Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021 09-13 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 via telephone Dial: 1-312-626- 6799 Meeting I D: 889 0322 0240# P asscode: 072855# S eptember 13, 2021 AGE NDA 1.City Council Discussion of Agenda Items and Questions - 6 p.m. 2.M iscellaneous a.Special Worksession S eptember 27 3.Discussion of Work S ession Agenda Item as T ime P ermits 4.Adjourn C ouncil Study Session DAT E:9/13/2021 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:D r. Reggie Edwards, City Manager T H R O U G H :N/A BY:D r. Reginald Edw ards , C ity M anager S U B J E C T:S pecial Works ession S eptember 27 B ackground: We w ould like to schedule a s pecial w ork s ession for Monday, S eptember 27 at 5 pm for discussion on pursuing s ales tax legisla5on for funding community center improvements and w ater park. S trategic Priories and Values: Enhanced Community I mage, Targeted Redevelopment, O pera5onal Excellence 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 via telephone Dial: 1-312-626- 6799 Meeting I D: 889 0322 0240# P asscode: 072855# S eptember 13, 2021 AGE NDA 1.Informal Open Forum with City Council - 6:45 p.m. Provides an opportunity for the public to address the C ounc 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 attacks, to air personality grievances, to make political endorsements, or for political campaign purposes. Council Members will not enter into a dialogue with presenter. Questions from the C ounc il will be for c larific 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 c all on those who notified the Clerk that they would like to speak during open forum, and then I will ask if any one else c onnected to this meeting would like to speak. W hen I do, please indicate y our name and then proc eed when I call on you. Please be sure to state your name and address before speaking. 2.Invocation - Ryan - 7 p.m. 3.Call to Order Regular Business M eeting This meeting is being conduc ted electronic ally under Minnesota Statutes, section 13D .021 due to the pandemic. For those who are connec ted to this meeting, please keep your microphone muted. I f there is an opportunity for public c omment, y ou may unmute and speak when called upon. Please do not talk over others and any one being disruptive may to ejec ted from the meeting. The packet for this meeting is on the City's website, whic h is linked on the calendar or can be found on "City Council" page. 4.Roll Call 5.P ledge of Allegiance 6.Approval of Agenda and Consent 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 Councilmember so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the c onsent agenda and considered at the end of Council Consideration I tems. a.Approval of Minutes - Motion to approve the following minutes: 8.16.21-Jt City Council & Financial Commission Meeting 8.16.21-Special City Council Meeting 8.23.21-Work Session Meeting 8.23.21-Study Session Meeting 8.23.21-Regular Session Meeting 9.1.21 - Jt City Council & Financial Commission Meeting b.Approval of L icenses - Motion to approve the licenses as presented. c.Resolution I dentifying the Need for L ivable Communities Demonstration Account (L C D A ) F unding and A uthorizing an Application for Grant Funds - Motion to approve the resolution identifying the need for Livable Communities Demonstration Account (L CDA) funding and authorizing the submission of application for grant funds. d.Resolution Declaring a P ublic Nuisance and Ordering the Removal of Dead Trees at Certain P roperties in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota - Recommend that the City Council declare a public nuisance and order the removal of dead trees for certain properties as listed in the resolution. e.Resolution to accept Coronavirus L ocal F iscal Recovery Fund established under the A merican Rescue P lan Adopt Resolution to authorize City staff to take actions necessary to receive the City's share of A R PA funds from the State of Minnesota for expenses incurred because of the pandemic and authorize City staff to make recommendations to the City Council for future uses. f.Resolution A ccepting the P ohlad F amily Foundation Racial J ustice Grant in the Amount of $550,000 T he Council accepts the P O HL A D FA MI LY F O UND AT I O N R A C I A L J US T I C E G R A NT to reduce harm through collaborative solutions initiative. 7.P resentations/Proclamations/Recognitions/Donations a.Presentation of Training Certification Awards from MnF I R E - Acknowledgement of MnFIRE Aware Certification Award b.Presentation of the 2022 Preliminary B udget - It is recommended that the City Counci l consider provi ding directi on to staff regardi ng the 2022 preli mi nary property tax levy and budget to be adopted Monday, September 27, 2021. 8.P ublic Hearings The public hearing on this matter is now open. I will first call on those who notified the Clerk that they would like to speak to this matter, then I will ask if anyone 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 Commission Items 10.Council Consideration Items a.Resolution Declaring a P ublic Nuisance and Ordering the A batement of Nuisance at 3006 65th Ave N - Motion to adopt a resolution declaring a public nuisance and ordering the abatement of the nuisance at 3006 - 65th Avenue N b.Resolution A uthorizing Entering into a J oint and Cooperative P urchasing Agreement for Purchase of F irefighter's Safety Gear - Authorize Brooklyn Center's participation in the Public Safety Purchasing J PA 11.Council Report 12.Adjournment C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:9/13/2021 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:D r. Reggie Edwards, City Manager T H R O U G H :N/A BY:Barb S uciu, C ity C lerk S U B J E C T:A pproval of Minutes Requested Council A con: - Moon to approve the following minutes: 8.16.21-Jt C ity C ouncil & F inancial C ommission Meeng 8.16.21-S pecial C ity C ouncil Meeng 8.23.21-Work S ession Meeng 8.23.21-S tudy S ession Meeng 8.23.21-Regular S ession M eeng 9.1.21 - Jt C ity C ouncil & F inancial C ommission Meeng B ackground: I n accordance with M innesota S tate S tatute 15.17, the official records of all mee6ngs must be documented and approved by the governing body. B udget I ssues: I nclusive C ommunity Engagement: A nracist/Equity Policy Effect: S trategic Priories and Values: O pera6onal Excellence AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip6on U pload D ate Type 8.16 Jt C C and F C Works ession 8/30/2021 Backup M aterial 8.16 S pecial C C mee6ng 8/30/2021 Backup M aterial 8.23 Workses s ion 8/30/2021 Backup M aterial 8.23 S tudy S es s ion 8/30/2021 Backup M aterial 8.23 Regular S ession 8/30/2021 Backup M aterial 9.1.21 J t C C and F C Workses s ion 9/7/2021 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 AUGUST 16, 2021 VIA ZOOM 1. CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council/Financial Commission Joint Work Session was called to order by Mayor Elliott at 6:34 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL/INTRODUCTIONS Mayor Mike Elliott and Councilmembers Marquita Butler, April Graves, Kris Lawrence-Anderson and Dan Ryan. Also present were Financial Commissioners David Dwapu, Taofeek Ishola, Emmanuel Kpaleh, and Dean Van Der Werf. Not present were Financial Commission Chair Taneshia Kragness, Commissionerand Abate Terefe. Also present were City Manager Reggie Edwards, Acting Finance Director Andy Splinter, Interim City Engineer Mike Albers, Public Works Director Mike Marsh, Interim Police Chief Tony Gruenig, and City Clerk Barb Suciu. Councilmember Graves noted that Commission Chair Taneshia Kragness has always been in attendance and asked if staff had reached out to Financial Commission Members. City Clerk Barb Suciu confirmed that meeting packets for tonight’s meeting had been hand delivered to Financial Commission Members and Commission Chair Taneshia Kragness had indicated she would not be attending tonight. Ms. Suciu noted three of the five members are in attendance. Mayor Elliott asked whether the Financial Commissioners had received an e-mailed notice as well, or just the hand delivery of the packet. Ms. Suciu answered the hand delivery of the meeting packet. Mayor Elliott asked if it is possible to send an evite to the Financial Commissioner’s e-mail, similar to what the City Council Members receive. That way, the meetings would appear on their calendars. Ms. Suciu explained the Financial Commission Members receive the same Zoom meeting notification as the City Council. Mayor Elliott thanked Ms. Suciu for the clarification and asked her to follow up with the absent Financial Commission Members to gain a sense of why they are not in attendance and if something needs to be adjusted. 08/16/2021 Page 2 3. 2022 GENERAL FUND DEPARTMENT BUDGET REQUESTS Mayor Elliott reviewed the topics that will be covered at tonight’s Joint Work Session with the Financial Commission. He noted the Mayor City/Council budget discussion will be coming up and he has some proposal for it that he will make at the next budget meeting. Mayor Elliott asked the Council Members to let him know if they have ideas for the City Council budget and, if desired, they can be discussed tonight. Mayor Elliott invited Dr. Edwards to make the staff presentation. City Manager Reggie Edwards stated tonight is the beginning of department presentations with four being made tonight and three being made on September 1, 2021. Then the final budget will be presented on September 13, 2021 and it will encompass all of the City Council discussions up to that date. At that time, the preliminary levy will be considered and after that point, it can be lowered but cannot be raised. Dr. Edwards explained tonight there will be presentations by four departments. He will present the budgets for the City Council, City Manager, and Administration, which all falls under one function as far as Administration is concerned. Dr. Edwards stated if there are significant changes to the City Council budget, based on discussions tonight, staff will make space during the next meeting to have those conversations. Those recommendations will be added and presented on September 13, 2021, with the total budget based on the parameters established by the City Council at the last meeting. Dr. Edward stated tonight he will present the City Council/Office of the City Manager/Administration budgets; Interim Finance Director Andy Splinter will present the Fiscal and Support Services budget; Interim Public Works Director Mike Marsh will present the Public Works budget; and, Community Development Director Meg Beekman will present the Community Development budget. He noted that other support staff members may also participate in the presentation. Dr. Edwards explained that as each department budget is presented, it will include a description of the department, core functionalities, highlights, and proposed budget on a high level as it relates to the totality of the budget. Staff will not be presenting the entire budget line item by line item or the budget as a whole. The agenda was reordered to first consider Item 3c. 3c. ADMINISTRATION City Council Budget Presentation Dr. Edwards stated the mission of the City Council is to represent community values, provide visionary leadership to the organization, and oversee the proper operation of the City government through the City Manager. The functions of the City Council, as the elected governing body of the City, is responsibility for the governance through establishment of ordinances, policies, and quasi-judicial administration. The City Council adopts the budget, serves as the Economic 08/16/2021 Page 3 Development Authority (EDA), and Housing Redevelopment Authority (HRA). Those budgets will be presented at a later time. Dr. Edwards stated the City Council also constitutes the Board of Appeals and Equalization and serves as the Canvassing Board for municipal elections. He noted that in 2022, two elections are budgeted for. The City Council also assesses the performance and provides oversight of the City Manager. Dr. Edwards stated the City Council budget highlights are to provide funding for City Council travel, training, and development. He noted the travel and conference budgets went down significantly given COVID. Each Council Member is allotted a certain amount of dollars in this budget. During COVID approximately $2,600 to $3,500 was spent and in previous years, roughly $6,000 was spent so there are funds in that area that have not been expended. Dr. Edwards stated other highlights in this budget are membership in municipal policy organizations like the League of Minnesota Cities; Metropolitan Counties; salaries and benefits throughout the organization and nine unionized staff, which is at 3% increase as it relates to salaries and benefits; and, additional funding proposed for contractual services in support of City Council policy review and analysis. Dr. Edwards noted this past weekend, the City Council held a retreat and did some development work that was budgeted for; however, during COVID and civil unrest, it was not possible to do as many departments so there will be several items during tonight’s department presentations that were intended but put on hold for a while due to COVID and civil unrest. Dr. Edwards stated there are resources within the budget in order to do that. Administration Department Budget Presentation Dr. Edwards stated the mission of the Administration Department is to provide Citywide support and leadership to internal and external customers, which ranges from residents to Council to staff. The functions of the Administration Department include the offices of the City Manager, City Clerk, and Equity and Anti-Racism Practices, which is the Office of Inclusion and Inequity to focus on antiracism practices. The Administration Department’s functions also include the Divisions of Community and Engagement, Human Resources, and Information and Technology. Dr. Edwards displayed a chart listing the full-time positions within the Administration Department, noting they propose no significant changes. With the Deputy City Manager position, in the coming year he anticipates the Communications and Community Engagement Manager and City Clerk to serve as the Assistant City Manager so they will pick up additional duties that he handled when the Deputy City Manager. They will also maintain supervision and management over their own divisions. This will allow some capacity to add an additional Communication Engagement Specialist through savings on the Deputy City Manager position. Dr. Edwards stated they plan to hold the line and maintain some capacity to move forward on the many projects throughout the organization, both internally and externally, and increase some capacity to do more communication and engagement. Dr. Edwards noted the Deputy City Manager position, is zeroed out for 2022 and while the City will maintain the position, no funds will be allocated in 2022 to that position. Instead, those funds 08/16/2021 Page 4 will be redistributed to other positions in the department in order to create capacity. Dr. Edwards read through the positions within Administration, noting the Human Resources/ Equity Officer and Trainer position was established in 2022. In 2020, the Graphic Designer position was moved to full time and they plan to add an additional Communication Specialist that will be paid for through savings in not funding a Deputy City Manager position. Dr. Edwards stated with the four Neighborhood Engagement Liaisons, the intention is to hire residents to help with engagement in neighborhoods and that strategy will continue. The wages have been increased to $16.60, which is a livable wage. In 2022, they will focus on getting two of the positions hired and working 20 hours a week. Dr. Edwards stated the Administration Department had a complement of 15.2 staff in 2020, that increased to 16.75 in 2021, and is proposed at 16 for 2022. Dr. Edwards stated a couple Administration budget highlights include establishing the Office of Equity and Anti-Racism Practices, developing the equity score card enterprise wide; expansion of communications and community engagement efforts; development of innovation capacity; and implementation of transparency protocols and practices including automated reporting system. He noted in the past few weeks, staff presented a framework for engagement and they will be doing the same thing with equity to create a scorecard and framework. He noted this will vary from department to department with the intent that all actions taken, in all department, there is a lens as it relates to equity and engagement. He noted these things need to be done in community and with the organization to move the City forward. They anticipate creating the structure and then the practice and determine how to do that going forward. Dr. Edwards stated they will continue to develop innovation capacity and that particularly showed during the City’s COVID response and civil unrest. The primary focus of innovation in COVID and dealing with civil unrest is how we engage and invest in community and bring innovations through community and with community, being a community-centered City. That has been the focus of innovation during this past year and they will continue to do that. With implementing transparency protocols and practices, they keep measures as it relates to departments and strategic priorities set by the City Council. They anticipate they will be able to put that information on the City’s website in the coming year so movement in those areas is reported to the City Council as well as the community. They will then be able to have an interchange and exchange of ideas in understanding of how the City is progressing. Dr. Edwards stated additional highlights for the City Council budget is the replacement of City Council iPads and laptops, which is needed in order to do hybrid at a cost of about $10,000 and is within the budget. He noted there not elections every year so the costs are up and down but they are anticipated and as we go forward, he hopes to stabilize the $80,000 cost every other year to instead fund one-half, or $40,000, every year so it does not artificially the levy. Dr. Edwards explained that due to high staff turnover in 2021, the Human Resources Department will be hiring four director positions including the Human Resources Director position. The search for director positions has been outsourced with search firms but all other staff hiring is handled 08/16/2021 Page 5 internally. Dr. Edwards stated the City will provide resources into the neighborhoods. He stated when the City had tried to initiate the neighborhood engagement groups and build on the Neighborhood Watch captains, they learned that residents would be willing to engage in neighborhood activities but could not afford to keep feeding everyone in their neighborhood, or have resources to keep continuously engaging. That means providing some resources, $1,500, for an ice cream social, National Night Out, or maybe an event related to the neighborhood. Dr. Edwards provided an overview of a chart depicting department budgets by program and object code from 2019 to 2022 showing an 11.76% increase in total administration for 2022. He noted that for the most part with the City Council budget, the increase relates to technology. The decrease in the City Manager cost is due to not replacing a Deputy City Manager but that is picked up in Community and Engagement; the increase in elections is required and was anticipated; and, the Human Resources increase relates to hiring due to the transition of directors. Dr. Edwards stated for the most part, this budget does not change except in those four areas, elections, transition of directors, stretching the dollars for the Deputy City Manager to increas e capacity, and, communication and engagement. The increases are in areas that are required, basically, because of elections, transitions of directors, and to have hybrid meetings with the City Council. Dr. Edwards completed an overview of department budgets by program and object code. Dr. Edwards stated this is where we are now but not necessarily where we will be on September 13, 2021 after considering the parameters of the City Council. Dr. Edwards stated the City Council may have ideas about their budget and things they want to do differently or add but that has to come from the City Council as a collective body. He displayed a chart of the City Council budget showing line items, noting on September 1, 2021, the y will come back to this and entertain the City Council’s thoughts as a body, and what they have consensus on and want changed. He stated with the final budget to be presented on September 13, 2021, some of the items may be part of it but some may not. On September 13, 2021, he will present what he believes is in the best interest in the City given the parameters the City Council have identified and his and staff’s best perspective. But the final decision is the City Council’s. He noted the budget timeline is extremely tight and staff will do all they can to assure everything comes together by September 13, 2021. Mayor Elliott stated the City Council needs to think about the priorities they have laid out and what it will take to implement them. More than in previous years, the City Council might have to dig into the budget and, as Dr. Edwards said, the City Council may have to cut here or add there to make sure they are matching the priorities set out, with Dr. Edwards’ advise of course. Mayor Elliott asked if any City Council Members or Financial Commissioners had questions. Hearing none, he moved to the next budget presentation. 3b. FISCAL & SUPPORT SERVICES 08/16/2021 Page 6 Acting Finance Director Andy Splinter stated the Finance Department’s mission is to provide accurate and timely information to administrative and professional support in financial matters to all departments and divisions of the City. He listed the many areas that Finance manages and gave a brief description of each including accounting; accounts payable; accounts receivable; assessing with Hennepin County; banking and investment functions; budget and financial planning; debt management; financial reporting; utility billing; and, safety/risk management. Mr. Splinter reviewed staffing levels, noting the same level as previous years is proposed at 5.5 employees. He stated the part-time utility billing technician has been vacant for a little over a year and they will be interviewing for that position this week. The Financial Director position is also vacant and that may involve an executive search at some point in 2022. Mr. Splinter summarized their budget request, noting in 2022 the City Council is at 3% but the rest of staff is at an increase of 2% in wages and 5% in the cafeteria plan that covers health insurance. He presented 2020 performance objectives, noted the City has received the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) Certificate of Achievement for Financial Reporting for at le ast 20 years. He pointed out the rate of investment return has decreased in 2020 and probably again in 2021 because the rate of return on bonds and treasury notes as reduced to zero for the near timeframe because of the economy. Mr. Splinter completed review of the 2022 non-department budget that falls under Finance’s oversight including legal, convention and tourism, insurance, central supplies and support, vacancy/turnover savings, contingency, reimbursements from other funds, transfers out , and joint powers payments. He reviewed the budgets for the Brooklyn Bridge Alliance, BrookLynk Youth Internship Program, Community Mediation and Restorative Services, CornerStone, and Northern Star Diversion. Mr. Slinter displayed a chart showing 2022 general fund revenues as they sit right now. with no changes to the property taxes or levy change. He noted that overall, the total general fund revenues in 2022 will be down 2.28% outside of the levy so about $500,000 needs to be made up. Dr. Edwards stated with the recreation decrease in revenue, as Mr. Splinter mentioned, rates were reduced in an effort to make programs more accessible, which is part of the 11% drop in revenue. Mayor Elliott stated he wants to see the contingency fund increased more than it is now, noting it has been as high as $230,000 in the past and he would like to see it at that level because we don’t know what will happen in 2022. He noted as seen in the past two years, there are contingencies that can put a strain on our ability to spend on unforeseen circumstances, noting even this year, the City probably spent more than $300,000 in responding to the uprising. Mayor Elliott asked if any City Council Members or Financial Commissioners had questions. Financial Commissioner Ishola stated he was surprised this was a Zoom meeting. He stated he got this booklet to review very late but he wanted to ask questions. He does not know how the budget was determined because as the Financial Commission, they have to read it but sometimes it is confusing so they need to set an in-person meeting so we all can go through these things together 08/16/2021 Page 7 and be able to have a broad idea and come up with concrete questions. He stated it becomes very difficult. Mayor Elliott stated the concerns are that Financial Commissioner Ishola received this meeting packet too late to review it and he would like a time set aside to actually go through the packet as a Financial Commission and broadly understand the budget before having to make a decision on it. He stated the City can work with the Financial Commission Chair to schedule time for a separate meeting to review the budget and line items to understand it better. There being no additional questions or comments, the meeting moved to the next presentation. 3a. PUBLIC WORKS Dr. Edwards invited Interim Public Works Director Marsh to present the Public Works budget. Interim Public Works Director Mike Marsh stated the mission of the Public Works Department is to provide for the maintenance and operations of the City’s infrastructure and facilities in a quality, cost-effective manner. He noted the City has 105 miles of streets, 5,100 traffic signs, 520 acres of parks and natural areas, 62 miles of trails and sidewalks, 6 municipal-owned buildings and grounds, 88 miles of storm drains, 40 treatment facilities, and water and sewer operations. Mr. Marsh explained the functional divisions of the Public Works Department include administration/engineering; street maintenance including storm sewer, traffic control, street lighting; park maintenance and forestry; public utilities including water and sanitary sewer; central garage; and, facilities maintenance, which used to be under the CARS division. Mr. Marsh presented a chart of staffing levels from 2020 to 2022, noting it has been pretty consistent. They are asking, in the 2022 budget, for an extra seasonal employee for the facilities division. That is not an additional of funds but, rather, shifting funds from hiring the contractor to do that function in house. Mr. Marsh reviewed the strategic functions for administration/engineering, street maintenance and traffic control; parks facility maintenance and forestry; and facilities maintenance. He then presented transportation key initiatives including the Brooklyn Boulevard Phase 2 and Trunk Highway 252 and Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) funding projects. He noted that after next year, all of the streets will have curb and gutter and at least one construction project Citywide so after that, it will be mostly mill and overlay projects. Mr. Marsh displayed a list of key initiatives, provided an overview of each, and then displayed a chart of performance objectives for Public Works projects and resident calls for service. Mr. Marsh stated the Public Works budget highlights for 2022 include a 5.2% increase on their $4.2 million budget. Some of the notable purchases include a grapple attachment at $20,500 for Forestry, a zero-turn mower of $15,000 for government buildings, and a truck at $28,000 for engineering. He explained the truck purchase would replace a holdover truck that has been used for several years by an engineering tech. 08/16/2021 Page 8 Mayor Elliott thanked Mr. Marsh for the presentation and stepping in, for the second time, as Interim Public Works Director. He stated with regard to the budget presentation, he wanted to ask about the Brooklyn Boulevard project and street reconstruction. He asked whether there are active plans to include bike paths along the corridor. City Engineer Mike Albers answered there will be an off-street bituminous trail constructed as part of the Brooklyn Boulevard project. It will be 10 -15-feet wide, constructed on the west side of Brooklyn Boulevard, and extend from 49th Avenue to Interstate 94 as part of Phases I and II. Mayor Elliott asked if that means converting the sidewalk or will it be separate from the roadway. Mr. Albers stated it will be a 10-foot bituminous trail that is off-set 10 feet from the curb and gutter. It will be an off-street facility to allow for pedestrians to use bikes or rolling activity. Councilmember Graves stated it will be a continuation of an extra-wide black asphalt sidewalk across the street from her house and in front of the sanctuary. Mr. Marsh stated that is correct. Mayor Elliott stated last winter, there was an e-mail chain about a resident in a wheelchair at the sanctuary who was having a difficult time getting around and got stuck in the snow. He asked if this will allow for better plowing and navigation by those in wheelchairs. Mr. Albers stated this trail facility will be similar to any other trail within the community and he does not know about the e-mail chain being referenced but will look into it. Mayor Elliott asked if any City Council Members or Financial Commissioners had questions. Councilmember Graves stated from her own experience having black asphalt, the snow does melt better than if on concrete so she thinks this will be an improvement. Mayor Elliott agreed this will be an improvement. Financial Commissioner Ishola asked whether this budget of $4.2 million also includes the Highway 252 budget suspended for 2024. Mr. Albers answered it does not as that project is part of the CIP budget, not the general fund operating budget. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson thanked Mr. Marsh for his presentation and again stepping in as Interim Finance Director. She asked about the forestry budget increase of almost 32%, from $140,000 to $185,000, and what is that increase attributed to. Mr. Marsh answered the majority of the increase is for the purchase of a grapple attachment in the amount of $20,500. This equipment will greatly assist with moving big portions of trees. He acknowledged it is a significant purchase but with taking down 1,200 trees in the next few years, proper equipment is essential. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson agreed and stated if staff needs an increase in capacity, then we have to supply the resources with which to do so. She noted with the December 23 -24 snowplowing event, Mr. Marsh indicated the streets had to be plowed twice and asked if that was due to the volume of snow. Mr. Marsh explained he can’t remember if staff plowed back -to-back days. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she was just curious and appreciates the presentation by Mr. Marsh and his time. 08/16/2021 Page 9 Mayor Elliott stated he had a resident forward information about a boot for snowplows that prevents snow from piling into driveways. He asked if this would be helpful in saving many cumulative hours for residents from re-shoveling their driveway after the plow goes by. Mr. Marsh stated he has not seen that equipment and will reach out to the Street Supervisor to find out if he is aware of that option. Financial Commissioner Ishola stated he is curious about the increase in the traffic control budget of 15%. He asked what that increase includes as that is a higher increase than previous years. Mr. Albers stated he is unsure and will have to look into it before providing an answer. Mayor Elliott stated that is a good question and asked staff to send that answer to both the City Council and Financial Commission as a follow up to this meeting. Dr. Edwards stated if the City Council and/or Financial Commission has questions, staff will make sure to provide a follow up with answers before the next meeting. Relating to the internal groundskeeping increase in equipment, Dr. Edwards explained there is a local provider for that service but staff thinks they can do it more efficiently. That local provider has indicated the City’s account was not signifi cant and if done internally, it will allow them to operate in other areas. He stated if the City is contracting with a local company and considering whether to privatize or use something else, they assess the impact to that local business before making a decision. Councilmember Butler asked about the Highway 252 project and if there is any cost involved for the next fiscal year or just the year after depending on the decisions made. She also asked how staff is preparing for that budget impact. Dr. Edwards noted as mentioned earlier by Mr. Albers, that project is part of the City’s CIP so they do anticipate cost impacts over future years. Mr. Marsh stated the Highway 252 project is included in the CIP and identified as a 2026-year project. Now there is a placeholder in the CIP with an estimate of $5.5 million as the City’s share for improving Highway 252. As the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process is completed, staff will refine that cost based on Mn/DOT’s cost participation policy. Mr. Marsh explained that the CIP accounts for all of the capital costs associated with the project. There have already been some expenditures for Highway 252 as part of the operating budget and with the engagement projects, which are included in the operating budget under the different categories. Mayor Elliott stated to that point, the figures in the CIP do not reflect the entire cost to the City for Highway 252 since other costs are covered in different parts of the budget. Mr. Marsh agreed this is a unique project, noting engagement costs are not qualified for capitalization where with most projects, everything is capitalized. Mayor Elliott asked, other than engagement, are there other budget areas where costs exist related to the Highway 252 project. Or, is it just capital and engagement costs. Mr. Albers stated as of 08/16/2021 Page 10 now, what is within the CIP reflects the City Council’s desire to do an interchange at 66th Avenue and that was the estimated cost for design and construction for that interchange on Highway 252. As the project continues with our project partners, that number will be refined based on the preferred alternative from the EIS process. That issue will have to be revisited in the future. Mr. Marsh stated there are various costs upfront and, obviously, engineering has put a lot of time and effort into the project as well. It is kind of a crossover point and once it is determined that a project is definitely going to happen and costs become capitalized, then the costs are pi cked up. Prior to that, they are more of an operating type of cost. Mayor Elliott referenced the forestry budget and reported that community members have reached out expressing concerns with the City cutting down a significant number of trees in their neighborhood park due to the Emerald Ash Borers. Those residents came up with a proposal to raise money themselves to treat and preserve the trees. He asked if staff has looked at policies for removing trees or considered a preservation strategy. Mr. Albers stated they have looked at that but unfortunately, it is extremely expensive to save Elm trees so it is not cost effective for the City to spend funds in that attempt. He stated if there was a private group willing to fund the costs, there is a way that can be done. Mayor Elliott stated one can assume the private group raising funds to save trees in their neighborhood are those who are better off financially. However, other parts of the City where trees are being cut down could also benefit from saving trees. He suggested that topic be visited to determine the types of investments the City is willing to make to that end and address equity to assure people in different parts of the City can still have trees regardless of economic level. Mayor Elliott asked when trees are removed, is there a one-for-one replacement strategy. Mr. Albers stated it is a one-for-one replacement and there are a handful of different tree species staff selects from. He stated he lived through losing all the Elm trees to disease and agrees about the importance of treescapes to neighborhoods. He assured the City Council that staff takes this seriously and looks at everything that can be done that is fiscally sound. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked whether, with Emerald Ash Borers, experts in the field can indicate the success rate that can be anticipated with treating Elm trees. She stated if 90% successful, it may make sense to save the trees. However, if the reverse is true and results in the potential for infecting other Elm trees in the entire City, that would be a concern for her. She stated there are two Elm trees in her yard that are healthy at the moment. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she heard there are well over 1,000 Elm trees in the City and if the treatment is unsuccessful and all of the Elm trees are lost, she would like to know what the treescape would look like ten years from now. Mr. Albers stated staff has these numbers including the success rate. He explained the one thing to consider is that treating Elm trees is expensive, not guaranteed, and has to be done every year. He stated staff will provide the City Council and Financial Commission with those numbers. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she will appreciate receiving those number whenever staff is able to provide that information. Mayor Elliott noted there may be a transitional period where new trees are being planted while Elm trees are being preserved. He commented that Public Works is one of his favorite departments 08/16/2021 Page 11 and he hears the same comments from residents and those driving through Brooklyn Center. There being no additional questions or comments, Mayor Elliott moved to the next agenda item. 3b. FISCAL & SUPPORT SERVICES 3c. ADMINISTRATION These items were considered prior to Item 3a. 3d. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Community Development Director Meg Beekman stated the mission of the Community Development Department is to preserve and enhance the quality of life for the residents and businesses of Brooklyn Center by guiding development of the City with effective measures of planning, design review, construction plan approval, code compliance, housing, and business assistance. Ms. Beekman displayed and described the Community Development organizational chart, then provided an overview of services related to building and community standards. Ms. Beekman stated to-date with construction activity, they track building permit project valuations because this is an estimator of permitting work occurring in the City. She noted the peak in 2019 of nearly $80 million in new investment came to the community. Then there was a fairly significant drop in 2020, which is not entirely surprising given the pandemic, and there was another fairly significant drop in 2021. Again, not unexpected given construction lags from six months to a year behind the economy so projects in the pipeline for 2020 continued but now there had been a real drop off of projects pipelined. Part of that is due to the inability to get construction materials, the skyrocketing cost of building materials, and unavailability of steel and labor. Ms. Beekman stated some projects under construction and moving forward, though there have been some delays due to the pandemic, include the C-Allen Homes, which is a triplex development; Raptor Carwash; Masjid Al-Ansar Mosque; and, Dean’s Home Service, tenant build-out of 6701 Parkway Circle). Ms. Beekman stated staff is currently reviewing several projects, one being The Crest to remodel and add 43 new affordable units. That permit application has not quite been submitted but it is expected to be received soon. Another is the Frasier Center, which is an autism center, has submitted an application for a tenant buildout of an existing building and will be considered for a Special Use Permit (SUP). BP on Brooklyn Boulevard has submitted for a fairly extensive remodel. Ms. Beekman listed and provided an overview of projects that have recently opened and the status of each, noting there has been an uptick of tenants coming int o existing light industrial and office areas. Ms. Beekman reported staff has seen a fairly steep drop off in the number of permits and inspections in 2021 and she expects that trend to continue into the early part of 2022 and then as the economy recovers and the six- to twelve-month lag moves, she expects an uptick by the end 08/16/2021 Page 12 of 2022. Ms. Beekman provided an overview of staff’s activities related to the City’s rental licensing program and procedural changes due to the pandemic. She noted there was a temporary hold on all inspections at the peak of the pandemic and a three-month extension was given to renewing licenses. As a result, there are a number of rental licenses that have expired. She explained that when inspections were resumed, they were reduced from 100% to 25% of units for multi-family properties. That was done to limit contact between the City’s inspectors and residents and limit the number of times inspectors and property maintenance staff were entering people’s units. Inspections are now back up to 100% of units. Ms. Beekman presented the City’s rental program, noting there are approximately 11,903 total housing units with 4,570 rental units, or 38% being rental. About one half are three-year rental licenses, one-third are two-year licenses, 10% are one-year licenses, and 2% are six-month provisional licenses. Ms. Beekman explained that the City’s property maintenance a code enforcement is fairly robust and a complaint-based program but there is also proactive enforcement. She described the City’s code enforcement engagement program called Knock and Talk, which has been very successful and resulted in compliance about 65% of the time with no correction order is needed. She noted they also administer citations and abatements. Ms. Beekman reported that during the pandemic, staff adjusted its approach to code enforcement as there has been an uptick in enforcement actions because of the significant increase in number of complaints, perhaps because people were at home more and observed their neighbors. Those violations included hoarding, unsafe living conditions, and illegal dumping including on EDA-owned land. Ms. Beekman stated staff has taken a lighter approach to enforcement in general and pulled back significantly on proactive enforcement and signage citations in the business community. As a result, there has been an uptick of cases and duration of cases between the complaint and compliance. With the vacant building program, Ms. Beekman reported the downward trend continued. In this case, staff takes a heavy-handed approach to vacant properties but seen fewer over time. She felt the trend was handling the larger and more complex vacant properties, noting the Sears site continues to be the number one problem property with almost daily staff visits for inspections and on-going issues with break ins, arson, illegal dumping, and vandalism. Ms. Beekman presented planning activities, noting again, there has been a drop in the number of cases in 2021 due to the pandemic. In 2020 the City had 9 planning cases compared to 17 in 2019. In 2021, there has been a reduction to 3 planning cases to date. Other noteworthy planning work relates to the Opportunity Site Master Plan Infrastructure Framework that was adopted by the City Council in June; work on a Zoning Code update; Wangstad Commons; the Brooklyn Boulevard Land Use Study; Housing Study; Tenant Protection Ordinance; and, concept plan reviews for the 694 Business Center (former Earle Brown Bowl) and the former Sears site. Ms. Beekman explained she would do a quick review of the economic development focus priorities 08/16/2021 Page 13 since that topic will be back before the City Council and Financial Commission when considering the special revenue funds. She noted the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) fund and Tax Increment District (TIF) #3 primarily fund redevelopment activities and initiatives as opposed to the general fund so there is not much point in reviewing in great detail because the Community Development budget does not address these particular items. She stated they do a significant amount of economic development work and over the last 18 months, have focused those priorities around pandemic response in two ways: focusing on small business resources and technical assistance (business economic stability); and, resident support and resources (resident economic stability). Ms. Beekman stated in 2020 they worked with CARES Act funds and Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding on the number of programs and issued approximately $150,000 in forgivable loans and grants to small businesses, which was administered through ACER and LIBA. They also issued non-profit community resource grants to non-profits and religious organizations directly supporting residents to build their capacity to do that work. Community Development also provided technical assistance, outreach and education, food access, rental assistance, and down payment assistance. Ms. Beekman stated the 2021 business economic stability programs and initiatives will be presented when they focus on the economic stability pieces. She completed review of other ongoing Community Development projects including the implementation of a new permit software, updated department website, tenant protection ordinance, commercial clean-up and beautification, food truck provisions, and use of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds. Ms. Beekman presented the Community Department staffing requests, noting there are no additional or new full-time staff being requested; however, they are looking at a request around reallocation of department staffing. She explained that as this department has grown over the past several years, the EDA has absorbed a greater proportion of the wages versus the general fund. In addition, TIF District #3 has historically funded many of the EDA initiatives that otherwise would have been funded by the EDA. Because TIF District #3 is decertifying at the end of 2021, all of the economic development work currently underway and on-going and new initiatives will need to be funded by the EDA. Ms. Beekman stated the request will be to move the wages out of the EDA and to the general fund. This will make room for those development initiatives that have historically been funded by TIF District #3. This is a recommendation she made to the City Manager and would have an impact on the Community Development budget but it is not included in the budget numbers this evening and would be an additional ask. Ms. Beekman displayed the Community Development 2019-2021 budget, noting it has remained fairly flat with a slight decrease of 1% because they largely have retained the programing they currently have with no new positions or initiatives being proposed. She presented and described 2022 initiatives for Building and Community Standards, Planning and Zoning, and Economic Development. Mayor Elliott asked if any City Council Members or Financial Commissioners had questions. 08/16/2021 Page 14 Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson thanked Ms. Beekman for a thorough presentation and her efforts, noting she can’t imagine how challenging it has been. She stated she was not aware of the Knock and Talk program for code enforcement, which she thinks is a great idea and hopes it is utilized as much as possible following the pandemic. Mayor Elliott referenced the line for interpretive services for EDA activity and asked if there is a general budget for that for all of the departments. Dr. Edwards explained there is funding for some interpretive translation services that applies to the City’s website and general communications but it is fairly limited. He noted that every department will have projects that are not anticipated or beyond the scope of what we generally budget for up front. Dr. Edwards stated, as Ms. Beekman had indicated, she made a request related to transition of funding for staff from the EDA to the general fund because the EDA fund is drying up and the TIF District #3 resource will no longer be available. He stated he will deliberate on that request and determine how to move forward, maybe in stages, noting it may be $240,000 or about a 2.6% increase in levy. There being no additional questions or comments, Mayor Elliott moved to the next agenda item. 4. 2022 BUDGET OVERVIEW – FOLLOW-UP Dr. Edwards stated at this meeting staff will not review the previous budget meeting as a follow up but will do that on September 1, 2021 after the department presentation. At the time the preliminary levy is presented on September 27, 2021, staff will articulate the summary from the previous budget meetings and explain how the budget aligns with those priorities the City Council set in the last meeting. 5. FUTURE BUDGET DISCUSSIONS 5a. SEPTEMBER 1, 2021 – GENERAL FUND BUDGET REQUEST CONTINUED  Recreation  Police  Fire & Emergency Management Noted. 5b. SEPTEMBER 13, 2021 – RECOMMENDED PRELIMINARY LEVY & BUDGET Dr. Edwards noted there were two things that staff asked the City Council to deliberate on , prioritized strategies and established a comfort level related to levy increase. Both of those items will impact the presentation made on September 13, 2021, and will be reviewed at that particular time. 5c. SEPTEMBER 27, 2021 – ADOPTION OF PRELIMINARY LEVY 08/16/2021 Page 15 Noted. 6. ADJOURN There was a motion by Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson and seconded by Councilmember Ryan to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed. The Brooklyn Center City Council/Financial Commission adjourned at 8:49 p.m. 08/16/21 -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 SPECIAL SESSION AUGUST 16, 2021 VIA ZOOM 1. CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Regular Session called to order by Mayor Mike Elliott at 8:49 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL Mayor Mike Elliott and Councilmembers Marquita Butler, Kris Lawrence-Anderson, and Dan Ryan. Councilmember April Graves was excused. Also present were City Manager Reggie Edwards, City Clerk Barb Suciu, and City Attorney Troy Gilchrist. 3. AMENDMENT OF THE MASK MANDATE 3a. AMENDED ORDINANCES Mayor Elliott explained this special meeting is to consider amendment options to the special emergency mask mandate ordinance. He invited City Attorney Gilchrist to provide an overview. City Attorney Troy Gilchrist presented amendment options, one offered by the City Manager in response to practical concerns regarding folks within City buildings, such as those working out in the Community Center, swimming in the pool, eating, drinking or speaking at public meetings. Those are the same issues the Governor wrestled with when he issued a mask mandate throughout the State. Mr. Gilchrist explained the idea is to create an additional exemption in those situations where it is not reasonable feasible or potentially dangerous to wear a face covering. Mr. Gilchrist stated in conversations he had with Mayor Elliott and City Manager Edwards, the thought was that if folks are gathered around a table eating where they cannot wear a mask, there is still a concern regarding the potential spread of the virus while engaging in those activities and talking while they are eating. To address that, he added a sentence, at the request of Mayor Elliott, indicating: ‘When people gather indoors in situations where face coverings are not required under one of the exemptions, social distancing or other safety measures shall be utilized to the extent reasonably possible to help prevent the spread of COVID-19.” Mr. Gilchrist explained the idea is that there are certain circumstances where face mask wearing is not feasible but, in those situations, the ordinance would then direct to encourage social distancing or engaging in putting up a divider partition to separate people and help stop the spread of the virus. 08/16/21 -2- DRAFT City Manager Reggie Edwards stated he has some comments to make on this amendment option. Mayor Elliott asked him to hold his comments until after Mr. Gilchrist presented the second amendment option. Mr. Gilchrist displayed the amended language he just presented in option one. Mr. Gilchrist stated he had a discussion with the general counsel of the school districts within Brooklyn Center and they encouraged the City Council, as detailed in the Friday update, to remove schools from the definition of public building and exempt the schools from the ordinance with the idea they would prefer to make masking decisions for their buildings and students themselves. Mr. Gilchrist stated without a particular recommendation from staff, he drafted a second amendment option for the City Council to consider. It would delete schools from the public building definition and make it clear in the general provision that talks about o wned or operated government entities to add the wording ‘other than schools’ to complete the exemption. Mr. Gilchrist noted the exemption language in Article II, Section 3, is the same as presented with amendment option one but without the additional language. He explained the import of this particular version is the language creating the exemption from schools and completes the exemption to add the wording ‘other than schools’ in the general exemption. Mr. Gilchrist stated that is a review of the two amendments prepared to provide options for the City Council to consider. With respect to the exemption language (option one), it provides for situations where it is not reasonable to wear a face covering, to create an exemption, and upon reflection, he thinks it is a good idea and he would recommend the City Council seriously consider it. Mr. Gilchrist explained that because this is an emergency ordinance, like the one adopted by the City Council at its previous meeting, any amendment adopted this evening would have to be by unanimous vote of the members present. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson noted proposed Ordinance 2021-02 includes language about gathering indoors when it is not convenient to wear a mask and the exemption for schools. She asked if it is all inclusive of the amendments. And, if not, which version is the City Council considering. Mayor Elliott answered there are two separate drafts and presented as options (option one mask exemption; option two school property exemption). For now, the City Council is holding an open discussion. Mayor Elliott invited Dr. Edwards to make comments on the proposed amendments. Dr. Edwards explained that a couple things that precipitated both of the amendments. The first option with indoor masks related to services at the Community Center as well as the Heritage Center, addresses people who swim or run and exercise at high aerobic levels where masking is difficult or may potentially be harmful. That gives rise to the ability to exclude those working out 08/16/21 -3- DRAFT or swimming indoors. In addition to that would be rental spaces where people will be eating and holding indoor events, specifically with the Heritage Center. Dr. Edwards stated since the emergency ordinance was adopted, there has been nine cancelations in the last few days, equating to a $60,000 loss and staff projects in the next three months, it will be upwards of a $300,000 in loss. He stated the impact on services provided at the Heritage Center will be significant. That was what precipitated the urgency of bringing this amendment to the City Council. Dr. Edwards recommended adding the term ‘rental’ so it applies to that circumstance because while ‘eating, drinking, and swimming’ covers the majority, there are other areas where it would not cover. Dr. Edwards stated with regard to the schools, he reached out to all of the superintendents via e- mail correspondence, spoke with one, and there was an issue around the authority of the City as well as differences between what was being communicated to students and families by the school district and what was being communicated by the City. Staff feels they are on fairly solid ground as it relates to the authority but there will be issues counter to relationship. He stated through communications with three of the school districts, there are challenges around the City passing the mask ordinance. Dr. Edwards stated he does not have a recommendation relating to the schools but he does have a recommendation on masking around eating, swimming, and working out along with the rentals. Councilmember Butler asked about the issue with rentals and why the City would have to refund any money if someone were to cancel. She stated she understands the impact to future bookings but if someone has already booked an event, why would we have to refund their money if the City mandated versus their own policy. She asked why that impacts the ability to get a refund. Dr. Edwards explained that even with the initial COVID shutdown, the City did refunds because it is something borne by the City and if not, but for the mandate, they would have had their event. So, the money they put down as a deposit was refunded because the only reason they are not having the event is due to a policy decision of the City. Dr. Edwards stated that is his understanding. Councilmember Butler stated if the ordinance is amended to add these exemptions, she thinks the City should not have a mandate. She noted the idea behind passing the mandate was to keep people safe, noting Brooklyn Center has the number one highest COVID cases in the County so clearly, our population is at risk. She stated if the ordinance is being changed to accommodate weddings and things like that, then the City Council is contradicting itself and when it comes to money, the City is are okay with people being exposed to COVID or having more risk to COVID with no masks. Councilmember Butler stated she does not know what the right answer is but personally, thinks the City should not be giving money back if it is an ordinance and we are trying to keep people safe. She does not think that is a reason to refund but she is not in that line of business and could be wrong. She stated she recognizes the impact on future bookings but is not in favor of adding 08/16/21 -4- DRAFT these things unless we don’t do it at all. She stated she is open to hearing what others thoughts are. Mayor Elliott stated since we passed this ordinance, he has heard from teachers and particularly in the middle school, who thanked us for passing the mandate and protecting them. Last year, he heard from a coalition of teachers of color reaching out who were concerned that no thing was happening to protect them and students in the school. The combination of those two things, to him, says the City Council is taking the right step to protect health in the City. He stated considering the fact, as Councilmember Butler said, Brooklyn Center has the highest COVID case rates in the County, we have to do more than other people to protect life and health. Mayor Elliott stated this is, obviously, the most dangerous virus we have seen in a very long time and we can’t afford to not protect the public, which is our number one responsibility as a City Council. Mayor Elliott stated he also has a concern about lifting restrictions but understands that when kids are eating there still needs to be distancing and measures like screens that have been proven to reduce the spread of COVID-19 and are recommended by health agencies. Mayor Elliott noted that last year, the Governor imposed a Statewide mandate to wear masks indoors and also imposed a restriction to actually close convention centers in order to prevent the spread of COVID-19 and limited the number of people who could gather indoors. These are all restrictions he is no longer able to put into place but he thinks if the Governor could, the Governor would consider the case rates with this virus being nine times more contagious than the first prominent variant. Mayor Elliott stated we may seriously need to consider going further and doing a Citywide mandate, like the Governor would do but his hands are tied, in order to protect health and even close our Convention Center or put limits on the number gathering indoors, like the Governor did, to protect health. He did not know if we necessarily need to restrict further at this moment, but we may very well need to. Mayor Elliott stated in terms of making provisions and edits, if kids are eating meals in schools, to have screens or distancing, that makes sense to the degree they will still be in school physically and may even end up going remote. Mayor Elliott stated we need to realize the virus is still here and even worse and more contagious than before so we need to think about ways to better protect the health of our community. He stated this community is most susceptible to this virus. Dr. Edwards affirmed that the refunding of the deposit was a decision made by the City when they did the original shutdown at the first emergency declaration from the State and City so we would have a choice to not refund. Mayor Elliott asked if the City has the capacity or would it be tenable to have six-foot distancing measures put in place if people are eating or have dividers up. Dr. Edwards stated he imagines we can create that capacity but he assumes folks would cancel because the reservation was premi sed on having ‘x’ amount of people. And, at this point, if we say that number is cut to one-third due to social distancing, we have to be prepared to know we will endure that loss. Dr. Edwards noted it is not reasonable to think people will plan out a wedding or reception for 100 people and then 08/16/21 -5- DRAFT we say they need to social distance and cut it down to 35 because they will just find another venue. He suggested the City prepare to lose that business. Mayor Elliott stated he does not know if there is a good way of providing dividers or social distancing in the Convention Center. He thinks at this point, there is a new decision to make. He stated he is okay with keeping it in place for the Convention Center and the City Council will have to decide if they are okay with the revenue loss for those that choose to cancel. He noted last year, convention centers were completely shut down and a number of events across the State had to cancel because the virus was spreading. Again, the City Council is not taking th at action tonight but there is a strong possibility it is something the City Council will have to consider. Mayor Elliott stated he does not see how the City can lift it at the Convention Center and still be safe with that number of people gathering indoors. Mayor Elliott stated with schools, as a practical matter, if kids are going to be in school at this point it is not something we can choose to do. He thinks the City Council can consider those adjustments provided the schools are able to put into place screens or distancing that separates kids at lunch while unmasked to prevent the spread. He noted it would not make sense to simply lift the mask mandate without any restrictions at the point they are eating because, arguably, that is when you have the largest gathering of students during the day, eating, sitting next to each other, and talking. He stated we might as well not have a mask mandate requirement unless there are those preventative measures put into place. Mayor Elliott stated he would be okay with making the modification pertaining to the schools provided there is some kind measures put into place like screens or distancing that have been proven by health agencies to prevent the spread. Mr. Gilchrist advised that with the current language, if any exception applies, then this language would come into play that you have to employ social distancing or other safety measures. Mr. Gilchrist stated you are obviously not going to wear a face covering if you are eating, drinking, swimming, and those sorts of things so this is a common-sense exemption similar to what was in place when the State had a mandate. Then with the language suggested, there would be safety measures employed whether distancing, screens, or some other safety measures. Mayor Elliott stated the important language would be something like: ‘has been proven to reduce the spread and recommended by health agencies.’ He did not see how we can do that because it is likely if those measures are put into place at the Convention Center, people will cancel anyway. So, if there is going to be an event there, people will either choose to wear masks and have the event or choose not to wear a mask and not have the event. He did not see how the latter option, people not wearing masks and gathering in that number, because while the City can make an exemption, COVID-19 does not make an exemption in terms of spreading. Dr. Edwards stated there would be some applicability as it relates to the Community Center. He noted Mayor Elliott mentioned applicability to the school but, again, he would say the City has a pool where people are swimming, working out, and running on treadmills, so it is the suggestion that we need to go back to social distancing in order for someone to not wear a mask when engaging in those activities. So, for example, we close down some rental rooms and move equipment into 08/16/21 -6- DRAFT separate places and require staggered reservation to provide social distancing. He stated with the pool, they created different lanes or pods for a family or group to use the pool by reservation. Mayor Elliott agreed the City will need to go back to those measures in order to still have the Community Center available while providing the necessary level of protections for our community. Dr. Edwards stated there is a process and time, which staff will figure out, and shut down in the meantime, move and set up equipment and cancel reservations already in place. He noted some logistical measures need to be taken in order to accommodate those safety measures. Mayor Elliott asked for a legal opinion on how that squares up with the language at this point, having the Community Center go to social distancing protocols as Dr. Edwards’ just described. Mr. Gilchrist advised that as the owner of the various City facilities with those amenities, it is essentially incumbent upon the City to comply with its own ordinance. He noted that regardless of the amendment, there are common-sense things that need to be done to accommodate the regulations imposed. If the amendment is adopted, then it compels, whether this is happening in a City building or school building. The idea is imposing that social distancing or other safety measures be utilized. Mr. Gilchrist stated the City, through this ordinance, has established certain expectations and requirements and it is incumbent upon the owners of the various buildings to come into compliance with it. So, however the City decides to implement that, drawing on experience over the last year, to implement some of those measures to assure people, while not wearing masks, are separated. Councilmember Ryan stated he appreciates the comments and is also in general agreement that the City should do everything it can to weigh in on the side of caution. However, given the explanation by the City Attorney just now and the City’s experience with making arrangements at the Community Center, for example, where activities and bookings could be divisionally separate to accomplish social distancing, then he would be willing to go forward with this language. Councilmember Ryan stated the City Manager could alert the City Council should things continue to escalate and the City Council needs to address it promptly and impose more stringent measures, such as, perhaps, shutting down the Community Center. Councilmember Ryan stated he is willing to accept the losses in revenue at the Heritage Center but then the City Council has to acknowledge that loss of revenue and set its expectations for the budget accordingly. Mayor Elliott noted this year the State provided some funds to help offset the costs of shutting down convention centers but he is not sure there are discussions to do something similar again. Councilmember Ryan noted that is an excellent point and stated he is not clear whether similar funds would be available through the CARES act but staff may be checking on that. He stated that is an open question for next year. Mayor Elliott stated it seems to him, based on the general definition, that the purpose of the funds is to be spent to respond to the pandemic and its negative economic impacts. So, he is hopeful that 08/16/21 -7- DRAFT is broad enough and the specifics of the bill will align with offsetting any losses the City may have at the Convention Center. Mayor Elliott asked Mr. Gilchrist to review the discussion so far. Mr. Gilchrist stated it sounds as though there is some hesitation about creating too many ex emptions from the mask requirement imposed through the emergency ordinance out of fear of the exception swallowing the rule. But he is also hearing some comfort with moving forward with common-sense exemptions that some folks would just presume are part of this. He noted that with ordinance writing, it is better not to presume but instead to state specifically and frankly. He thinks adopting subsection (e), the added language in the first option, helps strengthen the ordinance because it shows it is thou ghtful and creates those common-sense exemptions and safety measures when masks are not worn due to an exemption. Mr. Gilchrist stated his suggestion is to ask for further comments from the City Council to see if there is unanimous consensus to move forward with this amendment and if so, then to seek a motion. Mayor Elliott stated to parse this a little more, for the time students are still going to be physically going into the building, he is amenable to making the exception for eating and drinking, specifically in the school building but not necessarily for any other space where people are eating and drinking together. He stated he does not know how you parse that in subsection (e) to address schools specifically. Mr. Gilchrist stated the City Council could certainly add the language referring to schools but the things that come to mind are employees eating in the lunch room or at their desk, things like that. He asked Mayor Elliott if he only wants this exception to apply to schools. Mayor Elliott stated he thinks you don’t have to wear a mask when you are swimming so that should apply to the Community Center, noting that is the only government building with a pool. He thinks engaging in strenuous activity should not require a mask, such as when on a treadmill or biking. He suggested subsection (e) be subdivided into subsections (e) and (f) to list swimming, engaging in strenuous activity, or when presenting at a meeting or other gatherings, and make it broadly applicable. But, make the exception for eating and drinking in groups is permitted at the lunch room. He noted if people are eating at their desk or there are one or two people in the lunch room and they are distanced, that is fine. Mayor Elliott explained what he is trying to get at, particularly when it comes to our Convention Center, if we make the exception there and there are 150 people in a room eating and drinking, then we may as well lift the restriction on the Convention Center all together. He stated maybe the way to go about this is to say these exceptions do not apply to the Convention Center and asked if that would take care of it. Mr. Gilchrist stated it would indicate the exceptions would then not apply at the Convention Center. He advised the other way to do it is to take ‘eating and drinking’ out of subsection (e) and create a new subsection (f) that talks about eating and drinking in groups within school buildings. 08/16/21 -8- DRAFT Mayor Elliott stated he supports that suggestion, to create a new subsection (f), and make it applicable to groups within school buildings. He stated that would take care of it. He explained he is sympathetic to the idea we will experience revenue loss but the State previously made that choice knowing that would be the case for municipalities and we got federal recovery dollars that will offset. Mayor Elliott stated there are some decisions the City Council has to make and live with. Mr. Gilchrist displayed the ordinance on the screen, noting the Mayor’s amended language as follows: (f) Eating or drinking in groups in school buildings. Mayor Elliott asked for Councilmembers’ comments. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she had read information about the schools not liking what the City Council had proposed and asked how that comes into play here with new subsection (f). Pertaining to our Convention Center, she understands the City Council is looking at yet another modification to the ordinance amendment to disable our Convention Center for the present and ongoing into the near future. She asked if that is a correct understanding on the discussion thus far. Mayor Elliott stated yes, it will decrease revenue from the Convention Center but would not shut it down completely. He explained if the people who are making reservations are okay with making up while they are there, the whole time, then they are allowed to have the event. But it does not allow for a room full of people, upwards of 100 people or more, to all be in a room together eating without a mask. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated then there will be masking in public spaces and inside the confines of a room, say the Captain’s Room, it is their choice. He noted Dr. Edwards had indicated that people at City Hall in private offices should be exempt. So, if she understands correctly, wouldn’t we still be mandating that even if in a private space. Mayor Elliott stated the addition here with subsection (f) says the restriction only applies if you are eating or drinking in groups in schools. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked about those eating at City Hall. Mayor Elliott stated it would not apply but they would have to distance. Mr. Gilchrist advised that technically, the way this is set up, the eating and drinking exemption as modified would only apply to groups eating or drinking in school buildings. So, the two employees sitting at opposite sides of the lunch room, there is not an exemption for that. Mayor Elliott noted people eat in their offices. Dr. Edwards confirmed that is correct but as he brought up when this emergency ordinance was adopted, it is not practical that someone would be in their mask while in their single office or cubical space. They are by themselves and will not wear a mask. Mayor Elliott asked how the language can address that, employees by themselves allowed to have lunch and not wear a mask in the act of eating. 08/16/21 -9- DRAFT Mr. Gilchrist stated the language could indicate: ‘Eating or drinking groups in school buildings or individually in other public buildings. Councilmember Ryan stated as he reads the editing to add subsection (f), it essentially outlaws eating at the Community Center because it is obviously not possible to wear a mask when you are eating. But the subsequent language indicates when people gather indoors where face coverings are not required under the exemptions, social distancing or other measures shall be utilized to the extent reasonably possible to prevent the spread of COVID-19. That subsequent language would apply to Section 3., (e). If you have proper social distancing and other safety measures, we are still going to essentially prohibit eating at the Heritage Center. Mayor Elliott clarified it permits eating in other public buildings including the Community Center. Councilmember Ryan stated he would appreciate a legal opinion on that. He explained he is trying to be a devil’s advocate here for how someone may read that and why they may come back and want a refund on something they booked. Mr. Gilchrist advised that if the thrust of the proposed amendment language is to take eating and drinking out of subsection (e) and create an exemption for schools, maybe we should make it clear that this does not apply to the Heritage Center. He explained the enforceability of this ordinance is strengthened by the common-sense exemptions like eating and drinking. So, if the concern is the City does not, for fear of undermining the purpose of this ordinance, want large gatherings where people are not wearing face coverings and eating and drinking and socializing without masks on in the Heritage Center, then we should call that out and reinstate the eating and drinking language in (e) so we are not worrying about this building versus that building. He stated if the real concern is the Heritage Center, then calling it out and, as Dr. Edwards indicated, understanding the financial consequences of doing so, that is the City Council’s call. He noted language can be added at the end of subsection (e) that says: ‘The eating and drinking exception does not apply to the Heritage Center.’ Councilmember Ryan stated that is what he would prefer because, again, these issues will be a moving target and as we see the situation evolve, regrettably, he fears we may have to go back to partial shutdowns relative to the health information we get in terms of acceleration in new cases and hospitalizations and, he fears, deaths. This is something the City will have to watch carefully and if at a point, subject to advice from the Minnesota Department of Health, we still can have some of our public buildings open, then that solution of calling out the Heritage Center may be most appropriate. He stated he would appreciate hearing from his colleagues on their opinion about that. Mayor Elliott noted in an instance there is a gathering in the lunch room in our various buildings, would you see that as potentially problematic and would this language address that situation. Mr. Gilchrist stated the paragraph at the bottom would still apply so they are still being directed to sit separately and social distance. It would tell employees to sit separately when taking their masks off to eat. 08/16/21 -10- DRAFT Mayor Elliott stated the new addition would then be to say this does not apply to the Heritage Center. Mr. Gilchrist answered in the affirmative and recommended it be added at the end of subsection (e) The eating and drinking exemption does not apply to groups in the Heritage Center. Mayor Elliott stated he is comfortable with deleting subsection (f) considering we have the other added language. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated it is like hitting a moving target this evening. She asked if the restaurant at the Earle Brown Heritage Center can be open with social distancing or we can’t eat or have conventions there. Mayor Elliott explained that essentially, a convention gathering at the Heritage Center cannot eat there or take off their masks, say groups of 100 people in a room. The only events they could have are ones where they are not serving food. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson thanked Mayor Elliott for the clarification. She stated she understands the situation yet is deeply sorry for people who have planned events and will have to reschedule elsewhere. She stated although our intentions are very good, it will have an impact on a lot of people, which she wants to acknowledge. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she is comfortable with the language as amended this evening. Mayor Elliott thanked Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson for the acknowledgement of folks who will have to cancel. Dr. Edwards stated he wants the City Council to be aware that it will also have an impact on Heritage Center staffing. He will check into ARP and what we can do with that funding but as we started hiring and bringing people back, now we will be going in reverse and with fewer events and have to do something with staff. He wants to make sure that the City Council is also aware of that consequence. Dr. Edwards stated staff will figure out how to manage that within the fiscal capabilities of the City. Councilmember Ryan apologized for not being clear, noting in reading the language as presented before it was amended tonight, as displayed presently on the screen, he was under the impression that eating and drinking was an exemption under certain circumstances where social distancing and other safety measures shall be utilized to the extent possible to prevent the spread of COVID- 19. He is basically in the place where after thoroughly considering this, and he appreciates where people are going through a lot of different contingencies and options and being a bit uncertain, because we all want to take an action to ensure public health and safety, but he is actually of a mind to go with the original language. Councilmember Ryan stated if, in fact, staff does a good faith and well-informed effort at enforcing social distancing standards subject to recommendations of the Minnesota Department of Health and other safety measures utilized to the extent possible to prevent the spread of COVID -19, he thinks that eating and drinking should be a potential exemption in public buildings given those 08/16/21 -11- DRAFT safety measures. He is okay with the original language, and not adding the language discussed tonight. Mayor Elliott stated then we are back to where we started. He stated the thing that helped him arrive at the language added tonight is the idea that people who have made reservations are for a certain number of people in a room and not necessarily socially distancing six feet apart, which blows the reservation. Or, maybe putting up dividers is not feasible according to Dr. Edwards so it does not seem practical that we are going to be able to provide those measures. From a public health standpoint, just leaving it open and having potentially 100 or more people gathered in a space and eating, then we may as well not have the restriction in place. Councilmember Ryan stated this may be something that staff could determine where, given the other bookings, they could accommodate this particular group and their activity with food, if there are additional adjacent spaces, they can socially distance. Or, if not, then they could tell the group they can’t do this because we cannot enforce the socially distanced dining arrangements and other safety measures. In that case, we are sorry we have to cancel the event and then it is a policy decision if we have to refund. Councilmember Ryan asked Dr. Edwards to respond to that because he is also concerned about layoffs at the Heritage Center. Dr. Edwards stated staff is able to accommodate social distancing because that involves tabling and spacing. Then it would be up to someone who wants to rent whether or not they can accommodate that, downsize, or pivot to abide by those accommodations. Dr. Edwards stated the City can leave it up to them to determine that because either way. He assured the City Council that staff can provide a safe environment given social distancing. But, the City does not have the ability to provide partitions or dividers between for events like school at the Heritage Center. It would be more problematic to offer that type of setup. Mayor Elliott asked what were the restrictions put into place on the number of people who can gather indoors at the height of COVID-19. Dr. Edwards stated City staff are experts, and did already accommodate six-foot social distancing when it was implemented at the height of COVID- 19. Mr. Gilchrist stated if he recalls correctly, it was a moving percentage on indoor capacity up to a certain number but as Dr. Edwards indicated, there is a certain self-limiting factor that would come into play based on the size of the event and ability to accommodate within the size of the room. He noted staff has had plenty of experience with social distancing over the last year and the limiting factor will be the size of the room and number of tables. Mr. Gilchrist stated this discussion has been helpful and does, as Councilmember Ryan indicated, come around to the language added tonight about social distancing and other safety measures. He thinks that is the safety catch for any of the exemptions including eating and drinking because it will require distancing and if a large group cannot fit into a room with social distancing, then they will have to go elsewhere. Councilmember Ryan noted Mr. Gilchrist had mentioned something earlier about enforceability and asked if this ordinance language helps the City with enforceability of the emergency ordinance. 08/16/21 -12- DRAFT Mr. Gilchrist stated he believes subsection (e) helps the validity of the ordinance itself because the initial focus was imposing the mask requirement with certain exemptions but it did not get into the practical side of things with eating, drinking, and swimming. He thinks adding this language really helps make the ordinance more defensible. Councilmember Ryan stated he too found this discussion very helpful because Councilmembers tried to establish some sort of ideal parameters but then finding that as a practical matter, we can only establish certain parameters and should conditions worsen, then the next step logically is to go into shutdown, which he hopes the City does not have to do. In the interim, he thinks the original language is the best approach. Mayor Elliott stated he is amenable to the original language if staff is able to provide social distancing measures, especially at the Heritage Center. The only thing he is uncomfortable with is the wording: ‘to the extent reasonably possible.’ He noted the language require social distancing, but then only to the extent reasonably possible. Mr. Gilchrist advised that goes back to the defensibility of the ordinance because requiring something absolutely, regardless of cost or consequence, could raise questions regarding the validity of the requirement. He noted we are talking about public buildings, so these are all governmental entities implementing the requirements. They are all partners with th e City and there is a willingness to comply with the requirements so he thinks there will be a good faith effort to comply to the greatest extent reasonably possible. He advised that requiring more than that will raise questions regarding the ordinance. Mayor Elliott asked, with regard to our own buildings, what happens if staff says it is not reasonably possible to socially distance for an event. Dr. Edwards stated in that case, staff would say they can’t do it reasonably to execute it. Mayor Elliott stated then if it is not reasonably possible to socially distance, the exception does not apply. Mr. Gilchrist stated the City Manager is hearing this discussion and concern so yes, the expectation is set and he can’t imagine staff would just say, ‘we’re just not going to do it because it will be too tough so we will ignore this requirement of social distancing or engaging other safety measures.’ He does not think that is going to be a concern and as Dr. Edwards indicated, if staff can’t socially distance folks, there are simply too many people and we cannot accommodate them, then the directive to staff will be that the event has to be canceled. Mr. Gilchrist stated the wording “to the greatest extent possible’ is a qualifier used in that reference. Mayor Elliott stated as long as we have that understanding, we are good to go. He asked the Councilmembers whether there is a consensus. Councilmember Ryan noted the word ‘greatest’ was also added tonight. He stated Mayor Elliott had asked great questions of the City Attorney and we are all reminded the law is a blunt instrument. Mayor Elliott moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to adopt ORDINANCE 2020-02, An Emergency Ordinance Amending Emergency Ordinance 2021-01 Providing Additional 08/16/21 -13- DRAFT Exemptions to the Face Covering Requirement in Public Buildings within the City, as amended. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Gilchrist thanked the City Council for engaging in this discussion, which moves the City in a positive direction and the ordinance more defensible. Mayor Elliott thanked Mr. Gilchrist and Dr. Edwards for their work on this matter. 4. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Butler seconded adjournment of the Special City Council meeting at 10:12 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. 08/23/21 -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 SPECIAL WORK SESSION AUGUST 23, 2021 VIA ZOOM CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council/Economic Development Authority (EDA) met in Special Work Session called to order by Mayor/President Mike Elliott at 5:06 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor/President Mike Elliott and Councilmembers/Commissioners Marquita Butler (arrived at 5:07 p.m.), April Graves (arrived at 5:15 p.m.), Kris Lawrence-Anderson, and Dan Ryan. Also present were City Manager Reggie Edwards, Community Development Director Meg Beekman, City Attorney Troy Gilchrist, and City Clerk Barb Suciu. STUDY RESULTS OF PHASE I OF THE BROOKLYN CENTER COMMUNITY, HEALTH, CULTURE, AND RECREATION CENTER EXPANSION City Manager Reggie Edwards introduced the item, noting that about a year ago, the City started thinking about expanding the Community Center, which was generated by staff bringing various interests in who were interested in that expansion. That was followed up by conversations with former City Manager Boganey and staff to determine what was needed to move forward with a study to learn whether there was interest and need and what an expansion to the Community Center would look like. Councilmember/Commissioner Marquita Butler arrived at 5:07 p.m. Dr. Edwards stated the City Council/EDA is aware the City submitted an application for State bonding in the 2022 bonding year. A presentation on that will be made before the City Council/EDA on September 21, 2021. He stated an RFP was released for firms to conduct a study on the Community Center. Perkins and Will were one of several firms who responded, their favorable proposal and approach included engagement of the community to gain inside perspectives, and they come to the table with expertise after doing many facilities in the State and other locations. Staff found they had the needed expertise and brought skills to the process that would be favorable to how Brooklyn Center would consider a new Community Center or an expansion to the existing Community Center. Dr. Edwards stated the first phase of that study will be presented tonight to address the need and resident input on essential needs, articulate the possibilities and timeline with a more extensive 08/23/21 -2- DRAFT Phase 2 study. He noted that following the presentation, there will be time for the City Council/EDA to engage with questions and discussion. Lindsey Peckinpaugh, Principal in Charge and Architect with Perkins and Will, stated she is specialized in sports and recreation architecture and has had the honor of working in many communities throughout the country. She noted this is a team effort and introduced the project team including Brigitte Bjorklund with Zan Associates who are community engagement specialists. Ms. Peckinpaugh stated they know that Brooklyn Center is a rich and diverse community so Ms. Bjorklund’s team was critical in reaching out to the community. Ms. Peckinpaugh introduced Matthew Avila, Hunden Strategic Partners, who is a financial analyst and led the market and demographic in analytics on the project. Ms. Peckinpaugh stated they will be recapping the study goals and process, talk about their observations on the existing condition of the facility and spend the bulk of their time to bring the City Council/EDA up to speed on the public engagement process, economic and demographic analysis, and market analysis. She stated they will wrap up their presentation with con clusions and recommendations and leave time for questions and answers. Councilmember/Commissioner Graves arrived at 5:15 p.m. Ms. Peckinpaugh stated the goals, as outlined by City staff for this study, were to develop a ten- year vision for the Community Center Master Plan and this vision should be crafted by and for the community of Brooklyn Center. She described their four-step approach including the discovery of the vision and data gathering, define programming, and prioritization of needs. This is the first phase of the study that is being reported tonight, the discovery and definition phase. Should the City determine to continue, Phase 2 will include exploration and final recommendations. Ms. Peckinpaugh displayed a list depicting Phase 1 base services, noting it includes a review of the existing facility, their discussion with strategic partners, and deep dive on market and demand analysis. She explained that Phase 2 is the fun part for an architect as it uses the information learned from public engagement and the demographic analysis and market demand and they start to draw and generate planning strategies on what a new vision of the Community Center would look like and assign a cost to those improvements from a capital construction cost and on-going operational cost. Then they would move into implementation planning and final report and findings. Ms. Peckinpaugh displayed a schedule-timeline, noting it has slipped a little bit along the way as they had intended to wrap up Phase 1 by the beginning of August, which slid a few weeks as they took on additional community engagement, made sure there was time to talk with additional focus groups, and Zan Associates could get into the community for additional events. Even with the three-week slip, they are still projected to wrap up the study in its totality towards the end of the year. Ms. Peckinpaugh reported that coming out of Phase 1, they identified as a team with City staff four project indicators, noting there are four questions the team has been tasked with answering. 08/23/21 -3- DRAFT 1. Is there public support for the renovation, expansion, or renewed investment in the Community Center? 2. Do the community demographics and market analysis have favorable indicators to support a renewed investment? 3. Do the strategic partners that we talked to have complementary goals and resources? 4. Does Centennial Park have the capacity to accommodate improvements? Ms. Peckinpaugh stated they are in a position to answer these questions this evening. Ms. Peckinpaugh stated in looking at the existing building, the team of experts thinks that one of the most beneficial assets of the Brooklyn Center Community Center is its location in Centennial Park. There is a beautiful park that is well received by the community but it is part of a flood plain and they understand the adjacent ballfields are prone to flooding. She displayed an aerial view of the subject site, noting the areas denoting the flood plain and buildable area. Ms. Peckinpaugh explained the site is constrained in its buildable area but there is the capacity to make improvements on the site to the existing building. Ms. Peckinpaugh displayed colored pictures of the inside of the Community Center and stated it is their observation that it is well kept and maintained for its age but, like most buildings of this generation, it is opaque and highly compartmentalized. They observed, while onsite, that the building is hard to find, lacks wayfinding and a clear sense of entry, and informal gathering space. Because the building is primarily concrete and brick construction, it is rather rigid and cost- prohibitive to renovate. Ms. Peckinpaugh stated they recognize that the 50 -meter pool is an incredible asset and there are not many like it in the region. It is well kept and maintained, a true benefit to the community, so they have been looking for strategies throughout the Phase 1 study to increase utilization of that area. Ms. Peckinpaugh stated a key tenement of their study process is foundational to a public engagement process. As a team, they believe diversity drives innovation and inclusion and sparks creativity. They take a broad and wide-sweeping approach to public engagement, not just because it is the right thing to do but also know it yields better results for their clients and projects. She explained that for the public engagement process to be successful, it must be authentic, inclusive, and embrace diversity. They have come to appreciate what an incredibly diverse community Brooklyn Center is and have been learning as they have gotten out into the community that there is a lot of cultural aspects to this community that is certainly unique so their approach must be tailored to the community. Ms. Peckinpaugh stated it is important for the City Council/EDA to know they believe that public engagement is a continuum and what they have done in Phase 1 is just the very beginning of a long relationship with the community of Brooklyn Center. Should The City Council//EDA determine to move into Phase 2 with the design of a facility, they intend to keep the public engaged throughout that entire process. Public engagement is also achieved through a variety of methods and formats including broad community engagement, which Ms. Bjorklund has taken the lead on, a small focus group format for interviews, strategic partnership discussions, and direct staff 08/23/21 -4- DRAFT involvement. Ms. Peckinpaugh displayed a colored bar chart depicting engagement as a continuum starting with programming (Phase 1 of the Master Plan Study). Bridget Bjorklund, Zan Associates, stated she is excited to share the engagement plan and results of Phase 1. She displayed a picture of their online engagement platform that is a launching site and provides a convenient place to give and gather information, collect survey data and other feedback, and provide contacts and links; a kind of one-stop-shop. Ms. Bjorklund displayed a table showing the promotions launched during Phase 1, noting those efforts reached over 3,500 people and the two websites reached a lot of people in the community as well as flyers and e-mail blasts to historically under-represented residents to inform and gather input. She referenced a list of groups they worked with and diverse pop-up events they used to capture the wider diversity in Brooklyn Center, immersing themselves in the community. Talking face-to-face with residents was their strongest connection and gave them the most information. Their partners with the City were also in the community to connect with residents and gather information. Ms. Bjorklund described the Heal the City event they attended after the shooting of Daunte Wright when the community was grieving and participants were please to know their voices were being considered. She found this to be a very moving event because people realized we care about what they think, which was quite powerful. Ms. Bjorklund stated other events they attended included the Concert in the Park, Hmong Celebration in the Park, Thursday Farmer’s Market, and 26 National Night Out events where they offered engagement activities to gain resident input. Ms. Bjorklund then reviewed their online survey that was available in three languages. They received over 200 unique surveys sharing suggestions and impressions about the Community Center. Ms. Bjorklund presented a listing of their top recommendations with those in bold having the most mentions or votes from the community. Requests they heard repeatedly were for basketball and volleyball courts, indoor track, splash pad, and indoor/outdoor park. They also received requests for many things to do with learning, after school, tutoring, and computers, as well as arts and entertainment. Ms. Bjorklund explained that culture and diversity came up repeatedly in a myriad of ways, and those ideas are listed. There were also a lot of people who wanted to partner with the Brooklyn Center Community Center to have programs that reach out farther in the community. She noted people specifically want to do more in the winter. Ms. Bjorklund displayed a pie chart depicting the survey demographics, noting they match pretty well with the diversity in Brooklyn Center and they reached quite a few people of different races and ethnicities during the engagement phase. She then displayed a pie chart depicting survey respondents by gender. Continuing, Ms. Bjorklund provided an overview of slides relating to respondent’s answers about the current Community Center accessibility and favorite features. 08/23/21 -5- DRAFT Ms. Bjorklund reviewed the categories that residents identified at the last four or five events that indicated their favorites. She described current impressions residents offered that identified what they thought of the current Community Center, what events would get them to come more often, and what they suggested for the future. Ms. Bjorklund stated overall, they are very pleased with the breadth and depth of their engagement efforts. Ms. Peckinpaugh explained that in addition to the broad community engagement, they also administered focus groups and strategic partnership discussions. She stated they ran nine focus group meetings, as listed on the schedule, and were intentional on the diversity of groups included, from recreation staff, community leaders, and facility users (from families with young children to senior citizens). She stated they had a particularly fun focus group on July 13, 2021, with the Brooklyn Bridge Alliance attended by about a dozen 7th to 12th graders who were very participatory, polite, and full of great ideas. Ms. Peckinpaugh recapped and summarized that the common themes heard throughout the focus groups were the same heard by Ms. Bjorklund in the broad community engagement. Those themes included: the existing facility is clean and welcoming; the pool is the biggest asset with swim lessons; an exterior splash pad is encouraged; to accommodate competitive lap swimmers’ preference for cooler pool temps; perhaps an additional body of water is needed; meeting rooms are underutilized and need to be modernized plus a prep kitchen; an updated entry, signage, locker rooms, and indoor/outdoor park connection is needed; informal small group gathering spaces with Wi-Fi access plus programming for teens and seniors; multi-purpose gymnasium space for unstructured activities; spaces for artists, maker, STEAM, and eSports; rooms for multi-cultural dance/prayer/wellness; and, workforce training and enrichment programs. Ms. Peckinpaugh reviewed the four different strategic partnership groups they reached out to and explained their intention, through these engagements, to place these partners along a partnership spectrum. This spectrum ranges from potential partners who would be in support of the facility and/or facility improvements but probably not users of the facility to full strategic partners that could bring both capital for construction and ongoing operations acumen to the project. After talking with the four potential partners, they plotted them along this spectrum, recognizing that Brookdale Library and the School District are supporters of the Parks Department and would certainly be supporters of facility improvements but they are probably partnering more on the program side. However, Great Wolf Swim Club falls more into a rental partner model where they are interested in becoming a tenant and renting space within an improved facility. Youth & Families Determined to Succeed (YFDS) and Inner City Tennis are potentially viable partners as full capital and operational partner moving forward. Ms. Peckinpaugh provided a recap of each strategic partnership group’s desires for updated facilities, facility improvements, multi-use spaces and indoor courts, fundraising capacity, and ongoing acumen as detailed in her presentation. She explained her team knew it would be important to test fit those program elements on the site, knowing the Centennial Park site has a limited capacity. She displayed a site plan showing the ground space required to include a 400 - meter track and multi-purpose courts, noting it would start to overlay the floodplain. That tells us the fieldhouse would need to be elevated one story with parking underneath. Ms. Peckinpaugh 08/23/21 -6- DRAFT stated there is precedence for doing that and her firm has elevated field houses in other communities and knows it is doable; however, it comes at a cost premium. She stated the site would also allow expansion of the existing building to get shared community spaces and take on an expanded aquatic center. The current site does have the capacity to fit the program elements; however, there are some design complexities and engineering that come with it. Ms. Peckinpaugh explained that throughout the strategic partnerships, focus groups, and events, they have had thousands of touchpoints with the community and it is clear to them that the community is engaged in this process. But, as she said earlier, this is just the first piece of community engagement and they view this as a continuum. Also, as Ms. Bjorklund said, a lot of the feedback they heard, in summary, has recurring themes. She highlighted the key themes being basketball and volleyball courts, splash pad, better connection to Centennial Park, educational programs, Maker’s space, game room, anything that supports diversity whether multicultural dance or wellness or prayer rooms, and services around mental health, addiction, and housi ng support. Ms. Peckinpaugh stated they believe they must continue to co-create the vision with the Community Center and, as a team, are committed to doing that. She introduced Mr. Hunden to present the analytical side of the economic and demographic analysis. Matthew Avila, Hunden Strategic Partners, stated he would first present drive time demographics and then get into the market analysis of other comparable facilities and how Brooklyn Center can differentiate itself from this Community Center. He reviewed drive time demographics to look at where people are coming from, the number of households, and the total population within the drive times. He noted the median age is slightly lower within a 15-minute drive time than when that drive time area is expanded. In looking at the number of households that will be captured in this large metropolitan area, there are a lot of people who will be attracted to the Community Center and bring about a large opportunity that some communities do not have. Mr. Handen stated they also did a walking time demographics analysis to understand who is right in the proximate area around the Community Center, noting that within 10-, 20-, and 30-minutes, the population is young and the median home value and income levels are slightly slower. He explained that understanding these different characteristics as well as the age and ethnicity breakdowns will be critical in programming the space to meet the needs of those communities. He presented the ethnicity breakdown within the walk times and explained it is important to note it mirrors what they received from their survey respondents that it is a very diverse population group and one that very much mirrors the entire Brooklyn Center community as a whole. So, they need to create an environment in which they will want to come whether walking or taking public transit to the facility. Mr. Handen reviewed the age distributions within walk times, noting the 25-34- year-old demographic group is the largest and that is also the largest survey respondent group and Ms. Bjorklund’s analysis from community outreach. Mr. Handen stated when looking at the population as a whole, the City is growing in line with the greater metropolitan area as Brooklyn Center is close to the metropolitan core but is growing slightly above the State and Country average, which is promising to see as other areas across the country are not seeing that growth. 08/23/21 -7- DRAFT Mr. Handen stated they wanted to note the age and ethnicity breakdown in Brooklyn Center as a whole and strong distribution in the 2021 population demographic results from the US Census Bureau, Brooklyn Center has a strong young population that is growing. He noted understanding that how to cater to those in the area, and programmatically results in what can be in the facility is important to look at. He stated all are aware the City is very diverse and has a community with so many backgrounds and ethnicities is a strong point for the City. Mr. Handen reviewed income and spending demographic data that looks closer at the persons per household as well as the homeownership rate, which is slightly below that of Hennepin County and Minnesota as a whole. He explained this is seen as an opportunity in bringing the community together and potentially elevating some of the demographic indicators. Mr. Handen stated they also wanted to touch on unemployment rates, noting Brooklyn Center, as a whole, tracks slightly above and represents an opportunity for the Brooklyn Center Community Center to bring in people for job fairs or community programs to enrich people. He stated if the City creates a space for people to come for resume workshops and things of that nature, it will hopefully bring the unemployment rate slightly lower in the future. Mr. Handen presented the tapestry segmentation analysis that takes the greater Brooklyn Center political boundary and understands, based on 67 unique segments, who the population is. The top three are Parks and Rec, Front Porches, and Metro Fusion. He explained that the median age of this tapestry segmentation is about 40 years old, they make approximately $60,000 a year, primarily owner-occupied homes, and the average household size is about 2.5 persons per household. This represents very middle America and that is the City’s largest group but the third largest group is the one he wants to note. Mr. Handen stated Front Porches has a median age of 34.9 years old with a median household income of around $43,000, which is slightly lower. A lot in this segment are renters or first -time home buyers. He explained that understanding these demographic groups is critical to understand who might be in this space and what they might need whether it is spaces for kids and families to come or whatnot. Mr. Handen stated the third group is Metro Fusion and is a highly diverse demographic group that is slightly younger with a median age of under 30 years old. They don’t make that much money but they are highly connected with the general community area. This is the one they have seen, from all their survey responses, is coming up the most in the 25-to-34-year-old demographic grouping. This is promising to see as one of the core demographic groups in Brooklyn Center. Mr. Handen recapped the analysis of the economic and demographic implications that Brooklyn Center is very diverse which is a strength so bringing it together is critical but understanding the distributions of age and ethnicities will help program the space in further phases to meet their needs. He noted there is a lot of opportunities. Mr. Handen stated they wanted to benchmark Brooklyn Center’s Community Center with other facilities in the local area to understand the strengths, opportunities, weaknesses, threats (SWOT) 08/23/21 -8- DRAFT of the City’s facility as it currently sits. He stated all are aware that the 50 -meter pool is a strong aspect of the facility as it is not seen widely in the area and the addition of a warm water pool for leisure/therapeutic use will elevate the facility. With opportunities, keeping it flexible and allowing for court space to meet the needs of tennis and transition to potentially have basketball and volleyball uses would be a strong opportunity as well as an elevated walking track above the courts. In addition, career counseling and workshop space would be a strong opportunity. Mr. Handen stated there are a few weaknesses, which the City Council/EDA and staff are aware of, and threats would be conflicting public and private rental use that can occur when you bring in anchor tenants, but strong management can mitigate those types of issues. Mr. Handen stated they used a service called Placer.ai, which tracks cell phone data to understand where people are coming from and characteristics about their visitation. He stated the City has 120,000 visitors per year (in 2019) and 80% of those come from within 10 miles and 7.5% come from over 20 miles. This data is used to compare with other facilities to understand differentiating factors that might attract people from further away. Mr. Handen reviewed community center industry trends, in general, noting there has been a strong push for outdated community centers built in the late-1980s to the 1990s to be rehabilitated and renovated into new spaces. COVID has thrown a wrench into some of the development, but now is a great time to revamp these spaces and bring communities together, which everyone so desires given the past few years. Mr. Handen reviewed what makes a community successful and trends seen across the board including having the flexibility of spaces for use by multiple people and targeted programming and marketing. He stated several other characteristics are noted in his presentation. Mr. Handen stated in looking at the local community center supply in the area, there are five that are very competitive, three of which he will review in more detail. The three main characteristics are having aquatic and fitness centers and gymnasiums. He reviewed a list of other meeting spaces, event venues, parks, and other recreation spaces that people might go to if not for the Brooklyn Center Community Center. For the aquatic supply, he noted there are only two other 50 -meter pools in the Minneapolis area. One is at the University of Minnesota and the other is the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center. There is another 50-meter pool planned, but not yet constructed. Mr. Handen stated this information shows Brooklyn Center has a strong opportunity for the 50-meter pool if marketed well and the water temperature is brought down to meet the competitive facility needs. Mr. Handen next provided a brief overview of rates at the four competitive community centers in the area and how they do rate distribution. With the Brooklyn Park Community Activity Center, their strong differentiating factor is their two ice rinks, which drive those from outside the area into their community and creates an economic impact. They believe the same can occur with the City’s 50-meter pool. Mr. Handen stated Brooklyn Park’s Community Activity Center also offers a free walking track, which is attractive to their citizens. Their rate distribution goes by a free entry fee rate for the walking track plus a small fee for different activities and seasons based on usage. Next, Mr. Handen reviewed Brooklyn Park’s visitation data, noting they see around 08/23/21 -9- DRAFT 450,000 visitors (2019) and over 23% of them came from a distance of over 20 miles. Those visitors are eating and shopping in Brooklyn Park, driving economic impact. Mr. Handen stated the Shoreview Community Center is a strong competitor. It was built in 1990, has monthly and annual membership fees options, a fitness center, multiple studios, basketball and volleyball courts, and an aquatic center. Their membership rates are slightly elevated compared to most in the area, though their annual fee is comparable with a private facility. He stated Brooklyn Center will note these rates and benchmark off them in the future. He stated the Shoreview visitation data shows almost 700,000 visitors a year, likely due to their Aquatic Center’s leisure aspect. He reviewed the 5% distribution of visits, which they see a lot for these kinds of facilities. Mr. Handen stated the Plymouth Community Center is a proposed facility with a projected cost of $50 million. Their current facility will be renovated and expanded with 80,000 sq. ft. over multiple phases. Phase 2 will be an active wing in the west parking lot and completed at the end of 2021. Phase 2 is the renovation of the existing education wing and will finish in the fall of 2022. He displayed renderings of Plymouth’s proposed expansion with flexible spaces, elevated walking track, and large play area for families. He stated their current facility has visitation of 200,000 visitors with 80% from within 10 miles. Mr. Handen presented a case study of the Bridges Sports Complex in West Virginia, noting it is one they have been tracking. It is a public-private partnership with the City of Bridgeport and SFN Network, the management group for the facility that was completed in 2021. It is an attractive facility with a 30,000 sq. ft. fitness center, 6 hardwood courts, a turf space, two indoor pools, and a clip and climb. It is used by members of the community and private groups who rent spaces. Mr. Handen stated from their interview with them, they drew some implications he wanted to include. Mr. Handen stated that the facility was projecting 500 members in their first year and got 1,300 members in their first month. That’s astounding for a community that is just over 8,000 residents. This means they are drawing people from around the area due to how they program the space, how it is laid out, and the quality of it. He noted this shows the importance of how a facility is run by bringing in a managing partner as well as accommodating dual usage with the rental and also space for the community because, at the end of the day, a place where residents like to be is a place where visitors like to be as well. Ms. Peckinpaugh stated in summary, their recommendations are to move into Phase 2 design planning scenarios with a focus on the key assets around the 50-meter pool, figuring out ways to make it better utilized, and looking at strategies to better engage Centennial Park as a key asset. They see there is an opportunity for growth expansion of the facility for multi -purpose activity spaces like the gyms, courts, track, or turf space, and larger aquatic center. They also believe those multi-purpose activity spaces could have a broader draw from around the region to get economic impact into Brooklyn Center. They highly recommend the City Council/EDA look at value-based services including the introduction of a multi-purpose court space that will not only draw visitors from across the region but also could be beneficial for community-based rec programming by the Parks Department and alleviate pressure from the schools. They think the introduction of informal 08/23/21 -10- DRAFT lounge space and multi-purpose rooms to allow for cultural enrichment and community-based programs would allow the Community Center to flourish. Ms. Peckinpaugh referenced the four project indicators that had been mentioned at the beginning of the presentation with answers as follows: 1. Is there public support for the renovation, expansion, or renewed investment in the Community Center? Yes, the Brooklyn Center Community Center is widely perceived as a community asset and the community would like to see improvements made. 2. Do the community demographics and market analysis have favorable indicators to support a renewed investment? While Brooklyn Center has a lower median household income, they do believe the Community Center provides an opportunity for low-cost programs to the surrounding area and to promote quality of life for the community. 3. Do the strategic partners that we talked to have complementary goals and resources? YFDS and Inner City Tennis, they believe, are the most viable partnerships for capital and operational partnerships and should be explored further in Phase 2. 4. Does Centennial Park have the capacity to accommodate improvements? Yes, it can accommodate renovation expansion of the facility but a shared parking approach and certainly paying attention to the flood plain will be important to the success of those plans. NEXT STEPS Ms. Peckinpaugh stated their recommendation for the next steps is to move into Phase 2 of the study with continued community engagement. They recommend exploring the following three planning strategies: 1. Just renovation and expansion of the existing facility focused on community recreation , wellness, and health needs. 2. Renovation and expansion of the existing facility focused on the community recreation, wellness needs including the YFDS and Inner City Tennis partnership. 3. Look at this as a new construction facility with or without City Hall on the Centennial Park site. Ms. Peckinpaugh noted their presentation includes a list of program recommendations that should be considered moving forward. She offered to hear the City Council’s/EDA’s questions and provide answers. Mayor/President Elliott opened the floor for questions and comments from Councilmembers/ Commissioners. Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan stated in the last few years, the City put a lot of money into basically major maintenance, repair, and upgrades of the HVAC system for the Community Center. So, the planning scenario he would like to see is one where the investment already made 08/23/21 -11- DRAFT in the existing building can be maximized. He would appreciate it if the presenter could address how they would picture that element of the building. Ms. Peckinpaugh stated certainly expansion planning scenarios 1 and 2 that they have recommended would build upon all the recent investment in the building. They would look at expanding the systems and certainly not consider a wholesale replacement approach. Councilmember/Commissioner Butler asked how were the groups identified, for example, Inner City Tennis, and are leaving space to engage other groups. She also wondered whether the Teen Tech Center with Best Buy was explored. Dr. Edwards stated the City was approached by the Inner City Tennis and other tennis and track organizations as interested parties but the City is open to exploring other parties as they move into Phase 2. Ms. Peckinpaugh reiterated they are certainly open to talking with additional partners and as they move into planning strategies with capital and operational projections, any partners that can contribute to capital construction costs or ongoing operational revenue sources are parties they’d have interested in speaking with. She stated they did not look into the Teen Tech Center with Best Buy but she’d be interested in learning more about that and certainly would welcome conversations around that. Councilmember/Commissioner Lawrence-Anderson thanked all of the presenters for a very thorough presentation and stated she looks forward to the next steps for a better Community Center going forward. Mayor/President Elliott stated hearing no more questions or comments from Councilmember/ Commissioner he will open the floor for community members to comment. Ms. Cary stated they just got notice at 3:23 p.m. that this meeting was going to happen so a lot of community members are not in attendance. She asked if the recorded portion of this presentation can be shared widely and asked that until the community can watch this presentation and give feedback and input, nothing move forward. Ms. Cary stated her 13-year-old son goes to the Teen Tech Center in St. Paul, which is a fantastic program and could get the City’s teens on the cutting edge of technology. She described the classes her son has taken and stated their mentors are culturally competent with state-of-the-art technology. They also have a technology library with things that can be checked out. Ms. Cary stated if the City can get that kind of program in the kid’s hands, it will be a game-changer for Brooklyn Center. Caroline Long stated we have mentioned before how Brooklyn Center is a diverse community and the presenters did some of the comparisons but it didn’t seem to her like they were comparisons as diverse as the City’s community. She suggested looking at the Capri Theater, located in North Minneapolis, which was just finished and includes the Best Buy Tech Center for youth, a recording studio, and an area where kids can play music and make videos. She asked if that can be checked out and included. Ms. Long stated another place with a diverse community use is Maple Grove, even though their population is not that diverse, with a teen center that has nightly programming 08/23/21 -12- DRAFT that a lot of youth of color participated in. She hoped since Brooklyn Center is a diverse community, that everything is viewed through an equity lens and we try to find those diverse areas that look more like us. Myrna Kauth, former Brooklyn Center Mayor, stated this sounds like a wonderful project for many years from now and wondered what the outlook is for doing a certain part at a time or will it be one big project. As a Brooklyn Center taxpayer, she is also concerned about the cost to our people and requested more detail on that concern. Ms. Peckinpaugh stated part of their scope of services for Phase 2 will look at an implementation plan, which may very well include phases in smaller implementation projects over time. The goal is to first develop a master plan for the facility and then to work as a team to figure out an implementation strategy that is feasible for the community. Alexander Koenig asked what the project manager envisions as the priority that is feasible as part of this project, the outside, the entrance renovation, structural, or more infrastructure. He also asked what would produce the first benefit to the community users. Ms. Peckinpaugh explained that it is premature to say but she thinks the two most apparent opportunities are a renovation to the aquatic center to increase utilization of the 50-meter pool and the addition of some multi-use court space. Those are the two elements that could drive revenue and more diverse, broad use of the facility. Diane Sannes stated she thinks many new residents ask other residents, ‘Where is the YWCA in Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Park? She asked if the City has looked at other options for organizations that do this as a business. Ms. Sannes stated maybe the Y is an option we should be looking into because a lot of these services could be handled by an outside non-profit organization like the Y and it would be great to have it in Brooklyn Center and not give it to Brooklyn Park. Ms. Sannes stated Brooklyn Center has eight different school boards and she did not hear much about input from the school district. She also heard no talk about Park Center, which is where the majority of Brooklyn Center’s high school seniors graduate from. She noted that Park Center is on the border of Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Park. Also, Brooklyn Park has a tennis center that was not mentioned. She noted some of the school’s students are not as diverse so we need to also study that and determine who we are. Ms. Sannes stated she does not feel this study has a pulse of Brooklyn Center’s schools and who it is. Ms. Peckinpaugh stated she is sorry, but will have to leave the meeting at this point to make another council presentation; however, her team will stay on and field questions. She explained that in the interest of time, what they have presented tonight is a summary of data with benchmarks of other facilities. She stated she will follow up with her team after the meeting. Mayor/President Elliott asked if there is any follow-up by team members on the questions already raised. 08/23/21 -13- DRAFT Ms. Bjorklund stated they will continue to reach out as the engagement process goes forward to make sure they reach as many people as possible. They understand the City is very diverse and they had focused on under-represented communities in multiple ways and with creative ideas to hear what people have to say. She stated there are more people out there, places to go, and people to talk with, and they will continue to do that. Matt Branch stated he does not think we have to look too far to invent something that has been running successfully. He noted that just a mile into Brooklyn Park the Zanewood Rec Center is an example of a successful program that is supported by their city with an emphasis from their Park and Rec Department. He stated the Brooklyn Park city council put a lot into Parks and Rec in collaboration with the Police Department. Everything is run out of the Zanewood Rec Center, it is a model that works, and could absolutely work in Brooklyn Center so he does not feel we need to think too hard or look too far, as things are happening close to home that is already working and we could try to replicate that in Brooklyn Center. Ebonie McMillan asked who is Brian Fullman. Brian Fullman, an organizer with the Barbershop & Black Congregation Cooperation of Isaiah, stated he is here as a stakeholder, was a resident of Brooklyn Center for 13 years, and organizes in both Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Park. Ms. McMillan thanked Mr. Fullman for the clarification. She stated she is currently a Brooklyn Center renter from Sterling Square Apartments and the last few months have been hard for her as a tenant dealing with an incompetent property management company. They have been put in debt of over $3,000 due to bad communication on their behalf and incorrect paperwork and ledgers. She stated if they were communicated with properly so they knew what was going on with their rent and new property management, Monarch, taking over, they would have been able to stay on top of things. Ms. McMillan stated there have been a lot of discrepancies and errors with money, which they don’t have to waste. She explained the management company has added late fees, lease violations, not allowed them to renew leases so they have run out over the summer, and their argument for not renewing is not by the book. Ms. McMillan stated she settled with them last week, costing over $2,000, which put her in the hole so the money she received from the City to replace damaged property from teargas or relocate, whet to the management company. She, along with her other neighbors, was trying to use that money to build their credit so they could relocate into a home instead of an apartment but now they are starting from scratch. She stated there is no remorse on the management company’s behalf and their tone has been arrogant so tenants feel there is no type of stability, no leases to present to show they are a resident, and the violations are holding them back from moving. Ms. McMillan stated they have all applied for rent help, with the help of Brooklyn Center a few months ago, and they all got approved. The money has been paid out or is on the way but that has been overlooked. She stated she should not have had to settle with payment out of her pocket. She got approved for over $2,000, they just got their payment last week, and now she has given all of her money. 08/23/21 -14- DRAFT Ms. McMillan stated all of her neighbors who were in the Zoom meeting with the City Council/EDA over the past month have been targeted by their property management since those meetings and Code violations were handed out. She asked if the City can enforce current laws towards landlords or make better laws to help this current situation. Mayor/President Elliott stated we will have Open Forum from 6:45 to 7 p.m. but this discussion is to focus on the expansion of the Community Center. He explained he did not want to interrupt Ms. McMillan because her comments are incredibly important and encouraged her to stay on and speak at the Open Forum, noting her comments have been heard and the City will follow up. Mayor/President Elliott asked if there are other questions or comments about the Community Center expansion. Dr. Edwards stated to all who are listening, the survey is still up and will continue to be held open on the City’s website. He encouraged all to share that information and let folks know that it is available and the City is open to hearing from folks throughout the community. Mayor/President Elliott asked one more time for comments, noting this is an important conversation for the community to assure there are opportunities and places for our residents and young people. No comments were offered. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan moved and Councilmember/Commissioner Butler seconded adjournment of the City Council/Economic Development Authority Work Session at 6:34 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. 08/23/21 -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 AUGUST 23, 2021 VIA ZOOM CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Study Session called to order by Mayor Mike Elliott at 6:35 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Mike Elliott and Councilmembers Marquita Butler, April Graves, Kris Lawrence- Anderson, and Dan Ryan. Also present were City Manager Reggie Edwards, City Attorney Troy Gilchrist, and City Clerk Barb Suciu. CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION OF AGENDA ITEMS AND QUESTIONS City Attorney Gilchrist noted a correction needed under Item 10. Council Consideration Items, Item c., to indicate the action relates to the adoption of an agenda to approve a memorandum of understanding and appointment of a project coordinator. It was the majority consensus of the City Council to accept the above correction to the August 23, 2021, Regular Council Session agenda wording. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson requested this evening that both Agenda Items 10c, Resolution Approving Memorandum of Understanding and to Appoint a Project Manager for Community Safety & Violence Prevention Implementation Committee, and 10d, Resolution Establishing the Position of Policy Aide to Provide High-Level Administrative Support to the Mayor, be removed and rescheduled to the next Work Session with those resolutions, and then placed on the Regular Session agenda. She requested this because they are both budget items and these two positions should have been included in the Administration budget discussion after reviewal by the Financial Commission and at the Joint Study Session as well. They should have been included and considered with all other departments for the 2022 budget meetings. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson noted that an affirmative vote on these two items tonight, will automatically place into the 2022 budget a placeholder not knowing what the financial budget impact to the City’s levy will be and it places all other departments under higher financial scrutiny as we may have to cut from other areas to propose a reasonable levy. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she does not believe it is fiscally responsible or transparent to add these items to the agenda without further consideration with our normal due budget process and without community engagement on this component as well. Again, she 08/23/21 -2- DRAFT requested these two items be removed from this evening’s agenda and added to the next Work Session, then placed on the agenda for the next regularly scheduled meeting. Mayor Elliott stated we need to have this position in place as soon as possible, especially the Project Coordinator, noting there are two other positions starting and partners coming on board to provide technical assistance to the City after it passed this landmark resolution. He noted the positions would start October 25, 2021, because it takes time to post a position, make an application, and interview. This is a requirement for the partners we have coming on board. He suggested the City Council listen to the presentation this evening, look at the proposed source of funding, and then make a decision. Mayor Elliott felt that taking it off the agenda and moving it out a month or several weeks is past the time when the other FUSE positions will be starting and that will not be good on our part because we need the capacity to implement the resolution. He stated he is pushing back and saying we need to consider this tonight and at least hear the presentation. Then the City Council can take a direction. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she has thoroughly read all of the information and if you read the resolution about the Public Engagement Manager, it also indicates further that this person is a legislative aide. She noted that Item 10c references one item but when you read the resolution, it references something else so further discussion is necessary and she does not think two weeks is too much time. Therefore, that is her position. Councilmember Ryan stated he concurs with Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson on this matter because, again, the City Council has not had a Work Session to lay the groundwork for how we will structure the approach for the Community Safety Resolution implementation. Again, he finds this puts the ‘cart before the horse’ and by imposing a deadline when we should act upon i t in a well-organized manner and move forward in regular steps promptly. However, we need to lay the groundwork for how this is done. Councilmember Ryan stated he has some reservations about placing this outside of the purview and control of the City Manager. To him, it is an unprecedented structure that is being offered so the City Council and should have a more thorough review of this completely, stated he is sure those parties who have expressed an interest in assisting the City are not just going to go away because we are setting this back one meeting to do the Work Session to unpack all of the elements. Councilmember Ryan stated again he concurs with Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson but on the unresolved unanswered questions related to implementation, more so than on the budget. Councilmember Butler asked the City Council about the concern in terms of this exact position. She stated she hears the concerns about the structure and that it is different than we’ve had before with reporting to the City Manager versus the Mayor and we can have a further discussion about that. She is concerned that in some instances, we want to be involved in what is going on in the day-to-day but in other instances, we don’t. She thinks the City Council needs to be clear in what they want to be involved in and what they do not and that needs to be consistent. So, if Dr. Edwards decides to add a position, we don’t scrutinize it like what is happening right now. 08/23/21 -3- DRAFT Councilmember Butler stated she thinks there needs to be a Work Session around the whole resolution, where we are, where we are going, and steps in place because it seems a lot of people are unclear. She stated she has personally asked for meetings with Mayor Elliott and Dr. Edwards so she is clear on what is happening and that is the responsibility of everyone if they feel they are not up to speed. She agrees there needs to be a Work Session about the whole resolution; however, when it comes to this position, as we discussed the last time, we know we need som ebody to coordinate the Safety Resolution the City Council passed. She noted Dr. Edwards has been clear that his staff cannot take on this work as they do not have the capacity so it is known we need this position. She asked if we will risk losing two FTEs that are being given to us because we need to have one more meeting about this. Councilmember Butler stated she thinks people need to think about it and separate the issue of the resolution and how it is being implemented with this actual position. She thinks all agree that this position is needed to coordinate the work and we need to be clear on what the concern is and separate that. If the issue is who this person reports to, then let’s have that discussion but tabling it altogether because we need a Work Session, risks losing the two FTEs that are being donated so that would not be a smart decision. Mayor Elliott stated he has a presentation this evening that gives an update to the City Council on the implementation so far. He thinks that may help to answer some of the questions folks have. Councilmember Ryan stated since we are on this discussion, he appreciates the comments of Councilmember Butler as it was helpful. He stated another concern he has if we go with the structure that is outside the City Manager’s purview or, what he prefers, and handle this like a regular RFP. He does not understand why there is a deadline or timeline where if we take another two weeks, the entity offering two FTE will just walk. He noted that is something they can be asked about but also, he would feel better if this was handled like a regular RFP as there may be other agencies who could assist us in this manner as well. Councilmember Ryan stated we need to have that discussion and he would feel better if this was under the control of the City Manager. Councilmember Ryan asked how long it would take the City Manager, if instructed by the City Council, to build the capacity needed so we run this as we have with other important efforts of the City given the City Manager form of government we operate under. Mayor Elliott stated these are issues we can address when we discuss these two positions this evening. At that time, it would be more appropriate because then the City Manager and City Attorney can weigh in. He noted that tonight’s meeting packet includes the MOU, position description, and resolution. Mayor Elliott assured the City Council that the City Manager and City Attorney and he have had many, many meetings and talked through the structure, position, and how it would work. He stated the City Council needs the opportunity to listen to that this evening in an attempt to gain a full understanding of the work we are doing now and how we need to move forward. Then the City Council can decide. 08/23/21 -4- DRAFT Councilmember Ryan stated if the Mayor wants his vote, either whether through as a conventional RFP under the purview of the City Manager or with this new structure where the City Council appoints this Program Coordinator position, he wants this position to report to the City Council, not just to the Mayor. He stated that is his bottom-line condition if Mayor Elliott wants his vote. MISCELLANEOUS COMMUNITY PUBLIC SAFETY RESOLUTION UPDATE Mayor Elliott stated he has an update on the Public Safety Resolution and then the City Council will move into the Regular Session City Council agenda and Open Forum. Mayor Elliott provided a presentation to give an update on the implementation process since the City Council passed the Daunte Wright and Kobe Dimock-Heisler Community Safety and Violence Prevention Act. He reminded the City Council of what that resolution established to create the overall Community Safety & Violence Prevention Department with the existing Police Department and Fire Department under it and also create the Traffic Enforcement Department and Community Response Department. He noted the Traffic Enforcement Department is responsible for enforcing non-moving violations in the City and the Community Response Department is an un-armed civilian department made up of trained medical and mental health professionals, social workers, and volunteers responsible for responding to incidents where a City resident is experiencing medical mental health disability or other behavioral or social need. Mayor Elliott displayed another slide to give a better visual of the breakdown on what those departments will look like, noting it sets up the Community Safety & Violence Prevention Committee whose job is to ensure there is input at all levels of the implementation process and ensure there is proper review of police union contracts and provide comments during those negotiations that are headed by Dr. Edwards. They also are to make recommendations to the City Council on how to change or initiate programs and policies to improve community safety and prevent violence. Lastly, they are to review and make recommendations on police use of force during the protest and otherwise. Mayor Elliott stated also in the resolution was the implementation of immediate safety-oriented policy changes, namely the citation of someone’s policy that requires police officers to issue citations only and prohibit custodial arrests for low-level offenses. These include non-moving traffic infractions, non-felony offenses, and non-warrants. Mayor Elliott stated the basic structure is being set up is the Implementation Committee with various subcommittees that will get into the weeds on the different elements of the resolution. Under the Implementation Committee will be a Data Subcommittee focused on looking at all the data we get on public safety, stops, arrests, and citations in the City. The Community Response Subcommittee will focus on setting up all the programs and different types of responses that will emanate out of the Community Response Subcommittee. That includes the mental health team response. As an example, in other cities, there are community folks, such as elders, who can respond if there is conflict. Another example of community response is a mediation center dealing with neighbor-to-neighbor conflict in the city or conflict between people that do not necessarily 08/23/21 -5- DRAFT require a police officer to show up. Mayor Elliott stated there will be a Civilian Traffic Enforcement Subcommittee to look at what types of policies need to be put into place. He stated the Community Department of Safety Subcommittee will house all of our public safety programs. Mayor Elliott stated in terms of citation and summons, a policy has been drafted and is currently with the City Attorney and Prosecutors and they hope to have that policy implemented shortly. He noted the resolution called for that policy to be implemented forthwith but it has taken some time to work through the State Statutes and make sure it is in alignment with all the laws and all stakeholders are involved and part of the process of setting up that policy. Mayor Elliott explained that policy says instead of arresting people, we are going to issue them a citation and let them have their day in court. The significance of this policy is that if similar policies had been in place, it would have allowed the police to simply issue a ticket and walk away from George Floyd, Eric Garner, Mike Brown, and many other folks who have been killed after the police used deadly force in trying to make an arrest for rather low-level offenses. This is an area where we have made a lot of progress and hope that policy will be implemented soon and the City Council will be able to see progress in that area. Mayor Elliott next presented the timeline, noting that over the past three months, they have created and posted the Implementation Committee application on the City’s website; drafted the Cite and Summons Policy; secured funds in collaboration with FUSE valued at $300,000 for two positions to help us move forward in the work we are doing with implementing the resolution recognizing fully that we don’t have all the resources we need as a city in terms of money to fully staff all of the programs so they are working to secure additional funds to help fully implement the work; and, he along with Dr. Edwards and the City Attorney have been working with potential partners including FUSE and LEAP, an organization that works with municipalities on public safety reform. Mayor Elliott stated a former chief of police had spoken and testified at one of the Community Listening Sessions and they have met with his organization as well to provide some technical assistance and support for the implementation work. Mayor Elliott displayed the job descriptions for the two FUSE-funded positions. He stated those positions are posted online and people have started to apply. The first position will be focused on using data to enhance transformative public safety reforms and help us make sure we are gathering all the key important data needed to drive the conversations we will have in the Implementation Committee and its Subcommittees and help us shape our public safety reform. Also to look at how we use the data to drive the decisions we make in crafting policies, setting up new programs, and types of investments we make in public safety. The City will partner with FUSE and this position will be a quasi-data chief that will be hired by FUSE, not the City, and then assigned to the City of Brooklyn Center. The job is to harness the data so we can effectively tell a story of our public safety current realities and where we are driving towards. Mayor Elliott stated the second position is focused on building an equity-driven and culturally 08/23/21 -6- DRAFT responsive government through authentic community engagement focused on the work of the Implementation Committee. It is about building trust through this position with the community, building partnerships with residents across all the different spectrums in terms of diversity, and ensuring they are viewed as the decision-makers and co-designers in the City processes and policies. This position is also posted and both positions will be assigned to the City for one year and potentially two years. Mayor Elliott stated FUSE is currently working with a handful of other cities that are all big cities like Seattle, Houston, and Milwaukee. FUSE does not typically work with cities of our size. But, because of the bold step we took to pass this resolution, they decided to come on board to help us by providing resources fully recognizing we need support to fully implement the resolution. Mayor Elliott displayed the website where the two job applications are posted. Mayor Elliott presented the timeline going forward, noting they have started with community outreach and he has been working with community partners like Barbershop & Black Congregation Cooperation of Isaiah (BBCC) and he spoke yesterday to the congregation at Do Not Miss Church here in Brooklyn Center. He stated 20 people expressed interest in signing up for the Implementation Committee and being involved with the work we are doing. There are three or four more community outreach engagements over the next several weeks to make sure folks are informed and the application is available where they are. He noted that many people took applications yesterday and they are hoping more will be submitted as a result of this outreach. Mayor Elliott stated part of the outreach is a community update Town Hall event on September 9, 2021, from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. at the Centennial Hall Amphitheater. It will be an opportunity to update the community on what has been happening with the implementation as well as an opportunity to recruit and give people the applications for the Implementation Committee. Mayor Elliott stated on September 15, 2021, they anticipate they will start the interview process for those who have applied to the Implementation Committee. Then on September 27, 2021, he will have appointments for the City Council to approve during their meeting. It is anticipated that on September 29, 2021, they will have the Implementation Committee’s first meeting and on October 4, 2021, the Project Coordinator will start. He noted these times may be adjusted slightly to make sure the Project Coordinator is on board before the Committee’s first meeting. Mayor Elliott stated on October 25, 2021, the two FUSE executive fellows (data position and engagement position) will begin their work in Brooklyn Center to focus on the work of the Implementation Committee. On October 30, 2021, they anticipate they will work with some of the implementation partners to provide technical, facilitation, and law enforcement-focused technical assistance. LEAP is one of the partners they have met with and they work with partners on crafting public safety policing policies, reform, and also alternative community response models. They have been in conversations with LEAP and are looking at working with them starting around October 30, 2021. On November 8, 2021, the Implementation Committee will present a brief initial report to the City Council on what they are working on and what the trajectory looks like in the coming months. That will be followed by additional reports to the City Council. Mayor Elliott stated it is critically important that we are getting the capacities needed now to be 08/23/21 -7- DRAFT able to get all of this work done, timeline it out in a way to implement the resolution , and update the community and City Council regularly and timely fashion. He noted there is a ton of work to do here and it has been several months since the resolution was passed so they need to move forward to get the additional capacities needed so they can be effective in the work the City Council has approved. Mayor Elliott stated that is a brief update on the work they have done and the timeline going forward. He asked whether the Councilmembers had any questions, comments, or suggestions. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she did not know about much of what was just presented or the dates for the process that is in place right now. She does not know that the City Council has been in the loop on any of this. She stated this is new to her and she is concerned and would like to ask Dr. Edwards a question. She indicated she still has grave concerns over the method of this presentation and its addition to the 2022 budget when this could have been a line item included when we had our budget discussion with the Financial Commission a few weeks ago and talked about the Administration budget. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she is concerned we are potentially voting in favor of this tonight and automatically approving this for the next budget year at the risk of existing staffing within our budget. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson requested permission to ask Dr. Edwards about logistics. Mayor Elliott stated this is an update on the implementation so far and the discussion on those two positions will have an opportunity for Dr. Edwards and the City Attorney to comment on. He stated this is an opportunity for the City Council to see what the timeline looks like. He stated we so desperately need this capacity in place so the City Council can get more regular updates. That is one of the things the Project Coordinator will help build out the capacity to do just that. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated this presentation during the Administration budget meeting from a couple of weeks ago would have been more timely than placing it before the City Council the night they are voting. She asked Dr. Edwards, as it has been presented to him in multiple meetings with the Mayor and City Attorney, are these viable and can we support and afford these new positions at this time. She asked Dr. Edwards to comment on a timeframe in which we can successfully implement everything being proposed, which seems to be a bit lofty. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she is not opposed to making changes to our Public Safety Department but she is questioning how we are doing this. She feels a bit rushed with the vote tonight when she would prefer, as she said in the last meeting, a separate Work Session should be held and then bring it to a vote. Dr. Edwards stated from a fiscal perspective, he anticipates in the next budget meeting being able to present, as part of the overall budget, some funding for a Coordinator/Manager for beginning some type of capacity for the resolution and things it calls for. That is the extent, from his perspective, of what we can afford. Dr. Edwards explained that one position would move us substantially as far as a levy increase. 08/23/21 -8- DRAFT Mayor Elliott stated he anticipates Dr. Edwards will provide the City Council with information but in terms of this presentation, he would like to close out the Study Session. Then the City Council can move to the Regular Session and talk about the positions and costs and things like that so the City Council is well informed before making a decision. He stated he didn’t mean to cut off Dr. Edward’s comments but felt this was getting into a discussion about the positions themselves when this portion of the agenda is focused on the update. Mayor Elliott stated if it is alright with Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson, we will come back to that and have the City Manager provide the requested information. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated it is critical for the people listening and watching this evening to know what one position will do to the levy. This is pertinent information and the public, as the taxpayer, has the right to that information before the City Council voting on a topic. Mayor Elliott stated he could not agree more. ADJOURN STUDY SESSION TO INFORMAL OPEN FORUM WITH CITY COUNCIL Mayor Elliott adjourned the Study Session to Informal Open Forum at 7:19 p.m. 08/23/21 -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 AUGUST 23, 2021 VIA ZOOM 1. INFORMAL OPEN FORUM WITH CITY COUNCIL CALL TO ORDER INFORMAL OPEN FORUM The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Informal Open Forum called to order by Mayor Mike Elliott at 7:19 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Mike Elliott and Councilmembers Marquita Butler, April Graves, Kris Lawrence- Anderson, and Dan Ryan. Also present were City Manager Reggie Edwards, Community Development Director Meg Beekman, City Clerk Barb Suciu, and City Attorney Troy Gilchrist. Mayor Mike Elliott opened the meeting for Informal Open Forum. Lori Bardal addressed the City Council and staff and stated she is following up on the topic of memorials, which she brought to their attention on August 9, 2021. She had requested a memorial for Kobe Dimock-Heisler at Kylon Park, updates to the existing Daunte Wright memorial but received no response. She reviewed why it is important to move forward with these memorials and the violence prevention resolution as it acknowledges we need to make these changes and be sure to honor the lives of these two very special young men. She noted August 31 will mark the second anniversary since Kobe Dimock-Heisler was killed, nearly five months since Daunte Wright was killed, and three months since the resolution was passed. She asked to take a moment to reflect on the uprising last April when people were saddened, angry at the system, and demanded answers from the City. She noted the City Council and staff put in extra hours during that time and were under stress because residents were demanding answers. Lori Bardal stated the multistrand fence surrounding the Police Department remains intact as the trial of Kim Potter nears, which begs the question of what we can do so it never happens again. She stated the resolution was a start and we need to implement it. We knew there would be costs involved and the Mayor has done due diligence by researching and getting input from local experts and leaders. She stated her support for a push forward and appoint a Project Manager and Policy Aide as both will support the needs of the Mayor, community, and City Council Members, noting their time is valued and these positions are needed to make the resolution sustainable. Lori Bardal stated about the topic of cost, she would urge the City Council to think about what they can’t afford, such as another uprising and businesses shutting down, an $800,000 settlement, or one more life lost. She believed that stalling this process could result in more blood on the City 08/23/21 -2- DRAFT Council’s hands. She stated if Council Members do not understand the urgency, we will come to you during the next crisis. Myrna Kauth, former Brooklyn Center Mayor, stated Mayor Elliott was a member of the City’s Charter Committee. Mayor Elliott confirmed he was a member of that Committee but does not remember for how long. Ms. Kauth asked Mayor Elliott whether he studied the Charter while serving on the Commission. Mayor Elliott answered yes and asked Ms. Kauth to continue with her question. Ms. Kauth stated in the hiring for the City, the only thing the City Council is supposed to do is hire the City Manager. All other employees should be hired by the City Manager and that is stated in the City’s Charter. Amity Dimock, mother of Kobe Dimock-Heisler, one of the children the reformation was named after, stated the reform passed by the City Council, who residents voted in, was a measure taken, timelines were put in place, and now there seems to be weird bureaucracy and red tape with people trying slow the process down. She stated this is not an ordinary process, it is a reform to assure other lives are not lost in cases where they clearly should not have been lost. Ms. Dimock stated the longer we sit and people come up with excuses to not move forward with the timelines we have agreed upon is very heartbreaking. She found it hard to listen to meeting after meeting and still be at a point where nothing is going forward. Ms. Dimock stated we did not want this reform to appease us, we wanted it to make a significant change that helps everybody. She felt this was a life and death discussion and we need to move forward. She begged the City Council to do their jobs, make it happen, and not make excuses. Katie Wright stated in May when the City Council voted on the resolution, it was one of the happiest moments she had since her son was murdered because it was a little bit of justice for them, which was amazing. But now listening to the last few Sessions, and it is held up by minor things, lives are on the line. She referenced comments by Ms. Dimock and Lori B. that to wait any longer and continue the discussion, even just a week, means a lot of community members still not being safe. She stated our police officers are still the same, nothing has changed, it is business as usual, and that is frustrating and heartbreaking to a parent that has to go to their son’s memorial in the same City in which he was murdered and noting has changed. Ms. Wright stated she has other children who are driving on the streets of Brooklyn Center because they live, work, shop, and visit friends there, but nothing has changed. She stated it went from May being a great day for them when the resolution was voted on and passed, but not implementing as quickly as possible is like a punch in their face, like it was passed to appease them but implementing is not happening. Ms. Wright stated if this is not implemented as soon as possible, she hopes it is not one of your children that ends up having a memorial on a City block. Brian Fullman, an organizer with the Barbershop & Black Congregation Cooperation (BBCC) of Isaiah, referenced what the City Council is hearing tonight, and stated he is an organizer because he saw the lack of prioritizing of the community in what they need. He wants to be sure the leadership of Brooklyn Center is not doing that, noting there will always be an obstacle or something not perfect or aligned when you are dealing with something as transformational as this. 08/23/21 -3- DRAFT He felt the issue is that a lot of people are in pain who were able to experience a raindrop of justice but still have not seen if it is radical or practical, real or in the cloud. Mr. Fullman stated this resolution needs to be rolled out and he is having a tough time understanding why a position that needs to be filled is then further discussed, how you operate with that position, and how it aligns with what you are doing. He asked why it has to be held up if it is a position that needs to be filled and he thinks the money is there. He thinks desperate times call for desperate measures. He noted kids are being killed, there are no relationships with public safety now and at a minimum, residents, and constituents of Brooklyn Center deserve to know concrete steps are being put forth. Mr. Fullman stated he is the lead of BBCC and other powerful, amazing, and brilliant organizations are partnering with Mayor Elliott to make sure the resolution is implemented but sometimes your willingness and passion do not equate to your capacity. So as a lead organizer with a staff of three, and he is in the middle of a fight for his life in Minneapolis because they want to deliver what Brooklyn Center has amazingly done. He noted when you talk about the tours the Mayor is on with civic engagement, that is the job of the FUSE 2 option. He asked how long can we do that when there are other areas the Mayor needs to organize and build infrastructure for. He is concerned if we do not put somebody in place for that position and indoctrinate them around this process, we will have a Coordinator who is always behind and not able to do the job. He felt this was a different magnitude and level and there is a lot at stake. He noted he respects the questions of the City Council and is asking that they expedite the process and share the urgency of residents to deliver this implementation and roll this out on time. Mr. Fullman stated the last thing you want are constituents who are hopeless and cynical about the government of Brooklyn Center. Councilmember Ryan stated he appreciates the comments of Mr. Fullman, noting Informal Open Forum is not to be used for problem-solving or reacting to the comments made but rather hearing the presenter for informational purposes only. Respecting that, he would appreciate hearing from this gentleman personally and speaking to him because he hit on several excellent points. Councilmember Ryan noted this is not the time, but he would like the opportunity to dialogue with Mr. Fullman and encouraged him to contact him so he can address some of Mr. Fullman’s concerns as what gets lost is the difficulty with implementation. Councilmember Ryan stated we are all trying to get to a better place and concerns are how to have a better implementation, noting he did vote in support of the resolution on May 15, 2021. Mayor Elliott stated he hopes Councilmember Ryan will extend him the same offer, to meet with him. Councilmember Ryan stated that can be discussed at another time. Mayor Elliott stated he is happy to meet with Councilmember Ryan at any time and thinks it would do a lot of good. Arvid Sorensen stated he has looked at the proposals and wonders why are they again bypassing the City Manager for hiring and reporting to the City Manager. Mayor Elliott stated the hiring and reporting process for these two positions is something they will go over and the City Attorney will walk through how that will work in alignment with the City Charter. 08/23/21 -4- DRAFT Ms. Bardal stated it is important to point out that the two positions through FUSE are also funded through FUSE at no cost to Brooklyn Center and we need to push forward on that quickly so we don’t lose that FUSE funding as it will be a huge part of the Implementation Committee and moving forward quickly with expert opinions, research, and provide background we would not have otherwise. Councilmember Graves asked Mayor Elliott to clarify for Ms. Bardal that is not correct. Mayor Elliott stated Ms. Bardal was speaking only about the FUSE data position and the community engagement position that is fully funded by FUSE. He stated there are another two positions before the City Council this evening that is not funded by FUSE. Councilmember Graves noted technically, the City Council is talking about four positions, two would be funded by FUSE, and two are on the Regular Session agenda and will be discussed under Council consideration items. Those two positions would be funded by the City. Mayor Elliott stated that is correct. Ms. Bardal stated she understands that and wants others to know that of the four positions, two are being funded by FUSE and we want to take advantage of that and push forward quickly to get everything moving. The Project Coordinator would be funded by Brooklyn Center and is also a key part to oversee the implementation process. The Policy Aide would be able to assist with City Council in addition to the Mayor. She thinks if there is better communication to the community in how this is working, people can understand why it is so important. Ebonie McMillan stated she had made comments during the Study Session. Mayor Elliott asked Ms. McMillian to summarize her key comments and he will ask the City Clerk to transfer her earlier comments to Informal Open Forum. Ms. McMillian stated she is a tenant in Sterling Square Apartments and speaking on behalf of other tenants as well who have been dealing with Monarch, an incompetent property management company, who has not renewed any leases, not given valid reasons why given out lease violations and late fees due to the CARES Act being removed, and applied the payment to the wrong ledgers. She explained tenants have not been properly informed about the removal of the grant or fees until last month and the management company is not willing to remove any violations or correct errors unless you are willing to settle for a certain amount of money. She stated the costs are $2,200 to $3,000 since February because the CARES act was removed. She spent over $2,000 to settle, and her credit score dropped 50 points due to this. Ms. McMillian explained that many tenants were trying to use the money from Brooklyn Center to relocate or replace damaged property and build credit to purchase a home but now that is not possible. Ms. McMillian stated many are not clear about the next steps in renting or if they will be pushed out and end up homeless. She would like the City to enforce the current laws on landlords or make better laws to protect renters in Brooklyn Center. Mayor Elliott stated Dr. Edwards will follow up with Ms. McMillian on these important concerns, noting housing is of utmost importance and especially during this pandemic. 08/23/21 -5- DRAFT Dr. Edwards explained one of the challenges is that when people communicate virtually at a meeting, they do not fill out a card with their name and contact information. When communicating at virtual meetings, staff has no access to that information or the ability to reach out to them. He stated to communicate with the speaker, he will need that information. Mayor Elliott asked City Clerk Barb Suciu if people can message her directly and not have it viewed by others. City Clerk Barb Suciu replied anything in the chat goes directly to her. Mayor Elliott asked Ms. McMillian to message her contact information in the chat. Ms. McMillian stated she would do that. Lofte Ulum, Georgetown Park, stated she is an organizer and they had a meeting two months ago to raise the same issues but nothing has been done about it. She reviewed the items that had been discussed at that meeting and reported that 3-5 cars are still being towed daily, even with a parking permit. She stated they also asked for a security camera because in the morning many car tires are deflated so they can’t go to work so they can pay their bills. Instead of putting up security cameras, the residents were told to use the garages but the garages don’t have locks. She appealed to the City to talk to their management to install security cameras. Ms. Ulum stated there are a lot of apartment complexes where they are not renewing leases and residents are put on a month-to-month lease. She thinks that tenant protection should require automatic lease renewal because of COVID. She stated if a tenant does something crazy, then that’s why they don’t renew a lease but otherwise, leases should be renewed automatically. She stated they have children, their credit is very bad, and now they won’t renew their lease. Ms. Ulum recounted what had happened to a tenant who lost her father and the people who came to sit with them had their cars towed for no reason. She stated when they call management, they don’t do anything about it. She asked the City to help them by reaching out to the landlords. Mayor Elliott stated it is sad to hear that is happening and explained that the City had stopped towing during the winter because the costs for residents pile up and they lose their vehicles. He asked Dr. Edwards if this has come up before and has the City reached out to management. Dr. Edwards stated staff has had communications with tenants and management but there are some things where staff is limited in what they can do as far as the landlords, which has been discussed with the City Council. He will follow up on this issue and with Georgetown. Dr. Edwards invited Ms. Beekman to speak about what the City has done concerning Georgetown Apartments. Community Development Director Meg Beekman stated she has done a few weekly updates to the City Council on this topic and she can prepare another summary report. She stated staff has met with Georgetown residents on several occasions as have some Council Members. The staff is well aware of all of these issues and worked with the City Attorney and management company to address some of them. The parking lot, for example, has been redone and a lot of the traffic and circulation issues raised previously have been addressed but there are some issues the City does not have the authority to oversee or require the management company to address, such as adding security cameras and changing how they administer their parking policy. 08/23/21 -6- DRAFT Ms. Beekman stated these issues are being explored as staff drafts a Tenant Protection Ordinance and staff have also met with Georgetown residents to review this ordinance and get their input. She stated staff will continue to hold listening sessions with tenants about this but the ordinance intends to address issues the current Code does not address. She noted there are also issues the State Statutes do not allow the City to do regardless of what is in the Code. Mayor Elliott asked what is the significance of moving tenants to month-to-month leases as it pertains to the eviction moratorium. Ms. Beekman explained that generally speaking, a lease is a contract between two private parties and the lease duration is not something the City regulates, with a few exceptions. The current Tenant Protection Ordinance addresses point of sale to provide some provisions for notification requirements but there is no blanket ordinance to protect tenants across the board in that regard. She stated a landlord has the authority to alter lease provisions when it is being renewed. Ms. Beekman stated she can surmise as to why a landlord would do that (more to month-to-month leases) but it would not be productive to the discussion tonight. She explained it does not alter the eviction moratorium requirements the Governor put into place and if an eviction is going to proceed, those processes would have to be followed. But it does make non -renewals easier to do and that can be used as retaliation on tenants who complain or have issues. Ms. Beekman stated while it is a problem, it is not one currently the City has the authority to do anything about. Mayor Elliott stated he is sincerely troubled about what is being described. He asked Dr. Edwards to follow up with this speaker and asked her to provide contact information directly to the City Clerk through the chat feature. Mayor Elliott found this to be an emergency and he is hoping they can meet in the early part of this week. Dr. Edwards stated he will connect with the speaker, schedule time to hear more, and if there is something the City can do, they will do that and follow up. Mayor Elliott asked Dr. Edwards to review his calendar so he can coordinate the meeting. Kristie Campbell, a resident, stated she has been having problems with them towing cars even when she has the parking sticker. Her car was towed on Friday but she has a handicap parking sticker to use the handicap spot. On Friday morning, at 11 o’clock, when she went to her doctor's appointment, her parking sticker was laying on the dashboard but someone towed her car because the sticker was not hanging off the mirror. Since Friday, she has been trying to get her car back but every time she calls, he yells or hangs up on her. She stated other problems at Georgetown are broken windshields and slashed tires but management, when called, are rude and say there is nothing they can do about it and you should call the police. But, if you call the police, they say the apartment complex is responsible to handle it. Ms. Campbell explained they are not comfortable with saying anything because when they do, the management company tells you if you don’t want to be there you can move out. She has heard that twice from the rental office so, at Georgetown Homes, they live in fear. She stated she is a single mom so when her car is towed, she cannot go to work or do anything without paying for a ride. 08/23/21 -7- DRAFT Mayor Elliott stated they can count on him to reach out to them tomorrow and see what solutions they can come up with because it is heartbreaking to hear what is being described. Mayor Elliott asked Ms. Campbell to provide her contact information in the chat feature so it only goes to the City Clerk and the information is protected. Mayor Elliott noted that Informal Open Forum has gone over in time significantly but it is important to hear from the community. No one else wished to address the City Council. Mayor Elliott moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to close the Informal Open Forum at 8:07 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. 2. INVOCATION Mayor Elliott stated he would forego the Invocation, in the interest of time. 3. CALL TO ORDER REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Regular Session called to order by Mayor Mike Elliott at 8:07 p.m. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson noted, as discussed at the earlier Work Session, it has not yet been determined if we are continuing with Agenda Items 10c, Resolution Approving Memorandum of Understanding and to Appoint a Project Manager for Community Safety & Violence prevention Implementation Committee, and 10d, Resolution Establishing the Position of Policy Aide to Provide High-Level Administrative Support to the Mayor. Mayor Elliott stated that can be discussed under Item 6, Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda. 4. ROLL CALL Mayor Mike Elliott and Councilmembers Marquita Butler, April Graves, Kris Lawrence- Anderson, and Dan Ryan. Also present were City Manager Reggie Edwards, Interim Finance Director Andy Splinter, City Engineer Mike Albers, City Clerk Barb Suciu, and City Attorney Troy Gilchrist. 5. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 6. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA 08/23/21 -8- DRAFT Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson noted, as discussed at the earlier Work Session, it has not yet been determined if we are continuing with Agenda Items 10c, Resolution Approving Memorandum of Understanding and to Appoint a Project Manager for Community Safety & Violence prevention Implementation Committee, and 10d, Resolution Establishing the Position of Policy Aide to Provide High-Level Administrative Support to the Mayor. Mayor Elliott stated he will make a motion and following a second, the agenda items can be discussed. Mayor Elliott moved and Councilmember Butler seconded to approve the Agenda and Consent Agenda, as amended to correct the Agenda title of Item 10. Council Consideration Items, Item c., to indicate: ‘Resolution Approving Memorandum of Understanding and to Appoint a Project Manager for Community Safety & Violence Prevention Implementation Committee. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated there are too many questions that have not been resolved to her satisfaction and as with any positions, they are always vetted through the budget process so she does not think the City Council should be voting to approve two positions without, at a minimum, one more Work Session. She stated the Mayor’s presentation tonight was nice and she appreciates it, but it should have been given during the budget meeting with the Administration Department on July 19, 2021. That would have given the City Council a month to review it before tonight’s vote. She believes Items 10c and 10d should be removed from tonight’s agenda and if not, she will not vote in favor of either of those agenda items this evening. Councilmember Ryan stated he is torn about this because he would like the City Council to proceed with this agenda, if for no other reason than to hear the presentations and what M ayor Elliott has offered and take into consideration his efforts in this very important undertaking. However, we have had months during which the City Council could have been more fully informed about how this implementation of the Violence Prevention and Police Reform Resolution could have been implemented. Councilmember Ryan noted all know the ‘why,’ to get to a better place but of equal importance, he believes, is how we do it. Councilmember Ryan stated he can appreciate the concerns expressed by those who question why we are even bringing up objections to how we implement this because they may not appreciate how important it is that the City’s leaders implement it properly. He stated he will approve of the agenda for tonight but still has those reservations. Councilmember Ryan stated the City Council should not be in a place where any member sha res those reservations because we should have been informed about how this was proceeding and should not put the ‘cart before the horses’ where we are imposing a deadline on the City Council where members are not fully informed. He stated he hopes Mayor Elliott can appreciate that but he also, at the same time, does not intend that as a personal criticism or attack because this is a very difficult and fraught complex undertaking. Councilmember Ryan stated he also has had real reservations about the resolution passed because it was something taken off the shelf that was designed and fitted for a jurisdiction larger than 08/23/21 -9- DRAFT Brooklyn Center. He hopes, in terms of implementation, it can be more subtle and nuanced, fitted more appropriately for a city of our size that is so diverse and financially challenged. Councilmember Ryan stated he hopes Mayor Elliott appreciates his comments and with that, he will hope we can proceed with a vote on the agenda and our business for this evening. After the above discussion, the following consent items were approved: 6a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. August 2, 2021 – Joint City Council and Financial Commission 2. August 9, 2021 - Study Session 3. August 9, 2021 – Regular Session 4. August 9, 2021 – Work Session 6b. LICENSES MECHANICAL Anderson's Residential Heating & A/C 1628 CO RD 10 #34 Spring Lake Park MN 55432 Metro Heating and Cooling 1220 Cope Ave E Maplewood MN 55109 Modern Heating & A/C 2318 First St NE Minneapolis MN 55418 RENTAL INITIAL (TYPE IV – six-month license) 1001 65th Avenue N. Messiah Moore/Bright Path Homes INITIAL (TYPE II – two-year license) 2618 64th Avenue N. HPA US1 LLC/Joseph Florczak 1519 Humboldt Place Calvin Johnson/Johnson Organ., Inc. 6224 Kyle Avenue N. Achraf Derbak RENEWAL (TYPE IV – six-month license) 6336 Beard Avenue N. Chen Zhou/Cosco Properties RENEWAL (TYPE III – one-year license) 7044 Drew Avenue N. Jennifer Lenhart & Jan Mohrfeld 2913 Nash Road Chen Zhou/Godiva Prop. met req. RENEWAL (TYPE II – two-year license) 201 65th Avenue N. Riverwood LLC Riverwood Estates 4214Lakeside Avenue N. James & Gloria Shoultz 5742 Fremont Bruce Alan Goldberg 4019 Joyce Lane IH3 Property IL 08/23/21 -10- DRAFT RENEWAL (TYPE I – three-year license) 5601 Lyndale Avenue N. Brett Hildreth/Dragon Prop. Mgm. 1500 72nd Avenue N. Mai Le – met requirements 6005 Admiral Place Dan Soffia 6613 Camden Drive Mark Herstrom/Mark One Resources 5121 France Avenue N. IH3 Property IL 4013 Joyce Lane Frederick Heim 4207 Lakeside Ave. #226 Beach Condominium Assoc. 5315 Logan Avenue N. Kirsten & Joel Carson 6907 Palmer Lake Drive FYR SFR Borrow LLC 6500 Willow Lane Brett Hildreth/Dragon Prop. Mgm. TOBACCO Ali Sudani / AM Brothers LLC dba Cloud 9 Smoke Shop 615 66th Ave Ste 5 Brooklyn Center MN 55430 6c. EXTENSION OF AUDIT SERVICE PROFESSIONAL CONTRACT 6d. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-96 APPROVING CHANGE ORDERS 1 AND 2 AND ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED AND AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYMENT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO 2020-08, LIFT STATION 6 REHABILITATION 6e. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-97 CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITY ACCOUNTS Motion passed unanimously. RECESS AND RECONVENE Mayor Elliott called for a short recess of the meeting at 8:19 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 8:26 p.m. with all in attendance. 7. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS/RECOGNITIONS/DONATIONS 7a. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-98 RECOGNIZING THE CITY CLERK FOR THE WORK DURING COVID-19 Mayor Elliott read in full a Resolution recognizing City Clerk Barb Suciu for her work with elections during the COVID-19 pandemic. Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2021-98 Expressing Recognition and Appreciation to Barb Suciu, City Clerk, for Conducting the 2020 Elections during the COVID-19 Pandemic. 08/23/21 -11- DRAFT Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated, from a personal note, she does very much appreciate how well the election in-person process went at City Hall. She was with an immune-suppressed individual and pleased to be able to walk into our facility and see how well everything was sanitized, masks worn, so indeed, Barb Suciu provided excellent leadership in coordinating the 2020 elections. She thanked Ms. Suciu. Councilmember Ryan stated he would echo the sentiments of Councilmember Lawrence- Anderson and liked to call out City Clerk Suciu for an outstanding job in managing what was a difficult and challenging election given all the factors in play. He stated because of the efforts of City Clerk Suciu, the public can have high confidence in the results of that election. With that, he stated he is pleased to be in favor of this resolution. Councilmember Butler stated she too wants to thank City Clerk Suciu for all of her work daily, noting she has a lot on her plate and is always very gracious and kind in responding to many requests from City Council, the public, or other staff members. She thanked City Clerk Suciu for all of her hard work, which is appreciated and she is glad we can recognize Ms. Suciu tonight. Councilmember Graves stated she does not have a lot to add but thinks this is well deserved not only for the election last year but in general, for the excellent job City Clerk Suciu does daily. She thanked City Clerk Suciu and stated she is grateful for this resolution. Mayor Elliott stated he echoes all of those sentiments as well for Madam Clerk and is grateful for the work she does, noting it intersects with the City Council a lot and he is grateful for her work on the election. He stated as Councilmember Graves alluded to, the work City Clerk Suciu does every day in helping us get our meetings in order and going from in -person to Zoom was not an easy feat but Ms. Suciu did it and the challenges notwithstanding, the adjustments have been made and he is grateful for the help Ms. Suciu has provided in facilitating City Council meetings. Motion passed unanimously. Ms. Suciu stated she wanted to thank everyone for their kind comments and, as we discussed at the Canvassing Board meeting, it was a joint effort by many, many people including the Deputy Clerk who helped a lot. She stated it was a lot of fun, which may be weird, but when you love what you do it comes pretty easy. Ms. Suciu again thanked the City Council. Mayor Elliott stated Ms. Suciu does have a team she works with, obviously, and thanked them as well. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS 8a. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-104 VACATING CERTAIN EASEMENTS WITHIN LOT 1, BLOCK 1, EVANGELICAL CHURCH OF THE MASTER 2ND ADDITION, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA Dr. Edwards introduced the item and invited Mr. Albers to make the staff presentation. 08/23/21 -12- DRAFT City Engineer Mike Albers stated this evening staff is asking the City Council to hold a public hearing on certain easements within Lot 1, Block 1 Evangelical Church of the Master 2nd Addition. He explained staff is recommending the City Council open the public hearing tonight and then immediately motion to continue the public hearing until September 27, 2021. Mr. Albers explained that typically staff brings these easement vacations along with the future plat of the area but, unfortunately, there were technical difficulties at the August Planning Commission meeting, which postponed the review of the plat until September 9, 2021. So, to align this to be on the same agenda as consideration of the final plat for this parcel, staff recommends the public hearing be continued to September 27, 2021. Councilmember Ryan requested a parliamentary clarification, noting staff’s recommendation is to open the public hearing now even though staff has suggested there be a continuance. Mayor Elliott stated the City Council is being asked to open the public hearing and then continue it. Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson seconded to open the Public Hearing. Mayor Elliott asked for a legal opinion on the recommended procedure. City Attorney Gilchrist advised the purpose of doing it this way allows the notices provided for the hearing this evening to carry over as well and the City does not have to repeat that step. Motion passed unanimously. Mayor Elliott moved and Councilmember Butler seconded to continue the Public Hearing to September 27, 2021 Motion passed unanimously. 9. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS None. 10. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS 10a. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-99 AWARDING THE SALE OF $8,950,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT AND UTILITY REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2021A FIXING THEIR FORM AND SPECIFICATIONS; DIRECTING THEIR EXECUTION AND DELIVERY; AND PROVIDING FOR THEIR PAYMENT Dr. Edwards introduced the item and invited Mr. Splinter to make the staff presentation. 08/23/21 -13- DRAFT Interim Finance Director Andy Splinter stated tonight we have the presentation of the sale of bonds. Bids were received this morning and opened at 10:30 a.m. The low bidder came in with an interest rate of 1.06%, which is a very good result. He invited Mr. Green to present the results. Doug Green, Bakertilly, stated it is a pleasure to be here this evening. He presented the bid results, noting it is all very good news and nothing needs to be debated here. Mr. Green stated they accepted bids for two projects, the 2021 Grandview Park Area South Improvements and Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Phase 2. He acknowledged these projects have multiple funding sources, as shown, and not all are financed with bonds. The Grandview Park Area South Improvement Project has about $7.3 million financed with bonds and another $3 million with cash. With the Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Phase 2 project, only the stormwater portion was financed with bonds and there is County and Federal money in that project as well. Mr. Green explained bonds are awarded based on the true interest cost, which takes into account the coupon yields and underwriter’s discount that is a fee they pay themselves. He reported Piper Sandler of Minneapolis was the winning bidder and an underwriter who is familiar with the City, understands its credit worthiness, and, therefore, submitted a very good bid of 1.06%. Mr. Green stated the resolution notes $8,950,000 but they are approving $8,010,000 because, in this low-interest-rate environment, the City received a fairly large premium. This means the underwriters, the bondholders, buy the bonds at greater than 100%. They take that amount, that premium, and reduce the amount needed to borrow. He stated the City went out presale to bond for $8,950,000 and they don’t estimate what the premium will be but in this case, it was pretty high. Mr. Green noted costs for issuance and underwriter’s discount, which gets to the amount deposited into the project fund, noting it is very similar. He stated they estimate the true interest rate is 1.22% and post-sale, it is 1.08%, which will reduce the annual debt service slightly. Mr. Green provided an overview of the pricing summary for this bond, noting the City is borrowing $8,010,000 at the coupon interest rates depicted in the chart on display. He noted if borrowing $8,950,000 at these effective yields, it would end up with a very similar dollar price. Mr. Green explained they allow the end writers to bid it this way to meet their own needs and our funding needs for the project. Mr. Green then presented information related to debt service and repayment resources, noting $8,010,000 over ten years at these coupons results in approximately $945,000 in annual debt service but that is split up with only 23% paid for with property taxes, 15% from levy, and the rest with Utility funds. He provided a comparison with the past five bond issues, noting it is right in line, reflects the market, and just a little higher than last year’s, which is not uncommon to see. Mr. Green explained that Brooklyn Center’s credit rating is AA, which is a very high credit score, the third-highest. He noted the Standard & Poor’s credit rating report is available if anyone wants to read it. He stated, importantly, the City retained its AA credit rating though there was a negative outlook due to potential civil litigation and its financial impact. He stated when that gets worked out, he expects that negative outlook to be taken off the report and to go back to a stable outlook. 08/23/21 -14- DRAFT Mr. Green stated it is hard to know how that negative outlook affected the interest rate received because it was so low, but maybe the City would have received additional bids. He stated the fact is, the City still got very low-interest rates. Mr. Green noted the rest of the Standard & Poor’s report indicates the City has a very strong financial position and annual budget performance, strong financial management, manageable debt burden, and pension liabilities, and lower economic indicators compared to higher-rated cities. He stated the decertification of Tax Increment Finance (TIF) District #3 will greatly help the City’s market value. Mr. Green stated the updated resolution is before the City Council and if approved, over the next few weeks they will have some closing paperwork and the bond proceeds will be wired to the City in about a month. He offered to answer questions. Mayor Elliott asked the Councilmembers if there were any questions. Councilmember Ryan stated he has been around long enough to have taken in several of Mr. Green’s presentations and is always pleased to hear the City has exhibited sound financial management as indicated by Mr. Green’s presentation and the fact that when we borrow, we can do so at such a favorable term. He thanked Mr. Green for his presentation, noting this borrowing is for worthy purposes, not operations, but for physical assets. Mayor Elliott moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2021-99 Awarding the Sale of $8,010,000 General Obligation Improvement and Utility Revenue Bonds, Series 2021A Fixing their Form and Specifications; Directing their Execution and Delivery, and Providing for their Payment Motion passed unanimously. Dr. Edwards thanked Mr. Splinter for all of his work to prepare for the bond sale as well as Mr. Green for his advisement, and Ms. Beekman for her participation. He noted it was fairly dicey going into the conversation with Standard & Poors on the overall economic condition given the circumstances, income, and matters from a financial perspective within the City. So, Standard & Poors did an excellent job and during these challenging times they were able to present the financial picture and portfolio of Brooklyn Center and it allowed us to have a very favorable bond rating and to move forward with the sale of bonds at the lowest interest rate. Mr. Edwards thanked the City Council for their sound fiscal policy, noting it is not often that we come to see when sound fiscal policy shows up and goes into effect. But, when the City issues bonds, that is the moment they see whether the financial strategies and sound fiscal policies the City Council has put into place will show up. He noted that even during difficult times, the City Council has been able to manage and stick to those sound fiscal policies. 10b. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-100 APPOINTING REPRESENTATIVES AND ALTERNATES TO PARTICIPATE IN THE JOINT AIRPORT ZONING BOARD 08/23/21 -15- DRAFT (JAZB) Mayor Elliott introduced the item and stated the Metropolitan Airport Commission reached out recently to request that he make an appointment to this Board that will be established to develop and implement an Airport Safety and Land Use Zoning Ordinance for the Crystal Airport, which affects Brooklyn Center, New Hope, Robbinsdale, and Minneapolis. This is according to Minnesota Statute 360.061. He explained the two representatives from Brooklyn Center and neighboring cities will begin to meet as a Board in September or October of this year. Mayor Elliott stated we want to make sure we have representation on that board and on the elected side he will appoint himself and Councilmember Butler as alternate and based on the recommendation of staff he will appoint City Planner and Zoning Administrator Ginny McIntosh to serve as the representative and Associate Planner Olivia Boerschinger to serve as an alternate. Mayor Elliott read in full the resolution under consideration. Councilmember Butler moved and Mayor Elliott seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2021- 100 Appointing Representatives and Alternates to Participate in the Joint Airport Zoning Board (JAZB). Motion passed unanimously. 10c. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-101 APPROVING MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING TO APPOINT A PROJECT MANAGER FOR COMMUNITY SAFETY & VIOLENCE PREVENTION IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE Mayor Elliott introduced the item and invited Mr. Gilchrist to present the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) followed by a presentation of the position description for the Project Coordinator, and accompanying resolution. City Attorney Gilchrist explained this position originated with the Mayor’s request to consider a Policy Aide position and part of the packet information presented several months ago when he raised questions in a memorandum wondering how that squares with the Charter. He noted two provisions of the Charter, particularly one that talks about the City Manager essentially hiring and firing City staff and then another talking about City Council Members not interfering with the administration of staff or direct the hire or fire of individuals. So, keeping that distance between the City Council and City Manager in the operational side of City government. Mr. Gilchrist stated that was a question he raised and since then, had several conversations with the Mayor and City Manager about options to consider, and that discussion evolved over several months. One of the points being made is that the City Charter does not contemplate Legislative Aides that work directly with the elected officials and he thinks that is true, noting these Charters were drafted typically in the 1950s and 1960s when there was not a lot of contemplation the cities would grow to the point where a position like that would be necessary. 08/23/21 -16- DRAFT Mr. Gilchrist stated he was still struggling with how you square that with the Charter so with the idea that a Legislative Aid position would be legislative and not operational, it does create this bond between how can you have a City Manager that oversees and manages a position that is directly tied to, working with, and assisting an elected official. That discussion then evolved and it was the City Manager’s idea to have a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) formalizing that distinction between the operational side of the City government and the legislative side of the City government. Mr. Gilchrist stated they worked on several drafts and came up with an idea that stays consistent with the Charter yet still recognizes that distinction between operations and legislation. Of course, the City Manager rightfully was concerned so the MOU includes language talking about the separation of those duties and that the Legislative Aid position is not directing operations staff and vice versa. Mr. Gilchrist presented the MOU that would be entered into between the City Council and the City Manager with the idea that the City Manager is agreeing that to the extent the City Council wants to establish Legislative Aid positions, which is a generic term to recognize it is a legislative position, and assigned to one or more elected officials. He stated those are the general terms used and in talking about how to make that distinction in how to hire, manage, and fire someone in a Legislative Aide position, it boils down to the City Council establishing the position by resolution. Each one of these positions would be established by resolution. There are two resolutions before the City Council tonight but it is up to the City Council to decide whether to establish one of these positions and then if established, they would be managed under the MOU. Mr. Gilchrist presented the selection language, which stays consistent with the hire/fire authority of the City Manager. This MOU means the City Manager agrees that the ele cted official this Legislative Aide is assigned to would participate in the interviews. If the elected official indicates Candidate C is the one who would work best to fulfill the position that the City Council authorized, then the City Manager would agree to hire Candidate C for that position. So technically, it is still the City Manager who makes the hiring decision but through this MOU, it is the person the assigned elected official indicates. This goes back to the notion that ultimately the person being hired is working directly with that elected official as an assistant. So, logically speaking, that official should have input on who best would fulfill that position. And, hiring would still be done under all applicable City policies and laws, etc. Mr. Gilchrist stated with management, it is different as the position would be directly managed by and overseen by the assigned elected official. He clarified that ‘elected official’ is a generic term for any on the City Council, noting the resolution adopted when the position is created would identify the elected official(s) to which they are assigned. He stated as Dr. Edwards had pointed out, it is not unlike the directors in the City handling things where the City Manager is not directly involved with managing every City employee as it is a delegation to the Directors who ultimately report to the City Manager and he makes decisions based on the Director’s recommendations. Mr. Gilchrist reviewed the discipline and removal paragraph that goes through the elected official in directing discipline or dismissal of the person to the City Manager who takes action recognizing 08/23/21 -17- DRAFT that while elected officials and the City Manager will consult with other folks, such as the Director of Human Resources, as needed. Mr. Gilchrist explained the noninterference language that was of particular importance to the City Manager to make it clear the Legislative Aide works directly with the elected official and will comply with the duties of the position and the elected official agrees not to assign duties or direct the Legislative Aide in a way that would conflict with operations or direct City staff or assign a significant amount of work or tasks to City operations staff. Mr. Gilchrist stated all other requests for assistance from staff would go through the City Manager, which safeguards operations from being diverted into legislative tasks. Mr. Gilchrist stated another point raised by the City Manager relates to the budget, that it would be included as part of the Mayor and Council portion of the City’s budget. He stated they hope the dispute resolution never becomes an issue but if there is a problem between operational and legislative staff, the language sets out a process and framework to resolve that. Mr. Gilchrist concluded the review of the MOU terms, noting the section indicating this is an important document, it manages that relationship between legislative and operational staff and recommends periodic review to ensure it is being complied with. Mr. Gilchrist stated that is the gist of the MOU. Mr. Gilchrist stated with the first resolution, if adopted, does two things. It adopts the MOU he just reviewed and creates the Project Coordinator position. He explained the first action to consider would be to adopt the MOU and the next action item is to then create the Project Coordinator position. The subsequent creation of additional Legislative Aide positions, as proposed in the following resolution, are managed under the MOU. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated for clarification purposes, the Project Coordinator position to assist with the implementation of the Safety Act would be temporary and not a full- time permanent position. She asked if the position would sunset. Mayor Elliott stated the City Council could, at any time or when they see the work of the Implementation Committee coming to an end, act to end the position and put on a timeline ending the position. But, until this position gets on and the Committee is created with the timeline, we don’t know exactly when that will be. Mayor Elliott stated he generally agrees with what Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson is saying. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she wanted to understand that at such a time that everything is implemented, then the City Council will evaluate this position. Mayor Elliott stated that is correct. Councilmember Ryan stated he would like to remind other members of the City Council as well as all who are listening to this deliberation that we have had months to lay the groundwork for this implementation. Yet, we are hearing tonight that this is an impending deadline we have to act upon where the groundwork has not been laid. With that statement, he wanted to ask a couple of questions of the attorney. 08/23/21 -18- DRAFT Councilmember Ryan asked if this is rather unprecedented for a Home Rule Charter City that adheres to the Council-Manager form of government. He asked if we are patterning something from Ramsey County where some of these practices have been implemented where County board members hire staff outside of the executive director of the County. Mr. Gilchrist stated this is creative but not unprecedented in the fact that we certainly know the City of Berkeley has this and locally, Minneapolis has aide positions but they are expressly provided for in their Charter. He noted this came up in Ramsey County discussions and the City Manager can elaborate on that. Having an idea this is a Charter County and they do have this arrangement where they make that distinction between legislative and operational and as he understands it, the City Manager worked in that system so the MOU was his idea, which is reflective of his experience in working with Ramsey County and how they manage that relationship. Councilmember Ryan stated he has some reservations about how this will be operationalized because one of the things he has concerns with is how to preserve our system of government that has served us so well. He used this year’s budget to illustrate a process where we have used the same old system and model of government to pass a very unprecedented budget where human needs have been addressed. So, to erode the Council-Manager form of government, though maybe standing up for something obscure, is setting precedent for the future. Councilmember Ryan stated in the Councils he has served on over his 15 years it has always been a real concern. He hopes the reservation he has expressed will be understood in that context and he appreciates the candor of the City Attorney in presenting the MOU. Dr. Edwards stated several City Council meetings ago, he spoke on this issue and wanted to underscore some of the things he said then and will again mention now. He wants to offer clarity so the City Council is clear about the structure and intent and operationalizing of such a position. He stated he considers himself a vanguard of government structures, has worked in various types of governments and understands the rationale and reason for safeguards and the intended results and purpose of such parameters, such as that in the Council-Manager form of government that allows, for the most part, operation with a sense of efficiency and effectiveness and taking the sense of politicalness out of the administration of the organization. Dr. Edwards stated he has worked in Charter organizations, including Ramsey County, in which there is a county manager akin to a city manager but yet the legislative body has the assistance. He does not view that the legislative body having assistance jeopardizes the integrity of a Council- Manager structure of government. It is operationalizing that would interfere with the integrity of that structure, which is why the MOU was created. He recognizes that the City Council may have an interest in having some assistance but he wants to assure that does not infringe upon the authority and responsibilities of the City Manager to govern the operational body of the organization. Dr. Edwards stated for clarity purposes, a legislative position would merely serve as an extension of one of you as the legislative body and the responsibilities and purpose of that work would be legislative, or in other words, political. In approving such a position, the City Council would be 08/23/21 -19- DRAFT doing so with the understanding they are using taxpayer dollars and supporting the creation of a political position that will work from a political perspective at the political will of the elected officials. He explained that is important to know because the work of such a position could derive from anyone of the political desires or bents on a particular issue. He noted the MOU tries to distinguish and separate that authority to assure that is the case and the position does not infringe upon the operational side of the organization. Dr. Edwards stated as it relates to managing and hiring, for any individual hired by the City, laws still apply so should the person believe they are being managed in a way that is bullying or abuse or any other type of issue that may arise, that employee has the right to challenge. This position would operate under the laws and policies as articulated by the City Attorney. It does not allow the elected official free reigns to manage someone in any kind of manner as we still adhere to the laws and policies we have established as a City. Dr. Edwards stated the primary thing he wanted the City Council to understand is that he does not think having a position jeopardizes the integrity of a Council-Manager form of government. If it infringed upon the operationalizing of the position by establishing the MOU, we hope that it does not and that will be the measure used should the time come. Should staff indicate to him or he observes what he thinks is an infringement, he will bring that to the City Council for dissolution of the MOU and not be in agreement if the position or elected body was to do that which was contrary to the Charter and infringe on the management of the operations of the organization. Dr. Edwards stated from his perspective, there is a different issue whether or not the City Council hires a Project Manager or a Legislative Aide because this would apply to any position that is hired simply to serve the City Council or Mayor. He stated it is important to separate whether you are in favor of the MOU and if so, then would you approve the position as proposed. Dr. Edwards stated he has thoughts about budgetary implications on the positions themselves but he wanted to offer his perspective on the MOU as a separate and individual document and its implications on the operation of the organization. Councilmember Ryan stated he appreciates the input provided by Dr. Edwards and has a follow- on question. He asked if it is an essential component of the ethics of a City Manager not to show favoritism to any one member of a City Council. Dr. Edwards answered absolutely. Councilmember Ryan stated one of his concerns is, and not being directed at any one member of the City Council, but we have to be concerned about precedent established for future Mayors and City Councils who will serve the City. So, if this is implemented, even without intention, if it favors the Mayor over the Council Members, how does that impact that ethical imperative of the City Manager. Dr. Edwards stated that is a good question and from his perspective, the answer rests in the creation of a position by the City Council, noting the City Council is establishing the precedent so, for example, when they established a Mayor’s office, they did not necessarily establish a Council Mayor office. Right or wrong, the City Council made that decision and that is similar to this. If this is a position that serves the body and the City Council supports the notion that they are one 08/23/21 -20- DRAFT body, then a position being established that answers to all would be more in alignment with the spirit of this structure. If the City Council establishes a position for any one Council Member, then it may, from his perspective, challenge the integrity of being able to assure all Council Members are equally treated with equal access to resources and ability to make informed decisions in an equal manner. Dr. Edwards noted the Mayor has made the argument about the differences, and that is up to the City Council to determine whether or not they concur. It rests with the City Council and he thinks the City Council would be setting precedent in how it deliberates and decisions are made. He does not think the position itself jeopardizes the integrity but how it is utilized and the structure and operationalizing of it can and will set practice and precedent so he would challenge the City Council to think about that and if they choose to move forward, are they willing to establish a position for the Mayor alone with the intent they can do more for Councilmembers in the future, or are they creating a position that applies to all with a portion of time shared between members. Dr. Edwards stated to create a position for the Mayor and not address the needs of the City Council, in his perspective, would have some implications. Councilmember Ryan stated that is the nexus of his concern and he appreciates Dr. Edward’s walking through a number of those difficult issues because, in his humble opinion, we have to establish procedures that are consistent with the fundamental law of the City and help us to move forward and facilitate and expedite the implementation of the public safety resolution. He stated the Council Members need to reflect on those issues, which he does not raise lightly or with the intent of obstructing the implementation of public safety and police reform. Councilmember Ryan stated he hopes all understand the spirit in which he raises these issues. Dr. Edwards stated if the City Council intends to move forward with the Implementation Committee and the Resolution as passed, in his opinion, that cannot be done without additional resources to do that. Whether or not the City Council approves such work to be done with the Mayor as Chair or with the City Council or with the Administration, that can be discussed but he wants to underscore if the resolution is moved forward, there needs to be additional capacity and it does not exist now. He stated from a City perspective, they can potentially fund it for a short period but it would have to move to other dollars as there is no ability to sustain it over a year or two years. He explained that to make any headway on implementation of the Resolution and coordination, the City does not currently have the fiscal capacity to do that. Dr. Edwards stated from his perspective and observation, he believes if moved forward, some capacity needs to be created. Mr. Gilchrist addressed the concern on the form of government, noting that is an important question and one that needs to be safeguarded. He advised that for any of the positions to come into existence, the majority of the City Council act to establish them with the agreement of the City Manager and under the terms of the MOU. Within the MOU are provisions to safeguard the distinction between legislative and operations. Mr. Gilchrist stated fundamentally, he does not see this would change or undermine the continuity or structure of the government. And, frankly, as the City Manager indicated, if he experiences any 08/23/21 -21- DRAFT bleed-over where he thinks there is interference, then he has every right to raise that with the Mayor if the person is assigned to the Mayor. If that does not resolve it, then he can bring it to the City Council. He thought there were sufficient safeguards in the MOU to protect the form of government and address issues should they arise down the line. Mayor Elliott stated in terms of questions raised around the two positions proposed this evening, there are ARP dollars that the City Council can allocate for the Project Coordinator position. The ARP is $3.4 million of federal funds earmarked for us, $1.5 million is already going to the City Manager, and some of that could be allocated to the Project Coordinator position, which the City Manager estimates will be $65,000 to $75,000 for the base salary and an additional 27% for benefits, totaling around $100,000. He stated it would be the same for the Legislative Aide position. Mayor Elliott stated if the City Council chooses to allocate some of that funding to the Project Coordinator position, they could do so in the years 2021, 2022, and probably part of 2023 as the City has two years to utilize those funds. Then in subsequent budget years, that position could either be phased out, or if there is additional work to do, the costs could be worked into the budget slowly but anticipating the ARP funds would probably fully cover the duration of the Project Coordinator position. Mayor Elliott stated in terms of the Policy Aide position, it would have an impact of around $15,000 to $20,000 for the remainder of 2021 and need to be added to the Council Mayor portion of the budget for subsequent years. He stated in talking with the City Manager, it is possible to find those funds this year for the Policy Aide position. Mayor Elliott stated he wanted to share that around funding and how these positions will be paid for because those are possibilities. Mayor Elliott reviewed the job description for the Project Coordinator, which is Exhibit A to the accompanying resolution, noting it is to assist in the implementation of the Public Safety Act, report directly to the Mayor and will coordinate the projects for the implementation process for the Daunte Wright and Kobe Dimock-Heisler Community Safety and Violence Prevention Act. The position will help develop the scope of work, timelines for the Implementation Committee and its Subcommittees, serve a coordinating role with partners, and build relationships with stakeholders to help ensure the resolution is fully implemented promptly. Mayor Elliott stated some of the duties for this position include managing and coordinating the community-oriented public safety resolution implementation process; all related stakeholders; activities such as community participation and public information sessions, technical assistance, and communication; provide information and technical expertise; advise and service to individuals, groups, and organizations serving the Implementation Committee and its Subcommittees; lead partners in the collection, organizing, analyzing, and reporting performance measurement data, information, and research results; and, prepare and make presentations on the work of the Implementation Committee for a variety of audiences including elected officials and senior management. Mayor Elliott stated this position will not directly supervise but will be the primary point of contact for the two FUSE positions and any monies the City Council chooses to allocate to the 08/23/21 -22- DRAFT Implementation Committee, this person would help facilitate the spending of those amounts of monies. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated we are berating this tonight and she apologizes to the public but had we gone through the normal process of vetting positions during our budget meetings, we could have alleviated a lot of it. She has concerns about the resolution about the Public Safety Project Coordinator as far as the Mayor overseeing that position exclusively and Chairing that Committee as well. She does not think that the person chairing the Public Safety Committee should have an opinion going into it. Rather, it should be a neutral unbiased party. Nor would she insinuate or imply or recommend someone from a public safety directive be in charge of that Committee. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she takes opposition that the Mayor would serve as the Chair and thinks a member of the City Council should not Chair that Committee. She felt a liaison would be fine and she also believes the Committee should include members of the Public Safety Committee as liaisons, meaning Fire and Police Departments should be on that Committee to serve as a resource. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson noted that Dr. Edwards did not complete his comments on the financial ramifications of the positions and she wants to make sure he has an opportunity to finish what he started speaking to about the positions in question this evening. Dr. Edwards stated he and the Mayor have had conversations so he is not saying an ything new. He explained when the City Council adopted the resolution, there was an intent of the City Council and since then he has thought about how to initiate the intent and spirit of that resolution. He knew, as there were deliberations about the resolution, that the creation of multiple departments was fiscally impossible from his estimation so he had raised some questions around how we can at least scribe the departments by the unit of government. Dr. Edwards stated he raised this because it matters when looking at the full picture as it relates to budgetary and costs. If we were talking about the Project Manager in isolation to the direction to implement a public safety apparatus and new units within the organization, in addition to the Legislative Aide, in totality, that is a completely different picture than anyone in isolation. He has been thinking about how we can move forward, what can we afford to move forward, and what he can recommend to the City Council. Dr. Edwards stated the City Council has $184,000 in the City budget or about 1%. If we look at a position that is around the $65,000 to $70,000 position, it will cost roughly $100,000 to $104,000. If there are Legislative Aid and Project Manager positions to get started to implement the public safety resolution, in totality, it will be around $300,000 just in wages and benefits. You also need a place for the employee to sit, pencils, paper, resources to do something. So, for the most part, it will cost another $50,000 to $75,000 for the person to be able to do something. Dr. Edward stated when thinking about three positions and an additional $300,000 and the cost for the person to do work, then the cost is $450,000 for three positions. He stated that would not include the prospect of creating a department and trying to do work, whether around mental health folks going out into the field dealing with health issues or civilians trying to address minor offenses and things of that nature. 08/23/21 -23- DRAFT Dr. Edwards stated in totality, he did not view we could afford that so he would recommend in the budget a position in an office of Public Safety and Health and Prevention to begin to manage and coordinate the City’s effort to ensure there is a prevention and health lens to all we do in public safety. From his perspective, to get started, that is where he recommends we start. With the Project Manager, he believes we need some type of coordination whether that position is managed by the Mayor, the City Council, or City Manager. He suggested we try to use some ARP funding for that type of position and because it is time-sensitive, we do not want to create a position that may have ties in years to come and do it with one-time revenue sources. He noted the ARP funds will end so he would not recommend creating a position we anticipate being permanent with part-time funds because that means at some point, we have to provide those funds and that would be financially challenging. Dr. Edwards recommended if looking at the Project Manager as a temporary position and using temporary resources to fund it, then when the fund goes away and the position goes away and the City does not have to figure out how to sustain something that’s long-term. Dr. Edwards stated as it relates to the Legislative Aide, again, doing it in totality, he has no perspectives one way or the other as it relates to the use or need of that position. It is up to the City Council to have that conversation and make that decision. He would recommend, for this year, it would not be financially affordable for the City if the City Council is going to provide resources to bring on a new position on the public safety side for implementation. From his perspective, that action would preclude the City Council from adding other positions because the City cannot afford it and it would move the levy increase out of the City Council’s comfort zone given the City’s debt, cost of living, and the cost of doing business. Dr. Edwards stated from an operation perspective, he would suggest staggering the positions and making an investment upfront with general fund dollars for the public safety help on prevention so that structure is started that the City Council passed in the resolution. He noted it would not be creating three departments but the City will be able to do something with other resources like grant funds. He recommended that as being the first stable investment as it seems to be the priority of the City Council. Dr. Edwards stated the second would be immediate resources or capacity to begin the process of planning implementation. He would recommend using short-term dollars because that is a temporary short-term need and to hold on to the legislative piece because that would be a long- term permanent need for funding and the City does not have th at capacity this year. He also recommended coming back to it in 2023 or going forward. Dr. Edwards stated that the recommendation is based on a financial perspective as well as operationalization and funding. Dr. Edwards stated as he has thought about how to get to what the City Council passed in this resolution and how to do that in a way that’s affordable for the community, that is his perspective on all the positions, legislative, Project Manager, and positions for the implementation of the Public Safety Resolution. Dr. Edwards stated that is his recommendation as far as logistics, how to stage it in a fiscally responsible manner, and what he believes can be done within the context of the budget restraints. 08/23/21 -24- DRAFT Mayor Elliott stated the second position is a Policy Aide position to provide high-level support to the office of Mayor. He reviewed that job description, noting the position supports the Mayor to conduct research, scheduling, help provide constituent services, and other related duties as has been previously discussed. Selection of the duties includes conducting research, providing documentation as needed for decisions and critical issues, providing information and documentation to inform the Mayor and City Council on their decisions by conducting topical research as required, managing the Mayor’s calendar including overseeing intake of events and meeting requests, managing and responding to constituent inquiries, and overseeing the Mayor’s media requests and communications. Mayor Elliott stated he has quite a few media requests, noting he first proposed this item before Daunte Wright was killed. When that happened, there was an inundation of media requests and no capacity so they hired a firm at $25,000 a month and the City still has that firm to provide media support. He stated he was getting inundated with meeting requests, calls from constituents, and that probably aged him a decade in those few months. Mayor Elliott stated this job is extremely stressful and another mayor had said to him they thought they knew what it meant as a councilmember to be in the mayor’s shoes but had no idea until they became the mayor. He stated there is only one person who knows what it is like to be in the position here, right now, in Brooklyn Center, and that is him. It is extremely stressful with a lot of pressure that he has to deal with at $1,000 a month and, because of the demands of the job, he can’t have another full-time job to support his family. He stated if this position is not approved tonight, he goes back to worrying about how he can carry on and continue to slug through. Mayor Elliott stated it happened that he had a colleague who reached out when Daunte Wright was killed who happened to have experience in government and said he needed critical support right now and asked how he could support and volunteer. Mayor Elliott stated this is a City government and he, as Mayor, serves in this government as the primary point of contact for everybody and he does not have the support. He stated this is untenable, noting a resident who had gotten into an accident had testified they reached out to the Mayor’s office for support at a critical time and couldn’t get a call back promptly. Mayor Elliott stated he does not think this position reflects the 2021 Brooklyn Center, noting he is not asking for more money for himself, he is asking for the capacity in this position to be able to do this job and meet modern-day Brooklyn Center’s needs. That is why he is proposing this position and, quite honestly, to him it is a matter of health at this point to not have this support position. Mayor Elliott stated he hopes we can answer the questions the City Council has, noting we are not necessarily out of the woods with this situation and there is a reason the fence around the Police Station is still up. He pleaded with the City Council, noting if we can spend $25,000 a month on media consultants, how can we say we don’t have the money to support a $5,000 a month position that can help with all of the demands coming into the Mayor’s office. He asked how we can say that in 2021, in the middle of a pandemic and uprising we experienced and are still being in a tenuous position. 08/23/21 -25- DRAFT Mayor Elliott stated, to him, this is an emergency request he is asking the Council to support these two positions. He stated, as he had mentioned earlier on the funding side, it is the City Council’s prerogative to pay for the Project Coordinator role with the ARP funds the federal government has given us. There is $1.5 million available today, that money has been earmarked and can be used for public safety reform work in any city around the country and many are using those funds for public safety work. He asked how fortunate is Brooklyn Center to have those funds available. Mayor Elliott thanked the City Council for listening to his comments and stated those are the two positions before them this evening along with the MOU that creates the framework. He stated in his early conversations with Dr. Edwards, he did convey that a position that works closely with the Mayor should report to the Mayor, it makes sense, and they have laid out a framework for that to happen. He stated the policy position is available to the City Council to access for support and on the question of whether they report to the whole City Council, he would ask how many of you have five bosses at your job, noting except for Dr. Edwards, which is a special situation. He stated these positions are working day-to-day with him directly. That is why it was structured in this way as it makes sense for that person as well because a Project Coordinator will not necessarily come on at $65,000 to $70,000 a year and handle reporting to five people. He pointed out that Dr. Edwards makes $150,000, reports to five people, and can balance all of their politics and desires and play that high-stakes game of pleasing everybody. Mayor Elliott stated he does not know how someone coming on as a Project Coordinator wants to or can do that. He stated it would not be necessary or fair to that person. Mayor Elliott stated he hopes we can move forward on these two positions and provide the critical support that we need. He asked for questions or comments from the City Council. Councilmember Ryan stated he hopes we can clarify that, as a City Council, we are going to address two discrete questions. The first question is the Project Coordinator and secondarily is the question for the Mayor’s full-time Policy Aide, which is quite unprecedented for the Mayor of Brooklyn Center. He thinks we should be clear on those issues so the first question is the Project Coordinator for the Implementation Committee and secondarily the Mayor’s Senior Policy Aide, which has been presented at numerous City Council meetings and then withdrawn over many meetings, going back to March of 2020. Mayor Elliott agreed there are two separate items on the agenda. Councilmember Graves noted it is past 10 o’clock and she is getting tired but will say she is not surprised there is some difficulty in working towards some of the more lofty goals because when we first learned about the resolution and had a big press conference, it was spontaneously called a couple of days before and the City Council did not have the chance to read the resolution through or discuss it. That was part of the reason she wanted to slow things down, emotions were high , and everybody wanted to do something to make sure that nothing like that ever happens again. Councilmember Graves stated because it was not something really inclusive and intentionally crafted with everyone who has to be the main stakeholders of implementing it, whether community members or City staff, we could come up with some obstacles in the actual implementation. 08/23/21 -26- DRAFT Councilmember Graves stated she is happy to hear about the two FUSE positions that will help with this work and wonders how they will be integrated into the City because this is work the City has to do with the community. She thinks that is also true for the Project Coordinator role, that they need to be a bridge both within the City, within the community, and also, to the City Council and leadership. Councilmember Graves stated she is not opposed to the Project Coordinator position at all and wonders about it being a narrow focus of policy and reporting only to the Mayor because she hopes there will not be a disconnect between the partnerships and information. She stated if just implementing, it is not going to be that one person and the Committee and FUSE people. It will have to be throughout the organization that is the City. She is not clear on where operations stop and implementation starts with this specific policy focus so there are some ways in which it is still not very clear to her and in some ways, she thinks it has to become part of operations because that is systems change. Councilmember Graves stated some of that is unclear to her, how exactly it will be integrated both into the community and into the City enterprise without jeopardizing some of the Charter rules the MOU protects against. She is not sure that structure is the best structure for the actual position we need to fill but may feel more confident about it if it was a position that was going to be within a specific part of the City, working with our other staff, City Manager, community, Implementation Committee, and stakeholders including FUSE and/or LEAP fellows. Councilmember Graves stated to her, it still seems disconnected and she is optimistic it will move things forward and improve communications so she knows what is going on and can be part of what needs to happen in the City. Councilmember Graves stated she feels like a lot of the time, as a Council Member, she does not know what is happening and then gets pushed into having to make a decision and if you’re not ready at that moment to make it, the community looks at you like you don’t care about the issues. She stated this is a crappy place to be all around. Councilmember Graves stated she is sorry to hear about Mayor Elliott’s struggles financially or otherwise and she has compassion for Mayor Elliott. But, she is not in favor of the second position although willing to provide some tips or emotional support as he navigates the leadership role and feels like she has been there to do that as a friend and colleague. She stated she is tired and does not want to continue this City Council meeting much longer so she hopes we can move on soon. Mayor Elliott stated to the question of making sure the position is fully integrated, all the meetings we have had, the City Manager and City Attorney have been part of so they are moving forward in an integrated way in terms of what they are doing with the Implementation Committee. He stated the City Manager’s comments to him were that this position works closely with the Mayor so it makes sense to have that position report to the Mayor. He stated this is not unusual, noting they are doing this work in Berkeley and when he met with the Berkeley mayor, he has positions like that which report to the Mayor and they have a city manager form of government. They have a position like this assigned to their mayor’s office who is working in just this way with the community, their council, and city staff to coordinate the efforts of the different moving parts and 08/23/21 -27- DRAFT with partners. Their work is deeply policy-wise in terms of facilitating that process to implement the resolution. Mayor Elliott stated he has had conversations with the Berkeley city manager about whether at some point this person may move over to operational in a different capacity. So, this is something he has talked through and thought about. He stated the y talk regularly and in one of their last conversations, it was about the need for them to continue having these conversations. Mayor Elliott acknowledged it will be a challenge however we put it so the only thing that works is regular conversations. He stated they talk once a day or once every other day and that will continue. Mayor Elliott stated this position will provide more information in a more timely manner with regular updates as well for the City Council and community in working with staff. He emphasized that point, noting it is also written in the position description to function in that way. Councilmember Ryan stated we all understand the why part of police reform as a pa thway to improve public safety. But, the how of police reform is equally of great importance. He thinks if we work effectively with our Police Department and cooperation and engagement of the community while doing police reform, we will have greater confidence in the critical undertaking that we do regarding implementation. Councilmember Ryan noted it is a very late hour with unresolved issues so he thinks we should schedule a Work Session where the City Council can come together on a consensus of how we proceed. He stated the public, quite reasonably, may be impatient with the City Council about why we are at this point, dithering about this. Councilmember Ryan noted Mayor Elliott has had months to help the City Council to be informed about how we are proceeding. But, yet again, on several occasions, we have been presented with an immediate deadline where we have to decide at the very last minute with very minimal information and expected to act on Mayor Elliott’s initiative. He stated this is an example of where the City Council has to exhibit better process and through better process, the City Council will demonstrate and can arrive at better results. Councilmember Ryan stated he does not mean to be attacking Mayor Elliott personally, and this is a very difficult thing, but this is a challenging effort that needs to be a collaborative effort. He hopes Mayor Elliott understands the spirit in which he is presenting his objections. Councilmember Ryan suggested the City Council hold off on considering these items, have a Work Session at the earliest date, resolve to a consensus, and then bring it back to a future City Council meeting. Mayor Elliott acknowledged it is getting late and he sees two people from the public who would like to speak. He stated he will entertain those comments and asked the speakers to be brief. Arvid Sorenson stated in the past he was a temporary employee and he had to sign that he was an at-will employee. That way he could be terminated at any time for any reason without consequence to the people who employed him. Mr. Sorenson stated he does not see that type of clause in the 08/23/21 -28- DRAFT MOU or resolution. He stated if approved, this should be an at-will employee of the City Council, not the Mayor. Shantel stated she sent a message to the City Clerk. She is a community member and it is getting late but she wants to make sure her feedback is heard. It is unheard of to her and those she has spoken with that there hasn’t been an assistant to the Mayor. That, to her area of residents, has posted those concerns. Shantel noted the Mayor can only do what is possible and has addressed some concerns with limitations and we are seeing that in our community. She stated the Mayor can’t do it alone and as we are seeing, it takes a village. Shantel stated as someone mentioned earlier, the time is now and that is clear because Brooklyn Center needs a team who will be responsive to the community. In addition to the fact, there are a few positions that already have funds, she is not sure about the other budgetary constraint concerns but the importance of having a Policy Aide to assist as a liaison to the community and demands needed. She noted the needs are greater now than they were two to five years ago. She stated we have to act in a moment if it is necessary. Mayor Elliott closed public comment. Councilmember Butler stated she wanted to reiterate what she had said earlier. She thinks we keep talking about not understanding what is happening and not being aware of the work that’s being done but we all need to take personal responsibility for that and if you want to know what is going on, you have to ask questions. She too felt out of the loop for a little while; however, she contacted Dr. Edwards and Mayor Elliott and requested a meeting so she knew what was happening and asked how she could help and be involved. Instead of complaining that you don’t know what is happening, she thinks if you feel that way you should take action, get involved, and ask questions if you want to be part of what is happening. Councilmember Butler stated she understands the feedback of feeling rushed and having to make a decision and she appreciates that feedback. But, in terms of feeling entirely out of the loop, she thinks you have to take more personal responsibility for that and ask the questions you need answers to. Councilmember Butler stated she has been at Children’s Hospital since 5 o’clock and stayed on the call so she would like for the City Council to conclude so she can be off the telephone and be attentive to her son. Councilmember Butler stated she would like the City Council to make a motion and take a vote. Councilmember Butler moved and Mayor Elliott seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2021- 101 Approving Memorandum of Understanding to Appoint a Project Manager for Community Safety & Violence Prevention Implementation Committee. Councilmembers Ryan and Lawrence-Anderson voted against the same. Motion passed. Councilmember Ryan stated he wants to be clear that he is not opposed to the spirit in which this is undertaken but is opposed to the manner in which it is being implemented and the number of 08/23/21 -29- DRAFT questions that have not been clarified, which are necessary. He stated violence nationwide, regionally, and in Brooklyn Center has been peaking and he does not want the public to get the wrong impression that we are undertaking police reform while that is happening and some members of the public connect the dots wrong. That is the spirit in which he is making this objection, not that he is opposed to police reform but is opposed to police reform without the serious issues being clarified before we undertake it. Councilmember Ryan stated he is with Mayor Elliott with most of what we are talking about but thinks we have to clarify those issues. That is the spirit in which he objected to this motion. Councilmember Graves stated she thought the City Attorney had said earlier it has to be a unanimous vote to pass. Mayor Elliott asked for legal clarification. Mr. Gilchrist stated this is just a majority vote on this item. The unanimous vote only applied to the emergency ordinance dealt with at a previous meeting. 10d. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-102 ESTABLISHING THE POSITION OF POLICY AIDE TO PROVIDE HIGH-LEVEL ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT TO THE MAYOR Mayor Elliott introduced the item and stated this position will support the City Council as well. Mayor Elliott moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2021-102 establishing the Position of Policy Aide to provide High-Level Administrative Support to the Mayor. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked a clarification question, stating she does not like the wording of the resolution and asked if it is a conflict of interest for someone to vote upon something that exclusively benefits them. City Attorney Gilchrist advised he does not see this as a conflict as it is not financially enriching the Mayor, it just assists the Mayor’s office. He does not see this as a conflict that would prohibit the Mayor from voting on it. Mayor Elliott asked about the structure of this position reports directly to the Mayor but serves both the Mayor and City Council. He asked if there is conflict in that regard. Mr. Gilchrist stated he does not see a conflict but did note the language of the resolution does not specifically indicate that the position would report to the Mayor. Mayor Elliott asked for a review of the language and asked if it addresses supervision at all. Mr. Gilchrist referenced paragraph 4. Councilmember Ryan stated to his mind, for any man or woman who occupies the Mayor’s chair, such an aide position is superfluous, unnecessary, and duplicative. He stated we are all elected to the City Council as public servants. We do not do this as an office of emolument and personal gain. He stated we all understand that this is an office that requires a great deal of personal effort and commitment. This has been an extraordinary year and we have to recognize that under the Charter, the Mayor is simply another member of the City Council with extra duties, which are acknowledged, and the Mayor receives extra compensation for those duties to run a meeting, chair 08/23/21 -30- DRAFT the dangerous dog hearings, and in a public emergency to act on behalf of the City in a public emergency where the Mayor is granted extraordinary powers. Of course, the Mayor acts as the ceremonial representative of the City. Councilmember Ryan stated to give the Mayor a Policy Aide, which he believes is unwarranted when this simply duplicates the work of the City Manager and staff that supports all Council Members equally. The Mayor is not the chief administrator of the City. The City Manager is. Councilmember Ryan stated this position simply duplicates what the City M anager provides for every member of the City Council and therefore is a duplication of effort, expensive, and wasteful so he will not support this. Councilmember Butler seconded the motion. Councilmembers Ryan, Lawrence-Anderson, and Graves voted against the same. Motion failed. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson noted the time is 10:42 p.m. and the City Council did not take action to suspend the rules at 10:00 p.m. 11. COUNCIL REPORT Due to the late hour, this item was not considered. 12. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded adjournment of the City Council meeting at 10:43 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. 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 SEPTEMBER 1, 2021 VIA ZOOM 1. CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council/Financial Commission Joint Work Session was called to order by Mayor Elliott at 6:32 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL/INTRODUCTIONS Mayor Mike Elliott and Councilmembers Marquita Butler, April Graves, Kris Lawrence- Anderson, and Dan Ryan. Also present were Financial Commission Chair Teneshia Kragness, Emmanuel Kpaleh, and Taofeek Ishola. Not present were Financial Commissioners David Dwapu, and Dean Van Der Werf. Also present were City Manager Reggie Edwards, Acting Finance Director Andy Splinter, Interim Police Chief Tony Gruenig, Fire Chief Todd Berg, Acting Recreation Director Joe Ericksen, Recreation Director Cordell Wiseman, City Clerk Barb Suciu, and City Attorney Troy Gilchrist. 3. 2022 GENERAL FUND DEPARTMENT BUDGET REQUESTS Mayor Elliott reviewed the topics that will be covered at tonight’s Joint Work Session with the Financial Commission. He noted this is the last budget presentation meeting and on September 13, 2021, a recommendation on the preliminary levy cap will be made. After that, the City Council will continue with budget review and approve the final budget in December. Mayor Elliott invited Dr. Edwards to make the staff presentation. City Manager Reggie Edwards stated tonight the budgets for Recreation, Fire and Emergency Management, Office of Prevention Health and Safety, and Police Departments will be presented. Dr. Edwards introduced newly hired Recreation Director Cordell Wiseman, noting today was his first day on the job. Dr. Edwards explained he will present the budget for the Recreation Department, noting the lion’s share of budget preparation was handled by the Interim Recreation Acting Recreation Director Ericksen so is also on the call for this meeting. Dr. Edwards invited Acting Finance Director Andy Splinter to start the introduction to this item 09/01/2021 Page 2 followed by his presentation of that budget. Acting Finance Director Andy Splinter explained this is part of the 2022 presentation of the general fund divisions and tonight we will first go into the Recreation Department budget, which used to be the CARS Department that was realigned to move general buildings and grounds to maintenance to Public Works in this year’s budget. The Recreation Department budget is now solely focused on recreation. Mr. Splinter stated presentations tonight will also include the Officer of Prevention Health and Safety, the new division mentioned by Dr. Edwards, the Fire Department, and the Police Department. These will be high-level presentations and an overview of the base Department’s description and budget information, personnel, supplies, other services and charges, a capital outlay type-level rather than individual detailed accounts. Staff will present individual highlighted budget items that are a change from the previous year plus other highlights. 3a. RECREATION DEPARTMENT Dr. Edwards explained there was a realignment in this department last year and this year; it has been predominantly having the new division within the Recreation Department take off and begin to do some work. Community Recreation Services include public health, beautification, and public art, Brooklyn Center food collective, community large-scale events, and youth development. He noted youth development also occurs in another area under recreation programs. One is about programming, such as soccer and recreation activities that develop youth, and youth development is about leadership and empowerment. Last year when this was discussed, some of the efforts in this area included Cities United, BrookLynk, and other areas we work with youth. Dr. Edwards explained that the department did not previously exist, it was created last year, so this year it is primarily getting back up and running after COVID and implementing strategies and work within that division. Dr. Edwards presented an organizational chart and described the Recreation Department divisions of Community Recreation Services, Special Enterprises, Community Center Services, Recreation Program Services, Recreation Administration, and Recreation Facility and Property Program Services. He noted that Facilities has moved to the Public Works Department. Dr. Edwards stated the mission of the Recreation Department is to foster a safe and healthy community and enrich the quality of life for all. This mission has a particular emphasis on the issue of health and bringing it to all the work the City does in recreation and throughout the organization. Dr. Edwards stated the values center around inclusion, equity, quality, innovativeness, and adaptability. Dr. Edwards commented on the Recreation Department divisions, noting the special enterprise division includes the Heritage Center and Golf Course which both are not funded through the general fund. Rather, they are funded with an enterprise special funds. He described what relates to the Community Center and noted there will be a study about the expansion of this facility or building a new one. 09/01/2021 Page 3 Dr. Edwards described the types of programming offered through Recreation Program Services. He explained that each Division has a distinct function that it serves in the overall picture of the Recreation Department. Recreation Administration includes front desk and customer service, department evaluation and data analysis, shelter/room rentals, and permits and marketing/ outreach. The Recreation Facility and Property Program Services Division include parks coordination with Public Works, trail coordination, tournament and leagues, and recreational facilities. Dr. Edwards provided an overview of Recreation Department functions, noting recreation programs include adult programs with 2,500 participants, youth/teen programs with more than 3,000 young people participating, and general recreation services that include concerts, Movies in the Park, and special events and celebrations. He noted that due to COVID, many programs were delayed and they did not provide tournaments during the height of COVID but towards the end of the year, did hold tournaments including a very successful Dudley Classic and exercise programming. He stated residents have presented ideas for a new community celebration and staff looks forward to incorporating some of the thoughts that BrookLynk youth offered. Dr. Edwards stated the Community Center Services Division is responsible for the operation of the Brooklyn Center Community Center including the 50-meter pool, one of three indoor Olympic- sized pools in the State. This year, with the Olympics, more people became interested in swimming so the City may look to expand that capacity and introduce swimming to community members who may not have a cultural history with aquatics. Those offerings could include splash pads for family fun that may lead to participating in swimming programs. Dr. Edwards stated the Health and Social Development Division is in its second year and includes health programs, community events, youth engagement and empowerment, beautification and public art programming, Brooklyn Center Community Food Collective, and multi -cultural programming. He noted that during the height of COVID, they were effective in getting out to the community to provide COVID information on vaccinations and a myriad of things. Staff learned they need to have a mobile ability to be in the community and reach those who may not necessarily come to a facility. In the coming year, as they address mobility with health, they will use what they have learned to do a better job as staffing and grant funding become available. Dr. Edwards commented on the benefit of this type of programming for those in the community who feel disconnected from health care services and information. Dr. Edwards stated the Property and Environment Stewardship Division relates to trails and parks as the City wants to increase its stewardship around the environment as it relates to a quality life for residents. Where there is an opportunity to coordinate and collaborate between the Community Development and Recreation Departments to do something with pockets of green space to enhance the quality of life and provide environmental stewardship. This also involves what is done with gardens, plants, and food. Dr. Edwards displayed a staffing chart, noting the budget as it relates to staffing is flat with nothing significant being added. He stated last year there was a supplemental budget to bring forward the City Council’s strategic initiatives. There was also funding at the onset of COVID through 09/01/2021 Page 4 CARES Act and general fund dollars. Dr. Edwards stated with this new Division, the dollars were allocated and accounted for, as well as staffing, in the supplemental budget. This year, it was moved to the regular staff count and budget so it is accounted for within the general fund. Dr. Edwards noted staffing went from 20.5 in 2021 to 23 in 2022, which is not new staff for this year. Those staff members were added last year and approved by the City Council to get that new Division off the ground. There is not necessarily an increase in staffing, but it is being accounted for to show the true number of staff including the new members added last year through the supplemental budget. Dr. Edwards presented Recreation Department highlights including an increase in resident utilization of the Community Center. The City is now having a difficult time recruiting lifeguards so the hours of operation may be cut back by an hour or so. More time and operating hours will be offered to create greater access to the Community Center and services. He noted the rates have been reviewed and lowered to make it accessible to more community members who may not have historically been able to afford to participate in programs. They will also improve cultural competency in customer service, marketing, and in relationship to the Community Center. Dr. Edwards stated he has already presented the highlights for the Health and Social Development Division and Department Program Evaluation Development. Dr. Edwards presented the Recreation Department budget by program and object code, noting the increase from $1.8 million in 2021 to $2.3 million in 2022 due to a 100% increase relating to the Health and Social Environment Division. Those dollars were expended in 2021 but are being accounted for in the supplemental fund and moved in 2022 to the regular Recreation Department’s budget. This is a reallocation and accounting for those 2021 costs. Dr. Edwards stated Staff increased 2% for the cost of living that will be applied to general wages as well as the implementation of the City Council’s direction for livable wages so all City employees, regardless of full-time, part-time, or intern, will be paid a livable wage of $16.16 per hour. He stated that policy was started and implemented last year with a first step to increase salaries for all staff paid below $16.16 per hour so those wages were in alignment with the City Council’s directive. Dr. Edwards pointed out that under Recreation, there is an increase in 2021 from $1.3 million to $1.7 million in 2022 for COLA for regular staff but the lion’s share would be bringing part-timers and seasonal worker salaries to $16.16 per hour. He pointed out that for the most part, there was no other significant movement, increase, or decrease to any extent in this budget. Mayor Elliott opened the floor for City Council and Financial Commissioner questions and comments. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson thanked Dr. Edwards for clarification of two areas she was curious about, the increases in the Health and Social Environment Division and Personal Services. She asked about Services and Other Charges at $543,000, up from $412,000, which is quite a bit. She noted the Community Center budget also increased, as Dr. Edwards explained, due to 09/01/2021 Page 5 highlighted programs. Mr. Splinter explained that $55,000 in Services and Other Charges was part of the Health and Safety Division and the other $80,000 covered part of the cost for the study on the new Community Center. Financial Commissioner Kpaleh stated we have been talking about recreation but when seeing the various playgrounds, most of the time he does not see them encouraging our children to participate in a soccer game. He asked if we can create a place where our children can have a real soccer game because it is becoming one of the major sports in America. He thought if we had one here, it would encourage our children in Brooklyn Center to participate in those games and then at their schools. Dr. Edwards agreed, noting the City just finished its summer soccer camp, which Luther supports financially, so there are a significant number of kids that participate, upwards of 100 this year. He stated during that recent celebration, he and Mayor Elliott handed out pizza. Dr. Edwards invited Acting Recreation Director Ericksen to speak about the City’s soccer fields, camps, and programs. Acting Recreation Director Joe Ericksen explained that the summer program was down a bit due to COVID but they had a good season. There is also a soccer program through BPA Sports for older kids. He noted there are soccer fields at Evergreen, Willow Lane, Northport, and Grandview Parks. Financial Commissioner Kpaleh stated the Evergreen soccer field is open wide. He thinks we need something where we are equipped for Brooklyn Center, so they don’t have to go to Brooklyn Park to participate in a soccer game. Mr. Ericksen stated we can create such a soccer field right now, noting right now the Evergreen Park field is marked for football because that program is starting. He explained they could mark other fields for soccer but the need has not been expressed for leagues, etc. They know open games are occurring, but not necessarily for the youth. Dr. Edwards stated as our new Recreation Director comes on board, he brings a focus, ideas, and perspectives on how to work with soccer so we look forward to bringing on new concepts and partnerships as it relates to soccer. Mayor Elliott thanked Commissioner Kpaleh for that question, noting it was one he has been concerned about as well, the availability of our soccer infrastru cture as it is the fastest-growing sport in the country and a lot of our families participate in soccer. He hoped we can work towards a soccer infrastructure. Mayor Elliott stated that is a conversation he started having with some members of the community who expressed interest in having some kind of indoor soccer facility. That is not before the City Council just yet but if it is an interest of the community, the City Council can start having conversations. There being no additional questions or comments, Mayor Elliott moved to the next agenda item. 09/01/2021 Page 6 3b. OFFICE OF COMMUNITY PREVENTION, HEALTH, AND SAFETY Dr. Edwards stated this item relates to the creation of a new division, the Office of Community Prevention, Health, and Safety, which was borne out of efforts as it relates to the Public Safety Resolution adopted by the City Council that calls for the creation of three departments and the Implementation Committee, which is an advisory committee. Dr. Edwards explained that the ability to create three new departments, staff them, etc. would not be within the realm of reach for Brooklyn Center financially at this time. So, staff tried to create a structure to get at some of that. He noted this was discussed at the last City Council meeting and he wanted to speak to this particular effort. Dr. Edwards displayed an organizational chart depicting the creation of the Office of Community Prevention, Health, and Safety that will report directly to the City Manager, coordinates through an advisory committee, and will influence all departments. It will be a coordinating body with one position, an Office Manager, proposed at this time that will coordinate on prevention, health, and safety among all departments. Dr. Edwards stated there will be a particular focus on public safety departments, police, and fire, to carry out the intent in the articulation of that which is in the resolution. They also have the Office of Inclusion, Equity, and Diversity that was created last year and has a similar focus from a functional perspective as it relates to being able to impact and influence all departments. While they report directly to the City Manager, those two offices, in partnership with the City Manager, will assure the lens and intent under which they were created is carried out throughout all of our departments. The Office of Community Prevention, Health, and Safety are particularly focused on our Police and Fire Departments so when it is time to review the budget and talk about operational procedures and practices, we will assure we are carrying out the intent and spirit of that which was created in the Resolution and other policies the City Council may bring forth. Dr. Edwards stated the mission of the Office of Community Prevention, Health, and Safety is to provide leadership, programming, coordination, and evaluation of prevention, health, and safety across the enterprise and in the community. Coordination of efforts within the enterprise shall focus principally on all public safety-related departments with the belief that this work cannot be done simply within our Police and Fire Departments. It has to be done in the community, as it relates to being a community-centered City. It also speaks to the coordination efforts within the enterprise focusing principally on all public safety-related departments. Dr. Edwards explained the functions at this time, as we get started, would be to coordinate the Office of Community Prevention, Health, and Safety across departments with a specific focus on Police and Fire Departments. He noted we started working on health, Citywide and that landed in Recreation so there’s a coordination and we will work together as an organization to elevate that work. He explained there is particular work in public safety related to health but there is also health-related to food, through COVID, and thinking about general public health. He stated health is something that transcends all Departments so we will look for that coordination and make sure we have that lens with all the work we do in multiple departments as it relates to those three characteristics related to prevention, health, and safety. 09/01/2021 Page 7 Dr. Edwards stated the Civilian Traffic Enforcement Division is an element that was created within the Public Safety Resolution that pertains to unarmed civilian personnel responding to non-moving traffic violations. He explained they will try to look at piloting that this coming year and he will speak about funding to that in just a minute. Dr. Edwards stated the Community Response Division relates to community mental health and social calls that come out of 911 in addition to general community health responses. Those are the four core functions that would end this coming year based upon what has been proposed and the budget. Dr. Edwards stated the Recreation Department budget highlights going forward are the initial start with coordination across the enterprise; pilot civilian traffic response grant-funded for two years; pilot mental health 911 calls, community response grant-funded for two years, and, initiative data analysis and communication. Dr. Edwards stated the resolution calls for a committee that will be focused on implementation. Staff will work with that committee that is chaired by the Mayor to shape those pilots. He stated he can announce now that the City has secured funding for pilots for two years for each of those areas. They will communicate with the Implementation Committee and Police Department, Hennepin County, and the work they are doing, particularly related to mental health. They have secured the agreement of funding for both of those for the coming next two years so that will give the City time to build some internal capacity but primarily, he envisions it will allow us to begin to build capacity to contract and provide services within the community, by community folks, as opposed to having and creating regular staff. Hopefully, the pilots will allow us to be a little bit more nimble, invest in the community, have that work come out of the community, or we will support it financially in programs, which may be more powerful, sustainable, and financially feasible for the City. Dr. Edwards presented the Office of Community Prevention, Health, and Safety Department budget by program and object code. It includes one person at $75,000-$76,000 for wages with benefits or roughly $104,000 with $50,000 for programming. The $50,000 is the ability to do some programing whether coordinating, negotiating contracts with community folks, or other programs to provide contractual services and design some programming, maybe contract to help with office and design in coordination across our departments. It is a fairly minimum budget but it includes one person at a managerial level that can coordinate efforts amongst departments with a specific focus on Police and Fire Departments as it pertains to the resolution so we can implement what the City Council passed in the resolution. This gives us some ability to start that and carve out a path forward as to how we would do it as those pilots are refined and implemented, readjust, and find success so they can bring them to skill in whatever form that may be. He stated the $50,000 is simply to provide some programming whether or not simply equipment, a desk, ability to do marketing, have conversations, and event within the community. Dr. Edwards stated this is a minimal amount; however, from an office perspective, they anticipate the office budget being roughly $674,000 so, in this case, you can see where we’ve leveraged the $154,850 levy and see grant funding at the tune of $250,000 per year for at least two years. They 09/01/2021 Page 8 anticipate there may be more but at a minimum, they can build out those programs, have a good understanding through pilots, identify some pros and cons, if we are to sustain it, and want to move forward sustainably. Then we will be able to make those adjustments through the two years of pilots in those areas. Dr. Edwards noted that will get us pretty far along in the intent and spirit, from our perspective, of the resolution that speaks to core areas and the three departments: Office of Community Prevention, Health, and Safety; the Civilian and Mental Health/Community Response; and, the two Committees. Dr. Edwards noted that last week the City Council approved a Project Manager that would go along with the Implementation Committee and help the planning side happen. When it comes to an advisory committee, that will be attached and created by the Office of Community Prevention, Health, and Safety. Dr. Edwards stated with cite and summons, they are working on that policy and should have something we can execute. Those are the major elements of the resolution. Dr. Edwards explained that should this go forward, they will be well on their way as far as creating some capacity to address issues that were passed in the resolution by the City Council. In the budget of $654,000 of general funds, $154,000 coming from the City, for a person, supplies, and some programming. Mayor Elliott stated he and Dr. Edwards have had many conversations on this topic and he thinks it is very clear we are making progress on implementing the resolution and the Citations and Summons Policy. We are going through the process to get the resources on board and getting to implementation. He noted that the name of the department or person heading this particular department, to be in alignment with the resolution, will probably change. The resolution explicitly calls for a Director, not a Manager, with the other department heads, and oversees this the Office of Community Prevention, Health, and Safety. Mayor Elliott stated in terms of how that department works and the civilian response team and mental health response teams, all of that has to be worked out with the Implementation Committee overseeing that process, which of course will have a combination of Brooklyn Center residents, experts, and particularly technical assistance folks that have done this work in other cities, will advise us. The Director level position is supposed to be someone with a public health background. How we structure the Civilian Traffic Enforcement Division and Community Response Divisions will also depend heavily on where the Implementation Committee lands and whether a contracted service or embedded in the City’s structure. The Implementation Committee will work through and weigh the pros, cons, and potential liability. Mayor Elliott stated there is more work to be done and assuring the funds are approved is an important step forward to getting it done. He noted, as Dr. Edwards mentioned, in the wake of the uprising and particularly in our response to it, Brooklyn Center took this bold step toward transforming public safety. We have attracted quite a several organizations that are interested in partnering with us and helping to implement this resolution and, in general, do the work of transforming our community so we can be a thriving place that is more equitable for all who live here and come here. 09/01/2021 Page 9 Mayor Elliott stated he wanted to point out those key points in terms of this particular presentation and that we are moving in the right direction. He noted as we are going through the budgeting process, we will need to come back and look at the budget and what is our plan for fully funding and implementing the resolution. Councilmember Ryan stated in the earlier agenda, as posted, Item 5 shows September 13, 2021, as the date for recommending the preliminary levy and budget. He asked if that is the meeting when the levy will be set. Dr. Edwards answered in the affirmative. Councilmember Ryan referenced the slide on display depicting the Office of Community Prevention, Health, and Safety Department budget by program, noting the pilot civilian traffic response grant-funded of $250,000. He asked if the City’s Community Service Officers, who have not licensed Police Officers but are authorized to issue parking tickets. Dr. Edwards stated that is correct and asked Acting Police Chief Gruenig if he would like to also respond. Mayor Elliott stated these details will be worked out by the Implementation Committee so the comments on this matter are preliminary. The Implement ation Committee will work with a combination of experts who will help work through these questions. Councilmember Ryan asked Mayor Elliott if he was interested in what the Implementation Committee would bring but was not interested in his question right now. Mayor Elliott stated he is very interested in Councilmember Ryan’s question, as it is a very important question that he is asked all the time, but he wants to be clear that the resolution calls for us to go through a process with the Implementation Committee and experts who have done this type of transition work before. Also, we will be working with the City Attorney so we are in alignment. Mayor Elliott stated the answer to Councilmember Ryan’s question is squarely in the realm of the work of the Implementation Committee and he does not want everyone here to go on the record and say it will be this way or that way and pre-empt the work of the Implementation Committee. Councilmember Ryan stated he is curious and cannot think of a lot of other examp les other than people who are illegally parked or have other equipment violations that are visible or license plates are absent, things of that nature. He stated we already have employees who are authorized to write tickets and he does not understand why, if that is the case, couldn’t we simply augment our current program. Councilmember Ryan stated if Mayor Elliott does not want to engage in a discussion on this now, he would like some answers in the future. Mayor Elliott stated certainly and he thinks it is more appropriate that Councilmember Ryan get answers in the future as we are not well situated to answer that question right now. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she has a couple of questions and would like to hear 09/01/2021 Page 10 what Acting Police Chief Gruenig was going to say. She stated the $250,000 civilian traffic response grant and $250,000 mental health 911 calls and community response grants are wonderful. She noted that money is allotted for the next two years and asked where is that grant money coming from. Mayor Elliott stated we can’t speak on that right now but he can assure Councilmember Lawrence- Anderson that when the provider of the funds releases the information and it can be made public, then it will be made public and the City Council will be the first to know. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked if it is privately funded or federal, State or County funded. Dr. Edwards stated these are foundations that he has been in communication with. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she is concerned about any quid quo pro with private foundations so she is skeptical and a little nervous about taking $500,000 to fund a program when we don’t know where the funds are coming from. Dr. Edwards stated for several months, he has been working with numerous fairly large Minnesota foundations who have interest in working with Brooklyn Center. He stated investment in Brooklyn Center is much broader and larger than shown on the screen (Office of Community Prevention, Health, and Safety Department budget by program). The approach and the ask are for investment in Brooklyn Center over the next four to five years. He stated we may not get there with every foundation as some may choose to do a year or one aspect or another but it is an investment. We have asked them to partner with us over multiple years in the areas of health, public safety, economic development, and life-essential services, which relate to basic food and housing, things that are essential to living. That comes out of the work we have done in the community, with COVID, and civil unrest. So, bringing those foundations together and asking will they partner with us in a new and different way that we can address those pillars and areas of focus we believe need to be addressed to build a strong Brooklyn Center. These funds come from that work and some foundations have a particular interest in public safety so they are willing to fund it. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked if the City Council will have this information about the grant funding before approving the levy. Dr. Edwards answered in the affirmative. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked for a point of clarification on the Office of Community Prevention, Health, and Safety Department budget. She noted the budget has $1 04,850 for personal services and asked if that is for one position with salary plus benefits. Dr. Edwards answered in the affirmative. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated the City will have to correct the Sun Post that indicated the cost was $65,000 to $75,000. Dr. Edwards stated he has not seen that article but there are two positions and to be clear, last week the City Council did approve a temporary position related to project management to work with the Implementation Committee. That position will be funded with one-time resources because it has a beginning and an end. This is a position that will be part of the permanent structure of the City and be about $75,000 in wages. When you add benefits, it goes to $104,850. Dr. Edward stated the press may simply be reporting wages and not b enefits that go along with that person’s wages. 09/01/2021 Page 11 Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she understands the Project Manager Coordinator position will be reporting to the Mayor. She asked who the second position Dr. Edwards referred to will be reporting to directly. Dr. Edwards stated that is part of the operational structure of the organization and that person will report directly to the City Manager. Councilmember Ryan stated in looking at the organizational chart and the Office of Community Prevention, Health, and Safety it shows the connectivity to the various City departments but does not indicate this new position. He noted that presently, the City Manager is the superior of the Police Chief but this new position would not be considered as someone that would be over the Police Chief, as was suggested in one draft of the Crime Prevention and Safety Reform Resolution. Dr. Edwards stated is correct, the resolution calls for the creation of a Department, and this is an office that coordinates and reports directly to the City Manager. We work directly with all of our Departments, the Police Chief, the Fire Chief, and every other Department directly reports to the City Manager. But this would allow access and leadership in all Departments along with the City Manager for the Office of Community Prevention, Health, and Safety. The person who works in that office will have access and work directly with all Directors of all Departments, particularly Police, Fire, and the City Manager. Dr. Edwards explained that when they sit down, as they do regularly, to talk about various practices or policies from an operational perspective when it comes to budgeting, finance, how they are expending resources, and problem solving, that person is at the table and we are doing that together. That is someone who is looking out for prevention, health, and safety. They may also bring resources to the table to be implemented within those Departments, but they also bring expertise and their specific lens based on their function. Dr. Edwards stated this position will not have direct supervision over any particular department but will have a key role in helping the City Manager ensure that the intent of the resolution and addressing of community prevention, health, and safety is carried out in every department and particularly those that identify with public safety. Councilmember Ryan stated he knows Dr. Edwards has a lot of experience in various units of government and is sure he appreciates that if positions are created where lines of authority are not drawn, that can create terrific problems. Councilmember Ryan stated he is pleased with the answer that this person, hired to this position as described, their function will be as a conduit of information to assist the City Manager in coordinating all policies, activities, and practices of the various departments in working towards those goals as described. Councilmember Ryan stated in looking at the chart, that concern came to mind. Dr. Edwards stated as he looks at the organizational chart and considers Councilmember Ryan’s concern, he will correct the chart so the dotted line becomes a solid line as there is a direct link between these offices and the City Manager and also a chain of command and direct reporting to the City Manager. The line is dotted because it works between departments but the line between the City Manager and the Office of Community Prevention, Health, and Safety should be a solid line as it reports directly to the City Manager. Councilmember Graves stated from her perspective she is appreciative of City Manager Edward’s efforts and intention with the creation of this Office of Community Prevention, Health, and Safety 09/01/2021 Page 12 and position. She noted at the last meeting, she was somewhat reluct ant to vote for the Policy Aide straight to the Mayor and part of the reason she could do so was the diligence put into the MOU by the City Attorney and City Manager. Councilmember Graves stated her concerns were thinking about this separation of operations versus policy. And, the person reporting directly to the Mayor is going to be focusing on policy, whether the policy is specified in the resolution, tweaking, or additions, in collaboration with the advisory committee that is being formed of community members. Councilmember Graves stated her concern was that if it was policy and that was the focus, then how is that going to translate into implementation/operations because implementation and operations cannot be separated. From her own experience working in the Office of Violence Prevention at the City of Minneapolis, there is a steering committee, a director of the office, and multiple other ways that the director moves and interacts with other departments. But she is not the boss of the police or fire or anything like that. She is just the director of that particular office and works in collaboration. Councilmember Graves stated she is happy about this because she was concerned things were going to be siloed, wondering how do we get from policy words on paper and discussions in an advisory committee to actual implementations within operations as a City. So, having this position, to her, is just as, if not more important for the implementation of these different changes than the position she voted in favor of at the last meeting that will report directly to the Mayor. Councilmember Graves stated she understands the important work of the advisory committee needs to be led by somebody with expertise, impartial and thinks we probably could have done that with an actual staff member. But, considering the resolution we voted for does not allow that, it was the only alternative left. She hopes that this position will be filled with somebody good at working with both community and City staff and able to use the information gleaned from the advisory committee and Mayor’s Policy Aide, working with the advisory committee to implement on the operational level, the things that we want to see happen. And, that person will also be able to work with the City Manager and other department leads to thinking about what is feasible and what that means as far as budget. Councilmember Graves stated she is pleased with this position and happy to see that the City Manager has brought it before us. She noted that in a way, she would like to have known about it before the last meeting but is happy to see it now. Councilmember Butler stated she too appreciates the structure we have before us and noted this is now the second time it has come up about the grant dollars. She does not expect some who voted against the resolution to always be on board with all of the decisions, but it is a professional norm that the grantee cannot make it known before the grantor so she thinks we should be on the same page because until the grantor allows us to make it public, we cannot make it public. Councilmember Butler stated a lot of times when we discuss a resolution that was passed we are going round and round about things that don’t, in the grand scheme of things, matter because we passed this resolution and it needs to move forward. She is just saying can we stop having 09/01/2021 Page 13 comments and conversations about things that, in the grand scheme of things, really don’t matter because it is preventing us from moving forward, and getting the work done that we set out to get done in May. Councilmember Butler stated she is very excited we are moving forward and appreciates all the work that Dr. Edwards and his team have put in to get grant dollars so it does not have to come from our general operating fund, which we don’t have, to do this work. She looks forward to continuing to move forward and implementing the resolution. Councilmember Ryan stated he has a general question and comments. He asked when developing the Citation and Summons Policy with the Police Department was the existing policy thoroughly reviewed and did you take input from Police leaders. Mayor Elliott stated Councilmember Ryan’s voice is cutting in and out but he understands the question and the answer is yes. They are currently doing that while taking input from Police Department leadership. Councilmember Ryan stated in the previous comment about asking the question when the matter should be settled, he understands that but this is an object lesson for how we can conduct our processes better so we don’t have these issues and have things developed in good order where we begin from Work Sessions instead of making public announcements that votes will be taken at a meeting the next day. This was the case with the first meeting for passage of the Public Safety Reform Resolution. Councilmember Ryan stated this is an object lesson about how a good process provides better results and we don’t have these divisive issues. He would like that considered, in that regard, in the future. Mayor Elliott stated any time Councilmember Ryan wants to share with him more object lessons, he is happy to always listen. He is also available to meet and if Council member Ryan wants to talk about things he can do differently, he is always happy to hear. Mayor Elliott asked for a legal opinion on setting up positions related to the resolution. He referenced the third RESOLVED paragraph that addresses setting up a new Public Safety and Violence Prevention Office. Councilmember Graves requested that this discussion be continued to a Work Session and to move on to the rest of the budget. Mayor Elliott stated before we do that, he wants to make a final comment which is that what is before us this evening is a manager of the Office of Community Prevention, Health, and Safety and he wants to point out that what the resolution establishes is not a Manager level but a Director level position that is the Director of Community Safety and Violence Prevention responsible for overseeing all of the City agencies and City efforts regarding community safety. He stated those departments will report to this Director, and this Director will report to the City Manager. 09/01/2021 Page 14 Mayor Elliott stated he wants us to be clear that we are discussing approving the funding for this position. He stated the City Attorney has some thoughts on the resolution and he would like to hear from the City Attorney on his thoughts and understanding of how we go about setting up these departments. City Attorney Gilchrist stated he frankly agrees with the idea of having a more thorough discussion of this at a Work Session but his quick reaction, and his understanding, though he admits he has not been pouring over this resolution and figuring out exactly how it is all going to be implemented, has been that the Implementation Committee would be working to help identify how best to roll this out. One thing he has discussed with Mayor Elliott in the past is needing to identify a work plan to talk about that so essentially everyone is on the same page in understanding what comes first, then second. Then we will all know the mile markers we are working on to move this effort forward. At this point, that is his initial take. City Attorney Gilchrist noted we have been spending a lot of time trying to develop the Citation and Summons Policy and hopefully that will be in a position soon where it can be adopted. But that was an initial and immediate sort of step. In his personal view, he thinks the Implementation Committee does need to get going so we can lay out that work plan and get that ball rolling. There being no additional questions or comments, Mayor Elliott moved to the next agenda item. 3c. FIRE & EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT Dr. Edwards invited Fire Chief Berg to present the Fire and Emergency Management Department budget. Fire Chief Todd Berg stated the mission of the Fire Department is to protect lives and property from the adverse effects of fire and other dangerous conditions, whether manmade or acts of nature. This will be accomplished through public education and a commitment to excellence in training and superior customer service. Fire Chief Berg reviewed the Fire Department’s functions by division, noting it is divided into five sections. The Administrative Division is responsible for the management of the department including budgeting, implementation, and development of policies and procedures and ensuring that all records are maintained and updated according to the law. Fire Chief Berg stated the Fire Prevention Division offers a variety of public education opportunities primarily focusing on fire prevention, skills to lead a safer life, and conducts building inspections within the community to make it a safer place. The Operations Division provides fire suppression, emergency medical services, and mitigation of hazardous materials spills and leaks, and other rescue services. The Training Division is responsible for making sure all firefighters are trained to the appropriate certification level by offering weekly, monthly, and yearly training opportunities. Fire Chief Berg stated the Emergency Management Division helps identify and mitigate risks within the community through individual and organizational preparedness, accomplished through planning, training, conducting emergency management drills, and coordination of the City’s response to disasters. 09/01/2021 Page 15 Fire Chief Berg stated not that any one of these Divisions is more important than the other but Emergency Management has come to the forefront and center of a lot of things that happened in 2021 and 2020 with the COVID-19 pandemic. Fire Chief Berg presented 2021 highlights including the promotion of four probationary firefighters to regular firefighters with the potential to promote three additional firefighters yet this year. He explained that when a firefighter is hired, they don’t need to know anything about firefighting or first responders. The Fire Department takes them from zero to full-fledged firefighters in an 18-month process, based on the individual’s availability and what they already have from training when hired. He stated they conducted interviews last week and are looking to bring on five additional probationary firefighters when the process is com pleted. Fire Chief Berg continued presentation of 2021 highlights including COVID PPE preparedness through Emergency Management, during which they offered masks, went into the community to apartment buildings and long-term care facilities, worked with three partners who donated money for CARES funding food money, and went to those food distribution locations to make sure they were set up with masks during the high part of COVID last year. They also looked into food offerings at the West Fire Station so, throughout a good portion of 2021, they offered free food through a partnership that also offered masks and sanitizers for those who took advantage of the food program. Fire Chief Berg stated Emergency Management also facilitated, did the leg work, and encouraged, to establish two large vaccine clinics in our community. Fire Chief Berg stated the Fire Department responded to 1,062 calls for service so far in 2021 including 18 structure fires, 3 arson fires during the civil unrest, backfilled, and lined up a task force response, if needed, to further protect community and buildings from unnecessary fire during that time. He pointed out that paid-on-call staff is the backbone and heart of our Fire Department, comprised of 29 members right now, and their staff time should not go unnoticed whether duty crews, training, anything you can imagine. These 29 people have put in 12,591 hours so far in 2021 for their community. Fire Chief Berg presented 2022 Fire Department goals include training all staff to the EMT level, noting that right now, they are at the Emergency Medical Responder (EMR) level. EMT is the next step up and will deliver better service for our community. They will continue active recruitment, noting over the last few years they have recruited a lot of firefighters. The Fire Department will continue to promote MNFIRE, which is a Statewide group, and will visit with the City Council at a future meeting about the training staff has completed to further protect themselves from cancer, cardiac, and wellness procedures. The Fire Department will prepare for the annual Fire Prevention Week in schools this year. He explained that last year they had to use a distance learning type model. Fire Chief Berg stated the Fire Department will continue to implement the new pre-planning software and migrate all fire reporting to a new software program called ESO. He stated the Fire Department will also keep pushing COVID information to community and City employees, noting we have a way out of this health crisis and it is vaccines. They will push information to move in that direction. 09/01/2021 Page 16 Fire Chief Berg presented a slide depicting staffing levels and pointed out there is not a lot of change except for the paid-on-call firefighter numbers, which are sometimes hard to gauge due to retirement and applicants. He stated the paid-on-call firefighters who do duty crews are at a bare minimum number to cover our daytime duty crew from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. They are watching this and doing some planning to enhance it in 2023 when they will bring on a new full-time fire technician, which is a firefighter responsible to do some of the daytime duty shifts so we can continue to provide that service to the community. Fire Chief Berg explained that as far as spending and increasing the budget, they have an increase of $25,800 in clothing and personal equipment for seven sets of turnout gear that are expiring in 2021 and 22 body armor vests. The turnout gear costs over $3,000 a set and is protective gear worn during firefighting. According to manufacturers, OSHA, and the National Fire Protection Agency, there is a ten-year life span. The City has seven sets of gear that expire in 2021 and looking into 2022, they will outfit firefighters with body armor vests. Fire Chief Berg stated the Fire Department and Liquor Store have teamed up to get donations from customers as well as community members and businesses so he hopes to get that number lower by the time the actual levy is set. Fire Chief Berg stated there is a $25,000 increase in the training budget so the remainder of staff can finish EMT training. He explained the State budget for training grants, noting there were additional funds during their second biennium budget so he was able to secure EMT training funds for ten firefighters from the State. Next year is the State’s second biennium so there is only $140 per firefighter budgeted from the State. Fire Chief Berg stated the biggest budget increase is $136,000 to bring their vehicle replacement fund up to where it should be through Central Garage. For years, Central Garage has had the formula to forecast how much vehicles will cost at the time of replacement but it is very hard to forecast as fire trucks can go up 8% to 12% per year. It is typically budgeted to replace a staff car or pickup truck every ten years. The fire engines are replaced every 20 years and the aerials are replaced every 25 years. He explained it is hard to keep up with that and they have worked hard with Finance and the Central Garage over the last year to come up with a good formula to fund for this. The unfortunate outcome is an increase like this but if it is not budgeted for, the City will not be able to replace the 20- and 25-year-old fire trucks and they will be 35- and 40-year-old fire trucks before they are replaced and may not be usable at that time. Fire Chief Berg stated another increase is $8,200 for the emergency preparedness budget for the Armored Receive Notification System of Code Red, which is ARP eligible dollars. Fire Chief Berg presented the Fire Department budget by program and object code, noting Fire is up 13.13% and emergency preparedness is up 27.82%, which includes the $8,200. Since there is not much money in that budget, any increase looks like a high percentage. The personal services increase of 2.68% is for a cost-of-living increase for employees. Supplies are increased by 25.85% for the new turnout gear and vests, services, and other charges increase by 24.64% for the $40,000 in training, and Central Garage charges increase by 38.88% to address the vehicle replacement program. 09/01/2021 Page 17 Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson thanked Fire Chief Berg for the item-by-item explanation, clearly making certain about the Fire Department equipment, which is one of the top two or three items in the budget. She appreciates understanding more thoroughly that matter and the preparedness Fire Chief Berg has demonstrated throughout this past year during the pandemic and efforts of his staff and crew. She again thanked Fire Chief Berg for this proposal and presentation and wished him well. Councilmember Ryan echoed the sentiments of Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson and appreciates the detail. He explained his concerns were staffing, equipment, and setting aside resources for future purchases of very expensive equipment that is imperative the Department has. He also wanted to salute a long tradition of the Brooklyn Center Fire Department in getting many more years out of some of the very expensive specialty equipment than is the norm because our personnel have taken such excellent care of the equipment and ensured the City can get more years of use out of it and be good stewards of the City’s limited resources. Councilmember Ryan stated he appreciates what Fire Chief Berg has done, especially in the very difficult year of the pandemic, and his key role in emergency preparedness. He is sure Fire Chief Berg knows more about COVID than just about anyone with the City. Councilmember Ryan again thanked Fire Chief Berg, asked him to keep up the great work, and to extend his appreciation to all the personnel in the Fire Department. Councilmember Graves asked if any of the recruits are women or people of color who have been hired on as full-time firefighters. Fire Chief Berg stated they do not have any full-time firefighters right now, they are paid-on-call firefighters. He explained they had the opportunity to interview six people, will push five through the process, and of those five, there is one female minority. Councilmember Graves stated she remembers approving a fire truck recently and wondered if that was in last year’s budget. Fire Chief Berg stated that was the 2020 budget. Councilmember Graves asked, looking forward, how many more fire trucks will need to be replaced in the next five years. Fire Chief Berg answered he anticipates two if not three. He explained the fire truck approved this year was three years overdue already. Another vehicle is two years overdue for replacement, and one is supposed to be replaced this year. Councilmember Graves stated beside the truck recently purchased, how many others do we have that are less than ten years old. Fire Chief Berg stated he is not positive but there may be one that is less than ten years old. Councilmember Graves stated she was curious about that and wants to think ahead. Fire Chief Berg noted the City’s fleet is pretty old right now and hence the conversation and new formulated process because there is a need soon. Councilmember Graves stated she is also thinking about the long term, if there is a way to prevent the City from having to buy so many fire trucks in such close succession, such as buying five now and then in 25 years having to replace five again. Councilmember Graves stated she appreciates Fire Chief Berg and the volunteer firefighters and is happy to hear he was able to do some good recruitment. She is also excited to hear he is training 09/01/2021 Page 18 all to be EMTs, which is an important asset to add to our firefighters professionally and our citizens. She thanked Fire Chief Berg for his presentation and hard work during the pandemic and every day. There being no additional questions or comments, Mayor Elliott moved to the next agenda item. 3c. POLICE DEPARTMENT Dr. Edwards invited Acting Police Chief Gruenig to present the Police Department budget. Acting Police Chief Tony Gruenig the mission Police Department is to protect and serve in a manner that preserves the public trust. He reviewed the Police Department functions by Divisions, noting there are five. The Administration Division provides overall leadership and management oversight to the Police Department and ensures that proper funds and resources are allocated as efficiently as possible to aid in the reduction of crime and life-safety issues. Acting Police Chief Gruenig explained the investigative Division handles about 1,000 felony-level cases in need of an advanced level of police investigation beyond field-level information gathering. That work includes advanced-level evidence recovery and applying those results to aid in suspect identification, such as DNA and physical property evidence, and moves the investigation from probable cause to beyond a reasonable doubt. The Investigation Division works in direct partnership with Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, Hennepin County Child Protection Services, Hennepin County Adult Protection, and CornerHouse Child Advocacy and Interview Services. Acting Police Chief Gruenig stated the Patrol Division, is the primary Division of the Police Department and primary responder to 911 and emergency calls for service. Each year the Police Department handles nearly 37,000 public safety incidents, which amounts to about 100 calls in 24 hours. The Patrol Division has three part-time units that work together with patrol officers to ensure the best quality of service is delivered for each call. There is a Domestic Abuse Response Team (DART), the Emergency Operations Unit (EOU), and the Hostage Negotiation Team (HNT) or Crisis Negotiation Team. Acting Police Chief Gruenig stated the Community Services Division has seven primary approaches to building partnerships within the community and promoting a Citywide collaborative approach to eliminate crime. Those approaches are the Crime Prevention Program, Multicultural Community Liaison, and Joint Community Police Partnership (JCPP), an embedded social worker from Hennepin County since May 2021, commercial area street crimes unit, two cadets in the Police Cadet Program, and crime analysis. Acting Police Chief Gruenig stated the Support Services Division prepares all police reports in a format that can be used for review and dissemination of crime information. They report accurate crime data to the State of Minnesota from the records that are generated by our agency. Each year, the Police Department processes nearly 5,000 detailed reports. This Division also fulfills all data requests made by the public, media, or other public safety partners. Acting Police Chief Gruenig reviewed a breakdown of the Police Department ’s staffing levels, 09/01/2021 Page 19 noting it has not changed over the last three years and no change is proposed for 2022. He noted the 2021 budget had a .5 position for an auto theft officer and the Police Department received a grant through 2023. Acting Police Chief Gruenig stated the Community Service Officers at 4.64 FTEs is part-time staff comprised of young men and women who want to go into law enforcement. Acting Police Chief Gruenig stated the Police Department budget highlights are the setup of Benchmark Analytics software to streamline the process of reporting and sharing use of force, pursuit, and complaint information. This will allow the Police Department to be more efficient and transparent in those areas. The Police Department also ensures training mandates are met and officers receive training as required by the Minnesota POST Board. He explained this is traditionally not a very difficult task but with COVID staffing levels, it is becoming a challenge and they are forced to be more creative in processes to accomplish those goals. Acting Police Chief Gruenig stated they are looking to train in Forensic Experiential Trauma Interview (FETI) for detectives. One detective is signed up for that training now and they hope for more in the future. Another highlight is the implementation of the officer wellness plan with yearly check-ins and up to three free visits for officers for continued officer mental health wellness. This was implemented in early 2021 and has been very beneficial. Acting Police Chief Gruenig noted, as mentioned before, there is an embedded social worker that started in May of 2021. He explained a meeting was held on this today and it is a bit of a longer - haul where they hope to see results in six to nine months. A new multicultural liaison was added in the third quarter of 2020 and they have proactively reached out to the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Collaborative Reform Initiative Technical Assistance Center (CRI-TAC) to work on community trust, data analysis, and recruitment and retention to include diversity. Acting Police Chief Gruenig presented Police Department goals for 2022 to stabilize department staffing levels and address diversity and equity in hiring. They currently have a lateral officer hiring process with a bonus for living in the City and want to develop a Department Recruitment Committee to review application and background process to ensure applicants meet desired qualities and expedite the hiring process due to surrounding agencies doing the same and lack of qualified candidates. Acting Police Chief Gruenig stated the second goal is to increase staff training in Crisis Intervention Training (CIT), which is the gold standard in de-escalation. About 45% of staff is currently trained in CIT and two additional pieces of training were scheduled in 2020 but were canceled and rescheduled to April of 2021 due to COVID. He noted the Police Department hopes to contract with a mental health professional to respond to critical incidents. Acting Police Chief Gruenig stated the third goal is increased neighborhood engagement, develop crime prevention workshops, engage with local watch captains to address neighborhood issues and promote City resources, develop and implement neighborhood response plans with assistance from other departments, and work collaboratively with the community engagement team to host small neighborhood area meetings with the assistance of City funds. Acting Police Chief Gruenig reviewed the fourth goal to increase Police department transparency 09/01/2021 Page 20 by expanding benchmark analytics for the electronic tracking of use of force, complaints, pursuit, and community engagement data. The target is to have five years of previous data uploaded into that. They plan to implement a Police Department data dashboard on the City’s website and reinitiate and possibly expand the Police Department’s social media accounts. Acting Police Chief Gruenig presented the overall Police Department budget by program and object code. He noted the increases are in Administration of 10.31% for the licensed social worker plus an anticipated increase in hiring, with the rest of the Divisions being relatively flat except for Central Garage that has an increase of 8.12% to address issues with extremely unreliable vehicles that had to be traded in early. Councilmember Graves stated she heard the Multi-Cultural Advisory Committee (MAC) is going through a restructuring and asked if there is more information about that from the perspective of the Police Department. Acting Police Chief Gruenig stated Community Liaison Officer Theresa Shim was looking at revamping the MAC to get more focus and initiatives. He explained there are some long-standing members the City has had a relationship with over the years but Community Liaison Officer Shim was looking to reinvigorate MAC and ask what direction they wanted to go in. Councilmember Graves asked how much autonomy Community Liaison Officer Shim has in being able to make those decisions. Acting Police Chief Gruenig stated she had complete autonomy for the most part as she ran with it along with Commander Gabler. Acting Police Chief Gruenig explained he tries to not micromanage staff. Councilmember Graves noted there have been some things the City Council has brought up over the years like, for instance, posting MAC meetings outside the Police Department, and changing the application process. Councilmember Graves stated she has met with Community Liaison Officer Shim several times and she was planning to present to the City Council at one point but then decided to reschedule. Councilmember Graves stated she is anxious to hear more about what is happening with the MAC, changes being made, and how it will be a more guiding body in the work we are doing around reform. Acting Police Chief Gruenig stated he can get back in touch with Councilmember Graves with more details on it but we are trying to work with Dr. Edwards to help MAC and Supervisor Don Ryan is trying to connect the MAC with the JCPP. He stated one of the first things Community Liaison Officer Shim wanted to do was move the meeting locations and he anticipates that future meetings, once they are not virtual, will probably have various locations. Acting Police Chief Gruenig stated he will follow up with an e-mail to Councilmember Graves to provide more details than he has described on what the MAC is doing and future direction. Councilmember Graves asked what is the role of the social worker who started in May 2021 and what support is that person offering, primarily to the police officers or community members. Acting Police Chief Gruenig stated there are many different ways in which the social worker can work. This one is not an embedded social worker which is kind of a reactive situation. So, its singular focus is on the community. The wellness person the Police Department has on staff but the embedded social worker is for the community. As an example, our law enforcement would go 09/01/2021 Page 21 to a homeless person who may have some mental health issues, and once they have contact and establish that, when they are done with the call for service, they fill out a form and give it to the embedded social worker so that person can offer services to the homeless person. Whether they need help with mental health issues or some services for a homeless shelter or food services, whatever the needs may be, the social worker can then work with that person and get them those resources. Acting Police Chief Gruenig explained they do not get a lot of feedback because a lot of the information given to the social worker is protected. They are still working out the details and finer points of how to get people in need hooked up with those services. Councilmember Graves referred to an article she recently read that the County is expanding this program to even more cities and St. Louis Park has one in their Police Department and their Fire Department as well, which is interesting. She stated she would be curious, not to get protected information, but after the first year to get an understanding of how many people the social worker has helped and connected to resources. She noted this is an additional expense and even though she is happy to have the social worker there, it is still important to have accountability for that additional allocation of funds. Councilmember Graves asked how the addition of the mental health worker will work together or differently than the social worker. Acting Police Chief Gruenig ex plained the mental health worker was for law enforcement internally and in 2022 they would add the same mental health worker to help law enforcement and go to scenes, such as someone barricaded in a residence and wanted for a crime. In that case, the HRT would go to the scene, negotiate with that person, and the health care worker would respond with them and help with resources. He explained the mental health care worker can get protected information and help the Police Department be aware if there are mental health issues so they can talk to the person differently and help them de-escalate that situation. Councilmember Graves stated with the crime prevention focus, retired Crime Prevention Specialist Becky Boie led a lot of that effort and asked what is happening with it now that she has retired. She also asked if there are block captains or neighborhood groups engaged in leading the Crime Prevention Commission. Councilmember Graves stated she is not the liaison of that and was curious how that is going. She stated from her perspective when she was the liaison to the Crime Prevention Commission, which was very early in her term of service on the City Council, one of the main focuses was a book drive. As much as she thinks that book drives are helpful, she wonders if there are more innovative ways to think about crime prevention. One thing that comes to her mind is some of the things the City Manager and Community Development Department have done around crime prevention through environmental design or activities around that type of thing that the Crime Prevention Commission or Police Department can get involved in as well. Councilmember Graves stated she is not trying to micromanage but to think outside of the box and get more of our community members engaged in crime prevention that is more exciting than books, although as much as she loves books. Acting Police Chief Gruenig stated Dan Jerzak was hired for that position. He agreed that Officer Boie did an excellent job, established that position, and now with Mr. Jerzak coming to that role, 09/01/2021 Page 22 they are looking to expand it into different areas with more outreach, engagement with the community, and different areas to expand upon. Mr. Jerzak has taken his first days to contact all of the block captains personally, met with the vast majority of them, and with the assistance of Dr. Edwards, they will expand that position to have more of an engagement role in the community. They will see where they can work with the City’s engagement teams and expand upon and leverage their assistance together with the block watch captains. Also, instead of having four or five large neighborhood meetings, they will have a few more small meetings with the block watch captains. Acting Police Chief Gruenig explained it is still early in the process with Mr. Jerzak being in his first or second week. Also, Commander Gabler works with community engagement to expand upon that a little bit. For now, and due to staffing shortages, they are focusing on patrol. Councilmember Graves stated that answers her question, noting she is supportive of and willing to be helpful in any way as the Police Department builds that out and Mr. Jerzak gets established in that position. Councilmember Graves asked for more information on the FETI training as well as the outreach made to the DOJ and CRI-TAC. Acting Police Chief Gruenig FETI but it stands for Forensic Experiential Trauma Interview where you don’t connect the dots, you collect the dots. It is not about if things do not add up in chronological order. That is okay because that is not how people remember the experience. It is wrapping your head around that and just being a good listener about the situation and letting the person talk and communicate in their way. Councilmember Graves stated she will also do more research and is curious to learn more as the Police Department gets into implementing that training for the officers. Acting Police Chief Gruenig stated this will be for the detective staff where they can sit down with someone and take time as a traumatic experience is compounded if you have to sit with law enforcement and be interviewed by detectives. We will learn how to make people feel more comfortable while we are gathering information, which is a trend to help people express the story better. Councilmember Graves stated it caught her attention because it was related to trauma. She thinks if moving and trying to be trauma-informed, you will have more compassion and listening and not be thinking what is wrong with this person but instead what happened to this person. Then it is coming from a place of trying to understand rather than judging them on first appearances. Councilmember Graves stated in general, it sounds interesting and helpful. Councilmember Graves stated she is happy to see Acting Police Chief Gruenig was proactive about reaching out to the DOJ and technical assistance center, especially regarding the three categories. She is excited to see what work plans the Police Chief comes up with and how they may be implemented moving forward. She is also excited to hear that Acting Police Chief Gruenig is working on a dashboard for the City’s website, which will move us further along the path towards increased transparency and accountability. Councilmember Graves stated she appreciates Acting Police Chief Gruenig’s presentation, all his work, leading the department, and continuing to serve the City. She stated she is here and Acting 09/01/2021 Page 23 Police Chief Gruenig can call her any time. Councilmember Ryan stated he appreciates the closing comments of Councilmember Graves and echoes those sentiments. He has questions relating to staff, which is a big concern of his because we’ve seen a large number of officers leave the Police Department. He referenced a weekly update issued to the City Council and senior staff dated August 13, 2021, that noted the departure of Sergeant Troy Peasley with 20 years experience, Sergeant Steve Lorentz with 17 years experience, and an investigator with 12 years of experience, totaling more than 49 years experience with the Brooklyn Center Police Department. He asked Acting Police Chief Gruenig how many Sergeants are in the Department now and how many Sergeant positions are vacant because as he understands it, they are using Line Supervisors for officers for patrol and other functions. Acting Police Chief Gruenig stated they are supposed to have a total of seven Sergeants and they currently have four Sergeants or down 43%. They have one Sergeant on medical leave and two have left. Councilmember Ryan asked how many new officers are in the Police Department. Acting Police Chief Gruenig stated they hired two new officers recently and they are in field training now, which lasts about four months. During that training, they are not allowed to take a call for service by themselves and are always with a fully-trained police officer. Councilmember Ryan stated in terms of actively licensed police officers capable of going on their own on patrol or serving other functions, there are only 32 or 33 available at this time and there is the possibility of other officers leaving the Department. He stated he has heard rumors about this so it is a real concern of his. Regarding staffing, he asked Acting Police Chief Gruenig if he has looked at incentives for officer retention. Acting Police Chief Gruenig stated they have and maybe Dr. Edwards wants to comment on that. Dr. Edwards stated they have looked at a multitude of ways in ways to retain and recruit and, in some cases, made a contract. They are offering some incentives to retain employees at this time, exercising that, seeing what takes hold, and whether officers would be amenable as far as making some commitment to stay ‘X amount of period given some incentives. Dr. Edwards stated they are doing that and deploying that as we speak currently and hoping it will be helpful. Councilmember Ryan stated he spoke to someone at a recent Rotary meeting and they were told the Police Department has 12 new officers. He asked Acting Police Chief Gruenig what he sees as the deficits in the key advisory positions. Acting Police Chief Gruenig stated it is a bit of a concern having 12 new staff if that is the correct number. He stated they just hired 4 during the civil unrest, one resigned, and then they hired two more who are in-field training. Acting Police Chief Gruenig agreed it is a bit of a problem having staff leaving regularly and some Supervisors who are also leaving. His concern is if we have new staff working nights without good supervision, they can make innocent mistakes if they don’t have that leadership and experience to help guide them in a positive direction. With law enforcement, not every situation is the same and it is difficult to say in Situation A do this because Situation A does not come up and the situations vary from incident to incident so you have to use logic, common sense, experience, and quick thinking to make good solid decisions. So, there are some concerns with turnover rates and supervision 09/01/2021 Page 24 with Supervisors leaving. Acting Police Chief Gruenig stated his concern is making sure we have the gaps in supervision filled as quickly as possible. He stated we are having a Sergeant testing process and trying to move quickly through those processes to try and retain staff that is currently here or possibly considering leaving but might stay if they were up for a promotional process. Councilmember Ryan asked if there are concerns about changes in the policies regarding the priorities set for prosecution of cases through the Hennepin County Attorney’s office. He has heard some rumblings about lesser crimes being dismissed and not pursued and is concerned but does not have a background in law enforcement or experience as a County prosecutor but it seems to him that judicious and firm law enforcement is an absolute necessity, especially in this time where we are seeing a real upswing in a whole range of crimes. He asked Acting Police Chief Gruenig to shed some light on those concerns and if there is any change with how the County Attorney’s office is prioritizing prosecutions. Acting Police Chief Gruenig stated he is not aware of any direct changes in how they prosecute cases. He explained that being in law enforcement for a long time, police officers always complain that County Prosecutors don’t charge cases and they don’t get as much time, or Situation A or Situation B has been a problem. That is a long-standing internal issue that law enforcement has but he is not aware of any direct changes as to what County Prosecutors are changing in priorities for prosecutions. Acting Police Chief Gruenig offered to look into it and get back to Councilmember Ryan. Councilmember Ryan asked whether the barriers around the Police Station will stay in place until the Kim Potter trial is concluded, which starts November 30. Acting Police Chief Gruenig stated yes, he anticipates keeping the fences in place until after the trial as they are an excellent de- escalation technique and allows for law enforcement to stay way back from the situation and not be an instigator of anyone who wants to exercise their First Amendment right to protest. He wants to keep the fence up for community safety and law enforcement safety as well. Councilmember Ryan thanked Acting Police Chief Gruenig and stated he appreciates this work and that of all of his staff. He stated he recently had the opportunity for a ride-along, which was very enlightening, and he supports the Police Department and the legal pursuit of their duties. Mayor Elliott noted one of the positions we will be bringing on is the FUSE data position that will help us, along with other technical assistance partners, with aggregating data and putting together a data framework which Dr. Edwards talked about to have a dashboard on the City’s website that provides real-time access to information about how we are doing. That will be one of the more important pieces to building community trust and also providing ongoing transparency that is crucial. Mayor Elliott thanked Acting Police Chief Gruenig for the presentation. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson thanked Acting Police Chief Gruenig for the presentation and his department for going through some difficult times that, hopefully, will improve as time goes on. Councilmember Graves stated in response to the comments of Councilmember Ryan, she has heard things but has no concrete example to point to. In her other work, she has heard people talking 09/01/2021 Page 25 about how people arrested for some violent crimes or shootings are being released quickly by the Court system. She is not sure if that is what Councilmember Ryan is alluding to but she has heard that from other police in other work she does. She stated it has been a struggle specifically with some of the shootings but she does not know whether, specifically, any changes have been made. Councilmember Graves stated as much as she is concerned about making sure we have an adequate amount of patrol officers who are properly trained to work with the community, she also thinks with the contentious times we are in, that some people who left were ideologically misaligned with some of the work we are trying to do around racial equity and a reconning of accountability and transparency within policing, not just in Brooklyn Center but obviously on a national and maybe international level. She stated it is possible, as sad as it is to see some people leave after so many years of dedication to the force, and especially since they were training new officers, if they were uncomfortable with some of the conversations we are needing to have as a City and Police Department, they potentially could have been obstacles to that. Councilmember Graves stated she is hopeful that those who remain will be incentivized to stay and have the right kind of attitude to do the work that needs to be done as a Department, community, and City. Councilmember Graves stated she hears you and empathizes with some of your concerns but also thinks there could be a positive outcome from the departure of some of the folks that have already been part of that because culture is a big part of policing. She is not sure who those people are or what their reasons were for leaving, but she does know they were training new officers so thinking about that, it could potentially have been detrimental had they stayed depending on what their attitudes were. Acting Police Chief Gruenig stated he can understand where Councilmember Graves is coming from and appreciates that. He will add up the numbers but thinks the good majority of our people who left were BIPOC and the majority reason they left was basically that they did not feel respected or appreciated so they were going to other agencies. He completely understands where Councilmember Graves is coming from where you have a different cultural change within the Department and that may help change things but a lot of the BIPOC officers left because they did not feel like they were respected. Councilmember Graves stated she appreciates that clarity and it is disappointing to hear. Mayor Elliott asked how many BIPOC officers are on the force now. Acting Police Chief Gruenig stated he does not have that information right now as it is too fluid of a situation but he will follow up with an e-mail. He stated, as an example, they just had another resignation today from a BIPOC officer. Mayor Elliott asked Acting Police Chief Gruenig if he has an estimate. Acting Police Chief Gruenig stated he does not want to estimate without adding up the numbers and providing a solid answer tomorrow. Mayor Elliott also asked how many left, noting it would be interesting to follow up with those individuals to get a sense of why they left. He thinks Acting Police Chief Gruenig is probabl y better situated than anyone else to know why people are leaving. Mayor Elliott stated this is an important topic the City Council should discuss at another time. He stated officers of color have reached out to him after leaving the Department to share their thoughts and it is an important part 09/01/2021 Page 26 of the work we do going forward so that information would be helpful. Mayor Elliott noted that earlier Acting Police Chief Gruenig mentioned information about the number of officers on patrol and he would like those numbers e-mailed for this year and fiscal years 2020, 2019, and 2018. Acting Police Chief Gruenig stated he will provide that information. There being no additional questions or comments, the meeting moved to the next agenda item. 4. 2022 BUDGET OVERVIEW – FOLLOW-UP Dr. Edwards stated staff will be back on September 13, 2021, to present the overall budget as well as a preliminary levy for the City Council to consider and for the adoption of the final budget in December. Staff will be prepared to provide information on the preliminary budget and a summary of the information on items the City Council requested guidance and commented on. Mr. Splinter stated on September 13, 2021, staff will recommend the preliminary levy but it will not be adopted until September 27, 2021, so there is time for consideration before adopting the high point of the levy. Mayor Elliott asked the Council about their level of interest in providing some stipend to Commissioners. Recruiting for the Commissions and talking with the folks, particularly those in our community, one young Latino gentleman who is working multiple jobs, comes highly recommended, but the idea of taking additional time off work presents a real challenge to him. Mayor Elliott stated there are many people like that and recently, the Minnesota Department of Transportation, in its work organizing a community-based committee to advise on transportation projects, put in place a $50 a meeting stipend for people participating as a way to address some of the barriers people have to commit to public life and be able to participate. Mayor Elliott asked Council Members if they are interested in considering what that would look like. Councilmember Graves stated she is not opposed to discussing it but would not want to rush into a decision to include that in this years’ budget that will be voted on in a couple of weeks. Potentially, based on that discussion, it could be implemented in the next budget year. She does not want to feel rushed into making that decision before this budget is finished. Councilmember Ryan stated he would not be opposed to considering alternatives but at this point is not convinced we should offer stipends or compensation for volunteer positions with the City. He stated we are in a new environment, he does not want to shut people out, but at the same time, we are looking at a lot of things that could potentially increase the cost of government. Councilmember Ryan stated we have to look at everything carefully. Councilmember Butler stated she would be interested in hearing more about it. Financial Commission Chair Kragness stated she would also be interested in hearing more about it and agrees it probably would not be the perfect timing with this budget season. She stated she has been on the Financial Commission for 12 years and understands it is a volunteer position, which comes with the role. She again stated she would be willing to hear more but also 09/01/2021 Page 27 understanding what the roles are meant to be; it is a volunteer position for the City and that should be taken into consideration. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated of course we can always learn more about it and to Chair Kragness’ point about being a long-term volunteer on the Financial Commission, she had served on the Housing Commission for 12 years as a volunteer. Councilmember Lawrence- Anderson stated it is something we can consider but clearly, she does not believe we have the time or resources for this budget. She is amiable to learning more about those opportunities but, as Chair Kragness said, it is a volunteer position and if people have time to devote, that is good. Councilmember Graves commented that it is great to hear Chair Kragness is at the meeting and she is happy Chair Kragness is back. Financial Commissioner Kpaleh provided comments on the work of serving as a volunteer Commissioner, and his recent reference that sometimes we need in-service so members know exactly what we are talking about at the meetings. He noted that coming to this voluntary meeting takes a lot of time to prepare and people need to have an interest in the City to do this. Financial Commissioner Kpaleh noted that when you come here, you need to put gas in your car or, since doing it on Zoom, it is something that you take your time to be on this meeting to talk and listen and bring ideas. All of these things are important. He asked about the people who are taking their time to do this. He stated it is important for you to look at that and make decisions or come up with something. Mayor Elliott stated he will have more information on this at an upcoming Work Session where it can be discussed and he will start a process to talk with Commissioners to get their perspective and hear from prospective commissioners about how spending their time is potentially a barrier. 5. FUTURE BUDGET DISCUSSIONS 5a. SEPTEMBER 13, 2021 – RECOMMENDED PRELIMINARY LEVY & BUDGET 5b. SEPTEMBER 27, 2021 – ADOPTION OF PRELIMINARY LEVY Noted. 6. ADJOURN There was a motion by Mayor Elliott and seconded by Councilmember Graves to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed. The Brooklyn Center City Council/Financial Commission adjourned at 9:15 p.m. C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:9/13/2021 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:D r. Reggie Edwards, City Manager T H R O U G H :N/A BY:A lix Bentrud, D eputy City Clerk S U B J E C T:A pproval of Licens es Requested Council A con: - Moon to approve the licenses as presented. B ackground: The following bus inesses /persons have applied for C ity licens es as noted. Each bus iness/pers on has fulfilled the requirements of the C ity O rdinance governing respec6ve licens es, s ubmi7ed appropriate applica6ons, and paid proper fees. A pplicants for rental dwelling licens es are in compliance with C hapter 12 of the C ity C ode of O rdinances , unles s comments are noted below the property addres s on the a7ached rental report. Garbage H aulers D ick's S anita6on 8984 215th S t Wes t Lakeville M N 55044 M echanical Licenses A c6on H ea6ng & A /C 8140 A rthur S t S pring Lake Park M N 55432 The F ire P lace G uys 680 H ale Ave S te 110 O akdale M N 55128 Woodland Way I nc 2901 E F ranklin Ave Minneapolis M N 55406 B udget I ssues: I nclusive C ommunity Engagement: A nracist/Equity Policy Effect: AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip6on U pload D ate Type Rental C riteria 3/16/2021 Backup M aterial Rental L icenses 9-13-2021 9/7/2021 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 *** 3501 47th Ave N Multi 1 Bldg 11 Units Initial BMW Holdings II N/A II 6700 Humboldt Ave N Multi 4 Bldgs 54 Units Initial MIMG CLXXXIV Sterling SQ SUB/Alexander Fletcher 42 .78 per unit II N/A II 7230 West River Rd Multi 1 Bldg 4 Units Initial Sonam Nyorie 20 5 per unit IV N/A IV 6212 Chowen Ave N Single Initial Doreen Kalema 8 III N/A III 5323 Dupont Ave N Single Initial Anthony Nelson 3 II N/A II 3800 Commodore Dr Single Initial David Koenig 12 IV N/A IV 5707 Emerson Ave N Single Initial Garret Pplumley/C4D Homes 9 III N/A III 6918 Grimes Ave N Single Initial Olakunle Ojo 4 II N/A II 6109-11-13 Beard Ave N Multi 1 Bldg 3 Units Renewal James & Bobbie Simmons missing CFH cert * CPTED 3 II 0 III III 6220 France Ave N Multi 6 Bldgs 23 Units Renewal Ewing Square Family Housing LP 27 1.12 per unit II 0 II II 5304 Vincent Ave N 2 Family 2 Unit Renewal Pao Vang - Met Requirements 5 2.5 per unit III 0 III IV 3815 52nd Ave N Single Renewal Jeffrey Sandberg 0 I 0 I II 3200 63rd Ave N Single Renewal Adedamola Ogundipe 2 I 0 I 3312 64th Ave N Single Renewal Xuyan Janet Lang 1 I 0 I 6312 France Ave N Single Renewal TMC Mgt Corp - met requirements 1 I 0 I IV 5742 Fremont Ave N Single Renewal Bruce Goldberg 4 II 0 II II 6816 Fremont Pl N Single Renewal Ali Sajjad 4 II 0 II I 6757 Humboldt Ave N Single Renewal Saleem Raza 6 III 0 III I 7131 Indiana Ave N Single Renewal Jeremy Paskewich 0 I 0 I II 5643 Knox Ave N Single Renewal Jason Flaa 2 I 0 I I 5431 Logan Ave N Single Renewal Chen Zhou 5 II I 7023 Logan Ave N Single Renewal Fatou Jallow / Summit Properties - Met Requirements 3 II 0 II IV 5313 Northport Dr Single Renewal IH3 Property Illinois / Mai Thao 9 III 0 III II 6701 Scott Ave N Single Renewal Olaleye Olagbaju / Royal Priesthood LLC 5 II 0 II I 6830 Scott Ave N Single Renewal IH3 Property Illinois / Mai Thao 7 III 0 III I 4900 Zenith Ave N Single Renewal IH3 Property Illinois / Mai Thao 13 IV 0 IV 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 a previous license type All properties are current on City utilities and property taxes Type 1 = 3 Year Type II = 2 Year Type III = 1 Year Rental Licenses for Council Approval on September 13, 2021 0 II C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:9/13/2021 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:D r. Reggie Edwards, City Manager T H R O U G H : BY:M eg Beekman, C ommunity D evelopment D irector S U B J E C T:Res olu.on I den.fying the Need for L ivable C ommuni.es D emonstra.on A ccount (L C DA ) F unding and A uthoriz ing an A pplica.on for G rant F unds Requested Council A con: - Moon to approve the resoluon idenfy ing the need for Livable C ommunies D emonstraon A ccount (LC DA ) funding and authoriz ing the submission of applicaon for grant funds. B ackground: Livable Communi.es A ct (L C A ) grants are aw arded to communi.es that par.cipate in the Livable Communi.es P rogram in the s even-county metro region. Through four different grant programs , L C A grants help communi.es achieve development goals that create more housing choice, s upport living wage job crea.on, and connect jobs, hous ing, and regional ameni.es to create a more equitable region. Each of the four L C A programs have a different focus. Livable Communi.es D emons tra.on A ccount (L C DA ) supports development and redevelopment projects that link housing, jobs and services, and use community and regional infras tructure efficiently L C DA - Transit O riented D evelopment (L C DA -TO D ) grants are focus ed on high density projects that contribute to a mix of us es in TO D -eligible areas . The Tax Bas e Revitaliz a.on A ccount (T B R A ) helps clean up contaminated land and buildings for s ubs equent development. These grants are intended to provide the greatest public benefit for the money spent, strengthen the local tax base, and create and preserve jobs and/or affordable hous ing. T B R A has three different funding opportuni.es : C ontamina.on Cleanup, S ite I nves .ga.on, and S E E D. The L ocal H ous ing I ncen.ves A ccount (L H I A ) helps expand and preserve lifecycle and affordable hous ing, both rented and ow ned. L H I A applica.ons are submi@ed through the Minnes ota H ous ing S uper R F P, as opposed to directly to M et C ouncil. The funding year, staff is seeking authoriza.on to apply on behalf of two projects , Wangs tad C ommons and O pportunity S ite - P hase I , to the L C DA and L C DA -TO D funds res pec.vely. Both programs have similar eligible uses of funds , which include environmental s us tainability elements; public s paces , placemaking and public art; and infras tructure elements such as roadw ays , trails and s idewalks. The deadline for submi@al to both funding programs is S eptember 27, 2021. Wangstad C ommons B ackground D eveloper J O P roper.es has received a preliminary development agreement from the E DA on the four E DA -ow ned proper.es located at the northwes t corner of 61st Avenue North and Brooklyn Boulevard, w hich total a combined 1.79 acres . J O P roper.es has propos ed a 55-unit mul.-family affordable apartment building on the s ite. The C ity C ouncil previously s upported an L C DA P re-development grant to the Metropolitan Council, w hich w as subsequently approved. Thes e funds have s upported s ite planning work, financial analysis, and community engagement ac.vi.es . J O P roper.es submi@ed an applica.on to M H FA for L ow I ncome H ous ing Tax Credits to fund the project. A s part of that applica.on, The City Council approved a purchas e agreement w ith the developer, and the us e of Tax I ncrement F inancing to support the development. M H FA has not yet announced whether the project will be funded this round. F unds from the L C DA grant w ould s upport stormwater enhancements to the s ite as w ell as connec.ons to the adjacent Wangs tad Park. The developer an.cipates reques .ng $1.4 million in L C DA funds for this project. J O proper.es partnered with Tw in Ci.es L I S C to hold a series of community engagement s essions about the project. Par.cipa.ng residents w ere highly engaged in the process and iden.fied recommenda.ons for the project as it moves forward. W hile the City currently has mul.ple development projects in the pipeline, this project is unique in that it provides needed mid-market and affordable, larger unit-s iz ed rental units along the Brooklyn Boulevard corridor. The project aligns w ell with the City's s trategic priori.es , and s upports a local developer. F urther, this project would likely not move forward without the assistance of the grant funds. O pportunity S ite - P hase I B ackground The C ity has been w orking with developer A latus for the pas t 3.5 years on an ini.al development on the 81- acre O pportunity S ite. O ver that .me, A latus ' development concept has evolved and expanded from an ini.al s ingle market-rate apartment building, to include three dis.nct mul.-family developments in a wide range of price points , a community event center, childcare center, and entrepreneurial incubator. A latus has partnered with two other development groups to complete the project. They include P roject for P ride in Living (P P L ), a non-profit affordable hous ing developer, and Resurrec.ng World Faith Ministries, a church group w hich is focus ing on the community event center and childcare center. The entrepreneurial incubator is currently an.cipated to be approximately 25,000 square feet. I t also includes a s ubs tan.al public plaz a which will serve as the gatew ay to the development as well as the front door to the incubator. The plaza is intended to s erve as a community gathering place, but mos t importantly a place to s erve local entrepreneurs and busines s es through pop-up markets, cultural ac.vi.es, and vendor kiosks . The plaza w ill be operated and managed by the same group that operates and manages the incubator. A n architect has been iden.fied for the incubator and plaza. M E LO by D esign w ill oversee the design of these s paces , while w orking in coordina.on w ith N EO O Partners and the community engagement proces s to inform the final design. W hile that work is underway, Bolton & M enk have been tas ked with developing early concept renderings of the plaz a in order to facilitate the crea.on of cos t es.mates. This w ork is neces s ary in order to move ahead w ith the grant applica.on. L C DA -TO D funds w ould be used to s upport the construc.on and implementa.on of the plaz a. The C ity an.cipates applying for $2 million in grant funds to s upport this as pect of the project. The overall development project requires significant public infrastructure to s erve it. The City applied for and received a $585,000 H ennepin C ounty TO D grant to s upport the cons truc.on of public roadw ays and s tormw ater improvements. The C ity has ini.ated preliminary des ign and engineering on the por.ons of the infras tructure which will be city-owned that are w ithin the development area. B udget I ssues: There are no budget items to cons ider at this .me. No funding match is required for the use of grant funds. I nclusive C ommunity Engagement: Both projects have begun community engagement ac.vi.es w hich w ill inform the planning and design of the site layout and programming of the respec.ve developments . A nracist/Equity Policy Effect: The M etropolitan C ouncil has developed new s coring criteria, which heavily focuses on equity and an.- racis t outcomes for projects w hich are to receive funding. Criteria includes demons trated outreach to impacted and underrepres ented communi.es , iden.fica.on of specific res iden.al and/or w orkforce development community needs addressed by the project, project teams w hich reflect and are responsive to thos e mos t impacted by the project. Both projects under considera.on are likely to s core w ell in thes e criteria rela.ve to others they w ill compete agains t. S trategic Priories and Values: Targeted Redevelopment AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip.on U pload D ate Type Res olu.on 9/7/2021 Resolu.on Le@er RESOLUTION NO. Member introduced the following resolution and moved Subsequently its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION IDENTIFYING THE NEED FOR LIVABLE COMMUNITIES DEMONSTRATION ACCOUNT FUNDING AND AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS WHEREAS the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota is a participant in the Livable Communities Act’s Local Housing Incentives Account Program for 2021 as determined by the Metropolitan Council, and is therefore eligible to apply for Livable Communities Demonstration Account funds; and WHEREAS the City has identified a proposed project (or projects) within the City that meets the Demonstration Account’s purposes and criteria and is consistent with and promotes the purposes of the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act and the policies of the Metropolitan Council’s adopted metropolitan development guide; and WHEREAS the City has the institutional, managerial and financial capability to ensure adequate project administration; and WHEREAS the City certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws and regulations as stated in the grant agreement; and WHEREAS the City agrees to act as legal sponsor for the project(s) contained in the grant application(s) submitted on September 27, 2021; and WHEREAS the City acknowledges Livable Communities Demonstration Account grants are intended to fund projects or project components that can serve as models, examples or prototypes for development or redevelopment projects elsewhere in the region, and therefore represents that the proposed project(s) or key components of the proposed project(s) can be replicated in other metropolitan-area communities; and WHEREAS only a limited amount of grant funding is available through the Metropolitan Council’s Livable Communities Demonstration Account during each funding cycle and the Metropolitan Council has determined it is appropriate to allocate those scarce grant funds only to eligible projects that would not occur without the availability of Demonstration Account grant funding. RESOLUTION NO. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that, after appropriate examination and due consideration, the governing body of the City: Finds that it is in the best interests of the City’s development goals and priorities for the proposed project or projects to occur at these particular sites and at this particular time. Finds that the project components for which Livable Communities Demonstration Account funding is sought: will not occur solely through private or other public investment within the reasonably foreseeable future; and will occur within three years after a grant award only if Livable Communities Demonstration Account funding is made available for this project at this time. Represents that the City has undertaken reasonable and good faith efforts to procure funding for the project components for which Livable Communities Demonstration Account funding is sought but was not able to find or secure from other sources funding that is necessary for project component completion within three years and states that this representation is based on the following reasons and supporting facts: List project or projects applied for here: Project Name Amount Requested Wangstad Commons $1,400,000 Opportunity Site – Phase I $2,000,000 Authorizes its City Manager to submit on behalf of the City an application or applications for Metropolitan Council Livable Communities Demonstration Account grant funds for the project component(s) identified in the application(s), and to execute such agreements as may be necessary to implement the project(s) on behalf of the City. September 13, 2021 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: RESOLUTION NO. and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:9/13/2021 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:D r. Reggie Edwards, City Manager T H R O U G H :M ichael Marsh, P ublic Works D irector Mike A lbers , C ity Engineer BY:C ynthia Majors , P ublic Works A dmin Technician S U B J E C T:Res olu1on D eclaring a P ublic Nuisance and O rdering the Removal of D ead Trees at C ertain P roper1es in Brooklyn C enter, Minnes ota Requested Council A con: - Recommend that the C ity C ouncil declare a public nuisance and order the removal of dead trees for certain properes as listed in the resoluon. B ackground: The a6ached res olu1on represents the official C ity C ouncil ac1on required to expedite removal of dead trees that w ere recently marked by the C ity Tree I ns pector and have become a public s afety issue due to being a haz ard. The removal of dead trees is defined in City O rdinance C hapter 20-202 and 19-101 through 19-106. P roperty owners are given the opportunity to remove the dead tree on their own or enter into an agreement to allow the C ity to remove the dead tree. A minimal adminis tra1ve charge of $50 is applied to the costs as s ociated w ith the tree removal when an agreement w ith the property owner is executed. I f the ow ner does not respond within ten (10) days , they are provided with a s econd no1ce no1fying them of the C ity C ouncil mee1ng where the dead tree is declared a public nuisance. I f the property ow ner does not correct the viola1on or enter into an agreement, the C ity will remove the dead tree. A minimum adminis tra1ve abatement s ervice charge of $150 w ill be impos ed bas ed on the cos t of the abatement. B udget I ssues: The cost of removal of dead trees located on private property is the res pons ibility of the res pec1ve property ow ner, and if unpaid, is s pecially as s essed to the property. I nclusive C ommunity Engagement: A nracist/Equity Policy Effect: S trategic Priories and Values: Enhanced Community I mage AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip1on U pload D ate Type Res olu1on 9/8/2021 Resolu1on Le6er 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 7216 Fremont Ave N Cottonwood 38 6000 Vincent Ave N Maple 42 7200 Bryant Ave N Pine 46 5431 James Ave N Maple 49 6418 Kyle Ave N Cottonwood 52 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. ______________ 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. C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:9/13/2021 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:D r. Reggie Edwards, City Manager T H R O U G H :N/A BY:A ndy S plinter, I nterim F inance D irector S U B J E C T:Res olu.on to accept C oronavirus Local F is cal Recovery F und establis hed under the A merican Res cue P lan Requested Council A con: A dopt Resolu.on to authoriz e C ity staff to take ac.ons necessary to receive the City's s hare of A R PA funds from the S tate of M innesota for expenses incurred because of the pandemic and authorize City s taff to make recommenda.ons to the C ity C ouncil for future uses . B ackground: A s a result of the Pandemic ci.es have been called on to res pond to the needs of their communi.es through the preven.on, treatment, and vaccina.on of C O V I D -19. City revenues, bus inesses , and nonprofits in the City have faced economic impacts due to this Pandemic. Congres s adopted the A merican Res cue P lan A ct in March 2021 (“A R PA”) w hich included $65 billion in recovery funds for ci.es acros s the country. A R PA funds are intended to provide s upport to state, local, and tribal governments in responding to the impact of C O V I D -19 and in their efforts to contain C O V I D -19 in their communi.es, res idents, and busines s es. B udget I ssues: The C ity has received an alloca.on of $3,247,524.40 as a non-en.tlement unit which will be dis tributed in tw o parts from the state because its popula.on is less than 50,000. H alf w ill be received in 2021 and the balance in 2022. The focus of this relief is outlined as follow s : • S upport urgent C O V I D -19 res pons e efforts to con.nue to decreas e spread of the virus and bring the pandemic under control; • Replace los t public s ector revenue to strengthen support for vital public services and help retain jobs; • S upport immediate economic stabiliz a.on for households and busines s es; and, • A ddress sys temic public health and economic challenges The C oronavirus S tate and L ocal F iscal Recovery F unds provide s ubs tan.al flexibility for each juris dic.on to meet local needs —including s upport for hous eholds, s mall bus inesses , impacted indus tries , es s en.al w orkers, and the communi.es hardest-hit by the crisis. These funds also deliver resources that recipients can invest in building, maintaining, or upgrading their water, sew er, and broadband infrastructure. I nclusive C ommunity Engagement: A nracist/Equity Policy Effect: S trategic Priories and Values: Enhanced Community I mage, Resident Economic S tability, S afe, S ecure, S table C ommunity AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip.on U pload D ate Type Res olu.on accep.ng A R PA funds 8/13/2021 Resolu.on LeLer Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. _______________ RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT THE CORONAVIRUS LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUND ESTABLISHED UNDER THE AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT WHEREAS, as a result of the Pandemic cities have been called on to respond to the needs of their communities through the prevention, treatment, and vaccination of COVID-19. WHEREAS, city revenues, businesses and nonprofits in the city have faced economic impacts due to the Pandemic. WHEREAS, Congress adopted the American Rescue Plan Act in March 2021 (“ARPA”) which included $65 billion in recovery funds for cities across the country. WHEREAS, ARPA funds are intended to provide support to state, local, and tribal governments in responding to the impact of COVID-19 and in their efforts to contain COVID-19 in their communities, residents, and businesses. WHEREAS, $3,247,524.40 has been allocated to the City of Brooklyn Center (“City”) pursuant to the ARPA (“Allocation”). WHEREAS, the United States Department of Treasury has adopted guidance regarding the use of ARPA funds. WHEREAS, the City, in response to the Pandemic, has had expenditures and anticipates future expenditures consistent with the Department of Treasury’s ARPA guidance. WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota will distribute ARPA funds to the City because its population is less than 50,000. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that: 1. The City intends to collect its share of ARPA funds from the State of Minnesota to use in a manner consistent with the Department of Treasury’s guidance. 2. City staff are hereby authorized to take any actions necessary to receive the City’s share of ARPA funds from the State of Minnesota for expenses incurred because of the Pandemic. 3. City staff are hereby authorized to make recommendations to the City Council for future expenditures that may be reimbursed with ARPA funds. RESOLUTION NO. _______________ 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. C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:9/13/2021 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:D r. Reggie Edwards, City Manager T H R O U G H :N/A BY:D r. Reggie Edwards, City Manager S U B J E C T:Res olu+on A ccep+ng the Pohlad Family Founda+on Racial Jus+ce G rant in the A mount of $550,000 Requested Council A con: The C ouncil accepts the P O H L A D FA M I LY F O U N DAT I O N R A C I A L J U S T I C E G R A N T to reduce harm through collabora+ve s olu+ons ini+a+ve. B ackground: O n June 1, 2021 the City of Brooklyn Center s ubmi8ed a grant proposal to the Pohlad Family Founda+on Racial J us +ce G rant (see a8ached). The C ity propos al +tled “Evolving Brooklyn C enter: A Community-Centered C ity ” proposal w as founded on four specific interconnected projects co-created with community through a collabora+ve approach. T he framework for this process came out of community trauma, pain, and what has become our Four C ommunity Pillars (i.e., safety, health, business and social resources). T he vision is that the C ity of B rooklyn C enter will evolve as a C ommunity-C entered C ity (being one with the city and community) through these projects. T he grant funds are restricted to establishing a civilian public safety response and community health and police dialogues. N a+onal L eague of C i+es will be coordina+ng technical assistance and evalua+on ac+vi+es as a required part of the C ollabora+ve Solu+ons ini+a+ve. The C ouncil authoriz es staff to take any ac+ons necessary to receive and execute the Pohlad Family Founda+on’s Racial Jus+ce G rant funding of $550,000. B udget I ssues: The total Pohlad Family Founda+on’s Racial J us +ce G rant funding of $550,000 covers tw o years or $275,000 per year. I nclusive C ommunity Engagement: P ropos al ar+cula+on of I nclusive C ommunity Engagement V is ion - “Evolving Brooklyn Center: A C ommunity-C entered City ” is founded in four specific interconnected projects co-created with community through a collabora+ve approach. The vision is that the C ity of Brooklyn Center w ill evolve as a Community-Centered C ity (being one w ith the city and community) through these projects. The community is at the center of co-crea+ng the transforma+ve solu+ons outlined in this document; and crea+vely thinking about how Brooklyn Center can evolve into a Community-Centered C ity. Together we are u+lizing w hat we are calling a “community-centered idea+on” process. The framework for this proces s came out of community trauma, pain, and w hat has become our Four Community P illars (i.e., safety, health, bus iness and s ocial resources). The community-centered city idea+on proces s begins by crea+ng a welcoming atmos phere, grounded in A frican culture through music, gree+ng each other, sharing a meal, introducing ours elves; and moves to having authen+c conversa+ons that allow us to get to know each before we embarked on the difficult work together. We brought together res idents and the small busines s community who have been directly impacted by the recent civil unres t and resul+ng trauma, res idents who have had les s than favorable interac+ons w ith law enforcement, community intervener groups who have played a key role in helping the community during C O V I D and the civil unres t, community-based organiza+ons, city staff/elected officials, law enforcement leaders hip, mental health profes s ionals, s ocial workers , youth councils , arts organiz a+ons , and community ar+sts. The four projects being developed and/or piloted will ini+ally us e funds from grants to address elements of s ystemic change in public s afety covering: Pa8erns of Behavior, S tructure and M inds et. Each of the projects involves contrac+ng with community organiza+ons or res idents as a means to leveraging and cul+va+ng community capacity and expanding the capacity of city government, w hich is the path for new behavior by the city and the community. The projects will allow the city to act sys temically, dynamically, comprehens ively, and inten+onally! We know we cannot come together and build things over +me un+l w e rebuild and repair rela+ons hips . For Brooklyn Center, it is about how w e build new and rebuild old rela+onships and s us taining them over the long term. A nracist/Equity Policy Effect: S trategic Priories and Values: Enhanced Community I mage, I nclusive C ommunity Engagement, S afe, S ecure, S table C ommunity AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip+on U pload D ate Type Pohlad Founda+on P roposal 9/10/2021 Cover Memo Pohlad Family Founda+on O fficial L e8er 9/10/2021 Cover Memo Res olu+on 9/10/2021 Resolu+on Le8er Evolving Brooklyn Center: A Community-Centered City Our Vision, Projects, Transformative Approach and What We’ve Learned So Far Co-Created by the Brooklyn Center Community which included Community Members, Community Based Organizations, Businesses and City Staff Documented with the assistance of Dr. Reginald (Reggie) Edwards, Acting City Manager, City of Brooklyn Center and Linda Garrett-Johnson, Consultant, The Word Applied, Inc. June 1, 2021 Evolving Brooklyn Center: A Community-Centered City pg. 2 – City of Brooklyn Center, MN © 2021 Vision “Evolving Brooklyn Center: A Community-Centered City” is founded in four specific interconnected projects co-created with community through a collaborative approach. The vision is that the City of Brooklyn Center will evolve as a Community-Centered City (being one with the city and community) through these projects. The community is at the center of co-creating the transformative solutions outlined in this document; and creatively thinking about how Brooklyn Center can evolve into a Community- Centered City. Together we are utilizing what we are calling a “community-centered ideation” process. The framework for this process came out of community trauma, pain, and what has become our Four Community Pillars (i.e., safety, health, business and social resources). The community-centered city ideation process begins by creating a welcoming atmosphere, grounded in African culture through music, greeting each other, sharing a meal, introducing ourselves; and moves to having authentic conversations that allow us to get to know each before we embarked on the difficult work together. We have brought together residents and the small business community who have been directly impacted by the recent civil unrest and resulting trauma, residents who have had less than favorable interactions with law enforcement, community intervener groups who have played a key role in helping the community during COVID and the civil unrest, community-based organizations, city staff/elected officials, law enforcement leadership, mental health professionals, social workers, youth councils, arts organizations, and community artists. The four projects being developed and/or piloted will initially use funds from grants to address elements of systemic change in public safety covering: Patterns of Behavior, Structure and Mindset. Each of the projects involves contracting with community organizations or residents as a means to leveraging and cultivating community capacity and expanding the capacity of city government, which is the path for new behavior by the city and the community. The projects will allow the city to act systemically, dynamically, comprehensively, and intentionally! We know we cannot come together and build things over time until we rebuild and repair relationships. For Brooklyn Center, it is about how we build new and rebuild old relationships and sustaining them over the long term. We will be taking the financial resources from RFPs and grants coming into our community and investing them back into the community, not build the city budget. “Innovation is an intentional disruption of the current” – Reggie Edwards We are writing our story, not a grant. There is no city without the community. We are one community. – Dr. Reggie Edwards, Acting City Manager Evolving Brooklyn Center: A Community-Centered City pg. 3 – City of Brooklyn Center, MN © 2021 We will use grant funds to:  Plan – Our planning will allow us to continue to answer these questions: o How do we create community in advance of a crisis? o How can we turn an innovative moment of crisis into our way of being? o What are the things that must to change in our patterns of behavior, structures and mindset?  Act – Based upon what emerges from answering the critical planning questions, as a community we will develop strategies and tactics that are based upon acting and behaving differently, throwing out our old assumptions/mindsets and creating new patterns of working that are everchanging and responding to the emergence of new shifts in our community.  Evaluate – More than outcome statements, as a community we will look to see how what we are doing is making a lasting impact and real difference in our community. And we will course correct in real-time when necessary. Our project includes working with the community to identify our evaluation process and outcome measures.  Sustain – Beyond RFP and grant funding, as a community we are exploring how to sustain our community-based city. This includes rethinking how we use city resources and financial resources that come into our city; and identifying additional, long-term sources of revenue to fund our efforts. The funds we are seeking will help us evolve into a Community-Centered City, representing the City of Brooklyn Center being and living as one with the Community. To realize this vision, we estimate that grant support in the amount of $987,625.00 is needed. Projects: Addressing Patterns of Behavior, Structure and Mindset Below is the outline for the three types of systemic change projects (Patterns of Behavior, Structure and Mindset) that we are seeking funding to initiate. These are pilots for the city behaving, structuring, and thinking (mindset) in a new way! A by-product of these projects will help us to accomplish these four goals:  Transform the City of Brooklyn Center into a Community-Centered City,  Innovatively transform our approach to public safety,  Reduce the occurrence and severity of negative encounters between law enforcement and the community; and  Actively confront racial disparities and our history of racism in our City to improve safety, trust and the greater wellbeing among Black, Indigenous and people of color (BIPOC). Piloting our projects together as community will allow us to:  Learn from the wisdom of a diverse community  Manage risk Evolving Brooklyn Center: A Community-Centered City pg. 4 – City of Brooklyn Center, MN © 2021  More quickly implement the process changes  Get feedback in real time  Fail fast so we can refine solutions  Innovate and spur new ideas  Build generational capacity For the City of Brooklyn Center, these projects will allow us to rebuild, repair and transform how we exist as community, which in turn will innovatively impact and transform public safety in the City of Brooklyn Center. Our approach is especially transformative in how our projects are designed to confront racial disparities, inequities, safety, and well-being with our Black, Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC) communities. The total estimated costs for the projects below is $987,625.00. Patterns of Behavior Project Project 1: Community-Centered City Plan and Prototyping - In an effort to aid the City of Brooklyn Center evolution into a “Community-Centered City” it will undergo an 18-month planning and prototyping community process. The process will involve monthly two-day convening of 25 residents and eight city staff/elected officials, three learning journeys, project prototyping and evaluation. The process will include facilitation of three stages, which are central to our approach: co- sensing, co-presencing and co-creating. The process used will be modeled on the “theory U Process and Monte Fleur” process used in South Africa following the transformation out of the social and political construct of Apartheid. The three learning journeys (involving 25 residents who are predominantly BIPOC community members or reflective of the demographical make up of Brooklyn Center) and city staff/elected officials) will take us to three communities experiencing trauma similar to our own – Ferguson, MO (Michael Brown), Baltimore Maryland, (Freddie Gray) and Charleston, South Carolina (Church Shooting). The learning journeys will serve as part of the co-sensing and co-presencing parts of the process. From those shared experiences, potential strategies for change will emerge and ultimately shape and define prototype projects. The group will dialogue and learn from residents impacted by the trauma, devastation, civic organizations and local governments in those communities. Based on the shared learning and co-creating the group will prototype six public safety projects that will be developed and piloted for 2 years in the areas of Four Pillar areas of Community: health, safety, life essential resources, and business. Each pilot would have to influence each of the other three areas as they all interconnected in one system. The prototype projects will need to address the patterns of behavior, structures and mindsets related to creating a community-based city. Costs: Community-Centered City Plan and Prototyping – 18 Month Pilot: (Community Contract and City Staff Co-Create Pilots, Evaluation, Change Management and Process Consultation): $225,625. Evolving Brooklyn Center: A Community-Centered City pg. 5 – City of Brooklyn Center, MN © 2021 Structure (Umbrella) Projects Projects 2: Civilian Public Safety - The City will pilot the creation of two new service areas of innovation involving public safety which are Community Response (trauma and mental illness safety related services); and Traffic Enforcement (non-moving violations related services). This fundamental shift may advance safety in two ways : 1) leveraging community assets (especially the BIPOC community); and 2) investing in community economic stability. This pilot would involve contracting community intervener groups used during the civil unrest to pilot the following services:  Community Response Department. The City will create an unarmed Community Response Department (CRD) to respond to all incidents where a City resident is primarily experiencing a medical, mental health, disability-related, or other behavioral or social need. The CRD will consist of trained medical and mental health professionals, social workers, and/or other staff and volunteers, and will be routed via a dispatch system routing appropriate calls to the Community Response Department and not to the Police Department. This will include any other appropriate changes in City ordinances, practices or policies.  Traffic Enforcement Department. The City will create an unarmed civilian Traffic Enforcement Department to enforce all non-moving traffic violations in the City. The creation of this Department will include making any other appropriate changes in City ordinances, practices or policies, including restricting or eliminating the types of traffic offenses enforced by the City’s armed law enforcement patrol officers. Costs: The City will pilot Civilian Non-Motor Vehicle Traffic – 2 Year Pilot (Community Intervener Contracts): $474,500. Mindset Project Project 3 and 4: Below are two (2) Mindset interrelated components. Project 3: Daunte Wright Peace, Healing and Prosperity Area Plan, Public Art and Memorial This will be a community-based and youth led effort (through contracts with the Brooklyn Bridge Alliance Youth Council and Minneapolis-based Juxtaposition) to redesign the area of North Humboldt Avenue in Brooklyn Center between 65th Ave. North and 69th Ave. North. Currently located in this area are: Brooklyn Center Community Junior and High School, Kenyan Church, the Brooklyn Center Police Department, residential homes (predominantly apartments), corner convenience stores and Humboldt Square Shopping Center. The youth leadership vision is derived from a generational strategy, empowering youth, and tapping into the wisdom of youth. One of our paths forward involves youth being fully present and empowered so they may help sustain the intention and work for generations to come. Today, the businesses are boarded up and are covered with graffiti, the police department is surrounded by two fencing, apartments have been vandalized and covered with graffiti, and the schools are fenced off. Evolving Brooklyn Center: A Community-Centered City pg. 6 – City of Brooklyn Center, MN © 2021 During the civil unrest, th is area changed from a neighborhood residential area to an area that looked and felt like a war zone. With the leadership of youth and artists, the city will undergo a reconstruction of the area based on the desire and vision of community. The road will be reconstructed, pocket green spaces carved out, public art painted, and memorials erected. The desire is to transform a war-torn area into a place of remembrance, healing, and hope. The funding from grants would support the completion of a community-based plan, and the erection of the Daunte Wright memorial and other public art, while city and other government funding would be used for reconstructing the road. Costs: Daunte Wright Peace, Healing and Prosperity Area Plan, Public Art and Memorial – 18 Month Pilot: (Contract with Brooklyn Bridge Alliance Youth Council, Minneapolis-based Juxtaposition and Community Artists): $223,500. Project 4: Community and Police Dialogues - As a part of creating a sense of community and healing from the trauma of civil unrest, facilitated discussions by members of the Minnesota Chapter of the Association of Black Psychologist (MnABP) will be held with community and police officers. Members of (MnABP), community members and police officers will jointly design the sessions. Strategies will be developed and piloted for purposes of healing and cultivating trusting and caring relationships. These dialogues will be key to how we continue to engage and center on our BIPOC communities, elevating their voices historic pain, ensuring they play a major role in identifying and framing future work and projects. Costs: Community and Police Dialogues – 18 Month Pilot: (Contracted and Co-Lead by 21-Residence Community Group and the Brooklyn Center Multicultural Advis ory Committee): $64,000. Evaluation Metrics and Outcome Measures Below are high level (initial) evaluation metrics and outcome measures we are working towards. With the assistance of a contract with evaluation and process improvement professionals, we will finalize our metrics and measures. Project Metrics/Measures Timeframe Budget Community-Centered City Plan and Prototyping  60% of participating residents will be from the BIPOC community  Six public safety projects will be developed and piloted by 2024 18 Month Pilot $215,625.00 Civilian Public Safety  Community Response Department  Traffic Enforcement Department  30% of incidents related to medical, mental health, disability or other behavioral or social needs will be handled by the Community Response Department by 2022 and 60% by 2024 2 Year Pilot $474,5000.00 Evolving Brooklyn Center: A Community-Centered City pg. 7 – City of Brooklyn Center, MN © 2021 Project Metrics/Measures Timeframe Budget  30% of non-moving traffic violations will be handled by the Traffic Enforcement Department by 2022 and 60% by 2024  60% of participating teams will be from the BIPOC community by 2024 Daunte Wright Peace, Healing and Prosperity Area Plan, Public Art and Memorial  80% of the businesses boarded up and with graffiti will be repaired and exterior repainted by 2022  60% of the participating youth leaders will be from the BIPOC community  85% of residents will report they experience the Daunte Wright memorial to bring them a sense of healing 18 Month Pilot $233,500.00 Community and Police Dialogues  60% of participating residents will be from the BIPOC community  Bi-monthly community dialogues per month over two years (2023)  75% of participating residents will experience healing mental and emotional supports 18 Month Pilot $64,000.00 Total $987,625 Why We Developed these Pilot Projects Our City and Community values the lost life of Daunte Wright; and we walk alongside his family, who are members of our community. What happened on April 11th was a tragic wakeup call for our community, who determined we wanted to have lasting, positive change come out of it. We decided to rise up and show we are more than the tragic event. We are a people, a community who cares deeply about the individuals, families and business that are part of the City of Brooklyn Center. We found ourselves wondering why it took this event to be the catalyst for reimagining what our community and public safety could look like, but it did. So, we have chosen to see this as an unfortunate situation that created an opportunity for the emergence of innovative, community- based solutions. This is our story, the way that we want to tell it. This event led to the development of our projects. Four Community Pillars Our Four Community Pillars came out of the community responding in innovative ways to the crises that were before us. The community has been a major part of solutioning and creativity Evolving Brooklyn Center: A Community-Centered City pg. 8 – City of Brooklyn Center, MN © 2021 about how we think and do differently, including how we identify and confront racial disparities, safety, community well-being and build trust. A major part of our financial request is to help us continue and expand these solutions. The goals and priorities of all our projects will build upon and expand our four community pillars by way of our transformative, collaborative approach to authentic engagement. We are on the cusp of reimagining our city focused on these four community pillars, guided by what we want for our community, residents and businesses.  Health – The Health Pillar is how we plan for and address combating health disparities, especially within the BIPOC (Black, Indigenous People of Color) communities who do not having access to healthcare. o We learned that COVID lifted the curtain and shined light on this disparity. Understanding that systems are set up in ways that are not accessible to BIPOC communities o We learned that BIPOC communities do not receive information through traditional channels, there were language barriers, and there is a lack of trust in the government. o We learned that BIPOC communities do not have access to resources (ex: masks, internet, telehealth). o Community-based Solution Example: The community came together to address the disparities (and gaps) identified. Example: Purchasing a mobile unit called “Health on the Go” that was equipped to go to where people are to bring services to them.  Safety – The Safety Pillar is how we address communities feeling unsafe due to the number of shootings of black males by law enforcement particularly Daunte Wright and George Floyd; as well as safety around civil unrest. o We learned that the community needed to able to raise their voice of pain, and protest without being sprayed with tear gas or shot at with rubber bullets. o We learned that Law enforcement need new ways to work safely with the community. o We learned that the community suffers loss if businesses burned down or disrupted with the protests. Evolving Brooklyn Center: A Community-Centered City pg. 9 – City of Brooklyn Center, MN © 2021 o We learned that families were not safe in their own homes during peaceful protests due to inhaling tear gas and chemicals, the environmental trauma, and deep trauma to children hiding under beds which will last a lifetime. o Community-based Solution Example:  New tactics for addressing peaceful protesting were created and enacted by a partnership between community organizers, protest organizers, and city government (i.e., police, communications, community development, and administration).  We needed to create a new “playbook” because protests were happening in a highly dense residential area (which was directly across from the police department) with residents and homes in the path of people crying out in pain.  Social Life (Human) Resources – The Social Life (Human) Resources Pillar is how we address both civil unrests and the COVID-19 Pandemic. o We learned that business shutdown or bored up due to civil unrest (safety); and the pandemic (COVID) saw business impact. o Food, toiletries, and other essential life commodities shortages were exacerbated due to existing “food deserts” within Brooklyn Center and the closing of grocery stories and businesses. o Community-based Solutioning Examples: Setting up locations to provide resources such as food and supplies in the community because our food shelves were seeing people who had never been in a food line before due to lost income. The community came together to provide things like food, diapers, and water for people to get by. We also relocated people to hotels (for their safety) during the peaceful protest. During COVID, it was about keeping people from being evicted. We saw housing, food, and the need for essentials resources as being important to well-being and life.  Business – The Business Pillar is about ensuring we keep local businesses in our community to serve residents. o We learned that businesses needed to board up to protect themselves from the path of potential rioters, so our business community began look like a third world. o We learned that during the height of COVID, many businesses were shutting down. o We learned that during all of this, it was about keeping the businesses afloat to get through these challenging times. o We learned that there would come a time to take down the boarding and repaint with murals and positive messages any business impacted due to civil unrest, so people could get back to getting the resources they need within their own community. o We learned that it was important to contract with local community people to help do this repair and healing work (people who have expertise and are part of the community). Evolving Brooklyn Center: A Community-Centered City pg. 10 – City of Brooklyn Center, MN © 2021 Community-Centered Ideation Process We know that if we are going to evolve into a Community-Centered City, we must think and do engagement differently than has been done in our city before. And we must empower voices that are typically not engaged, like those impacted by our decisions including the Black, Indigenous People of Color (BIPOC) communities. Therefore, we have framed what we are calling a “Community-Centered Ideation” process. Our community-centered ideation process started with creating a welcoming atmosphere through music, greeting each other, sharing a meal, introducing ourselves, and moves to having authentic conversations that allows us to get to know each before we embarked on the difficult work together. As a conversation starter, we use our centerpiece which represents “one people, one head.” We use this process to systemically approach ideation as a community. One people, One head ~ Our Community Organized by our Acting City Manager, in groups facilitated by the community, we invite to our conversations individuals who represent the following:  Community residents (representing 75% of all participants) who are Black, Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC)  Community members who live and work in Brooklyn Center  Small business owners  City Clerk  Acting Chief of Police  Police Officer from the Street Crimes Unit  Multi-Cultural Advisory Committee) We move through our ideation conversations by looking through and under the iceberg, which represents the three levers we want to pull to take a systemic approach to dealing with systemic problems. This is our new way of looking at the presenting issues and/or events. If we want to proactively stop events or how they occur, then we need to address the underlying causes, not the problem or issue that are being presenting. To co-create a new way of being in community, we must address the patterns, structures and mindset that gets in our way. We have incorporated this in each of our proposed projects. Evolving Brooklyn Center: A Community-Centered City pg. 11 – City of Brooklyn Center, MN © 2021  Patterns of behavior  Structures (policies, procedures)  Mindset (is at the very bottom) Ideation Process An important part of the Ideation process is the way in which you address Patterns, Structures and Mindsets is through Co-Sensing, Co-Presencing and Co-Creating together. Co-Sensing – This is where we begin to rethink the events of the past and go on a journey together (called empathy walks) that frees us to imagine a new future together. Learning Journeys include visiting other cities who have experience similar trauma as our own to talk with the community first-hand to gather stories, information and understand what they learned as a result of the process. As a part of this work together, we’d like each person on the journey with us to create a sensing journal. We would love to get at least 100 residents from our community to participate in the Learning Journeys (real people in the community). Co-Presence – Which is how we sit together in this space as we co-create. It is when we open our hearts and minds to seeing that we are not two experiences, but one experience in community. It is where we remove our old patterns of reality and begin to open, warm and illuminate what is emerging from we see together as our social systems. Co-Creating – In the end, we want to co-create together a prototype of what our community can look like as a result of the co-sensing and co-presence work we do together. The purpose of prototyping is to create a microcosm that will allow our community to explore the future by doing. The prototype work is founded on the principle of “failing early to learn quickly.” (see IDEO.com) Elements of Evolving As we begin to co-create our community vision together, we know that it must address the elements of evolving which include Learning, Trusting, Leveraging – Innovation, Boots on the Ground and Everchanging. Evolving Brooklyn Center: A Community-Centered City pg. 12 – City of Brooklyn Center, MN © 2021 Community is built upon learning, trusting and leveraging. Learning – This is learning about each other as a community: individuals, businesses and the city. And it is continually taking in information that informs and updates our community plan and allows us to make needs changes as necessary. Trusting – As we learn about each other we are able to breakdown and dismantle disinformation and assumptions we had, allowing us to develop the ability to see each other as trusting partners in this community work together. Leveraging – As we learn and trust we are able to think differently about how to leverage both the City and Community resources that are in front of us. Adaptability is when we are open to new ways of being. Innovation – The methods of the past can’t create a community-based city. It takes thinking differently, new ways of looking at old problems. It takes innovation. Boots on the Ground – A community-based city requires finding, utilizing, developing and growing what we can boots on the ground – people who have a vested interest in the City – people who want to ensure its success. Everchanging – The solutions of today will not solve the identified issues and problems of tomorrow. Therefore we must nimble and be willing to be ever -evolving, everchanging. Authentic Community Engagement Below represents some of the initial work done through authentic engagement with the community and others, at three community gatherings in May. The comments below represent some of the thoughts, feedback and suggestions that surfaced. We are building upon this feedback to reimagine and evolve into a Community-Centered City, working city and community together. Community Learning TrustingLeveraging Adapability Innovation Boots on the Ground Everchanging Evolving Brooklyn Center: A Community-Centered City pg. 13 – City of Brooklyn Center, MN © 2021 What Worked Successes Changes Needed  Uniting on the community, leaning on each other  Decrease in crime  Increased community engagement and collaboration  Developing new relationships  Speaking up and developing trust  Relationship have been built through community interveners between the community and the Brooklyn Center Police Department  During COVID-19, homeless from Minneapolis found temporary shelter in Brooklyn Center and assistance clearing up minor legal issues with the help of the Police Department  City agencies became more flexible, adaptable and innovative  Gaps in services were identified  Meeting community needs for food, housing, mental health  Continue to find ways to authentically engage the community (DEI work)  Ensure systems and structures are able to respond in ways that are supportive to community needs  Connect resources within the community to the needs of the community  Create safe spaces for the community to ask for help  Investment in long term solutions  Better communication between the City and those it serves Taken from one of the May community events Evolving Brooklyn Center: A Community-Centered City pg. 14 – City of Brooklyn Center, MN © 2021 Background City History Brooklyn Center is a city in Hennepin County, Minnesota. The city is on the west bank of the Mississippi River on the northwest border of Minneapolis. The population was 30,104 at the 2010 census. Brooklyn Center is one of the original inner-ring suburbs of Minneapolis–Saint Paul, a metro area with about 3.63 million residents. Formed as the center of local trade in the former Brooklyn Township since 1873, the rural area farmed market gardening for nearby Minneapolis's growing population. The village of Brooklyn Center incorporated in 1911, splitting from Brooklyn Township, to avoid annexation by the expanding City of Minneapolis. The City of Brooklyn Center was incorporated in 1966. The city contains the site of the historic Earle Brown farm, home to Earle Brown, founder of the Minnesota State Patrol and first sheriff of Hennepin County. Brooklyn Center is in Minnesota's 5th congressional district. According to the US Census available through the Metropolitan Council, the population of Brooklyn Center is 32,722. The Events that Brought the Community Together The city was already experiencing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic which created food insecurity, job loss and impacts to local businesses, when on April 11, 2021, former Brooklyn Center police officer Kimberly Potter shot and killed Daunte Wright (a young Black man) during traffic stop, which turned into an attempted arrest and murder. Former Police Officer Potter, a veteran officer who was training other officers at the time, can be heard on her body worn camera stating she mistook her gun for her taser. Wright's murder outraged and traumatized the Black community; and resulted in protests and civil unrest, and solutions to reform public safety. Evolving Brooklyn Center: A Community-Centered City pg. 15 – City of Brooklyn Center, MN © 2021 We were already focused on responding to community needs, especially the hard hit BIPOC community due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The pain and trauma of this horrific event propelled the community to come together to reimagine public safety in Brooklyn Center. Four Community Pillars: Health, Safety, Social Life (Human) Resources, and Business With the onset of COVID-19, and then the killing of Daunte Wright, we began to develop responses to community and public safety challenges through four community pillars. Both COVID-19 and the killing of Daunte Wright highlighted historic and systemic racism, inequities, and disparities that required a collaborative, community approach to address them. In the face of these challenges, here is how we began to respond through the four pillars: Health, Safety, Social Life (Human) Resources, and Business. Health  Outreaching to the community to provide COVID-19 vaccinations for anyone who wants them  Addressing the identified food need for individuals/families impacted by job loss due to the pandemic by working with a community organization who had the capacity to fill the need  Responding to individuals and families whose health was impacted through the civil unrest near their homes and apartments due to tear gas and rubber bullets  Addressing the emotional pain and mental health needs of those traumatized by the killing of Daunte Wright Safety  Proactively responding to an organically developed peaceful protest on behalf of the Wright family who did not understand how to request an advance permit for their rally. This included relinquishing control of negotiations to trusted “interveners” who worked with City staff and guided the family through a suggested peaceful protest route, thereby expanding the City’s capacity to partner with the community  Our City Council recently adopted substantial changes to policing and public safety. Social Life (Human) Resources  Responding to individuals and families who were impacted by food and basic need insecurity as a result of the civil unrest near their homes and apartments by supplying food, diapers, clothing and other basic need items those impacted  Relocating individuals and families impacted by the civil unrest to secure temporary shelter; and helping those who need more permanent relocation find it Business  Contracting with organizations in our community who had the capacity to help small businesses in their applications for pandemic relief micro grants, thereby building the internal capacity of the community Evolving Brooklyn Center: A Community-Centered City pg. 16 – City of Brooklyn Center, MN © 2021 Innovative Solutions to Public Safety Our City Council recently adopted changes to public safety and the handling of encounters with law enforcement in ways to confront racial disparities as evidenced below. They developed these initial solutions which take into account and address the following areas . Public Safety Reducing Law Enforcement Encounters Confronting Racial Disparities  Creation a new Department of Community Safety and Violence Prevention  Creation a permanent Community Safety and Violence Prevention Committee  Regulate the use of force by armed law enforcement officers, including by appropriate changes in ordinance, practices or policies  Prohibiting certain uses of force or other policing tactics during First Amendment protests and assemblies  Creation of an unarmed Community Response Department responds to all incidents where a city resident is primarily experiencing a medical, mental health, disability-related, or other behavioral or social need  Creation of a Community Response Department consisting of trained medical and mental health professionals, social workers, or other expert staff and volunteers  Creation of an unarmed civilian Traffic Enforcement Department has the responsibility for enforcing all non- moving traffic violations in the City  The community will have the opportunity to review and comment upon all implementation plans, including by making periodic progress reports in open City Council meetings monthly, or more frequently upon Council’s request Evolving Brooklyn Center: A Community-Centered City pg. 17 – City of Brooklyn Center, MN © 2021 Images from our Authentic Community Engagement Process The images in this section represent what authentic community engagement that involves Black, Indigenous, People of Color (BIPOC) looks like. “A healthy, thriving community creates spaces for all voices to be able to influence key decisions that impact their life.” ~ Linda Garrett-Johnson, CEO/Principal Consultant, The Word Applied, Inc. You start with a meal and music How you engage sets the atmosphere for conversation This is what an authentically engaged community looks like involving the BIPOC community “The result is community-driven plans with positive impact.” ~ Linda Garrett-Johnson, CEO/Principal Consultant, The Word Applied, Inc. Evolving Brooklyn Center: A Community-Centered City pg. 18 – City of Brooklyn Center, MN © 2021 Community Response to the Lost Life of Daunte Wright Community-Centered Ideation in Action 9/3/2021 Reggie Edwards Deputy City Manager City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center MN 55430 Dear Reggie: On behalf of the Pohlad Family Foundation, I am pleased to inform you that a two-year $550,000 grant to the City of Brooklyn Center was recently approved by the Pohlad Family Foundation’s Racial Justice Grants Committee as a part of the Reducing Harm through Collaborative Solutions initiative. The funds are restricted to establishing a civilian public safety response and community healing and police dialogues. A grant agreement is being prepared that will include further detail including expectations on grant activities, outcomes, use of funds, and the grant period. If you have any questions about the grant agreement or next steps, please contact Brian Paulson at bpaulson@pohladfoundation.org or 612-661-3801. Funds will be disbursed upon receipt of the signed agreement. The National League of Cities will be coordinating technical assistance and evaluation activities as a required part of the Collaborative Solutions initiative. Details to follow. We look forward to your participation. We are pleased to support you in this important work. Sincerely, Susan Bass Roberts Vice President and Executive Director Pohlad Family Foundation Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. _______________ RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT THE POHLAD FAMILY FOUNDATION RACIAL JUSTICE GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $550,000 WHEREAS, on June 1, 2021 the City of Brooklyn Center submitted a grant proposal to the Pohlad Family Foundation Racial Justice Grant; and WHEREAS, “Evolving Brooklyn Center: A Community-Centered City” proposal was founded on four specific interconnected projects co-created with community through a collaborative approach; and WHEREAS, the framework for this process came out of community trauma, pain, and what has become our Four Community Pillars (i.e., safety, health, business and social resources); and WHEREAS, the vision is that the City of Brooklyn Center will evolve as a Community- Centered City (being one with the city and community) through these projects WHEREAS, the grant funds are restricted to establishing a civilian public safety response and community health and police dialogues; and WHEREAS, the National League of Cities will be coordinating technical assistance and evaluation activities as a required part of the Collaborative Solutions initiative; and WHEREAS, the Pohlad Family Foundation selected a grant proposal by the City of Brooklyn Center to reduce harm through collaborative solutions initiative. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that the City staff are hereby authorized to take any actions necessary to receive and execute the Pohlad Family Foundation’s Racial Justice Grant funding of $550,000. September 13, 2021 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. C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:9/13/2021 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:D r. Reggie Edwards, City Manager T H R O U G H :N/A BY:Todd Berg, F ire Chief S U B J E C T:P res enta.on of Training C er.fica.on A wards from M nF I R E Requested Council A con: - A cknowledgement of M n F I R E A ware C erficaon A w ard B ackground: MnF ire was s tarted to educate, prevent and s upport all Minnes ota firefighters on the dangers of C ardiac, Cancer and Emo.onal Trauma. Brooklyn Center F irefighters have a5ended all three of the training ses s ions and have s tarted to make the necessary adjus tments to promote the w ellnes s of ourselves and each other. B udget I ssues: I nclusive C ommunity Engagement: A nracist/Equity Policy Effect: S trategic Priories and Values: O pera.onal Excellence C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:9/13/2021 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:D r. Reggie Edwards, City Manager T H R O U G H :N/A BY:A ndrew S plinter, I nterim F inance D irector S U B J E C T:P res enta/on of the 2022 P reliminary Budget Requested Council A con: - I t is recommended that the City Council consider providing direcon to staff regarding the 2022 preliminary property tax levy and budget to be adopted Monday, September 27, 2021. B ackground: At the A ugust 2nd, 2021 City Council-F inancial C ommis s ion Joint Work S ession a budget overview was pres ented that included opera/ng budget policies , revenue policies, budget goals & outcomes (which included discussion on the City ’s strategic priori/es), market value trends and property tax implica/ons . The preliminary review of the 2022 budget, bas ed on departmental reques ts , would have required a levy increase of approximately $2,385,378 (11.96 percent). D uring that work ses s ion an interac/ve exercis e w as completed w ith the C ity C ouncil and F inancial C ommis s ion and the cons ensus results provided w ere as follow s : · G eneral agreement that the efforts outlined in the budget were in alignment w ith the intended strategic direc/on of the C ity and at a s ufficient pace. · The levy increase s hould not exceed 8% which was the point at w hich a median value home would see the s ame, or very similar tax bill for City s ervices as in the prior year due to the decer/fica/on if T I F 3. Through the work of D epartment H eads and the F inance division, w e reduced the preliminary levy by $1,004,264 (5.03 percent). The budget adjus tments include increas es in budgeted revenues of $630,000, cons is /ng of $530,000 in building permit revenue for P hase I of the O pportunity S ite, and an addi/onal $100,000 in es /mated lodging tax revenue, and a net decreas e in budgeted expens es of $374,264. The C ity M anager ’s recommended property tax levy is provided as follow s : C hart 1: 2022 Recommended P reliminary P roperty Tax L evy D escripon 2 0 2 1 A dopt e d 2022 Proposed Change % I mpact G eneral Levy $18,402,263 $19,532,263 $1,130,000 5.67% D ebt S ervice L evy 1,540,648 1,791,762 251,114 1.26% Total City Levy $19,942,911 $21,324,025 $1,381,114 6.93% H R A L evy $452,913 $505,994 $53,081 11.72% D escripon A mount L evy Change D ebt S ervice $ 251,114 1.26% P reven/on H ealth and S afety 154,850 0.78% C O L A /Cafeteria 345,000 1.73% P T livable wage increase 155,000 0.78% Reduced C harges for S ervices and fines Rec/P D 213,000 1.07% Exces s I ncrement and P E R A aid loss 264,000 1.32% 1,382,964 6.93% The propos ed 2022 property tax levy is impacted by the required increase in the debt s ervice levy to fund the Neighborhood Recons truc/on P rogram improvements . O f the $1,082,194 total levy increase, $251,114 (1.26%) is aJributed to the increase in debt service levy. This is s how n in the following chart, w hich pres ents other contribu/ng factors , which add up to the 6.93% levy increas e. For informa/onal purpos es a 1% change in the 2022 requested property tax levy is approximately $200,000. The H ous ing and Redevelopment A uthority Levy is limited to .01813% of taxable market value of the C ity. 2022 G eneral F und Budgeted Revenues Total reques ted G eneral F und revenues for 2022 are $24,668,973, w hich is an increas e of $1,310,083 (5.61%) from the previous year. S ignificant G eneral F und revenue changes from the prior year budget are as follow s : C hart 2: S ignificant G eneral Fund Revenue C hanges from the 2021 Budget Revenues D escripon C hange G eneral F und P roperty Taxes $1,100,674 Exces s Taxes (Tax I ncrements )(230,500) L odging Taxes 300,000 Permits 387,500 C harges for S ervices (198,050) F ines and Forfeits (55,000) S pecial A sses s ments (50,000) 2022 G eneral F und Budgeted Expens es Total reques ted G eneral F und expenditures for 2022 are $24,668,973, which is an increase of $913,446 (3.85%) from the previous year. S ignificant G eneral F und expenditure changes from the prior year budget are as follows: C hart 3: S ignificant G eneral Fund Expenditures C hanges from the 2021 Budget Expenditures D escripon C hange Personal S ervices $212,199 S upplies 146,700 P rofes s ional S ervices and O ther charges 393,441 C entral G arage C harges 166,326 M arket Value Changes - P roperty Tax I mplicaons: P reliminary es /mates from the C ounty as s essor ’s office shows con/nued growth in taxable market value. The C ity ’s taxable market value is es/mated to increas e by 11.7% for taxes payable in 2022. The market value con/nues to be driven by res iden/al and apartment property value increases . C hart 4: Taxable Market Value C omparison The tax capacity charts provide a breakdow n of tax capacity by clas s ifica/on. The comparison of this chart to last year shows that res iden/al proper/es w ill pay 1.9% more of the share of total C ity property taxes in 2021, with commercial proper/es paying about 2.5% less. A partments w ill pick up an addi/onal 0.6% and I ndustrial is down 0.1%. This is similar to trends in recent years, how ever the C ommercial sector saw a s light increas e from 2019 to 2020. C hart 5: Tax C apacity C omparison C hart 6: M edian Value H ome Most residents have probably experienced an increase in the as s essed value of their home over the pas t year. The H ennepin C ounty ’s asses s or ’s office es/mated the median value home in the C ity of Brooklyn Center to be $223,000, compared to $207,000 in 2021. C hart 7: C ity of Brooklyn C enter P roperty Tax Rates A s a result of the significant increas e in tax capacity due to the decer/fica/on of T I F 3, the City w ill s ee a significant decreas e in the City tax rate despite the recommended levy increase. The chart above provides the tax rate comparison in total as well as a comparison of the tax rate for G eneral F und opera/ons , D ebt S ervice and the H R A . C hart 8: 2022 Esmated P roperty Tax C hanges The es /mated impact based on the preliminary 6.93% property tax increas e and the es /mated market value changes are illus trated in the chart above. The median value home las t year had an asses s ed value of $207,000, and a taxable market value of $188,390 (les s the market value exclusion). The median value home’s asses s ed value increased from $207,000 to $223,000, with a taxable market value of $205,830 (les s the market value exclusion). A s a result of the increase in that median value home’s market value and C ity levy changes the property tax will decrease by an es/mated $20 or 1.6% due to the decer/fica/on of T I F 3. For informa/onal purpos es, a 1% change in the propos ed levy calculates to approximately $10 per year in property taxes on the median value home. For mul/-family residen/al, commercial and industrial we us ed hypothe/cal taxable market values (bas ed on average values ) and calculated the property taxes that w ould have been paid in 2021 on that value for that clas s ifica/on of property. For thos e hypothe/cal proper/es , we then increased the value in the same propor/on that the total market value increas ed for that property classifica/on type and calculated the es/mated 2022 property tax based on the new valua/on and tax rates. Bas ed on thes e calcula/ons , mul/-family res iden/al would see an increase of 0.46%, commercial a 14.93% decrease and I ndus trial a 6.59% decreas e. I f a par/cular property has a valua/on change of a different propor/on from the previous year or addi/onal value added, thes e values w ould be different. B udget I ssues: I nclusive C ommunity Engagement: A nracist/Equity Policy Effect: S trategic Priories and Values: Enhanced Community I mage, O pera/onal Excellence AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip/on U pload D ate Type M emo 9/12/2021 Cover Memo Exhibit 9/13/2021 Backup M aterial MEMORANDUM – CITY COUNCIL/FINANCIAL COMMISSION JOINT 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: September 13, 2021 TO: Reggie Edwards, City Manager FROM: Andy Splinter, Interim Finance Director SUBJECT: 2022 City Manager Recommended Preliminary Budget Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider providing direction to staff regarding the 2022 preliminary property tax levy and budget to be adopted Monday, September 27, 2021. Background: At the August 2nd, 2021 City Council-Financial Commission Joint Work Session a budget overview was presented that included operating budget policies, revenue policies, budget goals & outcomes (which included discussion on the City’s strategic priorities), market value trends and property tax implications. The preliminary review of the 2022 budget, based on departmental requests, would have required a levy increase of approximately $2,385,378 (11.96 percent). During that work session an interactive exercise was completed with the City Council and Financial Commission and the consensus results provided were as follows: • General agreement that the efforts outlined in the budget were in alignment with the intended strategic direction of the City and at a sufficient pace. • The levy increase should not exceed 8% which was the point at which a median value home would see the same, or very similar tax bill for City services as in the prior year due to the decertification if TIF 3. Through the work of Department Heads and the Finance division, we reduced the preliminary levy by $1,004,264 (5.03 percent). The budget adjustments include increases in budgeted revenues of $630,000, consisting of $530,000 in building permit revenue for Phase I of the Opportunity Site, and an additional $100,000 in estimated lodging tax revenue, and a net decrease in budgeted expenses of $374,264. The City Manager’s recommended property tax levy is provided as follows: Chart 1: 2022 Recommended Preliminary Property Tax Levy Description 2021 Adopted 2022 Proposed Change % Impact General Levy $18,402,263 $19,532,263 $1,130,000 5.67% Debt Service Levy 1,540,648 1,791,762 251,114 1.26% Total City Levy $19,942,911 $21,324,025 $1,381,114 6.93% HRA Levy $452,913 $505,994 $53,081 11.72% MEMORANDUM – CITY COUNCIL/FINANCIAL COMMISSION JOINT 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 The proposed 2022 property tax levy is impacted by the required increase in the debt service levy to fund the Neighborhood Reconstruction Program improvements. Of the $1,082,194 total levy increase, $251,114 (1.26%) is attributed to the increase in debt service levy. This is shown in the following chart, which presents other contributing factors, which add up to the 6.93% levy increase. For informational purposes a 1% change in the 2022 requested property tax levy is approximately $200,000. The Housing and Redevelopment Authority Levy is limited to .01813% of taxable market value of the City. 2022 General Fund Budgeted Revenues Total requested General Fund revenues for 2022 are $24,668,973, which is an increase of $1,310,083 (5.61%) from the previous year. Significant General Fund revenue changes from the prior year budget are as follows: Chart 2: Significant General Fund Revenue Changes from the 2021 Budget Revenues Description Change General Fund Property Taxes $1,100,674 Excess Taxes (Tax Increments) (230,500) Lodging Taxes 300,000 Permits 387,500 Charges for Services (198,050) Fines and Forfeits (55,000) Special Assessments (50,000) 2022 General Fund Budgeted Expenses Total requested General Fund expenditures for 2022 are $24,668,973, which is an increase of $913,446 (3.85%) from the previous year. Significant General Fund expenditure changes from the prior year budget are as follows: Description Amount Levy Change Debt Service $ 251,114 1.26% Prevention Health and Safety 154,850 0.78% COLA/Cafeteria 345,000 1.73% PT livable wage increase 155,000 0.78% Reduced Charges for Services and fines Rec/PD 213,000 1.07% Excess Increment and PERA aid loss 264,000 1.32% 1,382,964 6.93% MEMORANDUM – CITY COUNCIL/FINANCIAL COMMISSION JOINT 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 Chart 3: Significant General Fund Expenditures Changes from the 2021Budget Expenditures Description Change Personal Services $212,199 Supplies 146,700 Professional Services and Other charges 393,441 Central Garage Charges 166,326 Market Value Changes - Property Tax Implications: Preliminary estimates from the County assessor’s office shows continued growth in taxable market value. The City’s taxable market value is estimated to increase by 11.7% for taxes payable in 2022. The market value continues to be driven by residential and apartment property value increases. Chart 4: Taxable Market Value Comparison The tax capacity charts provide a breakdown of tax capacity by classification. The comparison of this chart to last year shows that residential properties will pay 1.9% more of the share of total City property taxes in 2021, with commercial properties paying about 2.5% less. Apartments will pick up an additional 0.6% and Industrial is down 0.1%. This is similar to trends in recent years, however the Commercial sector saw a slight increase from 2019 to 2020. Chart 5: Tax Capacity Comparison MEMORANDUM – CITY COUNCIL/FINANCIAL COMMISSION JOINT 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 Chart 6: Median Value Home Most residents have probably experienced an increase in the assessed value of their home over the past year. The Hennepin County’s assessor’s office estimated the median value home in the City of Brooklyn Center to be $223,000, compared to $207,000 in 2021. Chart 7: City of Brooklyn Center Property Tax Rates MEMORANDUM – CITY COUNCIL/FINANCIAL COMMISSION JOINT 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 As a result of the significant increase in tax capacity due to the decertification of TIF 3, the City will see a significant decrease in the City tax rate despite the recommended levy increase. The chart above provides the tax rate comparison in total as well as a comparison of the tax rate for General Fund operations, Debt Service and the HRA. Chart 8: 2022 Estimated Property Tax Changes The estimated impact based on the preliminary 6.93% property tax increase and the estimated market value changes are illustrated in the chart above. The median value home last year had an assessed value of $207,000, and a taxable market value of $188,390 (less the market value exclusion). The median value home’s assessed value increased from $207,000 to $223,000, with a taxable market value of $205,830 (less the market value exclusion). As a result of the increase MEMORANDUM – CITY COUNCIL/FINANCIAL COMMISSION JOINT 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 in that median value home’s market value and City levy changes the property tax will decrease by an estimated $20 or 1.6% due to the decertification of TIF 3. For informational purposes, a 1% change in the proposed levy calculates to approximately $10 per year in property taxes on the median value home. For multi-family residential, commercial and industrial we used hypothetical taxable market values (based on average values) and calculated the property taxes that would have been paid in 2021 on that value for that classification of property. For those hypothetical properties, we then increased the value in the same proportion that the total market value increased for that property classification type and calculated the estimated 2022 property tax based on the new valuation and tax rates. Based on these calculations, multi-family residential would see an increase of 0.46%, commercial a 14.93% decrease and Industrial a 6.59% decrease. If a particular property has a valuation change of a different proportion from the previous year or additional value added, these values would be different. 2021 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 10100 - GENERAL FUND 4101 - CURRENT AD VALOREM TAXES 18,000,404$ 9,192,056$ 18,402,263$ 19,532,263$ 6.14% 4102 - ALLOWANCE FOR UNCOLLECTIBLE - - (180,522) (195,323) 8.20% 4120 - DELINQUENT AD VALOREM TAXES 54,715 76,884 78,064 71,591 -8.29% 4154 - PENALTIES & INT-DELINQ TAXES 11,445 5,057 18,052 10,000 -44.60% PROPERTY TAXES 18,066,564 9,273,997 18,317,857 19,418,531 6.01% 4150 - TAX INCREMENTS 172,347 71,317 230,500 - -100.00% TAX INCREMENTS 172,347 71,317 230,500 - -100.00% 4161 - LODGING TAX 561,602 392,026 500,000 800,000 60.00% SALES & USE TAXES 561,602 392,026 500,000 800,000 60.00% TOTAL TAXES 18,800,513 9,737,340 19,048,357 20,218,531 6.14% 4201 - LIQUOR LICENSES 44,125 18,425 56,250 57,000 1.33% 4202 - BEER LICENSES 400 100 3,000 500 -83.33% 4203 - GARBAGE HAULING LICENSES 2,770 2,710 2,500 2,500 0.00% 4204 - CIGARETTE LICENSES 3,150 300 2,850 3,150 10.53% 4205 - RENTAL DWELLING LICENSES 195,324 100,280 211,243 195,290 -7.55% 4207 - MECHANICAL LICENSES 9,345 5,135 9,000 9,000 0.00% 4208 - PAWN SHOP LICENSES - - - - 0.00% 4209 - SERVICE STATION LICENSES 2,230 120 2,200 2,200 0.00% 4210 - MOTOR VEHICLE DEALER LICENSES 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 0.00% 4212 - AMUSEMENT LICENSES 175 55 400 400 0.00% 4213 - MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS LICENSE 4,421 2,775 4,900 4,500 -8.16% LICENSES 263,440 131,400 293,843 276,040 -6.06% 4221 - SIGN PERMITS 1,558 1,335 3,000 2,000 -33.33% 4222 - BUILDING PERMITS 406,567 162,719 500,000 930,000 86.00% 4223 - MECHANICAL PERMITS 71,123 33,196 50,000 40,000 -20.00% 4224 - SEWER & WATER PERMITS 2,440 1,520 3,500 3,000 -14.29% 4225 - PLUMBING PERMITS 133,209 28,885 75,000 60,000 -20.00% 4226 - ROW PERMIT FEE 23,550 1,400 5,000 4,000 -20.00% 4227 - ELECTRICAL PERMITS 88,452 42,481 85,000 70,000 -17.65% 4228 - MISC BUSINESS PERMITS 1,633 1,175 750 750 0.00% PERMITS 728,532 272,711 722,250 1,109,750 53.65% TOTAL LICENSES & PERMITS 991,972 404,111 1,016,093 1,385,790 36.38% 4320 - MISC FEDERAL GRANTS 1,569,647 1,623,762 - 113,076 100.00% FEDERAL 1,569,647 1,623,762 - 113,076 100.00% 4341 - LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID 1,066,938 1,141,915 1,147,225 1,186,376 3.41% 4345 - PENSION AID-FIRE RELIEF 177,079 3,000 180,000 180,000 0.00% 4346 - PENSION AID-POLICE 438,686 - 431,000 440,000 2.09% 4347 - PENSION AID-PERA - - 34,365 - -100.00% 4352 - POLICE TRAINING GRANT 46,105 44,306 48,000 48,000 0.00% 4359 - OTHER STATE GRANTS/AID 23,714 59,694 10,000 10,000 0.00% STATE 1,752,522 1,248,915 1,850,590 1,864,376 0.74% 4362 - COUNTY GRANTS/AID 3,056 - - - 0.00% COUNTY 3,056 - - - 0.00% 4373 - OTHER GRANTS/AID 750 - 4,000 - -100.00% 4374 - POLICE LIAISON / DARE 45,145 - - - 0.00% LOCAL 45,895 - 4,000 - -100.00% TOTAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL 3,371,120 2,872,677 1,854,590 1,977,452 6.62% 4401 - VACANT BLDG REG FEE 18,200 5,180 15,000 4,000 -73.33% 4402 - RENTAL CONVERSION FEE 26,400 12,400 10,000 15,000 50.00% 4403 - PLANNING APPLICATION FEES 8,750 5,300 10,000 10,000 0.00% 4404 - ZONING CHANGES/SPECIAL USE PER 100 2,925 1,000 2,000 100.00% 4405 - SALE OF MAPS & DOCUMENTS 5 5 - - 0.00% 4408 - REINSPECTION FEES 20,750 11,550 30,000 15,000 -50.00% 4410 - REOCCUPANCY INSP FEE 5,265 195 5,000 500 -90.00% 4411 - FILING FEES 175 - - - 0.00% 4412 - ABATEMENT FEES (150) - - - 0.00% 4413 - FINAL PLAT & VACATION FEES 125 125 250 - -100.00% 4415 - TREE CONTRACTOR REGISTRATION 1,050 665 - 1,000 100.00% GENERAL FUND REVENUES FUND - 10100 2021 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 4416 - ZONING LETTER 675 75 750 500 -33.33% 4417 - ABATEMENT SVC CHG 300 - 1,500 - -100.00% 4419 - ONLINE CREDIT CARD SURCHARGE 4,634 336 3,000 - -100.00% GENERAL 86,279 38,756 76,500 48,000 -37.25% 4421 - POLICE REPORT REVENUE 68 - 750 200 -73.33% 4422 - LICENSE INVESTIGATIONS 900 150 1,000 1,000 0.00% 4423 - ANIMAL CONTROL REVENUE 6,019 3,679 3,500 3,500 0.00% 4424 - FIRE ALARM FEES - - - - 0.00% 4424.1 - FIRE INSPECTIONS - - 500 - -100.00% 4425 - BURGLAR ALARM FEES - - 2,000 - -100.00% 4427 - POLICE SERVICE REVENUE 160 - 500 - -100.00% 4428 - PRIVATE SECURITY CONTRACTS 71,981 24,488 145,000 85,000 -41.38% PUBLIC SAFETY 79,128 28,317 153,250 89,700 -41.47% 4431 - WEED CUTTING CHARGES 754 - - - 0.00% 4434 - DISEASED TREE REMOVAL 11,465 749 - - 0.00% 4451 - NUISANCE ABATEMENTS - 406 3,000 - -100.00% COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 12,219 1,155 3,000 - -100.00% 4471 - ADULT RECREATION PROGRAMS 37,467 60,056 168,000 126,250 -24.85% 4473 - CHILDREN RECREATION PROGRAMS 4,856 13,064 55,000 45,500 -17.27% 4474 - GENERAL RECREATION PROGRAMS 1,445 440 18,000 42,250 134.72% PARKS & RECREATION 43,768 73,560 241,000 214,000 -11.20% 4481 - MEMBERSHIPS-FAMILY 9,410 8,974 35,000 25,000 -28.57% 4482 - MEMBERSHIPS-INDIVIDUAL 13,087 10,478 33,000 30,000 -9.09% 4483 - SILVER SNEAKERS TAXABLE 12,207 2,941 23,000 20,000 -13.04% 4485 - GENERAL ADMISSIONS-INDIVIDUAL 15,402 22,734 85,000 70,000 -17.65% 4486 - GENERAL ADMISSIONS-GROUP (237) 14,006 9,000 17,000 88.89% 4487 - SWIM LESSONS 18,631 38,528 125,000 80,000 -36.00% 4489 - LOCKER RENTAL 2,298 1,007 5,000 2,000 -60.00% 4492 - SPECIAL EVENTS - 18 - - 0.00% 4493 - GAME ROOM 26 51 750 - -100.00% 4494 - MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE 112 237 1,000 - -100.00% 4495 - CONSTITUTION HALL RENTAL 1,168 10,635 32,000 30,000 -6.25% 4496 - GIFT CERTIFICATE - - 250 - -100.00% 4497 - CONCESSIONS & COMMISSIONS - 1,065 3,000 2,000 -33.33% COMMUNITY CENTER 72,104 110,674 352,000 276,000 -21.59% TOTAL CHARGES FOR SERVICES 293,498 252,462 825,750 627,700 -23.98% 4508 - UNCLAIMED EVIDENCE 1,240 1,299 1,000 1,000 0.00% 4511 - COURT FINES 149,447 99,998 200,000 150,000 -25.00% 4512 - ADMINISTRATIVE FINES 4,775 3,500 15,000 10,000 -33.33% 4513 - RENTAL DWELLING LICENSES - - - - 0.00% TOTAL FINES & FORFEITURES 155,462 104,797 216,000 161,000 -25.46% 4601 - SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 63,154 22,578 100,000 50,000 -50.00% 4607 - SPEC ASSESS INTEREST - - - - 0.00% TOTAL SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 63,154 22,578 100,000 50,000 -50.00% 4603 - INTEREST EARNINGS 150,210 62,644 79,900 81,500 2.00% 4605 - UNREALIZED INVESTMENT GAIN/LOSS 115,977 - - - 0.00% TOTAL INVESTMENT EARNINGS 266,187 62,644 79,900 81,500 2.00% 4604 - CHECK PROCESSING FEES 120 60 - - 0.00% 4606 - OTHER REVENUE 62,722 48,760 25,000 50,000 100.00% 4612 - DONATIONS & CONTRIBUTIONS 810 35,371 - 1,000 100.00% 4613 - CARS DONATIONS & CONTRIBUTIONS 500 250 7,000 1,000 -85.71% 4812 - FACILITY RENTALS 14,906 14,701 31,200 15,000 -51.92% 4921 - REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 77,656 74,975 100,000 100,000 0.00% 4923 - PRIOR YEAR APPROPRIATION - - - - 0.00% TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS 156,714 174,117 163,200 167,000 2.33% 4915 - TRANSFERS IN - - 55,000 - -100.00% TOTAL TRANSFERS IN - - 55,000 - -100.00% REVENUES 24,098,620$ 13,630,726$ 23,358,890$ 24,668,973$ 5.61% City of Brooklyn Center 2022 Budget - General Fund - Expenditure Summary by Function 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 10100 GENERAL FUND 41110 MAYOR & COUNCIL 144,560$ 137,755$ 111,142$ 162,790$ 167,394$ 2.83% 41320 CITY MANAGER 363,915 371,332 386,475 384,746 233,178 -39.39% 41410 ELECTIONS 80,871 181,607 68,475 108,560 186,992 72.25% 41430 CITY CLERK 174,076 220,574 159,894 206,338 242,780 17.66% 41520 FINANCE 607,401 590,402 427,879 667,696 651,945 -2.36% 41550 ASSESSING 222,829 239,969 127,538 255,500 260,500 1.96% 41610 LEGAL 431,849 416,521 298,878 435,000 440,000 1.15% 41710 COMMUNICATION & ENGAGEMENT 234,390 275,155 333,175 381,859 593,536 55.43% 41810 HUMAN RESOURCES 404,758 407,063 305,441 519,382 605,150 16.51% 41920 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 586,954 636,008 567,979 697,078 717,771 2.97% 41940 GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS 951,829 1,152,247 629,673 942,289 1,007,884 6.96% GENERAL GOVERNMENT 4,203,432 4,628,633 3,416,549 4,761,238 5,107,130 7.26% 42010 PREVENTION HEALTH AND SAFETY - - - - 154,850 100.00% 42110 ADMINISTRATION 357,017 350,654 245,941 367,024 404,852 10.31% 42120 INVESTIGATION 1,042,233 1,410,237 871,430 1,259,646 1,266,522 0.55% 42123 PATROL 6,288,958 6,247,001 4,341,895 6,891,044 6,695,027 -2.84% 42151 SUPPORT SERVICES 1,001,612 949,295 591,482 1,042,998 1,040,013 -0.29% 42170 STATION & BUILDINGS 289,463 181,152 278,081 233,250 237,750 1.93% POLICE 8,979,283 9,138,339 6,328,829 9,793,962 9,644,164 -1.53% 42210 FIRE 1,461,593 1,592,343 965,414 1,638,897 1,961,128 19.66% 42510 EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS 4,995 47,801 8,776 26,600 34,000 27.82% FIRE 1,466,588 1,640,144 974,190 1,665,497 1,995,128 19.79% 41910 PLANNING & ZONING 222,011 283,879 250,461 280,547 206,524 -26.39% 42410 BUILDING INSPECTIONS - 66,309 27 - - 0.00% 42411 CODE ENFORCEMENT - 133 41 - - 0.00% 42420 BUILDING & COMMUNITY STANDARDS 1,193,579 1,138,845 760,321 1,203,344 1,244,659 3.43% 46320 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADMIN 207,467 366,653 182,499 267,409 230,637 -13.75% COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1,623,057 1,855,819 1,193,349 1,751,300 1,681,820 -3.97% 43110 ENGINEERING 976,784 1,087,684 774,387 1,112,931 1,132,485 1.76% 43220 STREET MAINTENANCE 1,553,527 1,296,477 873,030 1,428,139 1,510,337 5.76% 43221 TRAFFIC CONTROL 213,404 192,874 127,890 223,947 232,144 3.66% 45201 PARK FACILITIES 1,094,634 1,081,815 811,778 1,311,898 1,339,006 2.07% 45204 FORESTRY 102,844 108,862 68,528 140,724 147,000 4.46% PUBLIC WORKS 3,941,193 3,767,712 2,655,613 4,217,639 4,360,972 3.40% 45010 ADMINISTRATION 260,088 274,317 145,636 267,263 261,276 -2.24% 45110 REC ADMINISTRATION 487,132 415,460 454,841 562,663 648,006 15.17% 45111 ADULT PROGRAMS 136,469 53,035 50,199 147,912 121,058 -18.16% 45112 TEEN PROGRAMS - - - 10,343 10,941 5.78% 45113 YOUTH PROGRAMS 113,894 20,679 51,143 147,488 162,820 10.40% 45119 GENERAL RECREATION 62,122 32,037 41,951 65,557 22,127 -66.25% 45122 COMMUNITY CENTER 240,214 190,983 135,713 244,740 358,647 46.54% 45124 POOL 342,265 204,142 287,557 385,732 415,087 7.61% 45218 HEALTH AND SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT - - - - 286,176 100.00% CARS 1,642,184 1,190,653 1,167,040 1,831,698 2,286,138 24.81% 44110 JOINT POWERS 181,159 171,344 107,744 187,000 187,000 0.00% 45310 CONVENTION & TOURISM 514,813 266,086 147,448 237,500 380,000 60.00% 48140 INSURANCE 246,320 254,618 119,427 272,286 278,788 2.39% 48150 CENTRAL SUPPLIES 274,198 292,782 492,717 735,504 466,800 -36.53% 48160 VACANCY AND TURNOVER SAVINGS - - - (400,000) (450,000) 12.50% NON-DEPARTMENTAL 1,216,490 984,830 867,336 1,032,290 862,588 -16.44% 48170 INTERFUND REIMBURSEMENT (1,113,479) (1,201,027) (934,471) (1,518,097) (1,633,817) 7.62% 48210 TRANSFERS OUT 210,000 410,374 - 220,000 210,000 -4.55% TRANSFERS (903,479) (790,653) (934,471) (1,298,097) (1,423,817) 9.68% 10100 GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES 22,168,748$ 22,415,477$ 15,668,435$ 23,755,527$ 24,668,973$ 3.85% City of Brooklyn Center 2022 Budget - General Fund - Expenditure Summary by Object Code 2021 2020 September 2021 2022 Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 10100 GENERAL FUND 5586 COST OF SALES-MISC -$ 67$ 600$ 600$ 0.00% TOTAL COST OF SALES - 67 600 600 0.00% 6101 WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES 10,155,683 6,676,694 10,487,915 10,286,708 -1.92% 6102 OVERTIME-FT EMPLOYEES 392,498 459,963 392,619 437,000 11.30% 6103 WAGES-PART TIME EMPLOYEES 873,491 832,895 1,218,552 1,465,568 20.27% 6104 OVERTIME-PART TIME EMPLOYEES 912 1,739 1,500 500 -66.67% 6105 CONTRACTED SVCS OT 61,569 22,360 85,000 35,000 -58.82% 6111 SEVERANCE PAY 203,832 390,862 55,000 - -100.00% 6112 CAR ALLOWANCE 6,100 1,550 6,000 6,000 0.00% 6113 HEALTH/WELLNESS REIMB - - - - 0.00% 6122 PERA COORDINATED PLAN 446,987 307,251 525,528 545,694 3.84% 6123 PERA POLICE & FIRE PLAN 882,308 583,879 920,352 877,084 -4.70% 6124 PERA DEFINED CONTRIBUTION 1,623 1,172 992 1,022 3.02% 6125 FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 396,093 298,232 455,079 472,601 3.85% 6126 FICA - MEDICARE 166,973 121,112 183,437 183,895 0.25% 6127 FIRE RELIEF ASSOCIATION 178,079 3,000 180,000 180,000 0.00% 6131 CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS 1,873,538 1,372,098 2,098,270 2,223,734 5.98% 6141 UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION 1,355 - - - 0.00% 6151 WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 525,861 427,754 512,995 620,632 20.98% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 16,166,902 11,500,561 17,123,239 17,335,438 1.24% 6201 OFFICE SUPPLIES 19,452 10,190 26,775 28,050 4.76% 6203 BOOKS/REFERENCE MATERIALS 4,775 2,635 3,300 4,700 42.42% 6204 STATIONARY SUPPLIES - - 100 100 0.00% 6211 CLEANING SUPPLIES 22,493 13,918 21,000 21,500 2.38% 6212 MOTOR FUELS - - 3,500 3,500 0.00% 6214 CLOTHING & PERSONAL EQUIPMENT 93,973 75,686 93,200 136,550 46.51% 6216 CHEMICALS/CHEMICAL PRODUCTS 14,988 7,238 22,900 23,500 2.62% 6217 SAFETY SUPPLIES 19,800 9,136 17,075 19,725 15.52% 6219 GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 169,907 163,029 146,390 212,590 45.22% 6219.1 GEN OP SUP-FIRE EDUCATION - - - - 0.00% 6223 BUILDINGS & FACILITIES 3,663 1,975 9,000 18,000 100.00% 6224 STREET MAINT MATERIALS 82,885 45,134 105,000 118,200 12.57% 6225 PARK & LANDSCAPE MATERIALS 13,849 13,363 30,575 34,750 13.65% 6226 SIGNS & STRIPING MATERIALS 10,653 927 32,000 32,000 0.00% 6227 PAINT SUPPLIES 1,139 - 1,100 1,100 0.00% 6231 ATHLETIC FIELD SUPPLIES 1,131 5,185 5,200 5,300 1.92% 6233 COURT SUPPLIES 919 16,200 16,000 16,500 3.13% 6239 OTHER REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES 85,771 34,307 29,000 55,900 92.76% 6241 SMALL TOOLS 3,326 1,051 4,000 3,100 -22.50% 6242 MINOR EQUIPMENT 47,761 41,532 40,350 70,200 73.98% 6243 MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT 57,354 30,829 95,900 43,800 -54.33% TOTAL SUPPLIES 653,839 472,335 702,365 849,065 20.89% 6301 ACCTG, AUDIT & FIN'L SERVICES 38,859 42,666 45,000 46,000 2.22% 6302 ARCH, ENG & PLANNING 3,467 4,772 14,500 14,500 0.00% 6303 LEGAL SERVICES 416,521 299,049 437,000 441,000 0.92% 6305 MEDICAL SERVICES 12,084 16,588 19,300 38,700 100.52% 6306 PERSONNEL/LABOR RELATIONS - - 2,500 2,500 0.00% 6307 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 811,036 786,417 1,080,615 940,850 -12.93% 6308 CHARTER COMMISSION - - 1,500 1,500 0.00% 6321 TELEPHONE/PAGERS 70,350 27,631 65,560 82,765 26.24% 6322 POSTAGE 29,329 12,773 37,500 49,000 30.67% 6323 RADIO COMMUNICATIONS 38,429 23,364 40,500 40,500 0.00% 6329 OTHER COMMUNICATION SERVICES 62,328 29,868 50,700 44,330 -12.56% 6331 TRAVEL EXPENSE/MILEAGE 1,265 1,800 7,450 6,700 -10.07% 6333 FREIGHT/DRAYAGE 15,015 9,851 14,630 6,230 -57.42% 6339 OTHER TRANSPORTATION EXPENSE - - - - 0.00% 6341 PERSONNEL ADVERTISING 250 125 3,560 3,560 0.00% 6342 LEGAL NOTICES 7,105 5,738 8,200 9,450 15.24% 6349 OTHER ADVERTISING 2,361 305 13,000 24,500 88.46% 6351 PRINTING 41,054 24,177 47,710 67,050 40.54% 6361 GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE 101,152 51,654 106,210 108,435 2.09% 6362 PROPERTY INSURANCE 128,918 62,480 125,728 131,209 4.36% 6364 DRAM SHOP INSURANCE 944 - 1,100 1,100 0.00% Object Code / Description 2021 2020 September 2021 2022 Actual YTD Budget Budget Change Object Code / Description 6366 MACHINERY BREAKDOWN INSURANCE 9,569 4,211 10,048 8,844 -11.98% 6368 BONDS INSURANCE 2,189 1,082 2,300 2,300 0.00% 6369 OTHER INSURANCE 1,124 1,124 1,200 1,200 0.00% 6381 ELECTRIC 250,960 189,910 295,400 295,500 0.03% 6382 GAS 120,061 78,376 131,370 131,500 0.10% 6383 WATER 90,470 56,432 68,200 68,200 0.00% 6384 REFUSE DISPOSAL 29,667 19,724 33,950 35,250 3.83% 6385 SEWER 13,386 12,076 14,730 14,800 0.48% 6386 STORM SEWER 54,776 42,134 70,200 70,400 0.28% 6387 HEATING OIL - - 5,000 5,000 0.00% 6388 HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL 1,569 837 2,500 2,500 0.00% 6389 STREET LIGHTS 18,120 13,790 23,300 23,300 0.00% 6402 EQUIPMENT SERVICES 49,731 18,111 77,970 77,570 -0.51% 6403 BLDGS/FACILITIES MAINT SERVICE 425,430 133,812 215,000 219,500 2.09% 6404 STREET MAINT SERVICES - - 50,000 50,000 0.00% 6405 PARK & LANDSCAPE SERVICES 121,540 81,540 137,920 127,000 -7.92% 6406 MULTI-FUNCTION MTNCE 24,048 16,818 38,750 39,750 2.58% 6407 TRAFFIC SIGNALS MAINT 898 509 4,500 4,950 10.00% 6408 COMMUNICATION/INFO SYSTEMS 3,214 7,801 5,500 5,000 -9.09% 6409 OTHER REPAIR & MAINT SVCS 9,317 5,165 8,000 7,000 -12.50% 6412 BLDGS/FACILITIES 16,267 5,600 20,200 11,800 -41.58% 6415 OTHER EQUIPMENT 641 - 750 1,950 160.00% 6413 OFFICE EQUIPMENT - - - - 0.00% 6417 UNIFORMS 9,263 3,663 9,150 10,020 9.51% 6421 SOFTWARE LICENSE 92,496 85,063 136,245 145,177 6.56% 6422 SOFTWARE MAINT 64,325 53,289 143,500 148,750 3.66% 6423 LOGIS CHARGES 464,186 384,030 468,253 486,840 3.97% 6428 PROTECTION SERVICES - - - - 0.00% 6431 SPECIAL EVENTS 14,390 12,288 27,500 65,500 138.18% 6432 CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 105,234 106,353 159,950 184,690 15.47% 6433 MEETING EXPENSES 7,663 11,695 18,935 19,335 2.11% 6434 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 73,206 29,869 76,825 79,905 4.01% 6435 CREDIT CARD FEES 53,998 34,840 62,000 28,000 -54.84% 6436 UNCOLLECTIBLE CHECKS/DEBTS - - - - 0.00% 6441 LICENSES, TAXES & FEES 4,927 24,437 6,250 17,750 184.00% 6442 COURT AWARDS/SETTLEMENTS 6,053 - 20,000 20,000 0.00% 6443 PRIZE AWARDS/EXPENSE REIMB 702 107 1,500 1,500 0.00% 6444 RELOCATION EXPENSES - - - - 0.00% 6445 CONVENTION BUREAU PAYMENT 266,086 147,448 237,500 380,000 60.00% 6446 CONTINGENCY ACCOUNT 85,219 - 80,000 200,000 150.00% 6447 TOWING CHARGES 1,871 1,250 750 750 0.00% 6448 PRISONER BOARDING CHARGES 66,574 29,437 60,000 60,000 0.00% 6449 OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICE 493,275 811,170 649,450 778,890 19.93% 6491 MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE 15 987 2,000 2,000 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 4,832,927 3,824,236 5,498,859 5,892,300 7.15% 6461 FUEL CHARGES 156,983 76,845 211,200 212,600 0.66% 6462 FIXED CHARGES 114,918 135,892 272,542 221,450 -18.75% 6463 REPAIR & MAINT CHARGES 277,127 155,861 363,600 374,400 2.97% 6465 REPLACEMENT CHARGES 896,444 437,109 874,219 1,081,437 23.70% TOTAL CENTRAL GARAGE CHARGES 1,445,472 805,707 1,721,561 1,889,887 9.78% 6520 BUILDINGS & FACILITIES - - - - 0.00% 6540 EQUIPMENT & MACHINERY 13,290 - 7,000 125,000 1685.71% 6545 OTHER EQUIPMENT 93,700 - - 500 100.00% 6550 MOTOR VEHICLES - - - - 0.00% TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY 106,990 - 7,000 125,500 1692.86% 6471 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE TRANSFER (658,154) (599,723) (1,028,097) (1,033,817) 0.56% 6472 ENGINEERING SERVICE TRANSFER (542,873) (334,748) (490,000) (600,000) 22.45% 6473 STORM SEWER TRANSFER - - - - 0.00% 6480 GENERAL FUND REIMBURSEMENT - - - - 0.00% 6482 MISC TRANSFER OUT 410,374 - 220,000 210,000 -4.55% TOTAL TRANSFERS OUT (790,653) (934,471) (1,298,097) (1,423,817) 9.68% 10100 GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES 22,415,477$ 15,668,435$ 23,755,527$ 24,668,973$ 3.85% 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 41110 - MAYOR COUNCIL 6103 - WAGES-PART TIME EMPLOYEES 51,072$ 52,091$ 39,574$ 52,605$ 54,181$ 3.00% 6124 - PERA DEFINED CONTRIBUTION 1,591 1,623 1,172 992 1,022 3.02% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 1,225 1,220 1,004 2,033 2,093 2.95% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 751 757 575 764 785 2.75% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 252 306 215 286 303 5.94% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 54,891 55,997 42,540 56,680 58,384 3.01% 6201 - OFFICE SUPPLIES 13 - - 100 100 0.00% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 394 - 35 350 350 0.00% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT 798 17 1,498 - 10,000 100.00% TOTAL SUPPLIES 1,205 17 1,533 450 10,450 2222.22% 6307 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 29,116 22,553 34,605 41,000 35,000 -14.63% 6308 - CHARTER COMMISSION 193 - - 1,500 1,500 0.00% 6329 - OTHER COMMUNICATION SERVICES 2,521 5,630 1,470 2,600 2,600 0.00% 6321 - TELEPHONE/PAGERS 514 460 345 660 660 0.00% 6331 - TRAVEL EXPENSE/MILEAGE 618 142 - 800 800 0.00% 6351 - PRINTING 148 75 - 300 300 0.00% 6421 - SOFTWARE LICENSE 122 349 - - 400 100.00% 6423 - LOGIS CHARGES 63 63 - - - 0.00% 6432 - CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 9,320 6,653 3,635 9,000 7,500 -16.67% 6433 - MEETING EXPENSES 3,751 - 7,903 2,800 2,800 0.00% 6434 - DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 42,098 45,816 19,111 47,000 47,000 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 88,464 81,741 67,069 105,660 98,560 -6.72% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 144,560$ 137,755$ 111,142$ 162,790$ 167,394$ 2.83% 41110 - MAYOR COUNCIL GENERAL FUND 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 41320 - CITY MANAGER 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES 262,925$ 267,769$ 130,091$ 267,329$ 155,002$ -42.02% 6103 - WAGES-PART TIME EMPLOYEES 2,400 - 2,384 2,250 2,250 0.00% 6111 - SEVERANCE PAY 4,848 8,208 176,035 - - 0.00% 6112 - CAR ALLOWANCE 6,050 6,100 1,550 6,000 6,000 0.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 19,720 20,083 9,757 20,669 12,244 -40.76% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 14,725 15,081 13,482 16,010 8,994 -43.82% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 3,819 3,833 4,354 3,996 2,368 -40.74% 6131 - CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS 28,752 30,264 22,273 31,672 16,632 -47.49% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 1,925 2,233 1,626 2,150 1,338 -37.77% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 345,164 353,571 361,552 350,076 204,828 -41.49% 6203 - BOOKS/REFERENCE MATERIALS - 283 - 400 400 0.00% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 781 351 656 200 200 0.00% 6242 - MINOR EQUIPMENT - 396 - - - 0.00% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT - 180 140 1,800 250 -86.11% TOTAL SUPPLIES 781 1,210 796 2,400 850 -64.58% 6307 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 250 8,268 17,618 12,500 11,000 -12.00% 6321 - TELEPHONE/PAGERS 1,919 1,500 296 1,320 1,600 21.21% 6329 - OTHER COMMUNICATION SERVICES 1,222 1,018 490 950 1,200 26.32% 6331 - TRAVEL EXPENSE/MILEAGE - - 1,018 - - 0.00% 6421 - SOFWARE LICENSE 51 187 - - 200 100.00% 6432 - CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 10,446 2,731 909 7,500 3,500 -53.33% 6433 - MEETING EXPENSES 1,019 170 2,693 5,000 5,000 0.00% 6434 - DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 3,063 2,677 1,103 5,000 5,000 0.00% 6441 - LICENSES, TAXES & FEES - - - - - 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 17,970 16,551 24,127 32,270 27,500 -14.78% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 363,915$ 371,332$ 386,475$ 384,746$ 233,178$ -39.39% 41320 - CITY MANAGER GENERAL FUND 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 41410 - ELECTIONS 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES 47,476$ 52,225$ 35,940$ 54,709$ 57,201$ 4.56% 6102 - OVERTIME-FT EMPLOYEES 50 9,359 2,308 3,000 7,000 133.33% 6103 - WAGES - PART TIME EMPLOYEES - 55,779 - 7,000 60,000 757.14% 6111 - SEVERANCE PAY 163 385 - - - 0.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 3,564 4,619 2,869 4,103 4,290 4.56% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 3,180 4,914 2,564 3,392 3,546 4.54% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 744 1,149 600 793 829 4.54% 6131 - CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS 13,178 15,132 11,220 15,836 16,632 5.03% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 345 496 294 427 469 9.84% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 68,700 144,058 55,795 89,260 149,967 68.01% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 197 11,046 888 1,700 9,000 429.41% 6242 - MINOR EQUIPMENT - 350 - - 750 100.00% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT 9,275 7,600 19 1,800 - -100.00% TOTAL SUPPLIES 9,472 18,996 907 3,500 9,750 178.57% 6322 - POSTAGE 1,144 6,056 - 1,000 6,000 500.00% 6331 - TRAVEL EXPENSE/MILEAGE 98 133 38 100 200 100.00% 6333 - FREIGHT/DRAYAGE - 704 - 200 800 300.00% 6342 - LEGAL NOTICES - 881 - 500 1,000 100.00% 6351 - PRINTING - 4,642 - 800 4,500 462.50% 6402 - EQUIPMENT SERVICES - 2,965 3,485 4,000 4,000 0.00% 6412 - BLDGS/FACILITIES (240) 1,096 - 200 600 200.00% 6421 - SOFWARE LICENSE 51 67 7,275 7,200 7,275 1.04% 6432 - CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 1,404 30 814 1,200 1,200 0.00% 6433 - MEETING EXPENSES 22 982 - 200 800 300.00% 6434 - DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 220 245 161 400 400 0.00% 6449 - OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICE - - - - - 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 2,699 17,801 11,773 15,800 26,775 69.46% 6545 - OTHER EQUIPMENT - 752 - - 500 100.00% TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY - 752 - - 500 100.00% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 80,871$ 181,607$ 68,475$ 108,560$ 186,992$ 72.25% GENERAL FUND 41410 - ELECTIONS 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 41430 - CITY CLERK 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES 115,952$ 117,234$ 61,883$ 133,060$ 151,302$ 13.71% 6111 - SEVERANCE PAY 358 1,308 529 - - 0.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 8,696 8,792 4,641 9,979 11,348 13.72% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 7,598 7,450 4,060 8,249 9,381 13.72% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 1,777 1,767 950 1,930 2,194 13.68% 6131 - CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS 11,983 26,481 12,540 31,672 33,264 5.03% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 840 977 487 1,038 1,241 19.56% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 147,204 164,009 85,090 185,928 208,730 12.26% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 806 436 182 500 500 0.00% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT 1,569 68 - - 2,000 100.00% TOTAL SUPPLIES 2,375 504 182 500 2,500 400.00% 6307 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 11,456 47,802 67,233 - 10,000 100.00% 6321 - TELEPHONE/PAGERS 151 1,067 205 660 675 2.27% 6331 - TRAVEL EXPENSE/MILEAGE 58 82 38 150 300 100.00% 6342 - LEGAL NOTICES 9,945 6,224 5,738 7,000 8,000 14.29% 6351 - PRINTING - - 248 300 350 16.67% 6421 - SOFTWARE LICENSE 51 256 - 9,000 9,275 3.06% 6432 - CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 2,260 - 569 2,000 2,000 0.00% 6434 - DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 576 630 591 800 950 18.75% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 24,497 56,061 74,622 19,910 31,550 58.46% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 174,076$ 220,574$ 159,894$ 206,338$ 242,780$ 17.66% GENERAL FUND 41430 - CITY CLERK 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 41520 - FINANCE 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES 394,258$ 379,528$ 269,589$ 430,549$ 419,945$ -2.46% 6102 - OVERTIME-FT EMPLOYEES 122 921 866 500 500 0.00% 6103 - WAGES-PART TIME EMPLOYEES 18,864 24,764 - 18,273 18,633 1.97% 6104 - OVERTIME PART TIME EMPLOYEES - 386 - - - 0.00% 6111 - SEVERANCE PAY 1,693 2,630 8,588 - - 0.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 30,993 30,420 20,284 33,699 32,931 -2.28% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 25,680 25,333 17,913 27,858 27,222 -2.28% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 6,006 5,971 4,189 6,514 6,367 -2.26% 6131 - CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS 70,682 60,528 54,120 79,180 83,160 5.03% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 2,994 3,382 2,127 3,508 3,602 2.68% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 551,292 533,863 377,676 600,081 592,360 -1.29% 6201 - OFFICE SUPPLIES 237 1,936 511 1,100 1,100 0.00% 6203 - BOOKS/REFERENCE MATERIALS - 159 - 200 200 0.00% 6242 - MINOR EQUIPMENT 300 832 1,300 400 400 0.00% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT 17 490 140 5,750 4,000 -30.43% TOTAL SUPPLIES 554 3,417 1,951 7,450 5,700 -23.49% 6301 - ACCTG, AUDIT & FIN'L SERVICES 31,884 28,514 35,265 35,000 36,000 2.86% 6307 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,626 4,177 1,809 3,515 5,000 42.25% 6321 - TELEPHONE/PAGERS - 1,265 157 - 660 100.00% 6331 - TRAVEL EXPENSE/MILEAGE 658 - 42 500 500 0.00% 6333 - FREIGHT/DRAYAGE 10,822 13,963 9,525 14,000 5,000 -64.29% 6351 - PRINTING 2,607 2,865 - 3,000 3,000 0.00% 6406 - MULTI-FUNCTION MTNCE 1,199 809 574 1,250 1,250 0.00% 6413 - OFFICE EQUIPMENT 207 - - - - 0.00% 6421 - SOFTWARE LICENSE 102 323 - - 375 100.00% 6432 - CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 3,695 406 - 2,000 1,000 -50.00% 6433 - MEETING EXPENSES 15 - - 200 200 0.00% 6434 - DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 740 800 880 700 900 28.57% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 55,555 53,122 48,252 60,165 53,885 -10.44% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 607,401$ 590,402$ 427,879$ 667,696$ 651,945$ -2.36% GENERAL FUND 41520 - FINANCE 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 41550 - ASSESSING 6307 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 217,158 235,263 124,000 250,000 255,000 2.00% 6406 - MULTI-FUNCTION MTNCE 5,671 4,706 3,538 5,500 5,500 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 222,829 239,969 127,538 255,500 260,500 1.96% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 222,829$ 239,969$ 127,538$ 255,500$ 260,500$ 1.96% GENERAL FUND 41550 - ASSESSING 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 41610 - LEGAL 6303 - LEGAL SERVICES 431,399$ 416,521$ 298,878$ 435,000$ 440,000$ 1.15% 6307 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 450 - - - - 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 431,849 416,521 298,878 435,000 440,000 1.15% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 431,849$ 416,521$ 298,878$ 435,000$ 440,000$ 1.15% GENERAL FUND 41610 - LEGAL 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 41710 - COMMUNICATIONS & ENGAGEMENT 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES 76,785$ 101,703$ 98,436$ 161,113$ 249,183$ 54.66% 6103 - WAGES-PART TIME EMPLOYEES 30,284 26,020 9,611 35,600 36,845 3.50% 6104 - OVERTIME PART TIME EMPLOYEES 100 50 25 - - 0.00% 6111 - SEVERANCE PAY 513 1,601 - - - 0.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 7,841 9,233 8,109 14,754 21,452 45.40% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 6,952 8,022 6,857 12,197 17,734 45.40% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 1,626 1,884 1,604 2,852 4,148 45.44% 6131 - CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS 14,376 20,176 23,679 47,508 66,528 40.04% 6141 - UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION 113 - - - - 0.00% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 745 976 791 1,535 2,346 52.83% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 139,335 169,665 149,112 275,559 398,236 44.52% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 2,331 1,445 490 2,000 2,000 0.00% 6242 - MINOR EQUIPMENT - - - 1,200 500 -58.33% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT 3,792 2,154 - 3,700 3,600 -2.70% TOTAL SUPPLIES 6,123 3,599 490 6,900 6,100 -11.59% 6307 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 20,554 63,890 145,659 22,000 44,750 103.41% 6321 - TELEPHONE/PAGERS - 462 1,961 1,200 4,500 275.00% 6322 - POSTAGE 11,737 5,260 4,589 12,500 19,000 52.00% 6331 - TRAVEL EXPENSE/MILEAGE 327 87 (14) 450 350 -22.22% 6349 - OTHER ADVERTISING 6,813 2,361 305 13,000 24,500 88.46% 6351 - PRINTING 18,509 13,010 18,375 12,500 20,000 60.00% 6408 - COMMUNICATION/INFO SYSTEMS - 32 - 500 - -100.00% 6421 - SOFTWARE LICENSE 2,306 3,199 2,085 10,500 10,700 1.90% 6431 - SPECIAL EVENTS 25,149 11,719 10,213 19,500 57,500 194.87% 6432 - CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 2,408 1,072 - 4,000 4,500 12.50% 6433 - MEETING EXPENSES 904 799 - 3,000 3,000 0.00% 6434 - DUES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS 225 - 400 250 400 60.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 88,932 101,891 183,573 99,400 189,200 90.34% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 234,390$ 275,155$ 333,175$ 381,859$ 593,536$ 55.43% GENERAL FUND 41710 - COMMUNICATIONS & ENGAGEMENT 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 41810 - HUMAN RESOURCES 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES 242,268$ 252,583$ 168,933$ 315,091$ 321,394$ 2.00% 6111 - SEVERANCE PAY 2,039 3,749 12,253 - - 0.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 18,170 18,944 12,670 23,633 24,105 2.00% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 14,864 15,469 11,070 19,537 19,926 1.99% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 3,476 3,646 2,589 4,569 4,661 2.01% 6131 - CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS 43,128 45,396 33,660 63,344 66,528 5.03% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 1,754 2,109 1,328 2,458 2,636 7.24% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 325,699 341,896 242,503 428,632 439,250 2.48% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 1,153 1,173 2,251 5,500 4,000 -27.27% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT 108 719 280 1,300 2,250 73.08% TOTAL SUPPLIES 1,261 1,892 2,531 6,800 6,250 -8.09% 6305 - MEDICAL SERVICES 1,133 1,935 1,151 3,300 4,000 21.21% 6306 - PERSONNEL/LABOR RELATIONS 712 - - - - 0.00% 6307 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 74,248 59,525 51,316 55,000 130,000 136.36% 6331 - TRAVEL EXPENSE/MILEAGE - - - 100 100 0.00% 6333 - FREIGHT/DRAYAGE 84 - - 50 50 0.00% 6421 - SOFTWARE LICENSE - 67 7,522 22,500 22,500 0.00% 6432 - CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 1,115 1,119 - 1,000 1,000 0.00% 6433 - MEETING EXPENSES 22 - - - - 0.00% 6434 - DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 484 629 418 2,000 2,000 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 77,798 63,275 60,407 83,950 159,650 90.17% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 404,758$ 407,063$ 305,441$ 519,382$ 605,150$ 16.51% GENERAL FUND 41810 - HUMAN RESOURCES 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 41910 - PLANNING AND ZONING 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES 101,500$ 154,904$ 153,571$ 179,869$ 145,469$ -19.13% 6102 - OVERTIME-FT EMPLOYEES - - - 1,000 - -100.00% 6103 - WAGES-PART TIME EMPLOYEES - - - 9,000 - -100.00% 6111 - SEVERANCE PAY 493 1,676 - - - 0.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 7,612 11,618 11,518 14,240 10,910 -23.38% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 6,271 9,294 9,592 11,772 9,019 -23.39% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 1,466 2,208 2,243 2,754 2,110 -23.38% 6131 - CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS 27,554 25,220 28,380 35,631 24,948 -29.98% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 735 1,298 1,208 1,481 1,193 -19.45% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 145,631 206,218 206,512 255,747 193,649 -24.28% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT - 277 2,188 - - 0.00% TOTAL SUPPLIES - 277 2,188 - - 0.00% 6303 - LEGAL SERVICES 258 - 171 2,000 1,000 -50.00% 6307 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 70,210 73,783 37,772 15,000 5,000 -66.67% 6321 - TELEPHONES AND PAGERS 119 695 552 600 600 0.00% 6331 - TRAVEL EXPENSE/MILEAGE - - - 100 - -100.00% 6342 - LEGAL NOTICES 885 - - 500 250 -50.00% 6351 - PRINTING 1,083 - - 500 250 -50.00% 6406 - MULTI-FUNCTION MTNCE 166 - - 1,000 1,000 0.00% 6421 - SOFTWARE LICENSE 51 214 342 - 75 100.00% 6422 - SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE 632 198 721 - - 0.00% 6432 - CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 886 695 1,764 2,500 2,500 0.00% 6433 - MEETING EXPENSES 536 - - 200 200 0.00% 6434 - DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 1,554 1,799 439 2,400 2,000 -16.67% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 76,380 77,384 41,761 24,800 12,875 -48.08% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 222,011$ 283,879$ 250,461$ 280,547$ 206,524$ -26.39% GENERAL FUND 41910 - PLANNING AND ZONING 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 41920 - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES 227,492$ 253,163$ 165,826$ 269,810$ 265,340$ -1.66% 6102 - OVERTIME-FT EMPLOYEES 881 2,339 4,899 2,000 2,000 0.00% 6103 - WAGES-PART TIME EMPLOYEES 5,952 - 4,414 - - 0.00% 6111 - SEVERANCE PAY 446 1,160 - - - 0.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 17,574 19,163 13,135 20,385 20,051 -1.64% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 13,907 15,076 10,291 16,852 16,575 -1.64% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 3,252 3,526 2,407 3,941 3,877 -1.62% 6131 - CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS 30,374 45,396 33,000 47,508 49,896 5.03% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 1,695 2,125 1,364 2,121 2,192 3.35% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 301,573 341,948 235,336 362,617 359,931 -0.74% 6201 - OFFICE SUPPLIES - 173 - - - 0.00% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 484 27 - 3,200 1,000 -68.75% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT 8,616 12,514 9,375 1,150 5,000 334.78% TOTAL SUPPLIES 9,100 12,714 9,375 4,350 6,000 37.93% 6307 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 7,672 32,532 30,827 13,000 15,000 15.38% 6321 - TELEPHONE/PAGERS 3,425 1,677 1,596 1,980 3,500 76.77% 6331 - TRAVEL EXPENSE/MILEAGE 616 - 78 1,000 - -100.00% 6333 - FREIGHT/DRAYAGE 8 - - - - 0.00% 6402 - EQUIPMENT SERVICES 560 - 524 1,200 - -100.00% 6408 - COMMUNICATION/INFO SYSTEMS 1,906 3,182 7,801 5,000 5,000 0.00% 6421 - SOFTWARE LICENSE 1,291 2,269 2,506 17,325 17,500 1.01% 6422 - SOFTWARE MAINT 45,468 34,811 15,410 55,000 55,000 0.00% 6423 - LOGIS CHARGES 215,229 206,875 263,026 233,606 253,840 8.66% 6432 - CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 24 - 1,500 2,000 2,000 0.00% 6433 - MEETING EXPENSES 82 - - - - 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 276,281 281,346 323,268 330,111 351,840 6.58% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 586,954$ 636,008$ 567,979$ 697,078$ 717,771$ 2.97% GENERAL FUND 41920 - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 41940 - GENERAL GOVT BLDGS AND PLANT 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES 166,907$ 173,059$ 115,948$ 177,875$ 181,432$ 2.00% 6102 - OVERTIME-FT EMPLOYEES 22,689 9,370 5,987 25,000 25,000 0.00% 6103 - WAGES-PART TIME EMPLOYEES - - - - 18,000 100.00% 6111 - SEVERANCE PAY 1,345 3,473 - - - 0.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 14,220 13,682 9,145 15,216 16,832 10.62% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 10,226 9,387 6,286 12,579 13,915 10.62% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 2,392 2,251 1,470 2,942 3,255 10.64% 6131 - CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS 43,128 45,396 33,660 47,508 49,896 5.03% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 12,488 14,107 8,935 15,074 17,416 15.54% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 273,395 270,725 181,431 296,194 325,746 9.98% 6211 - CLEANING SUPPLIES 22,381 16,510 9,580 17,500 18,000 2.86% 6214 - CLOTHING & PERSONAL EQUIPMENT 200 200 - 400 550 37.50% 6216 - CHEMICALS/CHEMICAL PRODUCTS 3,586 1,964 1,780 5,000 5,000 0.00% 6217 - SAFETY SUPPLIES 301 651 134 3,000 1,500 -50.00% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 216 4,291 - 1,250 1,250 0.00% 6225 - PARK & LANDSCAPE MATERIALS - - - 3,500 7,000 100.00% 6239 - OTHER REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES 42,635 72,077 18,706 7,500 25,000 233.33% 6241 - SMALL TOOLS 186 1,068 89 1,000 1,000 0.00% 6242 - MINOR EQUIPMENT 1,270 - 1,417 1,500 16,500 1000.00% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT - - 8,312 - 5,400 100.00% TOTAL SUPPLIES 70,775 96,761 40,018 40,650 81,200 99.75% 6307 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,860 6,772 9,020 4,000 9,500 137.50% 6321 - TELEPHONE/PAGERS 1,187 751 235 1,980 1,200 -39.39% 6329 - OTHER COMMUNICATION SERVICES 440 931 544 - 1,380 100.00% 6381 - ELECTRIC 134,542 120,471 94,763 137,000 137,000 0.00% 6382 - GAS 49,297 76,735 48,461 76,000 76,000 0.00% 6383 - WATER 1,692 6,027 4,275 4,000 4,000 0.00% 6384 - REFUSE DISPOSAL 13,311 8,590 3,765 8,000 8,000 0.00% 6385 - SEWER 5,461 1,463 1,399 2,000 2,000 0.00% 6386 - STORM SEWER 4,482 4,114 3,552 5,500 5,500 0.00% 6387 - HEATING OIL 3,855 - - 4,000 4,000 0.00% 6388 - HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL 797 862 558 1,500 1,500 0.00% 6389 - STREET LIGHTS 1,298 1,156 973 1,500 1,500 0.00% 6402 - EQUIPMENT SERVICES - 28,945 - 40,000 40,000 0.00% 6403 - BLDGS/FACILITIES MAINT SERVICE 233,999 374,207 112,628 159,500 171,500 7.52% 6405 - PARK & LANDSCAPE SERVICES 34,565 39,556 23,259 36,000 - -100.00% 6421 - SOFTWARE LICENSE - 160 - - 12,175 100.00% 6422 - SOFTWARE MAINT 18,403 10,824 14,310 35,000 35,000 0.00% 6432 - CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 645 - 782 2,500 1,000 -60.00% 6441 - LICENSES, TAXES & FEES 1,410 505 105 1,250 1,250 0.00% 6449 - OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICE 94,699 97,147 86,126 78,000 78,000 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 602,943 779,216 404,755 597,730 590,505 -1.21% 6461 - FUEL CHARGES 950 644 439 1,000 1,000 0.00% 6462 - FIXED CHARGES 1,249 1,142 1,830 3,715 4,160 11.98% 6463 - REPAIR & MAINT CHARGES 117 1,359 - 600 600 0.00% 6465 - REPLACEMENT CHARGES 2,400 2,400 1,200 2,400 4,673 94.71% TOTAL CENTRAL GARAGE CHARGES 4,716 5,545 3,469 7,715 10,433 35.23% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 951,829$ 1,152,247$ 629,673$ 942,289$ 1,007,884$ 6.96% 41940 - GENERAL GOVT BLDGS AND PLANT GENERAL FUND 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 42010 - OFFICE OF PREVENTION, HEALTH AND SAFETY 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES -$ -$ -$ -$ 76,070$ 100.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN - - - - 5,705 100.00% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY - - - - 4,716 100.00% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE - - - - 1,103 100.00% 6131 - CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS - - - - 16,632 100.00% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE - - - - 624 100.00% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES - - - - 104,850 100.00% 6201 - OFFICE SUPPLIES - - - - 1,500 100.00% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT - - - - 2,000 100.00% TOTAL SUPPLIES - - - - 3,500 100.00% 6307 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - - - - 46,500 100.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES - - - - 46,500 100.00% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES -$ -$ -$ -$ 154,850$ 100.00% GENERAL FUND 42010 - OFFICE OF PREVENTION, HEALTH AND SAFETY 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 42110 - POLICE-ADMINISTRATION 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES 190,782$ 196,703$ 83,356$ 201,296$ 202,486$ 0.59% 6103 - WAGES-PART TIME EMPLOYEES 3,600 - - - - 0.00% 6111 - SEVERANCE PAY 4,451 7,628 48,374 - - 0.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 4,232 4,334 2,952 4,473 4,563 2.01% 6123 - PERA POLICE & FIRE PLAN 22,801 24,589 7,811 25,072 25,072 0.00% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 3,977 3,828 2,606 3,698 3,772 2.00% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 2,922 2,952 1,961 2,919 2,936 0.58% 6131 - CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS 28,752 30,264 16,500 31,672 33,264 5.03% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 8,027 9,645 3,809 9,134 12,199 33.56% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 269,544 279,943 167,369 278,264 284,292 2.17% 6201 - OFFICE SUPPLIES 3 - - - - 0.00% 6214 - CLOTHING & PERSONAL EQUIPMENT 232 292 162 500 500 0.00% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 580 301 272 500 500 0.00% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT 101 1,385 420 - 500 100.00% TOTAL SUPPLIES 916 1,978 854 1,000 1,500 50.00% 6305 - MEDICAL SERVICES 2,360 1,095 14,140 5,000 24,000 380.00% 6306 - PERSONNEL/LABOR RELATIONS - - - 2,500 2,500 0.00% 6307 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 11,606 12,742 13,113 5,000 15,000 200.00% 6321 - TELEPHONE/PAGERS 360 534 92 660 660 0.00% 6331 - TRAVEL EXPENSE/MILEAGE - - - 100 100 0.00% 6341 - PERSONNEL ADVERTISING - - - 1,000 1,000 0.00% 6412 - BLDGS/FACILITIES 9,284 10,223 5,390 9,000 9,000 0.00% 6421 - SOFTWARE LICENSE 179 222 - - 250 100.00% 6422 - SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE - 33 - - 50 100.00% 6432 - CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 47,772 29,814 40,615 50,000 50,000 0.00% 6433 - MEETING EXPENSES 1,534 734 276 1,500 1,500 0.00% 6434 - DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 11,833 12,346 1,925 10,000 12,000 20.00% 6441 - LICENSES, TAXES & FEES 1,629 990 2,167 3,000 3,000 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 86,557 68,733 77,718 87,760 119,060 35.67% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 357,017$ 350,654$ 245,941$ 367,024$ 404,852$ 10.31% GENERAL FUND 42110 - POLICE-ADMINISTRATION 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 42120 - POLICE-INVESTIGATION 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES 625,427$ 886,262$ 493,639$ 815,740$ 798,982$ -2.05% 6102 - OVERTIME-FT EMPLOYEES 32,170 47,048 64,048 37,000 37,000 0.00% 6105 - CONTRACTED SVCS OT 40,376 10,219 2,923 10,000 10,000 0.00% 6111 - SEVERANCE PAY 13,954 25,317 46,057 - - 0.00% 6113 - HEALTH/WELLNESS REIMB 847 - - - - 0.00% 6123 - PERA POLICE & FIRE PLAN 118,470 174,650 99,228 152,707 149,740 -1.94% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 9,609 14,464 8,355 12,512 12,267 -1.96% 6131 - CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS 101,387 135,975 72,571 126,688 133,056 5.03% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 38,095 64,430 42,472 52,799 69,877 32.35% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 980,335 1,358,365 829,293 1,207,446 1,210,922 0.29% 6214 - CLOTHING & PERSONAL EQUIPMENT 8,685 3,995 3,525 6,600 6,600 0.00% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 1,666 1,064 110 1,000 1,000 0.00% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT 10,739 3,780 703 3,600 2,000 -44.44% TOTAL SUPPLIES 21,090 8,839 4,338 11,200 9,600 -14.29% 6307 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 12,216 13,937 17,366 10,000 12,000 20.00% 6321 - TELEPHONE/PAGERS 3,247 4,835 1,064 6,000 7,000 16.67% 6329 - OTHER COMMUNICATION SERVICES 530 - - 900 900 0.00% 6331 - TRAVEL EXPENSE/MILEAGE 21 40 - 100 100 0.00% 6421 - SOFTWARE LICENSE 1,675 1,617 - - 2,000 100.00% 6432 - CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 7,700 4,637 1,407 2,000 2,000 0.00% 6434 - DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 50 170 205 - - 0.00% 6449 - OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICE 15,369 17,797 17,757 22,000 22,000 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 40,808 43,033 37,799 41,000 46,000 12.20% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 1,042,233$ 1,410,237$ 871,430$ 1,259,646$ 1,266,522$ 0.55% GENERAL FUND 42120 - POLICE-INVESTIGATION 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 42123 - POLICE-PATROL 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES 3,460,129$ 3,423,539$ 2,244,176$ 3,794,591$ 3,520,961$ -7.21% 6102 - OVERTIME-FT EMPLOYEES 276,789 235,374 317,778 250,000 275,000 10.00% 6103 - WAGES-PART TIME EMPLOYEES 183,684 200,055 91,293 190,000 190,000 0.00% 6104 - OVERTIME-PART TIME EMPLOYEES 2,415 452 551 - - 0.00% 6105 - CONTRACTED SVCS OT 80,557 51,350 19,437 75,000 25,000 -66.67% 6111 - SEVERANCE PAY 45,461 74,397 82,739 - - 0.00% 6113 - HEALTH/WELLNESS REIMB 5,067 - - - - 0.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 21,648 22,874 10,420 30,683 26,252 -14.44% 6123 - PERA POLICE & FIRE PLAN 630,428 631,750 441,762 690,868 648,467 -6.14% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 18,048 19,935 11,079 25,365 21,701 -14.45% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 58,678 56,681 39,760 63,485 59,149 -6.83% 6131 - CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS 541,609 580,323 420,865 665,112 697,748 4.91% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 203,685 229,630 196,936 245,793 308,689 25.59% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 5,528,198 5,526,360 3,876,796 6,030,897 5,772,967 -4.28% 6201 - OFFICE SUPPLIES - 135 19 200 200 0.00% 6203 - BOOKS/REFERENCE MATERIALS 1,229 759 568 1,500 1,500 0.00% 6214 - CLOTHING & PERSONAL EQUIPMENT 71,132 70,147 66,825 55,000 71,000 29.09% 6217 - SAFETY SUPPLIES 4,139 6,883 3,163 3,000 6,000 100.00% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 31,268 44,332 29,671 22,250 38,000 70.79% 6242 - MINOR EQUIPMENT 19,815 469 19,078 5,000 5,000 0.00% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT 29,221 7,406 3,272 22,050 - -100.00% TOTAL SUPPLIES 156,804 130,131 122,596 109,000 121,700 11.65% 6305 - MEDICAL SERVICES 540 419 747 1,000 700 -30.00% 6307 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4,352 16,018 41,408 92,000 92,000 0.00% 6321 - TELEPHONE/PAGERS 27,799 29,690 8,731 20,000 29,700 48.50% 6323 - RADIO COMMUNICATIONS 23,751 25,382 15,810 25,000 25,000 0.00% 6329 - OTHER COMMUNICATION SERVICES 32,395 39,797 18,772 33,000 33,000 0.00% 6331 - TRAVEL EXPENSE/MILEAGE 256 (39) - 100 100 0.00% 6333 - FREIGHT/DRAYAGE - - 13 - - 0.00% 6402 - EQUIPMENT SERVICES 1,156 1,049 - 9,000 9,000 0.00% 6421 - SOFTWARE LICENSE 5,742 8,191 900 - - 0.00% 6422 - SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE 7,116 - 431 7,250 7,250 0.00% 6423 - LOGIS CHARGES 28,509 30,325 15,319 33,000 33,000 0.00% 6432 - CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 8,882 4,778 1,170 10,000 10,000 0.00% 6447 - TOWING CHARGES 1,459 1,871 1,250 750 750 0.00% 6449 - OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICE 42,604 26,428 26,052 30,000 30,000 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 184,561 183,909 130,603 261,100 270,500 3.60% 6461 - FUEL CHARGES 105,485 87,253 38,619 116,600 115,600 -0.86% 6462 - FIXED CHARGES 25,054 26,263 37,221 73,846 60,093 -18.62% 6463 - REPAIR & MAINT CHARGES 94,070 74,014 34,210 95,900 98,800 3.02% 6465 - REPLACEMENT CHARGES 175,786 219,071 101,850 203,701 255,367 25.36% TOTAL CENTRAL GARAGE CHARGES 400,395 406,601 211,900 490,047 529,860 8.12% 6550 - MOTOR VEHICLES 19,000 - - - - 0.00% TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY 19,000 - - - - 0.00% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 6,288,958$ 6,247,001$ 4,341,895$ 6,891,044$ 6,695,027$ -2.84% GENERAL FUND 42123 - POLICE-PATROL 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 42151 - POLICE-SUPPORT SERVICES 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES 463,716$ 469,598$ 312,513$ 520,046$ 509,609$ -2.01% 6102 - OVERTIME-FT EMPLOYEES 2,086 2,422 1,890 2,500 2,500 0.00% 6111 - SEVERANCE PAY 5,754 10,089 11,279 - - 0.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 34,936 35,402 23,581 39,191 38,409 -2.00% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 30,168 30,640 21,010 32,398 31,750 -2.00% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 7,055 7,183 4,914 7,577 7,425 -2.01% 6131 - CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS 119,800 127,610 88,440 142,524 149,688 5.03% 6141 - UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION 2,107 - - - - 0.00% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 3,357 3,908 2,473 4,015 4,132 2.91% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 668,979 686,852 466,100 748,251 743,513 -0.63% 6201 - OFFICE SUPPLIES 7,375 5,053 3,057 6,000 6,000 0.00% 6214 - CLOTHING & PERSONAL EQUIPMENT 4,202 2,517 1,109 3,000 4,400 46.67% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 4,853 4,408 4,456 4,500 12,500 177.78% 6242 - MINOR EQUIPMENT 12,369 380 1,222 5,000 5,000 0.00% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT 16,606 9,007 355 3,500 - -100.00% TOTAL SUPPLIES 45,405 21,365 10,199 22,000 27,900 26.82% 6307 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,310 1,304 2,098 1,500 1,500 0.00% 6321 - TELEPHONE/PAGERS 1,581 1,397 1,021 2,050 2,050 0.00% 6322 - POSTAGE - - - - - 0.00% 6329 - OTHER COMMUNICATION SERVICES - - - - - 0.00% 6331 - TRAVEL EXPENSE/MILEAGE (19) - - 100 100 0.00% 6333 - FREIGHT/DRAYAGE 287 301 313 200 200 0.00% 6342 - LEGAL NOTICES - - - - - 0.00% 6351 - PRINTING 7,339 5,380 5,204 7,000 7,000 0.00% 6402 - EQUIPMENT SERVICES - - 2,060 2,000 2,000 0.00% 6406 - MULTI-FUNCTION MTNCE 6,428 4,490 3,095 5,500 5,500 0.00% 6421 - SOFTWARE LICENSE 3,643 107 - 5,000 - -100.00% 6422 - SOFTWARE MAINT 30,586 12,267 774 30,000 30,000 0.00% 6423 - LOGIS CHARGES 149,604 148,978 70,901 159,147 160,000 0.54% 6436 - UNCOLLECTIBLE CHECKS/DEBTS - - - - - 0.00% 6441 - LICENSES, TAXES & FEES 18 280 280 250 250 0.00% 6448 - PRISONER BOARDING CHARGES 86,451 66,574 29,437 60,000 60,000 0.00% 6449 - OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICE - - - - - 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 287,228 241,078 115,183 272,747 268,600 -1.52% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 1,001,612$ 949,295$ 591,482$ 1,042,998$ 1,040,013$ -0.29% GENERAL FUND 42151 - POLICE-SUPPORT SERVICES 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 42170 - POLICE-STATIONS AND BLDGS 6211 - CLEANING SUPPLIES 2,108$ 5,870$ 4,338$ 3,500$ 3,500$ 0.00% 6216 - CHEMICALS/CHEMICAL PRODUCTS - - - 500 500 0.00% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 599 876 57,594 1,500 1,500 0.00% 6225 - PARK & LANDSCAPE MATERIALS - - - 750 750 0.00% 6239 - OTHER REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES 7,341 3,340 4,379 10,000 10,000 0.00% 6241 - SMALL TOOLS - - - 200 200 0.00% 6242 - MINOR EQUIPMENT 1,681 2,875 5,447 2,500 10,500 320.00% TOTAL SUPPLIES 11,729 12,961 71,758 18,950 26,950 42.22% 6381 - ELECTRIC 69,174 60,533 41,279 73,000 73,000 0.00% 6382 - GAS 21,554 13,564 11,391 22,500 22,500 0.00% 6383 - WATER 3,718 3,100 429 4,000 4,000 0.00% 6384 - REFUSE DISPOSAL 3,083 2,954 1,851 3,000 3,000 0.00% 6385 - SEWER 670 574 375 1,000 1,000 0.00% 6386 - STORM SEWER 678 698 360 800 800 0.00% 6387 - HEATING OIL - - - 1,000 1,000 0.00% 6388 - HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL 551 707 279 1,000 1,000 0.00% 6389 - STREET LIGHTS 196 196 98 250 250 0.00% 6402 - EQUIPMENT SERVICES 89 - - 2,500 2,500 0.00% 6403 - BLDGS/FACILITIES MAINT SERVICE 75,646 41,278 17,679 45,000 45,000 0.00% 6405 - PARK & LANDSCAPE SERVICES 4,320 5,184 2,669 6,500 6,500 0.00% 6409 - OTHER REPAIR & MAINT SVCS - - - 1,000 - -100.00% 6423 - LOGIS CHARGES - - - 2,500 - -100.00% 6441 - LICENSES, TAXES & FEES 110 370 110 250 250 0.00% 6449 - OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICE 70,608 39,033 129,803 50,000 50,000 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 250,397 168,191 206,323 214,300 210,800 -1.63% 6520 - BUILDINGS & FACILITIES 27,337 - - - - 0.00% TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY 27,337 - - - - 0.00% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 289,463$ 181,152$ 278,081$ 233,250$ 237,750$ 1.93% GENERAL FUND 42170 - POLICE-STATIONS AND BLDGS 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 42210 - FIRE 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES 339,103$ 349,953$ 239,126$ 353,253$ 366,340$ 3.70% 6102 - OVERTIME FT EMPLOYEES 1,054 761 - - - 0.00% 6103 - WAGES-PART TIME EMPLOYEES 251,887 290,607 218,793 325,000 330,000 1.54% 6111 - SEVERANCE PAY 5,651 10,644 - - - 0.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 7,624 4,511 3,015 4,585 4,677 2.01% 6123 - PERA POLICE & FIRE PLAN 39,141 51,319 35,078 51,705 53,805 4.06% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 22,225 21,545 15,961 23,940 24,326 1.61% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 8,586 9,326 6,677 9,834 10,097 2.67% 6127 - FIRE RELIEF ASSOCIATION 170,652 178,079 3,000 180,000 180,000 0.00% 6131 - CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS 57,647 60,684 44,992 63,344 66,528 5.03% 6141 - UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION 101 10 - - - 0.00% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 84,689 97,975 88,652 67,259 72,051 7.12% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 988,360 1,075,414 655,294 1,078,920 1,107,824 2.68% 6201 - OFFICE SUPPLIES 367 3,258 115 2,500 2,800 12.00% 6203 - BOOKS/REFERENCE MATERIALS 97 1,087 2,067 500 1,300 160.00% 6211 - CLEANING SUPPLIES - - - - - 0.00% 6214 - CLOTHING & PERSONAL EQUIPMENT 16,661 15,809 3,311 26,200 52,000 98.47% 6217 - SAFETY SUPPLIES - - - - - 0.00% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 14,047 17,837 13,146 18,000 18,500 2.78% 6219.1 - GEN OP SUP-FIRE EDUCATION - - - - - 0.00% 6239 - OTHER REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES - - - - - 0.00% 6241 - SMALL TOOLS - - - - - 0.00% 6242 - MINOR EQUIPMENT 10,769 20,986 5,776 13,000 13,400 3.08% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT 2,762 1,698 103 20,000 - -100.00% TOTAL SUPPLIES 44,703 60,675 24,518 80,200 88,000 9.73% 6305 - MEDICAL SERVICES 6,731 8,635 550 10,000 10,000 0.00% 6307 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 26,116 5,205 419 - - 0.00% 6321 - TELEPHONE/PAGERS 4,708 4,046 1,507 5,600 5,600 0.00% 6323 - RADIO COMMUNICATIONS 11,191 13,047 7,554 15,500 15,500 0.00% 6329 - OTHER COMMUNICATION SERVICES 9,346 9,790 5,830 8,000 - -100.00% 6331 - TRAVEL EXPENSE/MILEAGE - - - 200 200 0.00% 6333 - FREIGHT/DRAYAGE - 47 - 100 100 0.00% 6341 - PERSONNEL ADVERTISING 592 - - 1,000 1,000 0.00% 6351 - PRINTING 224 80 - 500 500 0.00% 6369 - OTHER INSURANCE 1,124 1,124 1,124 1,200 1,200 0.00% 6381 - ELECTRIC 19,048 20,801 14,057 22,000 22,000 0.00% 6382 - GAS 6,104 18,179 9,539 18,000 18,000 0.00% 6383 - WATER 3,105 3,872 1,590 4,000 4,000 0.00% 6385 - SEWER 2,503 2,328 1,347 2,500 2,500 0.00% 6386 - STORM SEWER 979 924 604 1,100 1,100 0.00% 6389 - STREET LIGHTS 283 260 165 350 350 0.00% 6402 - EQUIPMENT SERVICES 9,110 13,526 9,828 10,000 10,500 5.00% 6406 - MULTI-FUNCTION MTNCE 774 684 983 1,000 1,000 0.00% 6417 - UNIFORMS - - - - - 0.00% 6421 - SOFTWARE LICENSE 152 7,573 - - 15,000 100.00% 6422 - SOFTWARE MAINT 4,660 5,202 11,214 6,250 3,250 -48.00% 6431 - SPECIAL EVENTS - - - - - 0.00% 6432 - CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 37,929 35,175 38,270 30,000 55,000 83.33% 6433 - MEETING EXPENSES 592 819 346 750 750 0.00% 6434 - DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 2,013 2,076 1,985 2,500 2,500 0.00% 6443 - PRIZE AWARDS/EXPENSE REIMB 1,333 702 107 1,500 1,500 0.00% 6444 - RELOCATION EXPENSES - - - - - 0.00% 6449 - OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICE 442 658 753 700 700 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 149,059 154,753 107,772 142,750 172,250 20.67% 6461 - FUEL CHARGES 12,393 10,286 6,026 13,000 13,600 4.62% 6462 - FIXED CHARGES 20,095 21,992 18,148 36,850 28,351 -23.06% 6463 - REPAIR & MAINT CHARGES 59,372 56,159 45,668 71,200 73,300 2.95% 6465 - REPLACEMENT CHARGES 187,611 213,064 107,988 215,977 352,803 63.35% TOTAL CENTRAL GARAGE CHARGES 279,471 301,501 177,830 337,027 468,054 38.88% 6540 - EQUIPMENT & MACHINERY - - - - 125,000 100.00% TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY - - - - 125,000 100.00% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 1,461,593$ 1,592,343$ 965,414$ 1,638,897$ 1,961,128$ 19.66% GENERAL FUND 42210 - FIRE 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 42420 - BUILDING AND COMMUNITY STANDARDS 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES 681,031$ 680,750$ 483,873$ 756,641$ 791,417$ 4.60% 6102 - OVERTIME-FT EMPLOYEES 20,939 3,570 200 5,619 3,000 -46.61% 6103 - WAGES-PART TIME EMPLOYEES 20,571 - 2,400 20,500 20,500 0.00% 6111 - SEVERANCE PAY 6,537 10,487 - - - 0.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 47,114 50,380 36,305 58,707 61,118 4.11% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 46,014 42,605 30,761 48,532 50,526 4.11% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 10,761 10,029 7,195 11,349 11,816 4.11% 6131 - CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS 125,790 129,883 100,980 150,442 158,004 5.03% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 4,498 4,933 3,315 5,303 5,770 8.81% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 963,255 932,637 665,029 1,057,093 1,102,151 4.26% 6201 - OFFICE SUPPLIES 573 - 101 - - 0.00% 6203 - BOOKS/REFERENCE MATERIALS 184 2,487 - - 600 100.00% 6214 - CLOTHING & PERSONAL EQUIPMENT 2,894 997 754 1,000 1,000 0.00% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 1,872 1,012 - - - 0.00% 6241 - SMALL TOOLS 382 690 266 900 - -100.00% 6242 - MINOR EQUIPMENT 21 342 303 600 600 0.00% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT 28,165 4,068 1,401 2,500 - -100.00% TOTAL SUPPLIES 34,091 9,596 2,825 5,000 2,200 -56.00% 6307 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50,750 72,456 30,179 60,000 60,000 0.00% 6321 - TELEPHONE/PAGERS 7,379 8,753 2,798 6,220 6,220 0.00% 6329 - OTHER COMMUNICATION SERVICES 3,499 3,856 2,041 3,250 3,250 0.00% 6331 - TRAVEL EXPENSE/MILEAGE 324 35 - 400 400 0.00% 6333 - FREIGHT/DRAYAGE 247 - - - - 0.00% 6341 - PERSONNEL ADVERTISING 159 - - 200 200 0.00% 6351 - PRINTING 1,758 5,301 - 2,000 5,000 150.00% 6402 - EQUIPMENT SERVICES - - - - - 0.00% 6405 - PARK & LANDSCAPE SERVICES 9,842 21,819 12,803 5,000 6,000 20.00% 6406 - MULTI-FUNCTION MTNCE 642 - - 3,000 3,000 0.00% 6421 - SOFTWARE LICENSE 417 578 - - - 0.00% 6422 - SOFTWARE MAINT - 990 - - - 0.00% 6423 - LOGIS CHARGES 36,532 42,473 17,377 - - 0.00% 6432 - CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 14,329 1,620 2,804 8,000 10,000 25.00% 6433 - MEETING EXPENSES 254 72 - 400 200 -50.00% 6434 - DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 1,251 589 125 1,000 1,200 20.00% 6435 - CREDIT CARD FEES 6,416 15,123 8,755 12,000 15,000 25.00% 6441 - LICENSES, TAXES & FEES 30 - - - - 0.00% 6449 - OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICE 34,960 - - 5,000 - -100.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 168,789 173,665 76,882 106,470 110,470 3.76% 6461 - FUEL CHARGES 4,102 2,722 1,077 4,900 4,100 -16.33% 6462 - FIXED CHARGES 4,614 4,369 6,263 11,281 7,438 -34.07% 6463 - REPAIR & MAINT CHARGES 4,260 2,283 1,245 4,600 4,700 2.17% 6465 - REPLACEMENT CHARGES 14,468 13,573 7,000 14,000 13,600 -2.86% TOTAL CENTRAL GARAGE CHARGES 27,444 22,947 15,585 34,781 29,838 -14.21% 6550 - MOTOR VEHICLES - - - - - 0.00% TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY - - - - - 0.00% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 1,193,579$ 1,138,845$ 760,321$ 1,203,344$ 1,244,659$ 3.43% GENERAL FUND 42420 - BUILDING AND COMMUNITY STANDARDS 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 42510 - EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS 6201 - OFFICE SUPPLIES 90 487 - 500 500 0.00% 6203 - BOOKS/REFERENCE MATERIALS - - - 500 500 0.00% 6204 - STATIONARY SUPPLIES - - - 100 100 0.00% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES - 43,215 6,166 15,500 15,500 0.00% 6242 - MINOR EQUIPMENT 713 - - 3,000 3,000 0.00% TOTAL SUPPLIES 803 43,702 6,166 19,600 19,600 0.00% 6381 - ELECTRIC 219 485 382 400 500 25.00% 6402 - EQUIPMENT SERVICES 2,214 2,214 2,214 3,300 3,300 0.00% 6422 - SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE - - - - 7,300 100.00% 6432 - CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 1,759 1,400 - 2,300 2,300 0.00% 6433 - MEETING EXPENSES - - 14 700 700 0.00% 6434 - DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS - - - 300 300 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 4,192 4,099 2,610 7,000 14,400 105.71% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 4,995$ 47,801$ 8,776$ 26,600$ 34,000$ 27.82% GENERAL FUND 42510 - EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 43110 - PUBLIC WORKS-ENGINEERING 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES 656,210$ 719,601$ 487,280$ 738,991$ 752,399$ 1.81% 6102 - OVERTIME-FT EMPLOYEES 19,875 50,054 48,057 35,000 35,000 0.00% 6103 - WAGES-PART TIME EMPLOYEES 10,867 10,536 9,688 11,000 11,000 0.00% 6104 - OVERTIME-PART TIME EMPLOYEES 157 24 545 500 500 0.00% 6111 - SEVERANCE PAY 5,316 12,401 5,008 - - 0.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 50,702 57,728 40,150 58,912 59,918 1.71% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 42,965 48,775 34,595 48,482 49,531 2.16% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 10,048 11,507 8,091 11,391 11,585 1.70% 6131 - CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS 115,572 136,188 97,020 126,688 133,056 5.03% 6141 - UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION - - - - - 0.00% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 4,498 5,778 3,756 5,323 5,661 6.35% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 916,210 1,052,592 734,190 1,036,287 1,058,650 2.16% 6201 - OFFICE SUPPLIES 835 635 631 605 850 40.50% 6203 - BOOKS/REFERENCE MATERIALS - - - 200 200 0.00% 6214 - CLOTHING & PERSONAL EQUIPMENT 50 - - 500 500 0.00% 6217 - SAFETY SUPPLIES 1,012 630 747 1,075 1,075 0.00% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 129 318 450 540 540 0.00% 6242 - MINOR EQUIPMENT 7,139 739 - 700 700 0.00% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT 4,502 406 560 10,000 - -100.00% TOTAL SUPPLIES 13,667 2,728 2,388 13,620 3,865 -71.62% 6302 - ARCH, ENG & PLANNING 3,316 3,467 4,772 14,500 14,500 0.00% 6307 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,559 1,574 1,259 3,900 3,900 0.00% 6321 - TELEPHONE/PAGERS 1,440 2,246 969 3,000 3,000 0.00% 6329 - OTHER COMMUNICATION SERVICES 496 1,306 721 2,000 2,000 0.00% 6331 - TRAVEL EXPENSE/MILEAGE 2,108 785 600 1,500 1,500 0.00% 6333 - FREIGHT/DRAYAGE - - - 80 80 0.00% 6341 - PERSONNEL ADVERTISING - - - 310 310 0.00% 6342 - LEGAL NOTICES - - - 200 200 0.00% 6351 - PRINTING 70 - - 450 450 0.00% 6402 - EQUIPMENT SERVICES 530 - - 520 520 0.00% 6406 - MULTI-FUNCTION MTNCE 4,095 2,429 1,539 5,000 5,000 0.00% 6421 - SOFTWARE LICENSE 457 883 8,573 - - 0.00% 6422 - SOFTWARE MAINT 9,074 - 10,429 10,000 10,000 0.00% 6432 - CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 6,666 2,577 625 4,400 4,400 0.00% 6433 - MEETING EXPENSES - - - 85 85 0.00% 6434 - DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 1,010 1,024 1,269 1,150 1,430 24.35% 6449 - OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICE - - - - - 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 30,821 16,291 30,756 47,095 47,375 0.59% 6461 - FUEL CHARGES 3,155 2,905 1,552 3,400 3,600 5.88% 6462 - FIXED CHARGES 3,368 3,136 2,579 5,229 8,895 70.11% 6463 - REPAIR & MAINT CHARGES 1,763 2,132 322 2,100 2,200 4.76% 6465 - REPLACEMENT CHARGES 7,800 7,900 2,600 5,200 7,900 51.92% TOTAL CENTRAL GARAGE CHARGES 16,086 16,073 7,053 15,929 22,595 41.85% 6540 - EQUIPMENT & MACHINERY - - - - - 0.00% TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY - - - - - 0.00% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 976,784$ 1,087,684$ 774,387$ 1,112,931$ 1,132,485$ 1.76% GENERAL FUND 43110 - PUBLIC WORKS-ENGINEERING 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 43220 - PUBLIC WORKS-STREET MAINT 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES 401,041$ 415,285$ 283,205$ 314,728$ 320,756$ 1.92% 6102 - OVERTIME-FT EMPLOYEES 28,605 18,045 3,710 12,000 25,000 108.33% 6103 - WAGES-PART TIME EMPLOYEES 53,477 3,880 70,608 55,000 70,000 27.27% 6111 - SEVERANCE PAY 5,965 10,935 - - - 0.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 32,224 32,499 21,519 28,630 31,183 8.92% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 29,163 26,037 21,452 23,668 25,777 8.91% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 6,820 6,159 5,017 5,535 6,030 8.94% 6131 - CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS 85,657 90,792 66,660 79,180 83,160 5.03% 6141 - UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION 1,476 63 - - - 0.00% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 30,512 30,398 25,157 30,482 38,125 25.07% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 674,940 634,093 497,328 549,223 600,031 9.25% 6201 - OFFICE SUPPLIES 468 270 453 270 500 85.19% 6203 - BOOKS/REFERENCE MATERIALS - - - - - 0.00% 6214 - CLOTHING & PERSONAL EQUIPMENT 575 - - - - 0.00% 6217 - SAFETY SUPPLIES 5,430 8,761 2,491 6,750 6,750 0.00% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 747 2,121 3,033 2,300 4,000 73.91% 6224 - STREET MAINT MATERIALS 127,882 82,885 45,134 105,000 118,200 12.57% 6225 - PARK & LANDSCAPE MATERIALS 1,344 - 725 1,000 1,000 0.00% 6226 - SIGNS & STRIPING MATERIALS 393 900 - 1,000 1,000 0.00% 6241 - SMALL TOOLS 983 613 305 900 900 0.00% 6242 - MINOR EQUIPMENT 680 601 400 600 1,500 150.00% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT 670 24 - 5,900 1,500 -74.58% TOTAL SUPPLIES 139,172 96,175 52,541 123,720 135,350 9.40% 6307 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,234 1,234 1,259 1,700 1,700 0.00% 6321 - TELEPHONE/PAGERS 2,613 2,449 381 2,880 2,880 0.00% 6331 - TRAVEL EXPENSE/MILEAGE - - - 250 450 80.00% 6341 - PERSONNEL ADVERTISING - - - 300 300 0.00% 6351 - PRINTING 131 - - 100 100 0.00% 6384 - REFUSE DISPOSAL 805 1,448 - 500 2,000 300.00% 6404 - STREET MAINT SERVICES 115,711 - - 50,000 50,000 0.00% 6405 - PARK & LANDSCAPE SERVICES 50,688 43,013 39,386 55,000 75,000 36.36% 6417 - UNIFORMS 4,229 5,584 2,238 5,150 5,300 2.91% 6421 - SOFTWARE LICENSE - 200 - - - 0.00% 6432 - CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 4,915 65 826 3,000 6,120 104.00% 6433 - MEETING EXPENSES - - - 100 100 0.00% 6434 - DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 505 514 - 650 650 0.00% 6449 - OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICE 44,026 28,457 11,410 45,000 45,000 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 224,857 82,964 55,500 164,630 189,600 15.17% 6461 - FUEL CHARGES 47,638 34,405 18,363 46,800 49,200 5.13% 6462 - FIXED CHARGES 37,890 39,074 46,401 94,033 78,716 -16.29% 6463 - REPAIR & MAINT CHARGES 121,722 88,524 43,780 131,500 135,400 2.97% 6465 - REPLACEMENT CHARGES 307,308 321,242 159,117 318,233 322,040 1.20% TOTAL CENTRAL GARAGE CHARGES 514,558 483,245 267,661 590,566 585,356 -0.88% 6540 - EQUIPMENT & MACHINERY - - - - - 0.00% TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY - - - - - 0.00% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 1,553,527$ 1,296,477$ 873,030$ 1,428,139$ 1,510,337$ 5.76% GENERAL FUND 43220 - PUBLIC WORKS-STREET MAINT 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 43221 - PUBLIC WORKS-TRAFFIC CONTROL 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES 111,302$ 118,936$ 82,561$ 124,689$ 127,437$ 2.20% 6102 - OVERTIME-FT EMPLOYEES - - 361 - - 0.00% 6111 - SEVERANCE PAY 1,051 1,943 - - - 0.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 8,348 8,920 6,219 9,352 9,558 2.20% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 7,194 7,658 5,234 7,730 7,902 2.23% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 1,682 1,802 1,224 1,808 1,847 2.16% 6131 - CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS 26,356 30,264 22,440 31,672 33,264 5.03% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 10,235 12,647 8,275 11,396 13,266 16.41% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 166,168 182,170 126,314 186,647 193,274 3.55% 6226 - SIGNS & STRIPING MATERIALS 39,737 9,753 927 31,000 31,000 0.00% 6242 - MINOR EQUIPMENT - - - - - 0.00% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT - - 140 1,800 1,500 -16.67% TOTAL SUPPLIES 39,737 9,753 1,067 32,800 32,500 -0.91% 6381 - ELECTRIC - - - - - 0.00% 6407 - TRAFFIC SIGNALS MAINT 7,183 898 509 4,500 4,950 10.00% 6417 - UNIFORMS - 53 - - 520 100.00% 6422 - SOFTWARE MAINT 316 - - - 900 100.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 7,499 951 509 4,500 6,370 41.56% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 213,404$ 192,874$ 127,890$ 223,947$ 232,144$ 3.66% GENERAL FUND 43221 - PUBLIC WORKS-TRAFFIC CONTROL 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 44110 - JOINT POWERS PAYMENTS 6449 - OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICE 181,159$ 171,344$ 107,744$ 187,000$ 187,000$ 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 181,159 171,344 107,744 187,000 187,000 0.00% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 181,159$ 171,344$ 107,744$ 187,000$ 187,000$ 0.00% GENERAL FUND 44110 - JOINT POWERS PAYMENTS 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 45010 - CARS ADMINISTRATION 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES 183,490$ 189,616$ 61,230$ 197,219$ 189,542$ -3.89% 6102 - OVERTIME - FT EMPLOYEES - - 298 - - 0.00% 6103 - WAGES - PT EMPLOYEES - 2,097 33,367 - - 0.00% 6111 - SEVERANCE PAY 5,185 52 - - - 0.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 13,762 14,379 6,739 14,792 14,216 -3.89% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 11,106 12,095 6,086 11,982 11,752 -1.92% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 2,597 2,829 1,423 2,860 2,748 -3.92% 6131 - CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS 28,752 22,698 25,740 31,672 33,264 5.03% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 1,323 1,810 2,315 1,538 1,554 1.04% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 246,215 245,576 137,198 260,063 253,076 -2.69% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES - 2,717 289 - 1,000 100.00% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT - 671 1,923 - - 0.00% TOTAL SUPPLIES - 3,388 2,212 - 1,000 100.00% 6307 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 9,405 6,202 2,265 1,000 1,000 0.00% 6321 - TELEPHONE/PAGERS 358 219 133 500 500 0.00% 6331 - TRAVEL EXPENSE/MILEAGE - - - - - 0.00% 6421 - SOFTWARE LICENSE 51 67 - - - 0.00% 6432 - CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 4,059 2,986 3,300 4,000 4,000 0.00% 6433 - MEETING EXPENSES - 78 68 500 500 0.00% 6434 - DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS - 2,508 460 1,200 1,200 0.00% 6441 - LICENSES, TAXES & FEES - 3 - - - 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 13,873 12,063 6,226 7,200 7,200 0.00% 6540 - EQUIPMENT & MACHINERY - 13,290 - - - 0.00% TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY - 13,290 - - - 0.00% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 260,088$ 274,317$ 145,636$ 267,263$ 261,276$ -2.24% GENERAL FUND 45010 - CARS ADMINISTRATION 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 45110 - CARS-REC ADMINISTRATION 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES 236,468$ 206,580$ 218,139$ 329,922$ 338,270$ 2.53% 6102 - OVERTIME-FT EMPLOYEES - - 138 - - 0.00% 6103 - WAGES-PART TIME EMPLOYEES 62,530 37,662 50,285 - 60,000 100.00% 6111 - SEVERANCE PAY 4,164 6,978 - - - 0.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 22,414 18,318 20,116 24,744 29,780 20.35% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 19,403 15,628 17,290 20,455 24,692 20.71% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 4,538 3,703 4,044 4,785 5,775 20.69% 6131 - CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS 52,609 60,528 44,880 79,180 83,160 5.03% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 2,647 2,345 2,874 2,573 4,489 74.47% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 404,773 351,742 357,766 461,659 546,166 18.31% 6201 - OFFICE SUPPLIES 3,025 1,212 606 3,000 3,000 0.00% 6217 - SAFETY SUPPLIES - - - 200 200 0.00% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 106 346 12,362 2,000 2,000 0.00% 6242 - MINOR EQUIPMENT - - - 250 250 0.00% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT 447 3,502 - - - 0.00% TOTAL SUPPLIES 3,578 5,060 12,968 5,450 5,450 0.00% 6321 - TELEPHONE/PAGERS 2,017 1,829 1,012 2,500 2,500 0.00% 6322 - POSTAGE 3,961 3,807 - 4,000 4,000 0.00% 6331 - TRAVEL EXPENSE/MILEAGE 601 - - 1,250 1,250 0.00% 6341 - PERSONNEL ADVERTISING - 250 125 750 750 0.00% 6349 - OTHER ADVERTISING - - - - - 0.00% 6351 - PRINTING 19,033 7,619 - 19,000 19,000 0.00% 6402 - EQUIPMENT SERVICES - - - 500 500 0.00% 6406 - MULTI-FUNCTION MTNCE 4,024 1,008 1,318 5,000 5,000 0.00% 6421 - SOFTWARE LICENSE 1,481 1,062 - - - 0.00% 6422 - SOFTWARE MAINT - - - - - 0.00% 6423 - LOGIS CHARGES 29,208 35,472 17,407 40,000 40,000 0.00% 6432 - CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 195 - - 500 500 0.00% 6434 - DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 1,209 - 150 1,250 1,250 0.00% 6435 - CREDIT CARD FEES 9,173 1,731 2,016 10,000 10,000 0.00% 6441 - LICENSES, TAXES & FEES - - - - - 0.00% 6449 - OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICE 2,244 616 58,047 4,000 4,000 0.00% 6491 - MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE 33 - 49 - - 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 73,179 53,394 80,124 88,750 88,750 0.00% 6461 - FUEL CHARGES 253 172 150 300 300 0.00% 6462 - FIXED CHARGES 752 717 1,001 2,029 2,865 41.20% 6463 - REPAIR & MAINT CHARGES 222 - 645 100 100 0.00% 6465 - REPLACEMENT CHARGES 4,375 4,375 2,187 4,375 4,375 0.00% TOTAL CENTRAL GARAGE CHARGES 5,602 5,264 3,983 6,804 7,640 12.29% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 487,132$ 415,460$ 454,841$ 562,663$ 648,006$ 15.17% GENERAL FUND 45110 - CARS-REC ADMINISTRATION 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 45111 - CARS-ADULT RECREATION 5586 - COST OF SALES-MISC 484$ -$ 67$ 600$ 600$ 0.00% TOTAL COST OF SALES 484 - 67 600 600 0.00% 6103 - WAGES-PART TIME EMPLOYEES 34,023 17,926 8,120 42,300 5,600 -86.76% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 1,641 317 258 3,173 420 -86.76% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 2,114 999 503 2,623 347 -86.77% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 494 261 118 615 81 -86.83% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 860 518 223 2,801 160 -94.29% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 39,132 20,021 9,222 51,512 6,608 -87.17% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 8,167 4,397 4,547 10,000 7,900 -21.00% TOTAL SUPPLIES 8,167 4,397 4,547 10,000 7,900 -21.00% 6307 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 14,336 2,564 4,524 11,000 9,000 -18.18% 6331 - TRAVEL EXPENSE/MILEAGE - - - - - 0.00% 6339 - OTHER TRANSPORTATION EXPENSE - - - - - 0.00% 6364 - DRAM SHOP INSURANCE 950 944 - 1,100 1,100 0.00% 6384 - REFUSE DISPOSAL 2,020 - 1,957 2,450 2,250 -8.16% 6402 - EQUIPMENT SERVICES - - - 450 - -100.00% 6412 - BLDGS/FACILITIES 1,785 - - - - 0.00% 6432 - CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS - 75 - 300 - -100.00% 6441 - LICENSES, TAXES & FEES - - - - - 0.00% 6449 - OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICE 68,801 25,019 29,282 70,000 93,100 33.00% 6491 - MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE 794 15 600 500 500 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 88,686 28,617 36,363 85,800 105,950 23.48% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 136,469$ 53,035$ 50,199$ 147,912$ 121,058$ -18.16% GENERAL FUND 45111 - CARS-ADULT RECREATION 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 45112 - CARS-TEEN PROGRAMS 6102 - OVERTIME-FT EMPLOYEES -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 0.00% 6103 - WAGES-PART TIME EMPLOYEES - - - 7,500 8,000 6.67% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN - - - 563 600 6.57% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY - - - 465 496 6.67% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE - - - 109 116 6.42% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE - - - 206 229 11.17% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES - - - 8,843 9,441 6.76% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES - - - 1,500 1,500 0.00% TOTAL SUPPLIES - - - 1,500 1,500 0.00% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES -$ -$ -$ 10,343$ 10,941$ 5.78% GENERAL FUND 45112 - CARS-TEEN PROGRAMS 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 45113 - CARS-YOUTH PROGRAMS 6103 - WAGES-PART TIME EMPLOYEES 81,438$ 13,754$ 36,758$ 91,600$ 104,000$ 13.54% 6104 - OVERTIME-PART TIME EMPLOYEES - - - - - 0.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 2,182 518 188 6,870 7,800 13.54% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 5,049 826 2,279 5,679 6,448 13.54% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 1,181 199 533 1,329 1,508 13.47% 6141 - UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION - 89 - - - 0.00% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 1,882 410 939 2,510 2,974 18.49% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 91,732 15,796 40,697 107,988 122,730 13.65% 6212 - MOTOR FUELS - - - 3,500 3,500 0.00% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 12,796 4,038 4,296 24,500 24,500 0.00% TOTAL SUPPLIES 12,796 4,038 4,296 28,000 28,000 0.00% 6331 - TRAVEL EXPENSE/MILEAGE 15 - - 250 250 0.00% 6433 - MEETING EXPENSES - - - 1,000 1,000 0.00% 6449 - OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICE 9,351 845 6,150 10,250 10,840 5.76% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 9,366 845 6,150 11,500 12,090 5.13% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 113,894$ 20,679$ 51,143$ 147,488$ 162,820$ 10.40% GENERAL FUND 45113 - CARS-YOUTH PROGRAMS 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 45119 - CARS-GENERAL REC 6103 - WAGES-PART TIME EMPLOYEES 5,411$ 6,440$ 6,975$ 8,150$ 5,700$ -30.06% 6104 - OVERTIME-PART TIME EMPLOYEES 26 - - - - 0.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 191 252 561 612 428 -30.07% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 337 354 432 505 353 -30.10% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 79 93 101 117 83 -29.06% 6141 - UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION 18 92 - - - 0.00% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 137 161 145 223 163 -26.91% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 6,199 7,392 8,214 9,607 6,727 -29.98% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 1,653 2,792 6,517 4,950 200 -95.96% TOTAL SUPPLIES 1,653 2,792 6,517 4,950 200 -95.96% 6369 - OTHER INSURANCE - - - - - 0.00% 6412 - BLDGS/FACILITIES 9,913 4,948 210 11,000 2,200 -80.00% 6431 - SPECIAL EVENTS - - - 1,000 - -100.00% 6449 - OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICE 44,357 16,905 27,010 39,000 13,000 -66.67% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 54,270 21,853 27,220 51,000 15,200 -70.20% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 62,122$ 32,037$ 41,951$ 65,557$ 22,127$ -66.25% GENERAL FUND 45119 - CARS-GENERAL REC 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 45122 - CARS-COMMUNITY CENTER 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES 68,654$ 71,164$ 47,537$ 77,309$ 80,823$ 4.55% 6103 - WAGES-PART TIME EMPLOYEES 38,594 24,813 16,673 36,000 38,500 6.94% 6104 - OVERTIME-PART TIME EMPLOYEES - - - 500 - -100.00% 6111 - SEVERANCE PAY 245 515 - - - 0.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 8,044 7,172 4,816 8,536 8,950 4.85% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 6,922 6,078 4,133 7,056 7,398 4.85% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 1,619 1,440 967 1,650 1,730 4.85% 6131 - CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS 4,333 3,456 3,139 15,836 16,632 5.03% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 1,472 1,323 790 1,603 1,764 10.04% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 129,883 115,961 78,055 148,490 155,797 4.92% 6211 - CLEANING SUPPLIES - 113 - - - 0.00% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 4,795 11,668 1,705 2,500 10,850 334.00% 6239 - OTHER REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES - - - - - 0.00% 6242 - MINOR EQUIPMENT 27,315 - 4,302 6,000 6,000 0.00% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT 82 - - - - 0.00% TOTAL SUPPLIES 32,192 11,781 6,007 8,500 16,850 98.24% 6331 - TRAVEL EXPENSE/MILEAGE 248 - - - - 0.00% 6384 - REFUSE DISPOSAL - - - - - 0.00% 6402 - EQUIPMENT SERVICES 659 - - 2,000 2,750 37.50% 6403 - BLDGS/FACILITIES MAINT SERVICE 235 4,107 - 3,000 3,000 0.00% 6432 - CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS - - - - 750 100.00% 6434 - DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS - 419 - - - 0.00% 6441 - LICENSES, TAXES & FEES 335 2,708 - 1,250 1,250 0.00% 6449 - OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICE 75,917 56,007 51,313 80,000 176,750 120.94% 6491 - MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE 745 - 338 1,500 1,500 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 78,139 63,241 51,651 87,750 186,000 111.97% 6540 - EQUIPMENT & MACHINERY - - - - - 0.00% TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY - - - - - 0.00% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 240,214$ 190,983$ 135,713$ 244,740$ 358,647$ 46.54% GENERAL FUND 45122 - CARS-COMMUNITY CENTER 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 45124 - CARS-POOL 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES -$ 2,803$ 2,953$ -$ -$ 0.00% 6103 - WAGES-PART TIME EMPLOYEES 221,206 102,239 181,738 235,000 267,000 13.62% 6104 - OVERTIME-PART TIME EMPLOYEES 141 - 618 500 - -100.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 5,277 1,020 4,812 17,663 20,025 13.37% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 13,731 6,110 11,497 14,601 16,554 13.38% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 3,211 1,525 2,689 3,415 3,872 13.38% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 5,591 3,014 5,025 6,453 7,636 18.33% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 249,157 116,711 209,332 277,632 315,087 13.49% 6211 - CLEANING SUPPLIES - - - - - 0.00% 6216 - CHEMICALS/CHEMICAL PRODUCTS 14,009 12,194 5,016 15,000 15,000 0.00% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 5,085 4,387 9,413 4,000 7,000 75.00% 6223 - BUILDINGS & FACILITIES - 749 - - - 0.00% 6239 - OTHER REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES 4,955 4,646 6,925 6,000 6,000 0.00% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT - 1,200 - 3,600 - -100.00% TOTAL SUPPLIES 24,049 23,176 21,354 28,600 28,000 -2.10% 6321 - TELEPHONE/PAGERS 1,257 836 183 1,500 1,500 0.00% 6381 - ELECTRIC 27,503 20,655 18,965 30,000 30,000 0.00% 6382 - GAS 12,160 9,007 7,053 12,500 12,500 0.00% 6383 - WATER 9,097 13,736 16,280 10,000 10,000 0.00% 6385 - SEWER 6,889 6,971 7,416 7,500 7,500 0.00% 6402 - EQUIPMENT SERVICES - - - - - 0.00% 6403 - BLDGS/FACILITIES MAINT SERVICE 1,456 5,838 3,505 7,500 - -100.00% 6421 - SOFTWARE LICENSE 51 483 - - - 0.00% 6431 - SPECIAL EVENTS 8,020 2,671 2,075 7,000 7,000 0.00% 6432 - CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS - - - 750 750 0.00% 6441 - CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 40 - - 250 250 0.00% 6449 - OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICE 2,586 4,058 1,394 2,500 2,500 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 69,059 64,255 56,871 79,500 72,000 -9.43% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 342,265$ 204,142$ 287,557$ 385,732$ 415,087$ 7.61% GENERAL FUND 45124 - CARS-POOL 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 45201 - PUBLIC WORKS-PARK FACILITIES 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES 378,133$ 436,897$ 312,315$ 484,573$ 481,162$ -0.70% 6102 - OVERTIME-FT EMPLOYEES 25,410 13,235 9,225 19,000 25,000 31.58% 6103 - WAGES-PART TIME EMPLOYEES 41,997 - 50,214 53,535 53,535 0.00% 6111 - SEVERANCE PAY 3,835 6,324 - - - 0.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 30,266 33,760 24,116 41,783 41,978 0.47% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 27,518 26,589 22,264 34,541 34,703 0.47% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 6,436 6,246 5,207 8,079 8,116 0.46% 6131 - CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS 77,308 84,160 70,459 110,852 116,424 5.03% 6141 - UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION - 1,101 - - - 0.00% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 22,653 23,186 18,799 28,262 29,572 4.64% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 613,556 631,498 512,599 780,625 790,490 1.26% 6214 - CLOTHING & PERSONAL EQUIPMENT - - - - - 0.00% 6216 - CHEMICALS/CHEMICAL PRODUCTS 2,445 830 442 2,400 3,000 25.00% 6217 - SAFETY SUPPLIES 2,575 2,828 2,601 2,600 3,750 44.23% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 9,444 1,002 4,052 8,750 8,750 0.00% 6223 - BUILDINGS & FACILITIES 9,932 2,914 1,975 9,000 18,000 100.00% 6225 - PARK & LANDSCAPE MATERIALS 18,559 12,534 11,755 19,000 19,000 0.00% 6227 - PAINT SUPPLIES 249 1,139 - 1,100 1,100 0.00% 6231 - ATHLETIC FIELD SUPPLIES 5,161 1,131 5,185 5,200 5,300 1.92% 6233 - COURT SUPPLIES 16,008 919 16,200 16,000 16,500 3.13% 6239 - OTHER REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES 5,630 5,708 4,297 5,500 14,900 170.91% 6241 - SMALL TOOLS 1,187 955 391 1,000 1,000 0.00% 6242 - MINOR EQUIPMENT 660 873 2,287 600 2,600 333.33% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT - 15 - 1,300 3,800 192.31% TOTAL SUPPLIES 71,850 30,848 49,185 72,450 97,700 34.85% 6307 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 9,406 6,052 325 2,000 2,000 0.00% 6321 - TELEPHONE/PAGERS 473 369 90 550 2,060 274.55% 6351 - PRINTING - - - 160 - -100.00% 6381 - ELECTRIC 30,794 28,015 20,464 33,000 33,000 0.00% 6382 - GAS 2,263 2,576 1,932 2,370 2,500 5.49% 6383 - WATER 35,721 63,735 33,858 46,200 46,200 0.00% 6384 - REFUSE DISPOSAL 19,840 16,675 12,151 20,000 20,000 0.00% 6385 - SEWER 1,961 2,050 1,539 1,730 1,800 4.05% 6386 - STORM SEWER 51,547 49,040 37,618 62,800 63,000 0.32% 6389 - STREET LIGHTS 18,002 16,508 12,554 21,200 21,200 0.00% 6405 - PARK & LANDSCAPE SERVICES 3,199 3,700 2,323 3,300 4,500 36.36% 6409 - OTHER REPAIR & MAINT SVCS 7,769 9,317 5,165 7,000 7,000 0.00% 6415 - OTHER EQUIPMENT 685 641 - 750 1,950 160.00% 6417 - UNIFORMS 2,702 3,626 1,425 4,000 4,200 5.00% 6421 - SOFTWARE LICENSE - 422 - - - 0.00% 6432 - CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 1,953 3,205 1,068 3,000 4,670 55.67% 6434 - DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 127 281 175 225 225 0.00% 6449 - OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICE 15,445 8,961 3,128 9,000 12,000 33.33% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 201,887 215,173 133,815 217,285 226,305 4.15% 6461 - FUEL CHARGES 23,381 18,596 10,619 25,200 25,200 0.00% 6462 - FIXED CHARGES 17,569 18,225 20,402 41,405 29,332 -29.16% 6463 - REPAIR & MAINT CHARGES 52,062 52,656 29,991 57,600 59,300 2.95% 6465 - REPLACEMENT CHARGES 103,708 114,819 55,167 110,333 110,679 0.31% TOTAL CENTRAL GARAGE CHARGES 196,720 204,296 116,179 234,538 224,511 -4.28% 6540 - EQUIPMENT & MACHINERY 10,621 - - 7,000 - -100.00% TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY 10,621 - - 7,000 - -100.00% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 1,094,634$ 1,081,815$ 811,778$ 1,311,898$ 1,339,006$ 2.07% GENERAL FUND 45201 - PUBLIC WORKS-PARK FACILITIES 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 45204 - PUBLIC WORKS-FORESTRY 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES 59,886$ 67,489$ 45,166$ 68,895$ 69,996$ 1.60% 6102 - OVERTIME-FT EMPLOYEES - - 198 - - 0.00% 6103 - WAGES - PART TIME EMPLOYEES 1,650 - - - - 0.00% 6111 - SEVERANCE PAY 552 1,088 - - - 0.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 4,491 5,062 3,402 5,167 5,250 1.61% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 4,027 4,433 2,975 4,271 4,340 1.62% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 942 1,037 696 999 1,015 1.60% 6131 - CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS 13,178 15,132 11,220 15,836 16,632 5.03% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 3,431 4,352 2,801 4,161 4,417 6.15% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 88,157 98,593 66,458 99,329 101,650 2.34% 6217 - SAFETY SUPPLIES 27 47 - 450 450 0.00% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 419 362 87 400 800 100.00% 6225 - PARK & LANDSCAPE MATERIALS 1,422 1,315 883 6,325 7,000 10.67% TOTAL SUPPLIES 1,868 1,724 970 7,175 8,250 14.98% 6351 - PRINTING - 277 - 100 100 0.00% 6405 - PARK & LANDSCAPE SERVICES 10,270 8,268 1,100 32,120 35,000 8.97% 6449 - OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICE 2,549 - - 2,000 2,000 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 12,819 8,545 1,100 34,220 37,100 8.42% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 102,844$ 108,862$ 68,528$ 140,724$ 147,000$ 4.46% GENERAL FUND 45204 - PUBLIC WORKS-FORESTRY 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 45218 - HEALTH AND SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES -$ -$ -$ -$ 39,520$ 100.00% 6103 - WAGES - PART TIME EMPLOYEES - - - - 111,824 100.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN - - - - 11,351 100.00% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY - - - - 9,383 100.00% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE - - - - 2,194 100.00% 6131 - CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS - - - - 16,632 100.00% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE - - - - 3,522 100.00% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES - - - - 194,426 100.00% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES - - - - 32,750 100.00% 6242 - MINOR EQUIPMENT - - - - 3,500 100.00% TOTAL SUPPLIES - - - - 36,250 100.00% 6307 - OTHER SERVICES AND CHARGES - - - - 12,000 100.00% 6351 - PRINTING - - - - 5,500 100.00% 6431 - SPECIAL EVENTS - - - - 1,000 100.00% 6449 - OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICE - - - - 37,000 100.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES - - - - 55,500 100.00% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES -$ -$ -$ -$ 286,176$ 100.00% GENERAL FUND 45218 - HEALTH AND SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 45310 - CONVENTION AND TOURISM 6445 - CONVENTION BUREAU PAYMENT 514,813$ 266,086$ 147,448$ 237,500$ 380,000$ 60.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 514,813 266,086 147,448 237,500 380,000 60.00% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 514,813$ 266,086$ 147,448$ 237,500$ 380,000$ 60.00% GENERAL FUND 45310 - CONVENTION AND TOURISM 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 46320 - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADMIN 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES 109,359$ 116,222$ 79,408$ 120,617$ 124,670$ 3.36% 6103 - WAGES-PART TIME EMPLOYEES 31,133 4,828 - 18,239 - -100.00% 6111 - SEVERANCE PAY 398 844 - - - 0.00% 6122 - PERA COORDINATED PLAN 10,525 9,078 5,954 10,414 9,350 -10.22% 6125 - FICA - SOCIAL SECURITY 9,021 7,754 4,956 8,609 7,729 -10.22% 6126 - FICA - MEDICARE 2,109 1,813 1,159 2,014 1,808 -10.23% 6131 - CAFETERIA PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS 43,128 45,396 33,660 27,713 29,106 5.03% 6151 - WORKER'S COMP INSURANCE 1,022 1,008 623 1,083 1,022 -5.63% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 206,695 186,943 125,760 188,689 173,685 -7.95% 6201 - OFFICE SUPPLIES 305 1,064 602 2,500 1,500 -40.00% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 467 1,434 50 4,000 2,000 -50.00% 6242 - MINOR EQUIPMENT - 18,918 - - - 0.00% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT - - - 5,000 - -100.00% TOTAL SUPPLIES 772 21,416 652 11,500 3,500 -69.57% 6307 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - 1,346 227 2,500 6,000 140.00% 6421 - SOFTWARE LICENSE - 64,000 55,860 64,720 47,452 -26.68% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES - 65,346 56,087 67,220 53,452 -20.48% 6545 - OTHER EQUIPMENT - 92,948 - - - 0.00% TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY - 92,948 - - - 0.00% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 207,467$ 366,653$ 182,499$ 267,409$ 230,637$ -13.75% GENERAL FUND 46320 - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADMIN 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 48140 - INSURANCE 6307 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 6,672$ 6,737$ -$ 8,000$ 8,000$ 0.00% 6361 - GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE 110,104 101,152 51,654 106,210 108,435 2.09% 6362 - PROPERTY INSURANCE 99,387 128,918 62,480 125,728 131,209 4.36% 6366 - MACHINERY BREAKDOWN INSURANCE 9,596 9,569 4,211 10,048 8,844 -11.98% 6368 - BONDS INSURANCE 2,368 2,189 1,082 2,300 2,300 0.00% 6442 - COURT AWARDS/SETTLEMENTS 18,193 6,053 - 20,000 20,000 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 246,320 254,618 119,427 272,286 278,788 2.39% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 246,320$ 254,618$ 119,427$ 272,286$ 278,788$ 2.39% GENERAL FUND 48140 - INSURANCE 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 48150 - CENTRAL SUPPLIES AND SUPPORT 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 0.00% 6111 - SEVERANCE PAY - - - 55,000 - -100.00% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES - - - 55,000 - -100.00% 6201 - OFFICE SUPPLIES 12,501 5,229 4,068 10,000 10,000 0.00% 6219 - GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES 1,390 2,511 311 3,000 3,000 0.00% 6242 - MINOR EQUIPMENT - - - - - 0.00% 6243 - MINOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT 1,423 173 - 1,150 - -100.00% TOTAL SUPPLIES 15,314 7,913 4,379 14,150 13,000 -8.13% 6301 - ACCTG, AUDIT & FIN'L SERVICES 10,379 10,345 7,401 10,000 10,000 0.00% 6307 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 131,623 108,967 152,075 466,000 150,000 -67.81% 6321 - TELEPHONE/PAGERS 5,437 5,270 4,303 5,700 5,700 0.00% 6322 - POSTAGE 19,113 14,206 8,184 20,000 20,000 0.00% 6333 - FREIGHT/DRAYAGE 353 - - - - 0.00% 6349 - OTHER ADVERTISING - - - - - 0.00% 6351 - PRINTING 2,703 1,805 350 1,000 1,000 0.00% 6402 - EQUIPMENT SERVICES 3,448 1,032 - 2,500 2,500 0.00% 6406 - MULTI-FUNCTION MTNCE 11,050 9,922 5,771 11,500 12,500 8.70% 6432 - CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 7,551 6,196 6,295 8,000 8,000 0.00% 6433 - MEETING EXPENSES 6,059 4,009 395 2,500 2,500 0.00% 6434 - DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 892 683 472 - 500 100.00% 6435 - CREDIT CARD FEES 43,777 37,144 24,069 40,000 3,000 -92.50% 6441 - LICENSES, TAXES & FEES 357 71 21,775 - 11,500 100.00% 6443 - PRIZE AWARDS/EXPENSE REIMB - - - - - 0.00% 6446 - CONTINGENCY ACCOUNT - 85,219 - 80,000 200,000 150.00% 6449 - OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICE 16,142 - 255,201 15,000 15,000 0.00% TOTAL SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 258,884 284,869 486,291 662,200 442,200 -33.22% 6462 - FIXED CHARGES - - 2,047 4,154 1,600 -61.48% 6465 - REPLACEMENT CHARGES - - - - 10,000 100.00% TOTAL CENTRAL GARAGE CHARGES - - 2,047 4,154 11,600 179.25% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 274,198$ 292,782$ 492,717$ 735,504$ 466,800$ -36.53% GENERAL FUND 48150 - CENTRAL SUPPLIES AND SUPPORT 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 48160 - VACANCY AND TURNOVER SAVINGS 6101 - WAGES & SALARIES-FT EMPLOYEES -$ -$ -$ (400,000)$ (450,000)$ 12.50% TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES - - - (400,000) (450,000) 12.50% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES -$ -$ -$ (400,000)$ (450,000)$ 12.50% GENERAL FUND 48160 - VACANCY AND TURNOVER SAVINGS 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 48170 - REIMBURSEMENT FROM OTHER FUNDS 6471 - ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE TRANSFER (658,154)$ (658,154)$ (599,723)$ (1,028,097)$ (1,033,817)$ 0.56% 6472 - ENGINEERING SERVICE TRANSFER (455,325) (542,873) (334,748) (490,000) (600,000) 22.45% 6482 - MISC TRANSFER OUT - - - - - 0.00% TOTAL TRANSFERS OUT (1,113,479) (1,201,027) (934,471) (1,518,097) (1,633,817) 7.62% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES (1,113,479)$ (1,201,027)$ (934,471)$ (1,518,097)$ (1,633,817)$ 7.62% GENERAL FUND 48170 - REIMBURSEMENT FROM OTHER FUNDS 2021 2019 2020 August 2021 2022 Object Code / Description Actual Actual YTD Budget Budget Change 48210 - TRANSFER OUT 6482 - MISC TRANSFER OUT 210,000$ 410,374$ -$ 220,000$ 210,000$ -4.55% TOTAL TRANSFERS OUT 210,000 410,374 - 220,000 210,000 -4.55% TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT EXPENSES 210,000$ 410,374$ -$ 220,000$ 210,000$ -4.55% GENERAL FUND 48210 - TRANSFER OUT C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:9/13/2021 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:D r. Reggie Edwards, City Manager T H R O U G H :M eg Beekman, C ommunity D evelopment D irector BY:X iong Thao, H ous ing and Community S tandards S upervis or S U B J E C T:Res olu0on D eclaring a P ublic Nuisance and O rdering the A batement of Nuis ance at 3006 65th Ave N Requested Council A con: - Moon to adopt a resoluon declaring a public nuisance and ordering the abatement of the nuisance at 3006 - 65th Avenue N B ackground: The property at 3006 65th Avenue N is currently occupied by the owner, Tommy and S hivon M cCall. The following is a brief summary of ac0ons related to this recommended Council ac0on: O n July 1 2 , 2021, the C ity received a complaint that the property was s pray painted w ith vulgar language on the front and s ides of the property. F urther, s igns w ere pos ted in the front law n and on the tree. A n ins pec0 on w as completed and found that the front and w es t side of the property had been s pr ay painted in viola0on of C ity C ode, Chapter 34-130. D uring the ins pec0on s taff found w ords painted on the structure, s igns in the front yard and tree, and w ords painted in the right of w ay. S taff a:empted to talk w ith the owner but was asked to leave the property. A follow up inspec0on w as conducted on July 15, 2021, and found no code viola0on corr ec0 ons had been made. S taff knocked on the door and no one responded. S taff called the phone number pos ted on the door and le; a voicemail for the owner to contact the C ity. O n July 16, 2021, s taff drove by the property and the condi0ons had not changed. O n J uly 22, 2 0 2 1 , an ins pec0 on w as completed and found the pr oper ty to s 0 ll be in v iola0 on of the ordinance. A compliance no0ce was s ent to the ow ner. A copy of the compliance no0ce was s ent to the owner's P O Box addres s as well as via U S Pos t office cer0fied mail to the property addres s . O n J uly 29, 2021, an inspec0on of the property w as conducted and the s igns on the property had not been removed. A s econd compliance no0ce was s ent to the property address and the owner's P O Box addres s . O n A ugust 9, 2021, a follow up inspec0on of the pr oper ty w as conducted and found the property to s 0ll be in viola0on of the s ign code. A n A dminis tra0ve C ita0on of $125 w as issued. O n A ugus t 23, 2021, a follow up ins pec0 on of the property w as conducted and found the pr oper ty to s 0ll be in viola0on of the s ign code. A n A dminis tra0ve C ita0on of $250 w as issued. O n A ugus t 3 0 , 2021 a follow up ins pec0 on of the pr oper ty was conducted and found the property to s 0ll be in v iola0 on of the s ign code. A declara0on was prepared and placed on the next available Council agenda. The resolu0on w ould declare the property to be a public nuisance and authoriz e staff to conduct an abatement of the viola0on in order to bring the property into compliance. V iola0ons include s igns that are painted on the building; signs tacked on or posted to trees, u0lity poles, or fences; and signs painted in the right of w ay. I f the res olu0on is approved, the C ity A:orney will use the declara0on to s eek a court order to ini0ate the abatement. The property owner will receive a final w ri:en w arning, and if the property is not brought into compliance, then the City w ill conduct the abatement. Bas ed on the findings in the a:ached resolu0on, staff recommends the C ity C ouncil adopt the findings of the C ity I ns pectors regarding the nuisance and authoriz e the City Manager to abate the nuis ance by removing any prohibited signs . B udget I ssues: The es 0mated direct cos t of aba0ng the prohibited sign on the property is $3000 to $7500 depending on the method used and material cos ts . A ll as s ociated cos ts of abatement will be the responsibility of the ow ner and if unpaid, the cos ts w ill be specially asses s ed agains t the property. I nclusive C ommunity Engagement: S taff received mul0ple complaints from neighbors and community members about the property condi0on and the language wri:en on the hous e. A s a response to the complaints, s taff has tried to A nracist/Equity Policy Effect: S trategic Priories and Values: Enhanced Community I mage AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip0on U pload D ate Type P hoto 8.24.2021 8/27/2021 Cover Memo 1st No0ce 8/27/2021 Cover Memo 2nd No0ce 8/27/2021 Cover Memo 125 C ita0on 8/27/2021 Cover Memo 250 cita0on 8/27/2021 Cover Memo Res olu0on A batement 9/8/2021 Resolu0on Le:er July 22, 2021 Tommy and Shivon McCall 3006 65th Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 RE: City Code Violation Enforcement Letter – 3006 65th Avenue North To Whom It May Concern: Following complaints received by the City regarding the property located at 3006 65th Avenue North, City staff were dispatched to the property and confirmed there were violations under the City Code of Ordinances (see attached photos). Hennepin County records indicate that you are the registered property owners for this property. Pursuant to City Code Section 34-130.12, “signs painted directly on building walls” are prohibited. This letter shall serve as the first formal written notice to the ownership of this property requesting that you take immediate and corrective action within seven (7) days from the date of this letter to remove all signage painted on the building. Failure to comply with the general orders of this City Code violation letter shall result in the matter being turned over for additional action, including, but not limited to administrative citations of up to $2,000 per day and/or a formal court complaint for any continued violations. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us. Thank you for your cooperation and compliance in this matter. Sincerely, Ginny McIntosh Jesse Anderson City Planner | Zoning Administrator Deputy Community Development Director Phone: (763) 569-3319 Phone: (763) 569-3420 Email: gmcintosh@ci.brooklyn-center.mn.us Email: janderson@ci.brooklyn-center.mn.us Enclosure(s): Photos of Code Violations at 3006 65th Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 Section 34-140 (Prohibited Signs) CC: Farraban Kaba, Housing & Code Enforcement Inspector, City of Brooklyn Center Xiong Thao, Housing & Community Standards Supervisor, City of Brooklyn Center Notice of Violation 3006 65th Avenue North Page 2 of 3 City of Brooklyn Center | 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy | Brooklyn Center, MN 55430-2199 | (763) 569-3330 | www.ci.brooklyn-center.mn.us Notice of Violation 3006 65th Avenue North Page 3 of 3 City of Brooklyn Center | 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy | Brooklyn Center, MN 55430-2199 | (763) 569-3330 | www.ci.brooklyn-center.mn.us City of Brooklyn Center 34-6 City Ordinance Street Line – The common boundary line of a street right-of-way and abutting property. Use – The purpose or activity for which the land or building thereon is designated, arranged or intended, or for which it is occupied or maintained. Section 34-120. NONCONFORMING USES. Any sign legally existing on the effective date of this ordinance which does not conform to the requirements set forth in this ordinance shall become a nonconforming use. Nonconforming, permanent signs shall be allowed to continue but shall not be rebuilt, materially altered, or relocated without being brought into compliance with the requirements of this ordinance, except that any flashing portion shall be discontinued within 30 days after the effective date of this ordinance. Section 34-130. PROHIBITED SIGNS. 1. Signs that, by reason of position, shape, or color would interfere with the proper function of a traffic sign or signal. 2. Signs within the public right-of-way or easement; provided, however, that the following signs in the public right-of-way or easement are not prohibited: a. government installed signs. b. signs denoting an architect, engineer, contractor, or owner meeting the requirements of Section 34-140.2.d. c. campaign signs meeting the requirements of Section 34-140.2.f. d. real estate signs meeting the requirement of Section 34-140.2.l.1. e. rummage sales signs meeting the requirements of Section 34-140.2.m. f. noncommercial opinion or expression signs meeting the requirements of Section 34-140.2.n 3. Signs that resemble any official marker erected by a governmental agency or that display such words as "Stop" or "Danger". 4. Flashing signs including indoor signs which are visible from the public streets and rotating signs. 5. With the exception of searchlights which may be approved in conjunction with an Administrative Permit as provided in Section 35-800 of the City Ordinances, no rotating beam, beacon or flashing illumination shall be used in connection with any display. City of Brooklyn Center 34-7 City Ordinance 6. Signs or sign structures that obstruct any window, door, fire escape, stairway or opening intended to provide ingress or egress for any building structure. With reference to commercial and industrial districts, signs painted on the inside glass portion of windows or doors are permitted. 7. Banners, pennants, streamers, balloons, stringers or similar attention attracting devices, unless approved in conjunction with an Administrative Permit as provided in Section 35- 800 or unless authorized by Section 34-140.2.m or 2.o of the City Ordinances. 8. Sign posters that are tacked or posted on trees, fences, utility poles or other such supports. 9. Portable signs, except as provided in Section 34-140.2.f unless approved in conjunction with an Administrative Permit as provided in Section 35-800 of the City Ordinances. 10. Roof signs except as provided in Section 34-140.3.A.1. 11. Off-Premises Advertising Signs except as otherwise permitted by Section 34-140 and Section 35-800 of the City Ordinances. Signs advertising a business no longer operating on the premises shall be deemed off-premises advertising signs and must be abated in accordance with Section 34-140.1.j. 12. Signs painted directly on building walls. 13. All other signs not expressly permitted by this ordinance. 14. Signs painted on a commercial vehicle which is parked at a commercial premises in such a manner as to constitute a static display advertising a business, product or service to the traveling public and which is not making a pickup or delivery or being appropriately stored on the premises. Section 34-140. PERMITTED SIGNS. 1. General Requirements and Standards for Permitted Signs a. Where a sign is illuminated, the beam of light shall not shine directly upon any part of a residence or into the street. b. No projecting sign shall: project more than 96 inches out from the wall to which it is attached; extend above the roof line; July 30, 2021 Tommy and Shivon McCall 3006 65th Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 RE: City Code Violation Enforcement Letter – 3006 65th Avenue North (Second Notice) To Whom It May Concern: Following complaints received by the City regarding the property located at 3006 65th Avenue North, City staff were dispatched to the property and confirmed there were violations to the City Code of Ordinances (see attached photos). Hennepin County records indicate that you are the registered property owners for this property. Pursuant to City Code Section 34-130.12, “signs painted directly on building walls” are prohibited. Additionally, City Code Section 34-140.2.n allows for noncommercial opinion or expression signage; however, only one such sign is permitted on a residentially zoned or used property, it shall not exceed six (6) square feet in area, and such sign requires consent of the property owner(s). This letter shall serve as the second formal written notice to the ownership of this property requesting that you take immediate and corrective action within seven (7) days from the date of this letter to remove all signage painted on the building and address the quantity and sizing of noncommercial opinion or expression signage on the property. Failure to comply with the general orders of this City Code violation letter shall result in the matter being turned over for additional action, including, but not limited to administrative citations of up to $2,000 per day and/or a formal court complaint for any continued violations. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us. Thank you for your cooperation and compliance in this matter. Sincerely, Ginny McIntosh Jesse Anderson City Planner | Zoning Administrator Deputy Community Development Director Phone: (763) 569-3319 Phone: (763) 569-3420 Email: gmcintosh@ci.brooklyn-center.mn.us Email: janderson@ci.brooklyn-center.mn.us City of Brooklyn Center | 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy | Brooklyn Center, MN 55430-2199 | (763) 569-3330 | www.ci.brooklyn-center.mn.us Notice of Violation - Second Notice 3006 65th Avenue North Page 2 of 4 Enclosure(s): Photos of Code Violations at 3006 65th Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 Section 34-140 (Prohibited Signs) CC: Farraban Kaba, Housing & Code Enforcement Inspector, City of Brooklyn Center Xiong Thao, Housing & Community Standards Supervisor, City of Brooklyn Center Notice of Violation - Second Notice 3006 65th Avenue North Page 3 of 4 City of Brooklyn Center | 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy | Brooklyn Center, MN 55430-2199 | (763) 569-3330 | www.ci.brooklyn-center.mn.us Notice of Violation - Second Notice 3006 65th Avenue North Page 4 of 4 City of Brooklyn Center | 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy | Brooklyn Center, MN 55430-2199 | (763) 569-3330 | www.ci.brooklyn-center.mn.us Owner Name and Mailing Address of Alleged Violator Tommy Mccall & Shivon Mccall 3006 65th Ave N Brooklyn Center MN 55429 Citation #6731446 Issued 8/9/2021 Case #CE21-0472 Violator Owner Repeat Status Continuing Violation Address/Location of Violation:3006 65th Ave N Brooklyn Center MN 55429 Date and Time of Offence:8/9/2021 Correct By:8/20/2021 GENERAL INFORMATION The Administrative Penalty Program is authorized by Chapter 18-200 of the Brooklyn Center City Code. This is a civil penalty and not a criminal charge. The fines are set by City Council resolution from time to time. FINE PAYMENT INFORMATION The fine may be paid with cash (must be paid in person), check, or money order. Payment must be made within ten (10) days of the date of the citation. A late payment fee may be charged by the City if the fine remains unpaid. A check or money order must be made payable to the City of Brooklyn Center for the correct amount. You may either pay in person or mail a copy of this citation with your check or money order to: City of Brooklyn Center, 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, MN, 55430-2199. NOTE: DO NOT MAIL CASH NOTE: BY PAYING THE FINE, YOU ARE ADMITTING THAT YOU VIOLATED THE CITY ORDINANCE. HEARING REQUEST INFORMATION If you believe that you did not violate the City Code, you may request a hearing before a hearing officer who is not a City employee. To request a hearing you must make your request in writing. The request must include a $20.00 hearing request deposit fee. An appeal request form is available in our Administrative Penalty Brochure which can be found at www.cityofbrooklyncenter.org or at City Hall. You must request a hearing within ten (10) days of the date of the citation. The Program Administrator will notify you of the date, time, and location of your hearing, and the name of the hearing officer. PENALTIES In the event that you are found to have violated the City Code and the fine remains outstanding, the City may take one or more of the following actions: 1.If you own property in the City and the property was the subject of the violation, and the fine remains unpaid, the City may assess or cause a lien to be placed in the amount of the fine against your property. 2.Pursue a legal action against you to collect the fine. 3.Suspend, revoke, not renew, or deny a City-issued license or permit that is associated with the violation. 4.Refuse to grant approval for any license, permit, or other City approval sought by you or for property under your ownership or control. 5.Issue a criminal citation and pursue criminal prosecution. 6.Issue additional administrative citations that may double per fine schedule. Please call 763-569-3330 with any questions. Inspector Name:Xiong Thao Account No.10100-4512 Reciept No. Date Paid Amount Paid City Use Only Nature of Offence Amount Prohibited Signs 34-130 $125.00 Total:$125.00 Administrative Citation This citation charges you with one or more violations of Brooklyn Center City Code *CE21-0472* Resident Name and Mailing Address of Alleged Violator Current Resident 3006 65th Ave N Brooklyn Center MN 55429 Citation #6731446 Issued 8/9/2021 Case #CE21-0472 Violator Owner Repeat Status Continuing Violation Address/Location of Violation:3006 65th Ave N Brooklyn Center MN 55429 Date and Time of Offence:8/9/2021 Correct By:8/20/2021 GENERAL INFORMATION The Administrative Penalty Program is authorized by Chapter 18-200 of the Brooklyn Center City Code. This is a civil penalty and not a criminal charge. The fines are set by City Council resolution from time to time. FINE PAYMENT INFORMATION The fine may be paid with cash (must be paid in person), check, or money order. Payment must be made within ten (10) days of the date of the citation. A late payment fee may be charged by the City if the fine remains unpaid. A check or money order must be made payable to the City of Brooklyn Center for the correct amount. You may either pay in person or mail a copy of this citation with your check or money order to: City of Brooklyn Center, 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, MN, 55430-2199. NOTE: DO NOT MAIL CASH NOTE: BY PAYING THE FINE, YOU ARE ADMITTING THAT YOU VIOLATED THE CITY ORDINANCE. HEARING REQUEST INFORMATION If you believe that you did not violate the City Code, you may request a hearing before a hearing officer who is not a City employee. To request a hearing you must make your request in writing. The request must include a $20.00 hearing request deposit fee. An appeal request form is available in our Administrative Penalty Brochure which can be found at www.cityofbrooklyncenter.org or at City Hall. You must request a hearing within ten (10) days of the date of the citation. The Program Administrator will notify you of the date, time, and location of your hearing, and the name of the hearing officer. PENALTIES In the event that you are found to have violated the City Code and the fine remains outstanding, the City may take one or more of the following actions: 1.If you own property in the City and the property was the subject of the violation, and the fine remains unpaid, the City may assess or cause a lien to be placed in the amount of the fine against your property. 2.Pursue a legal action against you to collect the fine. 3.Suspend, revoke, not renew, or deny a City-issued license or permit that is associated with the violation. 4.Refuse to grant approval for any license, permit, or other City approval sought by you or for property under your ownership or control. 5.Issue a criminal citation and pursue criminal prosecution. 6.Issue additional administrative citations that may double per fine schedule. Please call 763-569-3330 with any questions. Inspector Name:Xiong Thao Account No.10100-4512 Reciept No. Date Paid Amount Paid City Use Only Nature of Offence Amount Prohibited Signs 34-130 $125.00 Total:$125.00 Administrative Citation This citation charges you with one or more violations of Brooklyn Center City Code *CE21-0472* Owner Name and Mailing Address of Alleged Violator Tommy Mccall & Shivon Mccall 3006 65th Ave N Brooklyn Center MN 55429 Citation #6733014 Issued 8/23/2021 Case #CE21-0472 Violator Owner Repeat Status Continuing Violation Address/Location of Violation:3006 65th Ave N Brooklyn Center MN 55429 Date and Time of Offence:8/23/2021 Correct By:8/31/2021 GENERAL INFORMATION The Administrative Penalty Program is authorized by Chapter 18-200 of the Brooklyn Center City Code. This is a civil penalty and not a criminal charge. The fines are set by City Council resolution from time to time. FINE PAYMENT INFORMATION The fine may be paid with cash (must be paid in person), check, or money order. Payment must be made within ten (10) days of the date of the citation. A late payment fee may be charged by the City if the fine remains unpaid. A check or money order must be made payable to the City of Brooklyn Center for the correct amount. You may either pay in person or mail a copy of this citation with your check or money order to: City of Brooklyn Center, 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, MN, 55430-2199. NOTE: DO NOT MAIL CASH NOTE: BY PAYING THE FINE, YOU ARE ADMITTING THAT YOU VIOLATED THE CITY ORDINANCE. HEARING REQUEST INFORMATION If you believe that you did not violate the City Code, you may request a hearing before a hearing officer who is not a City employee. To request a hearing you must make your request in writing. The request must include a $20.00 hearing request deposit fee. An appeal request form is available in our Administrative Penalty Brochure which can be found at www.cityofbrooklyncenter.org or at City Hall. You must request a hearing within ten (10) days of the date of the citation. The Program Administrator will notify you of the date, time, and location of your hearing, and the name of the hearing officer. PENALTIES In the event that you are found to have violated the City Code and the fine remains outstanding, the City may take one or more of the following actions: 1.If you own property in the City and the property was the subject of the violation, and the fine remains unpaid, the City may assess or cause a lien to be placed in the amount of the fine against your property. 2.Pursue a legal action against you to collect the fine. 3.Suspend, revoke, not renew, or deny a City-issued license or permit that is associated with the violation. 4.Refuse to grant approval for any license, permit, or other City approval sought by you or for property under your ownership or control. 5.Issue a criminal citation and pursue criminal prosecution. 6.Issue additional administrative citations that may double per fine schedule. Please call 763-569-3330 with any questions. Inspector Name:Xiong Thao Account No.10100-4512 Reciept No. Date Paid Amount Paid City Use Only Nature of Offence Amount Prohibited Signs 34-130 $250.00 Total:$250.00 Administrative Citation This citation charges you with one or more violations of Brooklyn Center City Code *CE21-0472* Resident Name and Mailing Address of Alleged Violator Current Resident 3006 65th Ave N Brooklyn Center MN 55429 Citation #6733014 Issued 8/23/2021 Case #CE21-0472 Violator Owner Repeat Status Continuing Violation Address/Location of Violation:3006 65th Ave N Brooklyn Center MN 55429 Date and Time of Offence:8/23/2021 Correct By:8/31/2021 GENERAL INFORMATION The Administrative Penalty Program is authorized by Chapter 18-200 of the Brooklyn Center City Code. This is a civil penalty and not a criminal charge. The fines are set by City Council resolution from time to time. FINE PAYMENT INFORMATION The fine may be paid with cash (must be paid in person), check, or money order. Payment must be made within ten (10) days of the date of the citation. A late payment fee may be charged by the City if the fine remains unpaid. A check or money order must be made payable to the City of Brooklyn Center for the correct amount. You may either pay in person or mail a copy of this citation with your check or money order to: City of Brooklyn Center, 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, MN, 55430-2199. NOTE: DO NOT MAIL CASH NOTE: BY PAYING THE FINE, YOU ARE ADMITTING THAT YOU VIOLATED THE CITY ORDINANCE. HEARING REQUEST INFORMATION If you believe that you did not violate the City Code, you may request a hearing before a hearing officer who is not a City employee. To request a hearing you must make your request in writing. The request must include a $20.00 hearing request deposit fee. An appeal request form is available in our Administrative Penalty Brochure which can be found at www.cityofbrooklyncenter.org or at City Hall. You must request a hearing within ten (10) days of the date of the citation. The Program Administrator will notify you of the date, time, and location of your hearing, and the name of the hearing officer. PENALTIES In the event that you are found to have violated the City Code and the fine remains outstanding, the City may take one or more of the following actions: 1.If you own property in the City and the property was the subject of the violation, and the fine remains unpaid, the City may assess or cause a lien to be placed in the amount of the fine against your property. 2.Pursue a legal action against you to collect the fine. 3.Suspend, revoke, not renew, or deny a City-issued license or permit that is associated with the violation. 4.Refuse to grant approval for any license, permit, or other City approval sought by you or for property under your ownership or control. 5.Issue a criminal citation and pursue criminal prosecution. 6.Issue additional administrative citations that may double per fine schedule. Please call 763-569-3330 with any questions. Inspector Name:Xiong Thao Account No.10100-4512 Reciept No. Date Paid Amount Paid City Use Only Nature of Offence Amount Prohibited Signs 34-130 $250.00 Total:$250.00 Administrative Citation This citation charges you with one or more violations of Brooklyn Center City Code *CE21-0472* Member _______________ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 2021-_____ A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A CIVIL ENFORCEMENT ACTION REGARDING SIGN ORDINANCE VIOLATIONS AND NUISANCE CONDITIONS EXISTING AT 3006 65TH AVENUE NORTH WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center (“City”) has received complaints regarding conditions existing on the property located at 3006 65th Avenue North, legally described as Lot 2, Block 1, Garden City 6th Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota (the “Property”); and, WHEREAS, according to public records, the Property is owned by Tommy McCall and Shivon McCall (the “Owners”) and the City understands the Property is occupied by one or both of the Owners; and WHEREAS, the City received complaints regarding the signs painted on the home on the Property and the general nuisance condition of the Property; and WHEREAS, the City inspected the Property and staff observed a variety of graffiti painted directly on the exterior wall of the home on the Property, including a large painting of a vulgar word on the outside of the home; and WHEREAS, section 34-130(12) of the Brooklyn Center City Code (the “City Code”) provides that “signs painted directly on building walls” are prohibited and the signs exceed the total area of signs allowed on residential properties; and WHEREAS, section 34-210 of the City Code provides that it is unlawful for any person to maintain any sign or sign structure or cause or permit the same to be done in violation of any of the provisions of Chapter 34 (the “Sign Ordinance”); and WHEREAS, section 19-101 of the City Code deems it a public nuisance to maintain or permit a condition which unreasonably annoys, injures or endangers the safety, health, morals, comfort, or repose of any number of members of the public; and WHEREAS, the signs distract those driving on the City’s street and unreasonably annoys the morals, comfort, and repose of those living and raising families in the neighborhood; and WHEREAS, pursuant to section 19-105 of the City Code, the City Council may order the abatement of certain violations by the City on any premises and the City has the authority to institute a legal action to correct violations of the City Code; and WHEREAS, by letter dated and mailed on July 22, 2021, attached as Exhibit A, the City notified the Owners of the violations of certain code provisions and conditions addressed in this resolution, as well as action and deadlines required to correct the conditions; and 1 BR291\-4\-742652.v23 WHEREAS, the City also offered to discuss the condition of the Property with the Owners, issued administrative citations to the Owners on August 9, 2021 and August 16, 2021, and communicated to the Owners that if they fail to bring the Property into compliance, the City would institute additional enforcement actionactions; and WHEREAS, the deadline provided in the City’s letter has passed without corrective actions by the Owners and the administrative citations have not resulted in the Owners correcting the violations; and WHEREAS, based on the information presented, the City Council determines the conditions of the Property violate the Sign Ordinance and constitute a public nuisance that need to be abated. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: The City Council adopts, as factual findings, all of the above-listed recitals, and finds1. violations of the City Code provisions identified in this Resolution. The condition of the Property violates the Sign Ordinance and constitutes a public2. nuisance in light of these violations. The City Council directs City staff and the City Attorney to undertake a civil3. enforcement action in district court to seek an order requiring the Owners to abate the City Code violations, to allow the City to take action to correct the violations if the Owners fail to do so as directed in the order, and to pursue such other actions as may be appropriate under law to correct the violations. 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. 2 BR291\-4\-742652.v23 EXHIBIT A City Code Violation Enforcement Letter [attached hereto] A-1 BR291\-4\-742652.v23 Document comparison by W orkshare 10.0 on Tuesday, September 7, 2021 1:43:17 PM Input: Document 1 ID PowerDocs://DOCSOPEN/742652/2 Description DOCSOPEN-#742652-v2-Abatement_Resolution_-_3006 _65th_Ave_N Document 2 ID PowerDocs://DOCSOPEN/742652/3 Description DOCSOPEN-#742652-v3-Abatement_Resolution_-_3006 _65th_Ave_N Rendering set Standard Legend: Insertion Deletion Moved from Moved to Style change Format change Moved deletion Inserted cell Deleted cell Moved cell Split/Merged cell Padding cell Statistics: Count Insertions 15 Deletions 16 Moved from 0 Moved to 0 Style change 0 Format changed 0 Total changes 31 C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:9/13/2021 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:D r. Reggie Edwards, City Manager T H R O U G H :Todd Berg, F ire Chief BY:Reggie Edw ards , C ity M anager S U B J E C T:Res olu,on A uthoriz ing Entering into a J oint and C oopera,ve P urchasing A greement for P urchas e of F irefighter's S afety G ear Requested Council A con: - A uthorize Brookly n C enter's parcipaon in the P ublic S afety P urchasing J PA B ackground: I n 2009 H ennepin County F ire Chiefs A s s ocia,on s tarted a J PA to purchas e self contained breathing apparatus for it's firefighters . S ince then it has evolved into an all encompassing purchas ing power for much of the firefighters protec,ve equipment. Un,l recently, many of the vendors allow ed pricing without being a member and now they've discon,nued that s ervice. B udget I ssues: Poten,al savings in protec,ve gear with larger purchas es and be7er pricing. I nclusive C ommunity Engagement: A nracist/Equity Policy Effect: S trategic Priories and Values: S afe, S ecure, S table C ommunity AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip,on U pload D ate Type Third A mended J oint and C oopera,ve A greement for P ublic S afety P urchasing 9/7/2021 Backup M aterial C urrent J PA list 9/7/2021 Backup M aterial F ire J PA Res olu,on 9/7/2021 Resolu,on Le7er THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED JOINT & COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC SAFETY PURCHASING 1. Purpose This Agreement is made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 471.59 which authorizes the joint and cooperative exercise of governmental powers common to contracting parties. The intent of this Agreement is to make available joint public safety purchasing and leasing to the governmental agencies who are parties to this Agreement. The intent of this agreement is to also replace and rescind the Amended and Restated Joint & Cooperative Agreement For The Acquisition and Use of SCBA executed and approved by the parties in March, April and May, 2009, and the Second Amended and Restated Joint & Cooperative Agreement For The Acquisition and Use of Firefighting Equipment executed and approved by some or all of the parties in August and September 2010 (“Prior Agreements”). 2. Parties The initial parties to this Agreement are the cities of Bloomington, Brooklyn Park, Eden Prairie, Edina, Hopkins, Saint Louis Park, and Minnetonka, all of which are municipal corporations and subdivisions of the state of Minnesota. Additional governmental agencies may become parties to this Agreement by adopting a resolution approving this Agreement and sending an original execution page and a certified copy of the resolution to the secretary of the Operating Committee established below. The secretary of the Operating Committee must maintain a current list of the parties to this Agreement and must notify the contact person for each party whenever there is a change in the parties to this Agreement. 3. Operating Committee 3.1. Creation. There will be an Operating Committee (the “Committee”) to administer this Agreement. The Committee will consist of one representative appointed by each of the parties to the Agreement. In the absence of a specific appointment, a party’s representative will be its fire chief. Each member of the Committee is entitled to one vote. 3.2. Procedural Rules. The Committee must adopt procedural rules to govern its operations. Public Safety Purchasing Joint Agreement Page 2 3.3. Officers. The Committee will select from its members a chair to conduct meetings, a vice-chair to act in the place of the chair, and a secretary to keep the records of the Committee. 3.4. Powers, Duties. The Committee has the authority and responsibility to administer this Agreement on behalf of the parties and to take all necessary actions allowed by law to implement its terms. 4. Procedures 4.1. Acquisition. The Committee will take the necessary actions for obtaining contracts for the purchase or lease of public safety uniforms, supplies, equipment, and other items, and for contracting for services, as selected by the Committee. The Committee will comply with the Municipal Contracting Law, including the preparation of specifications and requests for proposals. The Committee will designate one of the member parties to act as the lead agency for selecting the contractor for a contract, based on the recommendation of the Committee. 4.2. Contract Terms. The contract with each selected contractor (the “Contract”) must provide that each party to this Agreement will have the option to order items directly from each selected contractor and make payments directly to the contractor. No party will have any responsibility for paying for the items ordered by any other party. When appropriate, the Contract may include an option for the contractor to maintain and certify designated equipment. The Contract must provide the terms of payment to the contractor for this service. 4.3. Rules for Use. When appropriate, the Committee will establish rules and procedures for the parties’ use of items acquired pursuant to this Agreement, including determining the responsibility for damage to, or loss of, the items. 5. Responsibility for Employees All persons engaged in the work to be performed by a party under this Agreement may not be considered employees of any other party for any purpose, including worker’s compensation and other claims that may or might arise out of the employment context on behalf of the employees. All claims made by a third party as a result of any act or omission of a party’s employees while engaged on any of the work performed under this Agreement are not the obligation or responsibility of any other party. Each party is responsible for injuries or death of its own Public Safety Purchasing Joint Agreement Page 3 personnel. Each party will maintain workers' compensation insurance or self-insurance coverage, covering its own personnel while they are providing services under this Agreement. Each party waives the right to sue any other party for any workers' compensation benefits paid to its own employee or volunteer or their dependants, even if the injuries were caused wholly or partially by the negligence of any other party or its officers, employees, or volunteers. 6. Indemnification Each party agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the other parties against any and all claims, liability, loss, damage, or expense arising under the provisions of this Agreement and caused by or resulting from negligent acts or omissions of the party and/or those of its employees or agents. Under no circumstances, however, may a party be required to pay on behalf of itself and another party any amounts in excess of the limits on liability established in Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466 applicable to any one party. The limits of liability for two or more parties may not be added together to determine the maximum amount of liability for one party. The intent of this paragraph is to impose on each party a limited duty to defend and indemnify each other subject to the limits of liability under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466. The purpose of creating this duty to defend and indemnify is to simplify the defense of claims by eliminating conflicts among the parties and to permit liability claims against both parties from a single occurrence to be defended by a single attorney. 7. Duration This agreement will be in force from the date of execution by at least two parties and notification to the secretary of the Operating Committee. Any party may withdraw from this Agreement upon 30 days written notice to the other party or parties to the Agreement. Upon execution of all of the parties to the Prior Agreements, the Prior Agreements will terminate. 8. Execution A separate execution page is provided for each party. [Signature pages follow] Execution Page for the Third Amended and Restated Joint & Cooperative Agreement For Public Safety Purchasing The party listed below has read, agreed to and executed this Agreement on the date indicated. Date ____________________ Entity _____________________________ By _________________________________ Title ______________________________ And _________________________________ Title ______________________________ Current JPA Roster – 1. Bloomington – Seal / Forester 2. Brooklyn Park – Seitz 3. Carver – Trimbo 4. Chanhassen – Johnson 5. Chaska – Trebitowski 6. Cloquet –Schroder 7. Coon Rapids – Johnston 8. Duluth – Kleive & Morehouse 9. Eden Prairie – Parker / Gerber 10. Edina - Slama 11. Excelsior FPD – Mackey 12. Forest Lake - Newman 13. Golden Valley – Krelly 14. Goodview - Klinger 15. Hamel – Ruchti 16. Hennepin Technical College – Deitering 17. Hopkins – Specken / Wenshaw 18. Long Lake – Van Eyl 19. Loretto – Leuer 20. Mayer - Maetzold 21. Minnetonka – Fox 22. Mound – Pederson 23. New Brighton – Hamdorf 24. Oak Grove – Hallerman 25. Osseo – Lynde 26. Owatonna - Seykora 27. Plymouth – Coppa 28. Prior Lake – Steinhaus 29. Rice Lake – Niemi / Twining 30. Richfield – Dobesh / Chwialkowski 31. Saint Bonifacius – Weber 32. Saint Louis Park – Koering / Wolfe 33. Savage – Bresnahan 34. Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community – Hayes / Zimmerman 35. Victoria - Heger 36. Wayzata – Klapprich 37. West Metro FPD- Nelson 38. White Bear Lake – Schmidt Known to be Contemplating JPA Agreement –  Brooklyn Center (Henrickson)  Cologne (Joos)  Lino Lakes (Lallier)  Rogers (Fiest) Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ENTERING INTO A JOINT AND COOPERATIVE PURCHASING AGREEMENT FOR PURCHASE OF FIREFIGHTER’S SAFETY GEAR. WHEREAS, Minnesota Statue 471.59 authorizes local units of government to enter into Joint and Cooperative agreements of governmental powers common to the contracting parties, and WHEREAS, The intent of this agreement is to make available at JPA prices, safety gear to the City of Brooklyn Center, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota: 1. The approval of the Joint and Cooperative Purchasing Agreement with other cities and fire departments from the Hennepin County Fire Chiefs Association. September 13, 2021 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 via telephone Dial: 1-312-626- 6799 Meeting I D: 889 0322 0240# P asscode: 072855# S eptember 13, 2021 AGE NDA AC T I V E D I S C US S IO N I T E M S 1.Youth on Boards P rogram Discussion 2.Snow Removal Ordinance Review 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 C ouncil/E DA Work Session DAT E:9/13/2021 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:D r. Reggie Edwards, City Manager T H R O U G H :N/A BY:M eg Beekman, C ommunity D evelopment D irector S U B J E C T:Youth on Boards P rogram D iscussion Requested Council A con: B ackground: T he C ity C ouncil has iden1fied a goal of incorpora1ng young people and advancing youth engagement and outreach as part of the 2021 budget and strategic ini1a1ves. T he C ity allocated $10,000 within the Recrea1on D epartment's 2021 budget to focus on and elevate youth par1cipa1on in decision-making. T his program would fulfill the goals of that ini1a1ve by imbedding young people within iden1fied boards, commissions or commi8ees as full contributors and decision-makers. The Brooklyn Bridge A lliance for Youth, in partnership with Youthpris e, is developing a program that would elevate youth voice at decis ion-making tables among A lliance partners. A full project charter and program descrip1on is a8ached to this report. This project for youth development and empowerment would cul1vate and mentor young people as they are appointed to various advis ory boards , commissions, and/or commi8ees of the City. The program s erves a dual func1on of eleva1ng youth voice at advisory and decision-making tables, and als o to reduce and eliminate barriers of entry for divers e voices as a whole. The program intends to provide leadership skill development for young people as well as skill building with current s i:ng advisory body members to create an inclusive and w elcoming space for diverse voices . The project includes a mul1-phased approach that w ould s tart s mall and build on itself to grow capacity and expand the number of youth who par1cipate. As part of the ini1al phase, staff is seeking direc1on from C ouncil on whether this program could provide value. T he next step would be to iden1fy 1-3 specific decision-making tables to imbed youth within, then work with the C ity A8orney to develop an implementa1on plan that meets any legal requirements that may exist for that body. Staff will then return to the C ity C ouncil to make any necessary changes to the by-laws or founda1onal resolu1ons that formed that decision-making body. T he inten1on is to con1nue to grow the program over 1me, adding youth par1cipa1on at addi1onal advisory tables as capacity grows. B rooklyn B ridge Alliance for Youth has received funding to support the program, and they are not asking for C ity contribu1on at this 1me. T he purpose of this work session discussion is to discuss the program and seek direc1on from the C ouncil on whether staff should proceed with developing an implementa1on strategy in partnership with B rooklyn B ridge Alliance for Youth. B udget I ssues: There are no budget is s ues at this 1me. I nclusive C ommunity Engagement: The purpos e of the program is to engage youth in a more direct and tangible way by including them at advis ory and decis ion-making tables w ithin the C ity. A nracist/Equity Policy Effect: The program w ill engage young people in the community, who are predominantly B I P O C, and provide leaders hip s kill building and inclusive engagement to elevate their voices and values within the exis1ng city governance s tructure. S trategic Priories and Values: I nclusive C ommunity Engagement AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip1on U pload D ate Type Youth on Boards P roject Charter and D es crip1on 7/20/2021 Backup M aterial Power points 8/19/2021 P resenta1on THE BROOKLYN BRIDGE ALLIANCE FOR YOUTH Youth OnBoard Project Charter Julie Richards April 29th, 2021 Part of accelerating youth success is creating intentional space for them at decision-making tables. By placing young adults on Boards and Commissions throughout the cities and systems of Alliance members, we will cultivate civic voice for the next generation of leaders by working collaboratively to identify issues and design and implement solutions. 1 The Youth OnBoard Project Charter Project: Youth OnBoard Background: Part of accelerating youth success is creating intentional space for them at decision-making tables. By placing young adults (Emerging Leaders) on Boards, Commissions, and Committees (Decision-making Tables) throughout the Alliance partners that broadly serve the northwest area of Hennepin county, we will cultivate civic voice for the next generation of leaders by working collaboratively to identify issues and design and implement solutions. Youth OnBoard: 1) Identifies Commissions, Advisories, and Committees (Decision-making Tables) where decisions are made that impact youth 2) Matches young adults 14-25 (Emerging Leaders) in the community with leadership opportunities and decision-making tables, 3) Provides inclusion training for adults, 4) Provides on-boarding training for emerging leaders, so they can effectively engage and provide input that strengthens city efforts, and 5) Assists with on-going maintenance for these process shifts on boards, commissions, and leadership tables. This model was developed by the Northfield Healthy Community Initiative (HCI); however, we are building upon that to include boards, commissions, and other leadership tables to meet the unique needs of our community. The Youth OnBoard program is founded in the belief that the community is stronger when young people, or Emerging Leaders, participate at Decision-making Tables. The Alliance partners offer unique opportunities for Emerging Leaders to get involved in local government, the four school districts, and non-profit organizations to make change, gain an understanding of how organizations work, and use their voice in meaningful and powerful ways. Key Stakeholders: Young people 14-25 living in the northwest area of Hennepin County, boards, commissions, and other leadership tables within this area, current boards, commissions, leadership team members, city and systems leaders, and community members. Project purpose and description: The purpose of this project is to create intentional pathways for Emerging Leaders to fully participate on Decision-making Tables, leading to more inclusive environments that utilize and capitalize on a wider range of voices, experiences, needs, and ideas. 2 Project has two phases: • Phase 1: Program Design and Readiness (Spring 2021-Summer 2021) • Phase 2: Launch Pilot Program (Fall 2021- Fall 2022) Scope: The pilot project includes comprehensive plans for recruitment, implementation and on-boarding (both for Emerging Leaders and current Decision-making Tables), and on-going communication and support. Emerging Leaders In response to a gap in civic opportunities and leadership development, we created a pilot plan that focuses on recruiting young adults ages 14-25 who are interested in furthering their professional development and engagement with systems and high-level decision- making. While we will work with each organization to identify which populations tend to be least engaged, we know that young adults from these specific demographics tend to have the least access to decision-making spaces. We welcome students and non-students from these communities: ● Live and go to school in Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park ● Low income/working class ● Renters ● County Involved ● Immigrant Communities ● LatinX ● African American ● Black or African ● Lao/Hmong Decision-making Tables We will begin the pilot project identifying tables (boards, commissions, and committees) within the program partners who are most ready. We will work to ensure that each table has at least two emerging leaders at the table. The appointments for Emerging Leaders will reflect the appointment schedule for the table (this is not just a school year program). Major Tasks and Timeline: Beginning in May 2021, we will begin to draft specific timelines that include formal invitations sent to interested program partners, exploratory conversations with interested Decision-making Tables to assess organizational readiness, develop the on-boarding process for current commission members, peer mentors, and young adults, discuss and development recruitment strategies and implementation, create an on-going communication loop, and determine how best to evaluate the pilot comprehensively. We will also begin to build diverse and intentional recruitment pathways for young people to participate. 3 By early fall, we plan on having our first Emerging Leaders begin participation. We will report back on what we’ve learned to the Alliance board and program partners, and then determine how to move the pilot into a sustainable phase. 2021 Tasks Lead Phase 1: Program Design and Readiness (Spring 2021-Summer 2021) April • Establish timelines for project launch. • Create readiness rubric for partners. • Reach out to our program partners with readiness rubric. • Establish initial recruitment pathways for Emerging Leaders. (Andrew Mua) • Draft youth profile Julie Implementat ion Team May • Begin stakeholder conversations in response to readiness rubric. • Draft timelines in response to readiness conversations. • Develop trainings for both young adults and current commission members. • Begin attending commission meetings for exploratory conversations. Julie Implementat ion Team June • Develop communication and feedback loop. • Finalize first iteration of Decision-making tables. • Finalize scope of 1st program launch – 1st iteration of decision-making tables. • Expand personnel as needed to respond to the Youth Onboard program scope • *If needed, post Youth OnBoard Program Coordinator position, begin hiring process. • Work with Ivan to develop evaluation strategy to focus on ensuring inclusive tables and EL satisfaction. Julie Implementat ion Team July • Invite Youth to become an Emerging Leader. • Post positions for tables with recruitment partners (BrookLynk Alumni network, BYC alumni, and program partners) Julie Phase 2: Launch Pilot Program (Fall 2021- Fall 2022) 4 August • Begin training first round of decision-tables (see logic model) • Begin training emerging leader: Both with general tools for participation and specific to each table. (See logic model) Julie Implementat ion Team Program Coordinator September - December • Test out communication mechanism with young adults. • Appointees begin commission appointments. • Begin bi-weekly/monthly meetings with young adults and peer mentor. • Attend and continue to assess the inclusion practices for the table. • Continue improving communication/support loop. • Begin young adult group trainings. For tables that have challenges with inclusion, explore the use of IDI for table development. • Continue young adult on-boarding, revisit self-care, their own equity journey and reflections on their development. • Begin recruitment for second cycle iteration. • Check in with program partners and table mentors for initial reactions/feedback to project implementation. Julie Program Coordinator Implementat ion Team Spring • Continue program, monitor results. • Provide update to board of directors. Summer • If supported by program partners, continue the program, and determine next steps in program sustainability. Fall • If supported by program partners, launch year 2. Project team: • Julie Richards – Project lead, Program Supervisor • Lexi Prahl, Transition Age Coordinator, Hennepin County • Andrew Mua, Public Ally, Brooklyn Bridge Alliance for Youth • *Youth • *Point person from each program partner – who will liaise, coordinate, and engage as needed with the project team. These may be individuals who are assigned to onboarding efforts in their organization. *indicates project team members who will advise regularly but are not required to attend meetings. 5 Evaluation: Broadly speaking, the success of this effort will be measured in three ways. 1. Did leadership tables expand inclusive practices to include those impacted? 2. Did emerging leaders build skills that support their development? 3. Did we effectively coordinate the program? Definitions: Emerging Leaders: young people between the ages of 14-25, interested in participating Decision-making Tables: boards, commissions, committees, and other decision-making spaces 8/19/2021 1 City Council Work  Session – August 23, 2021 Meg Beekman, Community Development Director Youth on Boards Program  Discussion Background 2 •City Council has identified a goal of elevating youth voice and  increasing youth engagement and outreach as part of 2021 budget  priorities. •$10,000 was identified in the 2021 Recreation Budget to further  this goal •The Brooklyn Bridge Alliance for Youth, in partnership with  Youthprise, is developing a program that would elevate youth voice  at decision‐making tables among Alliance partners, including  Hennepin County and Brooklyn Park. 8/19/2021 2 Youth on Boards Program 3 •Project purpose and description: The purpose of this project is to  create intentional pathways for Emerging Leaders to fully participate  on Decision‐making Tables, leading to more inclusive environments  that utilize and capitalize on a wider range  of voices, experiences,  needs, and ideas.  •Scope: The pilot project includes comprehensive plans for  recruitment, implementation and on‐boarding (both for Emerging  Leaders and current Decision‐making Tables), and on‐going  communication and support.  Youth on Boards Program 4 •Identifies Commissions, Advisories, and Committees (Decision‐ making Tables) where decisions are made that impact youth •Matches young adults 14‐25 (Emerging Leaders) in the community  with leadership opportunities and decision‐making tables, •Provides inclusion training for  adults •Provides on‐boarding training for  emerging leaders, so they can  effectively engage and provide input that strengthens city efforts,  and •Assists with on‐going maintenance for  these process shifts on  boards, commissions, and leadership tables.  8/19/2021 3 Next Steps 5 •Develop an implementation plan •Identify 2‐3 city boards/commissions to initiate program •Evaluate legal and logistical implications of youth participation  •Initiate any necessary modifications to procedures and processes to  facilitate youth participation •Identify youth matches and begin implementation Policy Issues 6 1. Does the Council see value in the program and including youth at  advisory and decision making tables within the City?  2. Does the Council have additional questions/concerns related to the  program or next steps?  3. What is the Council's direction as it pertains to moving into the next  steps of implementing the program? C ouncil/E DA Work Session DAT E:9/13/2021 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:D r. Reggie Edwards, City Manager T H R O U G H :N/A BY:M ayor M ike Ellio* S U B J E C T:S now Removal O rdinance Review Requested Council A con: B ackground: B udget I ssues: A nracist/Equity Policy Effect: S trategic Priories and Values: AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip0on U pload D ate Type P roposed O rdinance A mendment 9/7/2021 O rdinance documents from 2018 O rdinance 9/7/2021 Backup M aterial Excerpts from 9_24 C C Mee0ng M inutes 9/8/2021 Backup M aterial CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the ____ day of __________, 2020, at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard during the regular City Council meeting to consider an ordinance related to repealing the snow emergency prohibition. City Council meetings are being conducted by electronic means under Minnesota Statutes, section 13D.021 and information on how to connect to the meeting is provided on the City’s website. Please notify the City Clerk at 763-569-3306 if there are any questions about how to connect to the meeting. ORDINANCE NO. _____ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 27 TO REMOVE THE SNOW EMERGENCY RESTRICTIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: ARTICLE I. Brooklyn Center City Code Section 27-120 is hereby amended as follows: Section 27-120. PARKING RESTRICTED AND PROHIBITED. 1. No person in charge of any vehicle shall park or permit such vehicle to stand upon the roadway of any highway or street in the City of Brooklyn Center between the hours of 2 a.m. and 6 a.m., nor for more than six consecutive hours at any other time. No person in charge of any vehicle shall park or permit such vehicle to stand upon any alley in the City of Brooklyn Center at any time. 2. Snow Emergency. After a snowfall of at least 2.5 inches in the City, parking is prohibited on any public street or alley until and after that particular street or alley has been plowed and the snow removed to the curb line. It is unlawful to deposit snow or ice, plowed or removed from private property, onto the traveled portion of a street, alley or public way. Vehicles parked in violation of this section may be removed in accordance with Section 27-121. 3. No person in charge of any vehicle shall park or permit such vehicle to stand upon any street, highway, parking lot or other area within the City of Brooklyn Center in violation of posted parking restrictions or traffic control devices. 4. No person in charge of any vehicle shall park or permit such vehicles or any part thereof, to stand upon a public sidewalk or upon the nonroadway area of any public street right of way. 5. The City Manager is authorized to establish and post parking restrictions for parking lots and other property owned by the City or its Economic Development Authority. Anyone parking a vehicle in violation of the posted restrictions is a violation of this code and the vehicle is subject to removal as provided in Section 27-121. 6. The Chief of Police or his/her designee may allow short-term exceptions to the above stated parking restrictions under certain circumstances if requests for such exceptions are submitted to the Police Department at least two hours prior to the time period for which the exception is requested, and if he/she determines that the granting of such exceptions will not create problems affecting the health and safety of the citizens or unduly affect traffic movements or street maintenance operations. Specific examples of events for which exceptions may be granted if all conditions are met include but are not limited to: a.) family gatherings for special events such as weddings, graduations, anniversaries, and funerals in residential areas. b.) civic events such as community celebrations and parades. c.) reconstruction or resurfacing of driveways. d.) out of state visitors with large R.V.'s. ARTICLE III. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty days following its legal publication. Adopted this ___ day of __________, 2020. ____________________________ Mike Elliott, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________ City Clerk Date of Publication _________________________ Effective Date _____________________________ (Strikeout indicates matter to be deleted, double underline indicates new matter.) COU N C IL ITEM MEMOR ANDUM DAT E:9/24/2018 TO :C urt Boganey, C ity Manager T HR O UG H:N/A F R O M:Tim G annon, C hief of P olic e S UBJ EC T:An O rdinance Amending C hapter 27 of the C ity C ode of O rdinanc es R elating to S now Event P arking R estrictions Requested Council Action: - M otion to open the P ublic H earing, take public input, close the P ublic H earing, and consider adoption of An O rdinance Amending C hapter 27 of the C ity of O rdinances R elating to Traffic O rdinances and S now P arking R estrictions. Background: R outinely, P olic e and P ublic Works staff are contac ted by res idents c onc erned about individuals parking overnight in violation of c urrent C ity parking regulations. O vernight parking is rarely an issue for P ublic Works s taff exc ept during s now plowing operations. T here are often times in exc es s of 130 vehicles that s taff has to plow around and c ome bac k to clean up the mes s after vehic les leave. Unfortunately, c urrent parking regulations allow for daytime parking even if we are actively involved in snow plowing operations . At the January 22, 2018, Work S es s ion s taff pres ented the following three options to addres s overnight parking related is s ues. O ption 1 was no c hange to the c urrent ordinance inc luding police enforc ement. O ption 2 was no change to the current ordinanc e but with enhanc e polic e enforcement. O ption 3 was to modify the current ordinance to inc lude s eas onal res tric tions (no parking 2:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. November 1 through April 30), no on-street parking during any event of 2.5 inc hes or more until roads are plowed curb to c urb, no parking for more than 12 continuous hours, enhanced s eas onal enforc ement and towing during s now events with enhanced public education and outreach. T he C ity C ouncil did not direct proc eeding with any new options. Upon further review C ity s taff has developed an amended version of the parking ordinanc e that addresses s now related parking restrictions s pecific ally. T he proposed amended ordinance prohibits on-s treet parking after a snow fall of 2.5 inc hes. Within that amendment there is a provision whic h allows for removal of vehicles in violation of the ordinance in acc ordanc e with S ec tion 27.121. At the direc tion of the C ity C ouncil, in order to ensure that the public is well aware of the revised parking ordinance, staff has developed the attached c ommunications plan. T he plan outlines the means and methods by which the public will be provided with the c hanges to the ordinanc e as well as the current parking restrictions on record in the C ity. Budget Issues: T he 26 existing C ity limit entry s igns that display the current overnight parking restrictions will all have to be changed out with the new parking res tric tions identified. T he existing signs will be resurfaced with the new res tric tions and reins talled. T he cost to perform this work will be negligible and c an be done in the normal cours e of busines s . S trategic Priorities and Values: S afe, S ecure, S table C ommunity CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING SNOW EVENT PARKING RESTRICTIONS SEPTEMBER 24, 2018 PARKING ENFORCEMENT –STATE STATUTE 2 -8.01.02 Local Authority –Local authorities may also restrict parking by ordinance or resolution. 2 -8.02 Limited Time Parking –Limited time parking is a local concern, which is controlled by local authorities. It is Mn/DOT's policy to give considerable latitude to local communities in setting parking time limits . PARKING ENFORCEMENT –CITY ORDINANCE Section 27-120. PARKING RESTRICTED AND PROHIBITED – No person in charge of any vehicle shall park or permit such vehicle to stand upon the roadway of any highway or street in the City of Brooklyn Center between the hours of 2 a.m. and 6 a.m., nor for more than six consecutive hours at any other time. No person in charge of any vehicle shall park or permit such vehicle to stand upon any alley in the City of Brooklyn Center at any time . ADDITIONAL PARKING PROVISION •No on -street parking during any snow event of 2 ½ inches or more until the roads are plowed curb to curb . •Enforcement actions would include the issuance of a citation and the towing of any vehicle in violation. •Snow parking restrictions would be enforceable whenever the amount of snow is 2 ½ inches or more. BENEFITS •Easier for Public Works staff to maintain roadways. •Keeps the streets clean/open for emergency personnel. •Easier for Police staff to identify suspicious vehicles in neighborhoods. •Citizen complaints the past few years have included “plow - arounds,” which would be eliminated by this provision. FEEDBACK FROM PUBLIC WORKS •The last snow event of 2017 included 135 vehicle violations from 3:00 a.m. –6:00 a.m. and 145 from 6:00 a.m. –8:00 a.m. •There has not been a snow event this year to count snow bird residents. •A poll of surrounding cities conducted by Public Works in 2014, showed snowbirds are a significant issue for most cities (see handout). •Suggestion –add language to the ordinance that reflects if snowfall is over 2 ½inches, no parking until the streets have been plowed curb to curb. SNOW EVENT PARKING RESTRICTION ORDINANCE CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE PROPOSAL •No on -street parking during any snow event of 2 ½ inches or more until the roads are plowed curb to curb. •Enforcement of the ordinance would include issuance of a citation as well as towing the vehicle to allow for snow plowing. •The provision is in effect whenever snow fall meets or surpasses 2 ½ inches. EDUCATIONAL AWARENESS CAMPAIGN •If the Ordinance is enacted the City will: •Distribute parking flyer materials at all community outreach events. •Flyer will be written in both English and Spanish •The flyer will be added to all utility billing mailings. •The Police and City websites and social media sites will explain the new restrictions. •Current posted parking rule signage will be changed to reflect the added snow rules. •The Police in partnership with Public Works will do on -camera interviews with local media and submit information to print media outlets. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 24th day of September 2018, at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard at City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an ordinance related to parking. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please notify the City Clerk at 763-569-3306 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. 2018-11 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 27 OF CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES REGARDING PARKING THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Article I. Brooklyn Center City Code, Section 27-120 is amended as follows: Section 27-120. PARKING RESTRICTED AND PROHIBITED. 1. No person in charge of any vehicle shall park or permit such vehicle to stand upon the roadway of any highway or street in the City of Brooklyn Center between the hours of 2 a.m. and 6 a.m., nor for more than 6 consecutive hours at any other time. No person in charge of any vehicle shall park or permit such vehicle to stand upon any alley in the City of Brooklyn Center at any time. 2. Snow Emergency. After a snowfall of at least 2.5 inches in the City, parking is prohibited on any public street or alley until and after that particular street or alley has been plowed and the snow removed to the curb line. It is unlawful to deposit snow or ice, plowed or removed from private property, onto the traveled portion of a street, alley or public way. Vehicles parked in violation of this section may be removed in accordance with Section 27-121. 3. No person in charge of any vehicle shall park or permit such vehicle to stand upon any street, highway, parking lot or other area within the City of Brooklyn Center in violation of posted traffic control devices. 4. No person in charge of any vehicle shall park or permit such vehicles or any part thereof, to stand upon a public sidewalk or upon the non-roadway area of any public street right of way. 5. The Chief of Police or his/her designee may allow short-term exceptions to the above stated parking restrictions under certain circumstances if requests for such exceptions are submitted to the Police Department at least two hours prior to the time period for ORDINANCE NO. 2018-11 which the exception is requested, and if he/she determines that the granting of such exceptions will not create problems affecting the health and safety of the citizens or unduly affect traffic movements or street maintenance operations. Specific examples of events for which exceptions may be granted if all conditions are met include but are not limited to: a.) family gatherings for special events such as weddings, graduations, anniversaries, and funerals in residential areas. b.) civic events such as community celebrations and parades. c.) reconstruction or resurfacing of driveways. d.) out of state visitors with large R.V.'s. Section 27-121. REMOVAL OF ILLEGALLY PARKED VEHICLES. Any vehicle parked in violation of the ordinance of the City or in violation of any State law may be removed by towing at the direction of the City police to a suitable place for storage until claimed by the owner or his agent, and the owner or other person responsible for such parking of the vehicle shall be liable for the reasonable cost of such towing and storage. Article III. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of , 2018. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Strikeout indicates matter to be deleted, double underline indicates new matter.) Parking I Communication Plan 1 Parking Communication Plan Objective: This communication plan outlines the means and methods by which the public will be provided proposed changes to the ordinance as well as the current parking restrictions on record in the city. To ensure sure all stakeholders receive communication, targeted strategies was created for those most likely to be towed. This plan contains the following three (3) focus areas: 1. Stakeholder/Audience 2. Engagement Methods for External Stakeholders 3. Strategies to Engage External Stakeholders. A. Stakeholder/Audience External stakeholders are the members of the larger population of Brooklyn Center, including residents and workers, business owners, and visitors, among others. External stakeholders and/or audiences identified for communicating this project’s activities include: o Apartment Management/Renters o Residents/ Home Owners o Businesses (Owners, Staff and Customers) o Schools o Churches o Visitors B. Engagement Methods for External Stakeholders Early and proactive outreach using social media, press releases, and communication strategies will be an important contributor to providing awareness to all. Engagement method descriptions and options for this plan are provided below: 1 - Social Media Outreach through social media will be done through coordination with City of Brooklyn Center’s Communication Coordinator and other staff responsible for updating social media channels. This method can be used to provide timely announcements and share information about proposed changes to the ordinance as well as the current parking restrictions on record in the city. • Outlets: Facebook and Twitter • Purpose: Share information broadly • Timing: Prior to and after ordinance change, reminders re: Did you Know? 2 - Flyers Outreach using flyers will be done through coordination with City of Brooklyn Center’s Communication Coordinator and other staff responsible for citywide engagement efforts. • Format: Flyers created will be translated into different languages. They will be provided in electronic and/or in a hardcopy. Parking I Communication Plan 2 • Distribution: Flyers will be distributed by block captains, engagement team staff, CSO’s and churches. Flyers will be distributed at businesses, churches, schools apartments and in neighborhoods. • Purpose: Share information broadly • Timing: Prior to and after ordinance change 3 - Newsletters • City News: Information will be included in the City Newsletter. This is a bi- monthly newsletter. September deadline for October publication, plus any other publications needed 4 - Website Website outreach will be done through coordination with City of Brooklyn Center’s Communication Coordinator and other staff responsible for updating website. This can be used to provide timely announcements and share information about proposed changes to the ordinance as well as the current parking restrictions on record in the city. • Outlets: Homepage and other page locations • Purpose: Share information broadly • Timing: Prior to and after ordinance change 5 - Traditional Media (News paper) • Number: Paid media campaigns • Timing: In promotion of proposed ordinance change. • Outlets: Sun Post and Star Tribune 6 - Community Television CCX Media ( https://ccxmedia.org ) is a service of Northwest Community Television serving the northwest suburbs of Minneapolis, Minnesota, including Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Crystal, Golden Valley, Maple Grove, New Hope, Osseo, Plymouth and Robbinsdale. CCX Media can be used to share proposed ordinance changes during the following segments: Mayor Minutes and staff interview. 7 – Utility Bills Utility bills are printed every two weeks. It takes about 12 weeks for all of our residents to receive their quarterly utility bills. We are currently in the fourth quarter of the year. City staff will work with utility billing staff to place inserts in the envelopes regarding proposed ordinance changes. Distribution Date Quantity DIST #1 10/10/2018 1798 DIST #2 12/19/2018 1450 DIST #3 11/07/2018 1295 DIST #4 10/24/2018 980 DIST #5 12/05/2018 1609 DIST #6 11/21/2018 1765 Parking I Communication Plan 3 8 – Council Meetings Mayor will provide a general reminder at the beginning of each City Council Meeting. • Dates: September 24, October 8 and October 23 9 – City Meetings City staff will provide a general reminder at all meetings (Planning Commission, ARMS, etc.) 10 – Signage Signage throughout the city should be updated to include proposed ordinance change. 11 - Electronic mailing lists and email notifications Electronic mailing lists will be used to send additional communication. Signups are always available via the city’s website. These lists can be used to distribute notifications before and after ordinance change. • Outlets: CivicPlus - Notifyme (targeted specific subscribers) • Purpose: Key project milestones and promote engagement opportunities • Timing: Prior to and after ordinance change, reminders re: Did you Know? 12 - News releases and media alerts Staff will work with the Communication Coordinator to create content for news releases and media alerts covering proposed ordinance change. C. Strategies to Engage External Stakeholders As part of our outreach with External Stakeholders, the following engagement strategies provided below are recommended for communicating changes to the ordinance as well as the current parking restrictions. Numbers identified in this section correspond with numbers referenced in Section B. Engagement Methods for External Stakeholders. External Stakeholders Engagement Method Apartment Management/Renters 2,3 (Flyer/Social Media Card), 6, 7, 9, and 10 Residents/ Home Owners 1, 2 (Canvass), 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 10 Businesses (Owners, Staff and Customers) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, and 10 Schools 2, 3, 4, 5, and 10 Churches (see businesses) Visitors (see all above) Additional Strategies: • When posting content we will make sure documents are easily downloadable. We will also ask for other to share the information. • We will provide businesses with cards to distribute • We will ask apartment managers to sign-up/connect at the center in order to receive updates and notifications. • We will repeat steps (5-7x’s) 09/24/18 -6- described the communication plan developed by staff to ensure the public is well aware of the revised parking ordinance, noting this plan outlines the means and methods by which the public will be provided the changes to the ordinance as well as the current parking restrictions on record in the City. In addition, Community Outreach can be used to get out the word and the information will be printed in English and Spanish so all will know. Police Chief Gannon stated his hope is that no vehicles have to be towed during the first snow event of the season. Chief Gannon noted the City’s 26 entry signs display current overnight parking restrictions so each will have to be replaced with the new parking restrictions identified. Councilmember Butler stated it is known that apartment parking is a concern, noting the City has a regulation on the number of parking spaces that have to be provided and asked how the City can assure apartment residents are not impacted. Dr. Edwards confirmed apartments are required to provide ‘x’ amount of parking and that comes from licensing. City Attorney Troy Gilchrist explained if the apartment building was constructed several years ago, the parking restrictions at that time would have been applied. That may not be the same requirement in the current ordinance. He stated if the concern is that the parking does not meet today’s ordinance, it is likely that was not the requirement at the time the apartment building was constructed. Mr. Gilchrist explained that once the apartment exists and is permitted, it can continue even though it does not comply with current standards. Councilmember Graves stated she raised the issue of parking at a Work Session because of concern whether the current ordinance was equitable or disproportionately affecting low-income households and people of color, and was counterproductive with the City’s strategic goal of residential economic development. She noted that initially, the feedback from the City Council was that they did not want to discuss changing it further. Councilmember Graves stated it should be equitable for more residents and that is why she voted nay on this ordinance. She raised the option of talking to business owners with empty lots to facilitate residents for having a place to park as people are already getting tickets and now it will be compounded by towing cars. Councilmember Graves stated she understands the importance of having safe and clean streets, but the City is doing a good job of that already. She stated she will vote nay on this ordinance because the City Council has not been able to discuss the things that are also important. Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Butler seconded to open the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. Denise Butler, 7552 Brunswick Avenue N, stated her agreement with Councilmember Graves that discussion of inequities is being avoided and not taken into consideration. She asked how many people are allowed in a one-bedroom apartment, noting if there are three occupants and the apartment has one parking space, then the other person legally on the lease does not have a spot and has to park on the street. Also, college students are returning to live at home and bringing their vehicle. Ms. Butler stated another issue is small driveway space for multiple drivers in one household so they also need to access the streets. Ms. Butler asked the City Council to look at economic impact as we are trying to build the tax base. She also asked who we are trying to accommodate, existing residents or future residents we want to live here. 09/24/18 -7- Abate Terefe, 5101 Howe Lane, stated last year, his wife went to Minneapolis and her car was towed on a snow day. He went to the impound lot at 5 p.m. but didn’t get the car until midnight. He stated if this ordinance goes into effect, single moms will not have the opportunity to pick up their car. Single moms will need someone to watch their kids, and someone will need to give them a ride. He agreed with the need for safety of streets, and suggested some way to increase a charge to pay $45 now, thinking that would be equitable to low-income and single mom families. Ephraim Olani, 3813 51st Avenue N, stated he likes both ways and thinks what the Police Chief proposes is nice to have a clean street but it will be a huge burden on our community. He suggested the City allow time between when the snow is 2.5 inches to allow 12 hours or 24 hours before the ordinance takes place so people have enough time to remove their cars. Mayor Willson asked if he was suggesting that with a ten-inch snowfall, the streets would not be plowed for 12 to 24 hours. Mr. Olani stated residents need ample time, like 6 hours or 12 hours, to move their car. Mayor Willson noted during that time then, emergency vehicles would not be able to use the City’s streets. Mr. Olani stated it is a huge burden on the people of the community because they do not have enough space to park. He believed the probability is small that an emergency vehicle is needed compared to the number of residents impacted if their car is towed. Mayor Willson commented on the impact to a family should emergency vehicles not be able to reach a family member experiencing a medical emergency. Councilmember Graves asked about plowing that is timed and staggered in specific areas so people know when the plow is coming, which may solve some of the problems. If possible, then people would know where they could move their cars to an area already plowed and once their street is plowed, they could move it back. She stated she does not know if that system is used by other cities but if done right, it could solve both problems. Hamza Hussan, 2406 Lyndale Avenue South, ACER community organizer, asked if an odd/even plowing system like they use in Minneapolis would be a resolution to that issue. Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Butler seconded to close the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Ryan stated at first an odd/even plowing schedule may sound like an idea worth exploring but snowfall does not occur on a regular schedule and the City needs to respond flexibly to weather events. He stated he is not oblivious to the concerns expressed and has experienced them himself when he lived in St. Paul so he is sensitive to the experience. But at the same time, the City has a safety obligation to clear the streets. He noted there are streets in Minneapolis that become impassible for two oncoming cars after several snow events and Brooklyn Center cannot let that happen. Councilmember Ryan stated support for staff to explore the option of cooperative agreements between apartment and business owners where the business parking lot can be used. But, that is 09/24/18 -8- still at the discretion of the retail spaces that have parking lots and not something the City can mandate. He noted there is a public safety mandate to clear streets. Councilmember Ryan stated many apartments were constructed in the 1960s when fewer parking spaces were required and now for affordability, more people may be sharing an apartment. He stated he wished the City Council could address every equity but would ask how the City would have the resources to do so. He stated addressing the safety imperative will cause a lot of people to be angry and he does not see a solution there. Councilmember Graves stated the ordinance is before the City Council and the other options around parking are not under discussion but she would support having that consideration. She suggested a routine staggered plowing schedule, not something based on a whim. She stated some areas may be more congested because there is not adequate parking but 135 to 145 cars are typically plowed around and that has not been enough to create an emergency, and that is without the towing. Councilmember Graves asked about the cost to families versus the inconvenience. She stated she has not heard about accidents or incidents around the plowing but understands the convenience part. She suggested the conservation include the time when the plows will be in their neighborhood and how to communicate that to residents, which adds to the effort on the changes being made Mayor Willson stated if the City could guarantee when 2.5 inches of snow is hit, then the process suggested by Councilmember Graves makes sense. But if it occurs at 6 p.m. and the City can’t plow that street until 8 p.m. because that is the timeline, it goes against the concern of maintaining public safety and emergency vehicle access. He stated should a fire truck or ambulance not be able to get through the streets or there is a delayed response, then there would be a law suit against the City. Councilmember Graves asked if that has ever happened. She stated she is not suggesting the streets not be plowed, which is important to the safety of the residents, but the issue is ticketing 135 cars possibly when she does not think the need has been demonstrated. Councilmember Graves felt there must be a way to minimize the number being ticketed. She stated whoever is in charge of plowing probably knows the areas plowed first, such as the most trafficked streets, and then the less trafficked residential streets are plowed and on to the next, creating a staggered timeline so you can expect when the plows will be in your neighborhood. She suggested that information be part of the communication plan. Mayor Willson stated Public Works could be asked about that option. He asked how that could be communicated to the public. Councilmember Graves stated it can be communicated using public media, noting if there is a window of time that it is known the plows will be in your neighborhood, then you will know the vehicle needs to be moved during that time. She stated she has had her car towed and ticketed and if she can’t get to work, she can’t feed her family or pay rent. For those of low income, that can be enough to make them lose their homes and become homeless and she does not want to be part of that to keep streets cleaner. C ouncil/E DA Work Session DAT E:9/13/2021 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:D r. Reggie Edwards, City Manager T H R O U G H :N/A BY:D r. Reginald Edw ards , C ity M anager S U B J E C T:Pending I tems Requested Council A con: Earle Brow n Name Change for P ublic P roperty Council Policy for C ity C harter requirement of Mayor's s ignature on all contracts S trategic P lans for years 2018-2020 and 2021-2023 Review S pecial A sses s ment Policy Tobacco O rdinance Emerald A s h Boer Policy Review Civilian D is cipline Review Commi7ee Community-W ide S urvey A7orney R F P P rocess B ackground: B udget I ssues: A nracist/Equity Policy Effect: S trategic Priories and Values: