á Engage arts experts to develop industry-specific recommendations to guide the safe reopening of cultural venues and community-based arts and cultural activities. Á Advocate for continuity and expansion of funding for the arts in your state. DIRECT HEALTH BENEFITS Arts and cultural assets, which are prevalent in commu- nities across each state, offer immediate opportunities for mitigating the serious mental and physical health consequences associated with physical distancing. For example, artists and arts organizations are reducing loneliness and isolation through programs delivered online and in safe-distance formats. And, research has shown that engaging in the arts—even for short periods of time—reduces stress, enhances coping and emotion - al regulation, and increases wellbeing.2 Examples. Rhode Island Governor Gina Raimondo hired renowned street artist Shepard Fairey to create a new work to bring Rhode Islanders together, and she urged citizens to create and share their own artwork on a new website designed as a platform for well-being and connection. In Kentucky, Governor Andy Beshear has urged Kentuckians to make encouraging sidewalk art and hang art in their windows to cultivate connection. And, at daily press briefings, he featured examples of citizens’ art to highlight compassion and togetherness. Boulder County in Colorado created a new website for engaging people in the arts to improve mental health. TAKE ACTION: Á Educate state and local health professionals about the demonstrable health benefits associated with arts participation, so that these benefits can be integrated into response plans and offerings. Á Collaborate with your state's cultural agencies to ensure that virtual arts offerings are available to populations that need them most, including seniors who are already prone to isolation, communities of color that are being disproportionately impacted by the virus, and children, who require creative outlets and social engagement for healthy development. Á Use the arts in state press activities or social media channels to convey positivity in the face of adversity—and to model safe yet meaningful community engagement practices. Á Collaborate across sectors—including public health, mental health, social services, community development and arts and culture —to generate trauma-informed initiatives that address community needs for connection and wellbeing.3 Copyright © University of Florida Center for Arts in Medicine, 2020. 1-2 Citations can be found here. 95Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan RESOURCES: Á Find examples, collaborators, and resources in the Arts & COVID -19 Resource Repository Á Contact your state arts agency to find arts partners in your state Á Find and cite evidence using the Evidence-based Framework for Using the Arts in Public Health and the recent WHO report on arts in health Á Advise on community action using recommendations and examples in the Call for Collaboration: Mobilizing the Arts for Covid-19 Communication and Coping Á Learn more about how the arts can address collective trauma, mental health, and social isolation in the Creating Healthy Communities through Cross Sector Collaboration White Paper Á Generate arts-based communications using information from the CDC or the Ad Council’s COVID -19 Toolkit 1-5 Citations can be found here. Copyright © University of Florida Center for Arts in Medicine, 2020. “PUTTING ARTISTS TO WORK IN SUPPORT OF THE CHALLENGES YOUR STATE IS FACING NOT ONLY PUTS FORWARD PROACTIVE SOLUTIONS, IT SUPPORTS CREATIVE INDIVIDUALS AND ORGANIZATIONS DURING A TIME OF HISTORIC HARDSHIP. HIRING AND CONTRACTING LOCAL ARTISTS WILL MAKE YOUR STATE CULTURALLY STRONGER AND STRENGTHEN YOUR CREATIVE ECONOMY OVER THE LONG TERM.” — FRANK WOODRUFF, NACEDA 13. Mobilizing Arts and Cultural Assets in Response to Covid-19 (page 3 of 3) 96Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan April 17, 2020 1 COVID-19 Response Resources for the Arts This list of resources is not extensive nor exhaustive, but it is a starting place for resources. Hopefully it will spawn ideas of where to look for support and will lead you to other resource pages, trainings, and experts. UF COVID-19 RESPONSE • Arts + COVID-19 Repository - Open-source resources with real-time projects happening in response to COVID-19. Anyone can add their projects or resources to it as well as search the repository for ideas. Please add what you are doing to it! • Call for Collaboration: Mobilizing the Arts for COVID-19 Communication and Coping - offers examples and resources for using to arts to advance support communication, connection, coping and wellbeing. Invites public health, arts and culture, and community development professionals, programs and agencies to: Engage and pay artists, collaborate, source reliable information, adapt programming, facilitate connection, and think long-term • Arts + Culture in Public Health Evidence-based Framework - Grounded in the Social Ecological model, this framework builds on the Creating Healthy Communities through Cross-Sector Collaboration white paper —which is informed by 250 thought leaders in the public health, arts and culture, and community development sectors. The arts have been shown to influence six broad areas of individual- and population-level health. This framework highlights each of these areas, and identifies outcomes that can be enhanced through arts and cultural approaches, and the mechanisms that mediate or moderat e these outcomes. • Creating Healthy Communities Through Cross-Sector Collaboration White Paper - presents the views of more than 250 thought leaders from the public health, arts and culture, and community development sectors who were convened in working groups in 2018 and 2019. Their voices are joined by over 500 participants in a national field survey and focus groups, and are supported by findings of a scoping review of arts + public health literature. • UF Health Shands Arts in Medicine AIM to Connect – UF Health Shands Arts in Medicine Hospital-based practice adapted for COVID-19 • Call for participation in the COVID-19 Social distancing Study – Be a participant in an international Big Data study that will help researchers understand the health impacts of sheltering in place. All are welcome to participate. • Local Governmental Advisory Brief - call to Public Health Agencies and Organizations about how to mobilize local arts and cultural assets in response to COVID -19. Stay-tuned for a State Governmental Advisory Brief • Join the Creating Health Communities Network on Facebook 14. Covid-19 Response Resources for the Arts (page 1 of 4) 97Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan April 17, 2020 2 ARTS ORGANIZATIONS COVID-19 RESOURCES • Americans for the Arts Resource and Response Center • Center for Performance and Civic Practice (CPCP) – Call to all local officials and those who serve them • Creative Forces: NEA Military Healing Arts Network - initiative of the National Endowment for the Arts in partnership with the U.S. Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs and the state and local arts agencies that seeks to improve the health, wellness, and quality of life for military and veteran populations exposed to trauma, as well as their families and caregivers • National Organization for Arts in Health Resources (NOAH) including member-specific calls to action • National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) CARES Act Funding to Support Arts Jobs and Help Sustain Organizations • Travel and Leisure 100+ Things to do at home right now from virtual tours to animals cams and more • Time Slips Creativity Center – tools to spark meaningful engagement with family members. Note: Timeslips organization is thinking critically about how to deliver low -tech and no-tech arts engagement • TimeSlips Postcard Project – list of adult residential facilities that are requesting postcards for delivery to their residents. • US Department of Arts and Culture Art became the Oxygen: an artistic response guide (USDAC) - A guide for artists, emergency management agencies, funders, policy makers, and communities responding to natural and civic emergencies. CREATIVE ARTS THERAPIES COVID-19 RESOURCES The Creative Arts Therapies COVID-19 resources can be useful for arts in health professionals, public health professionals, and community artists as a place to find collaboration and also consultation. Many creative arts therapists are willing to help arts professionals understand how to use art materials, processes, and activities that will help pro tect participants physical and emotional safety during this time when stress and trauma is elevated. Check out the discipline - specific COVID-19 resources, each of which have provided training related to virtual service - delivery. You might also search their member directory for therapists in your local area. • American Music Therapy Association COVID-19 Resources (AMTA) o Music Therapy & Telehealth Webinar - (talks about some of the technology, space, and assistance considerations with delivering music virtually) • American Dance Therapy COVID-19 Resources (ADTA) o Adapting Dance/Movement Therapy to Telehealth Webinar: (helpful discussion of how to create space for arts facilitation, technical competencies, conversations about virtual/screen fatigue) • American Art Therapy Association COVID-19 Resources (AATA) • National Coalition for Creative Arts Therapies Association (NCCATA) 14. Covid-19 Response Resources for the Arts (page 2 of 4) 98Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan April 17, 2020 3 OTHER RELEVANT RESOURCES • American Psychological Association (APA) COVID-19 Information and Resources – appropriate for psychologists, healthcare workers, and the public • American Red Cross Steps to Help Cope with Evolving Coronavirus Situation • Care for Your Virus Anxiety Website – use this site with caution as it is not a professional association, but it is curating some good resources, articles , and self-care practices about COVID-19. • Center for Disease Control Resources on Stress and Coping during COVID-19 (CDC) • Coalition to End Social Isolation & Loneliness COVID-19 and Social Isolation Resources • HIPAA and Telehealth during COVID-19 • National Alliance for Direct Support Professionals (NADSP)- direct support workforce that partners with, supports and empowers people with disabilities to lead a life of their choosing. Site has helpful videos about self-care, risks for people in helping roles, and how to grief support • The Schwartz Center for Compassionate Healthcare – Resources for healthcare professionals and additional webinars such as: Caring for Yourself & Others During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Managing Healthcare Workers’ Stress • US Small Business Association Coronavirus relief options Children • American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommendations and resources • Child Mind Institute: Talking to Kids About the Coronavirus • The Center for Disease Control (CDC) has some basic recommendations for parents and teachers • HealthyChildren.org (site powered by the Academy of Pediatrics) • National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) has some additional details for parents and teachers Older Adults • American Geriatrics Society Coronavirus Information Hub (AGS)– society of geriatrics healthcare professionals for improving health, independence, and quality of life of older people. • Family Caregiver Alliance COVID-19 Resources and Articles (FCA) – supporting caregivers of adults with physical and cognitive impairments such as Parkinson’s, stroke, Alzheimer’s and other types of dementia Disability Services • Access Living CODVID-19 Resources for the Disability Community – Chicago based headquarters that supports over 400 Centers for Independent Living acros s the US. Core services include: advocacy, independent living skills, transition support, peer support, information and referral • Capacity Building Toolkit for including Aging & Disability Networks in Emergency Planning • Healthcare Access Research and Developmental Disabilities (HCARDD)– Information to support people with developmental disabilities and their families during this time • Florida Mental Health Counselors Association (FMHCA) + Special Olympics Emotional and Mental Wellness Guide for Individuals with Disabilities While Practicing Social Distancing 14. Covid-19 Response Resources for the Arts (page 3 of 4) 99Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan April 17, 2020 4 • NYConnects – Center for Independence of the Disabled spon sored resource for people living with disabilities in the New York area Social Justice • American Bar Association COVID-19 Series (ABA)– Section of Civil Rights and Social Justice multi-part webinar series addressing how COVID -19 highlights critical legal issues of criminal justice, civil rights, human rights, and economic concern. Strategies for advancing law and justice. • Health Justice Strategies to Combat COVID-19 Protecting vulnerable communities during a pandemic – Article by Health Affairs Online Learning & Education • Florida Alliance for Arts Education (FAAE) and the Interactive Academy - initiative to provide arts education classes across Florida • National Center for Faculty Development and Diversity – Article “The Paradox of Productivity in a Pandemic” • Online Learning Consortium Accelerate Conference (OLC)– Creating community and knowledge around quality online, blended, and digital learning while driving innovation. Next conference is in June, fully online • United States Copyright Office – answers to Intellectual Property and Copyright questions with streaming and video 14. Covid-19 Response Resources for the Arts (page 4 of 4) 100Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 15. Sample Public Art Policy (page 1 of 5) City of Hopkins Public Art Policies & Procedures Approved by the Hopkins City Council 4/16/13 PURPOSE AND VALUE OF PUBLIC ART The City of Hopkins recognizes the value that the arts play in a vibrant community and supports public art programs and activities that meet the following objectives:  To provide meaningful aesthetic and cultural experiences for Hopkins residents, business owners and employees, and visitors, adding to the vibrancy of the community  To attract new residents and new visitors, including but not limited to cultural tourists  To showcase and/or collect artwork that demonstrates the creativity and innovation practiced in the arts, stimulates discussion and exchange of ideas, honors the history and heritage of Hopkins, and/or reflects the character and diversity of Hopkins HOPKINS PUBLIC ART COMMITTEE The City of Hopkins’ public art program shall be led by a Committee made up of representatives of the Planning, Public Works and Hopkins Center for the Arts staff, community volunteers, business owners and artists. This Committee shall be responsible for the oversight of all public art programs and projects undertaken by the City of Hopkins including planning, grant writing, communication, acquiring public art, and maintenance of such art works. The Committee shall meet as needed to achieve the goals of the Public Art program as determined by the Hopkins City Council. PURPOSE OF THIS POLICY The objectives of this policy are to:  Provide uniform procedures for the review and acceptance of gifts and loans of works of art for the City of Hopkins  Provide policies and procedures relating to the commissioning of artwork, purchase of artwork from ArtStreet or other instances of the City of Hopkins initiating the acquisition of works of art  Maintain high artistic standards in works of art displayed in public areas of the City of Hopkins  Charge the appropriate staff with the responsibilities to administer public art initiatives  Facilitate planning for the placement, maintenance, and funding of works of art on City property  Define guidelines for the retention and possible deaccession of public art works  Facilitate appropriate recognition of artists and donors of works of art to the City of Hopkins  Direct the use of monetary donations including art dedication payments For purposes of this policy, Public Art is defined as permanent, fixed, temporary or portable artistic expressions. This may include elements integral to a public site or building indoors or outdoors; landscape elements designed as part of an architectural design; objects and amenities used in a public site that are designed by a professional artist such as but not limited to benches, lighting, tree surrounds, railings, architectural ornament, etc.; or original works of fine art by artists not associated with any building project. Examples of the latter include: sculpture (free-standing, wall-supported, suspended, kinetic, electronic, mechanical, etc.); murals; paintings; collage; earthworks; neon; glass; fiber; mosaics; clay; wood; photographs; prints; literary arts; calligraphy; film; holographic images; video; computer projections; drawings; or any hybrids/mixed media. Civic undertakings such as 101Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 15. Sample Public Art Policy (page 2 of 5) historical markers, memorials and monuments may fall under these guidelines if created by a professional artist. Time-based artworks such as musical performances, theater, dance created by a professional artist or team may also fall under these guidelines. For purpose of these guidelines, the following shall be excluded from the definition of Work of Art: mass produced objects, fountains, playground constructions, landscape elements and park amenities that are of standard design and not designed by a professional artist. Also excluded from this policy are directional or functional elements such as signage, maps and graphics that are not designed by professional artists. ACQUISITION OF ART WORK The City of Hopkins may acquire artwork through its own initiatives (ArtStreet, commissioning of work, etc.) or through the donation of artwork. Artwork purchased by the City of Hopkins should demonstrate community support including but not limited to being the result of a People’s Choice of Children’s Choice Award for Hopkins ArtStreet, or commissioned artwork resulting from community input. The following three sections detail the procedures and policies for the donation of artwork. DONATED ARTWORK, SECTION 1: PROCEDURES FOR MAKING A DONATION Any person, group of people or organization may request the City to accept a donation of artwork. A Donor’s Guidelines for Works of Art and sample application form are attached and must be given to anyone interested in donating artwork to the City. Donations of art work most likely will be for works of art expected to last several years if not into perpetuity. DONATED ARTWORK, SECTION 2: ACCEPTANCE PROCESS The purpose of this process is to ensure an equitable system for accepting or rejecting proposed donations of artwork, to ensure that a high level of artistry is consistently achieved, and to work with donors and artists to ensure that artwork meets maintenance standards and is placed appropriately. The process is: 1. A designated staff representative of the City meets with the potential donor to discuss the gift and review the Donor’s Guidelines for Works of Art. Donor then completes the application form. 2. The application is referred to the Public Art Advisory Committee for review. This group may choose to meet with the donor to clarify any issues. It may also meet with business owners, neighborhood associations, or other interested parties as potential sites are considered. The Committee then makes a recommendation to the City Council as to whether or not they feel the application should be accepted. This recommendation should include site placement and maintenance plan as well as information on the work of art. 3. The City Council may accept the gift, deny the gift, or ask the Committee for further review. If an art work is accepted, the City Council makes a resolution to accept the donation. If the donor holds a title to the work, that title should be conveyed to the City of Hopkins. If such a title does not exist, the donor should provide a signed letter clearly stating the work of art is in their ownership and is being given to the City in perpetuity and that the donor relinquishes all control over the art work. 4. The Committee and designated staff schedule the installation of the artwork, ensure the donor is recognized for the gift at the installation site, and sends a letter of thanks to the donor on behalf of the City of Hopkins. The Committee is responsible for executing the maintenance plan 102Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 15. Sample Public Art Policy (page 3 of 5) for the artwork and, if it should arise, determining if an artwork should be moved, repaired or deaccessioned. DONATED ARTWORK, SECTION 3: SELECTION CRITERIA The assessment of art work can be a rather subjective endeavor. The Committee should adhere to the following basic criteria to make the process as fair as possible and to ensure a quality public art program:  High aesthetic level (evidence of the artist’s mastery of the medium; impact on the viewer; contributes to a diverse and high quality collection of artwork)  Appropriateness to the site (size, theme, historical or cultural significance, etc.)  Impact, positive or negative, on property use and on adjacent property owners  Practical maintenance burden (time, materials, cost)  Safety to passersby, children, the disabled and the environment (including but not limited to projections, materials, noise, light and odor)  Undue susceptibility to vandalism or theft  In no instance should the work depict subjects that are trademarked or commercially licensed  The donor has clear title/ownership of the work being donated POLICY REGARDING THE COMMISSIONING OR PURCHASING OF ART WORK BY THE CITY OF HOPKINS The most common way in which the City of Hopkins purchases an art work is through the project, ArtStreet. Each year, the Committee has the option, but not the obligation, of purchasing one or more pieces of art from the current round. The Committee will decide if any pieces in the current round are deemed appropriate for purchase. Results of the People’s Choice and Children’s Choice voting shall be an important factor in making this determination. The basic criteria listed above shall also be employed. The pricing of the artwork in relationship to the purchase fund is another key factor. If the Committee decides to purchase a piece, a Hopkins staff person will handle the transaction. In some cases, a third party may contribute to the purchase and will be recognized at the site of installation and sent an acknowledgement. There may be an instance when the City of Hopkins wishes to commission an artwork for a specific site or purpose. In most such cases, a request for proposal will be disseminated to public artists. These will be reviewed by the Committee and staff and a recommendation made to the City Council. POLICY REGARDING THE IDENTIFICATION OF ART WORK Unless a donor asks to remain anonymous, individuals or groups will be recognized for their donation of public art through a small plaque near the donated work. Likewise, unless he/she prefers to be anonymous, in all cases the artist of the work will be recognized on the plaque along with the year in which the artwork was completed and the medium. All design and text of this plaque must be approved by the Hopkins Public Art Committee. If an artwork is for sale, such as through the ArtStreet initiative, this will be communicated through a brochure, the City’s website and through QR codes on the piece if available. 103Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 15. Sample Public Art Policy (page 4 of 5) POLICY REGARDING INSTALLATION and MAINTENANCE OF ART WORK The City of Hopkins is responsible for installing and maintaining all pedestals, concrete pads and securing mechanisms to be used for public art. The installation of actual art work shall be arranged on a case-by-case basis but in general will be handled as follows. Any exceptions must be reviewed and approved by the Hopkins Public Art Committee. In the case where public art work is coming directly from an artist, that artist is responsible for overseeing the installation of the work by the City of Hopkins and holds all liability for loss or damage during transport and installation of the work. In the case of a short-term loan by an artist (ex. ArtStreet), the artist is responsible for any repairs or maintenance required during the term of the loan. In addition, the artist is responsible for delivering the artwork properly prepared for installation per project guidelines or agreement (ex. steel mounting plate secured to artwork). When public art is coming from a third-party donor, the donor is responsible for transport of the artwork to its installation site and assumes all liability for loss or damage during transport. The City of Hopkins is responsible for installation of the artwork and maintenance thereafter. Art work that does not conform to the specifications detailed in the program or project guidelines will not be installed unless otherwise approved by the Hopkins Public Works Department representative. At the discretion of the Hopkins Public Art Committee, plans for installations of art may be sent to the City’s Inspection Department for review for safety and security. (ex. a very tall artwork) The Public Art Committee is responsible for establishing a maintenance plan and schedule for all public art in Hopkins and seeing that proper maintenance and repairs are carried out. The City of Hopkins will maintain insurance on public art other than short-term loans or temporary works. It may arise that very costly works may require an insurance rider. This will be determined by the Director of Finance of the City of Hopkins. All public art that is to be owned by the City of Hopkins will be installed on public property. Temporary installations, such as through ArtStreet, may occur on private property if agreed to in writing by the owner of the property on which the art is installed. Public Art Maintenance Fund and Art Dedication Payments Ten percent of commissions collected from the sale of Hopkins ArtStreet art work will be deposited in a Public Art maintenance fund. An Art Dedication Fee is not a requirement associated with any City approval for a development project but shall be accepted as a donation to the City’s Public Art Program. It is the responsibility of the donor to provide direction as to how the proceeds are to be used in accordance with all City policies. It there is not a public art project associated with the development for which the fee was donated, that fee will be applied to the Public Art Maintenance Fund, unless otherwise directed by the City Council. POLICY REGARDING RETENTION, RELOCATION AND DEACCESSION OF ART WORK All art work has a life span. The City of Hopkins is cognizant that a policy must be in place to deal with art work reaching the end of its life span or in which art work has become irrelevant or no longer useful in 104Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 15. Sample Public Art Policy (page 5 of 5) serving the public art goals of the City. The City of Hopkins retains the right to relocate or permanently remove an artwork from public display for any reason, at the sole discretion of the City. The City may do so for reasons such as increased hazard to public health and safety, unsightly or deteriorated conditions of the artwork, the need to access and maintain public facilities, in the interest of improving the quality of the collection, etc. In general, if such conditions do not apply art work will be retained in the public art collection so long as:  The artwork continues to be relevant and useful for the purposes and activities of the City, is not redundant or a duplicate that no longer has value as part of the collection as a whole  An appropriate site for public display is available  A public safety problem is not created by the project and no adverse environmental effects are created  The authenticity, attribution or genuineness of the work is not determined to be false or fraudulent  Its condition remains good and represents no more than natural and proper aging of the work  Artwork withstands exposure to the natural elements and/or public use  Artwork can be properly and cost-effectively stored, maintained, preserved and/or used  The item is located in an area when jurisdiction will not be transferred to another entity or made inaccessible to the public If an artwork is going to be deaccessioned, the artist shall be contacted and have the option of reacquiring title and possession of the artwork upon permanent removal by the City. Donated items will be deaccessioned only at the direction of the City Council, which shall consider the recommendations of the Hopkins Public Art Committee, City staff and public comment. The City will contact the donor and artist (if known) and will determine the method and manner of the deaccessioning with preference given to returning the artwork to the donor. Deaccessioned items may be disposed of by means of public sale; private sale; exchange for another work; gifting to a tax-exempt public institution; recycling or destruction. Destruction may be considered the viable alternative where the physical condition of the work is severely deteriorated or will be irreparably damaged by deinstallation. 105Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 16. Sample Percent for Art Policy (page 1 of 3) 1 ESTABLISHING A PERCENT FOR ART PROGRAM Percent for Art ProgramA policy resolution establishing a Percent for Art program. WHEREAS, the placement of public art throughout Columbia will significantly enhance the public environment of the City; and WHEREAS, art placed in public places will further enhance the civic pride of the people of Columbia; and WHEREAS, the placement of public art throughout the City will promote economic development in Columbia; and WHEREAS, public art will improve and expand the value and use of public buildings and facilities; and WHEREAS, public art will enrich the lives of Columbians with new opportunities to experience art, thereby enhancing the public welfare; and WHEREAS, the City Council by Policy Resolution PR 70-97 created a Percent for Art Program in order to commission art for placement throughout the City in public places for the beautification, enhancement and benefit of the City; and WHEREAS, the experience gained with the program over the past several years suggests the program and its administration could be improved. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA, MISSOURI, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Policy Resolution PR 70-97 is hereby repealed and replaced with this resolution. Section 2. Where fiscally appropriate and legally permissible, the City shall set aside one percent (1%) of the cost of all above ground capital improvement projects which exceed $1,000,000 (including costs for architects and engineers but excluding land costs) to fund the creation and placement of public art according to the guidelines set out in this resolution. Section 3. For purposes of this resolution, “capital improvement projects” mean the following: a. construction of buildings and structures such as City offices, administration buildings, fire and police stations, airport terminals, recreation centers. b. construction or expansion of utilities such as power plants, electric substations, water plants, water towers and above ground reservoirs, waste water treatment plants, bus stations, parking structures and lots. c. construction or renovations to maintenance facilities for public works and utilities, recycling centers and transfer stations. 106Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 16. Sample Percent for Art Policy (page 2 of 3) 2 d. construction, renovations or expansions to parks, playgrounds, swimming pools, trails and playing fields. e. capital improvement projects shall not include: wells, above ground pump stations and lift stations, streets, roads or bridges, lakes, wetland cells, storm water detention facilities or radio towers. Section 4. For purposes of this resolution, “public art” includes permanent or portable pieces located on public property, arts integrated into the design of a public facility and garden landscaping. Section 5. Where feasible, amounts set aside for public art in connection with a capital improvement project shall be spent on public art which enhances the project and funds set aside for public art from a utility shall be spent on art which enhances the utility. No more than three public art projects shall be initiated during any one fiscal year. Each fiscal year an adequate amount shall be budgeted for the maintenance of existing public art. Section 6. There is hereby established a Commission on Cultural Affairs Standing Committee on Public Art. The Committee shall consist of two members of the Commission on Cultural Affairs chosen by that Commission, one of whom shall serve as chair; and two artists and one member of the business community appointed by the City Council. Current members of the Standing Committee on Public Art shall continue serving on the Committee until June 30, 2002. Thereafter, members shall serve three years staggered terms. In order to establish staggered terms, the Commission on Cultural Affairs shall appoint to the Standing Committee on Public Art one of its members to serve a three year term and another of its members to serve a one year term beginning on July 1, 2002. The City Council shall appoint to the Standing Committee on Public Art for terms beginning on July 1, 2002, one member to serve a three year term, one member to serve a two year term and one member to serve a one year term. After initial appointments, all members shall be appointed for three year terms, except that appointments to fill vacancies shall be for unexpired terms only. Members shall serve until their replacements are appointed. In addition to the regular members of the Standing Committee, up to three temporary additional members may be appointed for any specific public art project to serve until the public art work has been accepted by the City. The Commission may appoint two of the additional members; one shall be a representative of the neighborhood for the proposed site and the other shall be an appropriate artist/expert. At the request of the Commission, the City Manager may appoint as one of the additional members a representative of the appropriate City department. The Committee shall receive City staff assistance as directed by the City Manager. Section 7. The City Manager and staff shall use the following process when recommending Percent for the Arts Projects: a. The City Manager shall indicate on the Capital Improvements Plan submitted in the proposed annual budget those projects which meet the general criteria for Percent for Art. b. The Capital Improvements Plan shall be forwarded to the Cultural Affairs 107Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 16. Sample Percent for Art Policy (page 3 of 3) 3 Commission and Standing Committee on Public Art for their recommendations and priorities, which shall be forwarded to the City Council. c. The City Council, by resolution, shall determine which CIP projects shall have a Percent for Art component and will authorize City staff to begin developing the public art component. Section 8. The final decision as to the type of art, location of the art, the work of art to be commissioned and the cost of the art shall rest solely with the City Council. Policy resolution PR 47-02A adopted March 4, 2002. 108Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 17. Why Public Art Matters (page 1 of 8) WHY PUBLIC ART MATTERS 2018 109Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 17. Why Public Art Matters (page 2 of 8)A rt in public spaces plays a distinguishing role in our country’s history and culture. It reflects and reveals our society, enhances meaning in our civic spaces, and adds uniqueness to our communi- ties. Public art humanizes the built environment. It provides an intersection between past, present, and future between disciplines and ideas. Public art matters because our communities gain cultural, social, and economic value through public art. In this document we will explore how public art impacts five community values: Economic Growth and Sustain- ability, Attachment and Cultural Identity, Artists as Contributors, Social Cohesion and Cultural Understanding, and Public Health and Belonging. Each section includes a summary, reasoning statement, supporting data, and examples. This document is designed as a tool for those making the case for public art in their community. We encourage the distribution of this document and the information provided to anyone interested in this topic or in need of an educational tool. “Why Public Art Matters (2018)” reflects on the previous green paper of the same title released in the late 2000’s. The current document was developed in collaboration with the 2018 Public Art Network Advisory Council who Americans for the Arts thanks for their dedication to strengthening the public art field. “Magic Carpet” by Candy Coated. Association for Public Art, Philadelphia, PA. Photo credit: Constance Mensh FRONT & BACK COVER: “Firmament” by Christopher Schardt. Discovery Green Conservancy, Houston, TX. Photo credit: Kayla Horner 110Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 17. Why Public Art Matters (page 3 of 8) DATA: 70 percent of Americans believe that the “arts improve the image and identity” of their community.* Half of people with college degrees (49 percent) and a majority of Millennials (52 percent) and Generation Xs (54 percent) say they would strongly consider whether a community is rich in the arts when deciding where to locate for a job.** Arts, culture, and creativity can improve a community’s competitive edge, attract new and visiting populations, and integrate the visions of both community and business leaders. REASONING: Enhancing the identity and character of communities through public art directly supports cultural tourism and economic development strategies, which can both retain and attract residents. In addition, incorporating public art into private development can be a way for buildings to stand out as developers and managers look for renters—whether businesses or residents. The attention public art can bring to a development project can be calculated. A healthy public art ecosystem also drives the growth of new businesses. EXAMPLES: n Reston Town Center in Reston, Virginia has a less than one-half of one percent (0.5 percent) office vacancy rate in a region where the average office vacancy is 16-18 percent. Real estate broker Joe Ritchey attributes the low vacancy rate in part to the permanent and temporary public arts located in the Center. (Public Art Spurs Economic Development). n Indianapolis, Indiana has seen the growth of two new manufacturing businesses that have either branched out or sprung up anew to handle the demand for the fabrication of public art and employing people in the process. n The Farm/Art DTour in Sauk County, Wisconsin generated tourism in the area with an esti- mated 4,200 visitors—over 65% of whom traveled over 50 miles to see the installations which helped to increase the revenue of many local businesses; some of whom saw reve- nue increases as much as 300%. n In Nashville, projects over $150,000 are estimated to distribute two-thirds to three-quarters of the budget back into the local economy via fabricators, installers, art handlers, electri- cians, landscape architects, concrete companies, and other locally-based businesses. n Public art projects have boosted cultural tourism, including an influx estimate of $1 bil- lion from Christo’s and Jeanne-Claude’s the “Gates” in New York’s Central Park and the Bay Area Lights on the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge—with an informal economic impact assessment conservatively estimated at $97 million dollars added to the local economy. ECONOMIC GROWTH AND SUSTAINABILITY By engaging in public art as a tool for growth and sustainability, communities can thrive economically. *Americans Speak Out About the Arts, 2018 **Americans Speak Out About the Arts, 2016 Karl Unnasch’s sculpture “Ruminant (The Grand Masticator).” Installed in Reedsburg, WI as part of the Farm/Art DTour public art roadside tour, 2015. Photo credit: Aaron Dysart. 111Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 17. Why Public Art Matters (page 4 of 8) REASONING: When people see themselves reflected in their civic spaces they have a sense of attachment that allows them to feel ownership and respect. Attachment to a location, whether it be a neighbor- hood, town, or city is key to retention of residents and commut- ers alike. Public art makes places unique through the reflection of local history and culture which gives communities a sense of place and identity. EXAMPLES: n In San Antonio, Texas “Ballroom Luminoso” transformed a highway underpass into a community-friendly space that helped unify and strengthen the identity of the nearby neighborhoods. n In “Charting Pogues Run,” by Sean Derry, a temporary project in Indianapolis mapped the invisible path of a local water system and indicated how the development of the city continues to change over time. n In York, Alabama “Open House” by Matthew Mazzota addressed the lack of public gathering spaces by providing a physical location as common ground for community dialogue and activities. Aesthetics is one of the top three characteristics of why residents attach themselves to a community. 70 percent of Americans say they experience the arts in a “non-arts” venue such as a park, hospital, shopping mall, or airport.* 70 percent of Americans believe that the “arts improve the image and identity” of their community. * DATA: *Americans Speak Out About the Arts, 2018 ATTACHMENT AND CULTURAL IDENTITY Public art directly influences how people see and connect with a place, providing access to aesthetics that support its identity and making residents feel appreciated and valued. Public art encourages attachment to a location for residents through cultural and historical understanding, and by highlighting what is unique about the places where people live, work, and play. Matthew Mazzotta’s “Open House” was created in collaboration with the people of York, AL and the Coleman Center for the Arts, 2011. Photo credits: Matthew Mazzotta, Shana Berger, and Nathan Purath. “Ballroom Luminoso” by Joe O’Connell and Blessing Hancock in San Antonio, TX. Commissioned by Public Art San Antonio, 2013. Photo credit: Fred Gonzales. 112Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 17. Why Public Art Matters (page 5 of 8) DATA: 100% of public art is made by artists and other creatives. ARTISTS AS CONTRIBUTORS Providing a public art ecosystem supports artists and other creatives by validating them as important contributors to the community. REASONING: A public art ecosystem resonates with artists and other creatives as a visual reminder that they are embraced by a community. Artists bring innovation and problem-solving wherever they go, which strengthens America’s competitiveness in the global mar- ketplace, and plays an important role in building and sustaining a vibrant economy. Artists provide valuable contributions when they are included in the planning of public spaces and ameni- ties with planners, engineers, designers, elected officials, and community stakeholders. Artists bring their creative skills and interpretations to each idea, site, social construct, and aesthet- ic potential. These conversations generate creativity in others inspiring an inventive result. Artists become civic leaders advo- cating through art for alternative perspectives that can challenge assumptions, beliefs, and community values. EXAMPLES: n When Indianapolis developed their 2017 Riverside Park Master Plan, an artist’s contributions to the planning team worked out so well that the parks and recreations department hired another artist to be on the planning team for the Broad Ripple Park Master Plan in 2018. n In Madison, Wisconsin The Blubber @ Madison Public Library provides the community with access to artists and art in the forms of programming, exhibitions, and more—this provides a space for learning and reflection. For example, their teen pro- grams develop art and aim to provide “relationship building, basic skill development, and connection to the community.” n “Everyday Poems for City Sidewalk” re-imagines Saint Paul’s annual sidewalk maintenance program as an ongoing pub- lishing entity for a city-sized book of poetry. Created by one artist, it allows for the self-expression of many local artists as it addresses beautification of infrastructure. n In Boston’s Artist-in-Residence (AIR) program, artists, commu- nity members, and city employees work on projects that help reframe social conversations. These artists explore the ways they can use art and media to improve and bolster city initia- tives. They also search for ways to make artistic social practice a part of government and community work. Artist LaShawnda Crowe Storm as part of the planning team for the Riverside Park Master Plan in Indianapolis, IN. Photo credit: Ratio Architects. 113Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 17. Why Public Art Matters (page 6 of 8) SOCIAL COHESION AND CULTURAL UNDERSTANDING Public art provides a visual mechanism for understanding other cultures and perspectives, reinforcing social connectivity with others. REASONING: Public art supports communities by providing social cohesion and encouraging civic engagement. Public art activates the imagination through visual art and storytelling to emphasize the shared humanity of civic spaces—allowing the individual to better understand strang- ers and neighbors alike. Public art aids communities in visualizing different perspectives through civic icons and infrastructure projects such as train stations, traffic circles, hospitals, water treatment facili- ties, and airports. By reinforcing the culture of a community, public art acts as a catalyst for unity and social engagement. EXAMPLES: n In Philadelphia, artists Shira Walinsky and Laura Deutch utilized the 47 bus as a mobile gallery to showcase places that are important to members of diverse communities who live and work along the route. Quotations revealed what interviewees love and value about the city. n In New York City, the project “Key to the City” provided everyday citizens a key to unlock 20 public art sites across the city’s five boroughs. Participants could access ceme- teries, community gardens, and police stations while initi- ating conversations about belonging. n Located in a rapidly gentrifying neighborhood in Seattle’s Central Area Union, serves as a gateway marker to a his- torically African-American community whom are becom- ing increasingly displaced. The artwork was designed at the request of community members who expressed an interest in both landmark and gathering areas. 72 percent of Americans believe “the arts unify our communities regardless of age, race, and ethnicity. * 69 percent of the population believe the arts “lift me up beyond everyday experiences.”* 73 percent of Americans agree that the arts “helps me understand other cultures better.”* DATA: *Americans Speak Out About the Arts, 2018 LEFT: “47 Stories” by Shira Walinsky and Laura Deutch in Philadelphia, PA. Commissioned by Mural Arts Philadelphia in collaboration with Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, 2017. Photo credit: Steve Weinik. RIGHT: “Union” by Martha Jackson Jarvis in Seattle, WA. Administered by the Seattle Office of Arts & Culture and Commissioned with Seattle Department of Transportation 1% for Art Funds, 2016. Photo credit: Spike Mafford. 114Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 17. Why Public Art Matters (page 7 of 8) DATA: Public art can function as a powerful catalyst for improved mental and physical health. Public art has been shown to have clear public health impacts including decreased stress, eliciting awe, developing shared identity, reinforcing self-efficacy, and promoting positive health behaviors. Art located in hospitals offer major opportunities in the delivery of better health and improved experiences for patients, service users, and staff alike. Public art is also noted as slowing pedestrians down to enjoy their space and providing a positive impact on mood. PUBLIC HEALTH AND BELONGING Public art addresses public health and personal illness by reducing stress, providing a sense of belonging, and addressing stigmas towards those with mental health issues. REASONING: Strong social cohesion creates a positive environment, which in turn supports both physical health and mental well-being of the community. By both engaging in public artwork development and facing artwork in the environment, individuals become aware of others and their role in their com- munity. Public artworks can address negative stigma issues towards another culture or group by providing another perspective when considering peoples of different backgrounds. Additionally, located in healing spaces such as hospitals, public art improves healthcare and the healing process by providing an aesthetically interesting place for providers to work in and for patients to heal. EXAMPLES: n Mural Arts Philadelphia researched the impact of public art on mental health with their Porch Light project where they found “a promising and sustained relative decrease in stigma toward individuals with mental illness, and a relative decrease in stress.” n Mikyoung Kim’s Ripple Garden at Miami Jackson Hospital in Miami, Florida was designed as an opportunity for fresh air, light exercise, therapeutic gardening, and offering covered seating to accommodate patients whose medications are adversely affected by sunlight. n San Francisco Hospitals have a plethora of exterior and interior works of public art which provide several benefits from creating healthy environments to connecting with the community in which the hospital is situated. LEFT: “Ethereal Bodies 8” by Cliff Garten at the Zuckerberg General Hospital and Trauma Center in San Francisco, CA. 2016. Commissioned by San Francisco Arts Commission, 2016. Photo credit: Jeremy Green. RIGHT TOP AND BOTTOM: “Ripple Garden” by Mikyoung Kim at the South Community Hospital in Miami, FL. Commissioned by Miami Dade County Art in Public Places, 2011. Photo credit: Robin Hill. 115Brooklyn Center Beautification & Public Art Plan 17. Why Public Art Matters (page 8 of 8) DATA: Public art can function as a powerful catalyst for improved mental and physical health. Public art has been shown to have clear public health impacts including decreased stress, eliciting awe, developing shared identity, reinforcing self-efficacy, and promoting positive health behaviors. Art located in hospitals offer major opportunities in the delivery of better health and improved experiences for patients, service users, and staff alike. Public art is also noted as slowing pedestrians down to enjoy their space and providing a positive impact on mood. PUBLIC HEALTH AND BELONGING Public art addresses public health and personal illness by reducing stress, providing a sense of belonging, and addressing stigmas towards those with mental health issues. REASONING: Strong social cohesion creates a positive environment, which in turn supports both physical health and mental well-being of the community. By both engaging in public artwork development and facing artwork in the environment, individuals become aware of others and their role in their com- munity. Public artworks can address negative stigma issues towards another culture or group by providing another perspective when considering peoples of different backgrounds. Additionally, located in healing spaces such as hospitals, public art improves healthcare and the healing process by providing an aesthetically interesting place for providers to work in and for patients to heal. EXAMPLES: n Mural Arts Philadelphia researched the impact of public art on mental health with their Porch Light project where they found “a promising and sustained relative decrease in stigma toward individuals with mental illness, and a relative decrease in stress.” n Mikyoung Kim’s Ripple Garden at Miami Jackson Hospital in Miami, Florida was designed as an opportunity for fresh air, light exercise, therapeutic gardening, and offering covered seating to accommodate patients whose medications are adversely affected by sunlight. n San Francisco Hospitals have a plethora of exterior and interior works of public art which provide several benefits from creating healthy environments to connecting with the community in which the hospital is situated. LEFT: “Ethereal Bodies 8” by Cliff Garten at the Zuckerberg General Hospital and Trauma Center in San Francisco, CA. 2016. Commissioned by San Francisco Arts Commission, 2016. Photo credit: Jeremy Green. RIGHT TOP AND BOTTOM: “Ripple Garden” by Mikyoung Kim at the South Community Hospital in Miami, FL. Commissioned by Miami Dade County Art in Public Places, 2011. Photo credit: Robin Hill. 1000 Vermont Avenue NW 6th Floor Washington, DC 20005 T 202.371.2830 One East 53rd St. 2nd Floor New York, NY 10022 T 212.223.2787 AmericansForTheArts.org MEMOR ANDUM - C OUNCIL WOR K SESSION DAT E:8/10/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, C ity Manager T HR O UG H:N/A BY:C urt Boganey, C ity Manager S UBJ EC T:C AR ES AC T F unding Appropriations Recommendation: - S taff recommends the C ouncil hear the proposed plan of C AR E S AC T funding usage and direct staff as to the execution of the proposed plan or an amended C ouncil proposal. Background: In June 2020, the US C ongres s establis hed funding under s ection 601(a) of the S ocial S ecurity Act known as the C oronavirus Aid, R elief, and Economic S ecurity Act ("C AR ES Ac t"). T he C AR ES Ac t es tablished the C oronavirus R elief F und (the "F und") and appropriated $150 billion to the F und. Under the C AR ES Ac t, funding payments were to be us ed for s pecified uses to S tates and c ertain loc al governments; the Dis tric t of C olumbia and U.S . Territories (c onsisting of the C ommonwealth of P uerto R ico, the United S tates Virgin Is lands, G uam, American S amoa, and the C ommonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands ); and Tribal governments . T he C AR ES Ac t provides that payments from the F und may only be us ed to c over costs that: 1. Are necessary expenditures inc urred due to the public health emergency with respec t to the C oronavirus Disease 2019 (C O VI D–19); 2. Were not acc ounted for in the budget mos t recently approved as of March 27, 2020 (the date of enactment of the C AR ES Ac t) for the S tate or government; and 3. Were incurred during the period that begins on Marc h 1, 2020, and ends on Dec ember 30, 2020. T he C ity of Brooklyn C enter rec eived funding from the C AR ES AC T in the amount totaling $2,433,415. Much of the funding was anticipated to reimburs e the C ity for expenditures that had been incurred during the Minnesota S tate of Emergenc y Declaration caus ed by the C O VI D-19 P andemic. In ac cordance with the guidelines of the C AR ES AC T funding staff has developed a propos ed disburs ement of the funds based on eligibility criteria and c ommunity need. We have foc used our review based generally on the following: C ity eligible c os ts already s pent or inc urred. Additional c ity c os t that advance anticipated C O VI D needs C os ts that addres s R esident Economic S tability and the reduction of racial dis parities. C ollaboration with c ommunity partners to addres s resident economic s tability, and the reduction of rac ial dis parities. All funds must be expended by November 15, 2020. Any balanc e remaining that the C ity has not expended by C AR ES AC T regulations s hall be dispersed to a medic al fac ility(s ) within the C ounty at the C ity's disc retion. C urrently, the US C ongress is c onsidering extending the deadline for expending C AR ES AC T funding; however, the November 15 date continues to be the regulated deadline. S taff is seeking c onsens us of the C ouncil to expended C AR ES AC T funding in ac cordance with federal guidelines and the proposed dis bursement plan, unless modified by the C ouncil. A copy of the draft plan will be provided at the meeting. Policy Issues: Is there a cons ensus of the C ounc il to expend C AR ES AC T funding in acc ordanc e with federal guidelines and the proposed dis bursement plan or if modified by the C ouncil, the adjusted plan? S trategic Priorities and Values: Enhanc ed C ommunity Image, R es ident Ec onomic S tability, Inc lusive C ommunity Engagement, S afe, S ec ure, S table C ommunity, C us tomer Intimac y, O perational Exc ellenc e MEMOR ANDUM - C OUNCIL WOR K SESSION DAT E:8/10/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, C ity Manager T HR O UG H:N/A BY:C urt Boganey, C ity Manager S UBJ EC T:P ending Items Recommendation: C ity-wide S ewer Ac cess C harge P olic y - 8/24 C ouncil P olicy for C ity C harter requirement of Mayor's s ignature on all c ontracts - 8/24 Tobac co R egulations - 8/24 Highway 252/694 Update - 8/24 S trategic P lans for years 2018-2020 and 2021-2023 C ouncil's R etreat F ollow up NO AH P res ervation P rogram R eview S pec ial As s es s ment P olic y Earle Brown name Vehic le Tow P olicy C itizen's R eview C ommittee O rganic R ec yc ling Background: