Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024.09.23 CCM REGULAR9/23/24 -1- 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 SEPTEMBER 23, 2024 CITY HALL – COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. INFORMAL OPEN FORUM WITH CITY COUNCIL The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Informal Open Forum called to order by Mayor April Graves at 7:00 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL Mayor April Graves and Councilmembers Marquita Butler, Dan Jerzak, and Teneshia Kragness. Councilmember Kris Lawrence-Anderson was absent and excused. Also present were City Manager Reggie Edwards, Director of Fiscal & Support Services Angela Holm, Zoning Administrator Ginny McIntosh, Assistant City Manager/City Clerk Barb Suciu, Deputy City Clerk Shannon Pettit, and City Attorney Cristina Cruz-Jennings. 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 4. INFORMAL OPEN FORUM Mayor April Graves opened the meeting for the purpose of Informal Open Forum. She reviewed the rules of conduct. Sophia W. suggested yard signs be made for residents to share information about the Community Center referendum as it will be on the upcoming ballot. The link could also provide more information on the ballot in general. Yard signs could be used year-round encouraging folks to read about local politics to promote community engagement. Councilmember Jerzak moved and Councilmember Butler seconded to close the Informal Open Forum at 7:08 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. 5. INVOCATION Councilmember Butler shared a quote from the Dalai Lama, “Do not let the behavior of others destroy your inner peace.” 9/23/24 -2- 6. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA Councilmember Jerzak moved and Mayor Graves seconded to approve the Agenda and Consent Agenda, and the following consent items were approved: 6a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. September 9, 2024 – Study Session 2. September 9, 2024 – Regular Session 3. September 9, 2024 – EDA/Work Session 6b. LICENSES RENTAL INITIAL (TYPE II – two-year license) 4307 66th Avenue N Fyr Sfr Borrower Llc 5712 Bryant Ave nue N Fyr Sfr Borrower Llc 5901 Pearson Drive HOME TRS LLC 6243 France Avenue N Fyr Sfr Borrower Llc RENEWAL (TYPE IV – six-month license) 1302 69th Avenue N Aeon Holdings Llc 5542 Judy Lane Kao Yang & Mai Yer Xiong 6400 Fremont Avenue N Jesus Vazquez Martinez RENEWAL (TYPE III – one-year license) 3012 51st Avenue N Sri Lakshmi Valiveti 5906 Dupont Avenue N Bruce & Rebecca Goldberg 6613 Camden Drive Mark One Resources Llc RENEWAL (TYPE II – two-year license) 4210 Lakebreeze Avenue N Simons Revocable Trust 5327 Queen Avenue N Myrka Zambrano 5322 Irving Avenue N Peter Phuong Nguyen RENEWAL (TYPE I – three-year license) 4207 Lakeside Ave N, #238 Hussein G Seman 9/23/24 -3- 2932 69th Lane N Mayerling Rios 5541 Morgan Avenue N 5541 Morgan Ave LLC 5818 June Avenue N Herman Capital Partners VII, LLC 5842 Washburn Avenue N Pryde Real Estate Solutions 6601 Unity Avenue N Cel Monton LLC 6737 Camden Avenue N Ronald F Jasicki 6749 Humboldt Avenue N Patrick Nguyen 7193 Unity Avenue N Mary R Turcotte 6c. RESOLUTION NO. 2024-89; APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE BROOKLYN CENTER FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION BY- LAWS 6d. RESOLUTION NO. 2024-90; REQUESTING APPROVAL FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN A PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR A USED FIRE ENGINE 6e. RESOLUTION NO. 2024-91; AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT, PROJECT NO. 2026-01, HUMBOLDT AVE (COUNTY ROAD 57) RECONSTRUCTION (53RD TO 57TH) PROJECT 6f. RESOLUTION NO. 2024-91; ACCEPTING FEASIBILITY REPORT AND CALLING FOR AN IMPROVEMENT PUBLIC HEARING FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2025-02, 67TH AVENUE AND JAMES AVENUE MILL & OVERLAY Motion passed unanimously. 7. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS/RECOGNITIONS/DONATIONS None. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS 8a. AN ORDINANCE NO. 2024-10; AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 12 AND 19 OF THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES REGARDING PROPERTY 9/23/24 -4- MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS AND COMMERCIAL VEHICLE STORAGE - SECOND READING City Manager Reggie Edwards introduced the item and invited Community Development Director Jesse Anderson to make the staff presentation. Community Development Director Jesse Anderson explained the first reading of the Ordinance was held on August 12, 2024, and the Work Session was held on April 22, 2024. The proposed changes are to Chapter 12 and Chapter 19, which include proposals for requiring mailboxes at all licensed rental properties, commercial addressing requirements, and the changes to the definition of commercial vehicles. Mr. Anderson stated the proposed changes for Chapter 12 include mailbox requirements for licensed rental properties. Inspection Staff has received complaints about multi-family properties not replacing mailboxes which leads to mail delivery being held at the post office. Mr. Anderson pointed out there are currently no requirements for mailboxes. Federal and State regulations dictate the size, location, and type of mailbox but do not require properties to have a mailbox. The proposal would be for the City to require that all rental properties are required to provide a mailbox that meets Federal and State requirements for their tenants. Mr. Anderson noted the City does not have an ordinance that specifies a size for the addressing of a commercial or retail building. Residential buildings have requirements outlined in the Building Code and in the International Property Maintenance Code (IPMC). Staff has looked into the building code and the building code is silent on the matter. The proposed changes would only impact retail and commercial properties and inserted into Chapter 12. One-story commercial buildings would require the address to be 12 inches, 18 inches for two stories, and 24 inches for three-story buildings and taller. Mr. Anderson added that commercial vehicle storage in a residential district is enforced in both Chapter 19 Public Nuisance and Petty Offenses and Chapter 35 Unified Development. Since the adoption of the Unified Development Code in 2023, the definitions of commercial vehicles do not match. The purpose of bringing this forward is to ensure that both definitions would be identical and allow for smaller commercial vehicles to be stored in a residential district. Mr. Anderson pointed out that currently, Chapter 19-103.12 identifies a commercial vehicle as a vehicle that is “…a length greater than 21 feet, or a height greater than 8 feet, or a gross vehicle weight greater than 9,000 pounds…” The proposed language would read as follows, “Commercial vehicles will be defined as a vehicle length greater than 22 feet, a height greater than 10 feet (measured from grade), or a gross vehicle weight more than 20,000 pounds.” Mr. Anderson stated the newly adopted definition in chapter 35-5512.c only allows vehicles identified as class 1-4 by the Minnesota Department of Transportation. The proposed language would allow small box trucks, step vans, and cube vans to be parked/stored in an R1 and R2 district. The language would continue to prohibit the storage of construction equipment, farm 9/23/24 -5- vehicles, dump trucks, construction trailers, backhoes, front-end loaders, bobcats, well drilling equipment, farm trucks, combines, thrashers, tractors, tow trucks, and truck tractors. Mayor Graves asked if there are any Ordinances regarding storage containers. Mr. Anderson confirmed there are Ordinances restricting the use of storage containers, and the uses are different depending on the type of property. Some properties may have been grandfathered in with previous rules for accessory buildings. Councilmember Jerzak asked if there was an opportunity to amend the Ordinance. Mr. Anderson stated the item could be tabled to allow for revisions. However, the motion itself could include minor changes. Mayor Graves asked if it was legally permissible. City Attorney Cristina Cruz-Jennings confirmed Mr. Anderson’s explanation was correct. Councilmember Jerzak stated he could support the proposed changes to Chapter 19-103.12. He requested the Council reconsider the commercial vehicle restrictions to add four feet to the length. The Ordinance is virtually impossible to enforce. Additionally, food trucks can be longer than the proposed length. Food trucks are often owned by minority business owners and don’t need additional expenses for food truck storage. The proposed Ordinance is less restrictive than what the City currently has, but they need to consider all food trucks. Councilmember Butler stated she wants to support food trucks. However, larger trucks park on the street and may create safety issues. There is additional wear and tear on the roads from the large trucks. Councilmember Jerzak stated he agrees with Councilmember Butler’s concerns about safety. It is the role of the Police Department to handle parking violations that impact safety. Box trucks are excluded from the proposed Ordinance. No matter what, there isn’t street parking allowed 2:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. He hasn’t heard complaints about food trucks, but he has heard complaints about semi-trucks, box trucks, and the like. Councilmember Kragness stated there needs to be a line drawn somewhere. She doesn’t oppose food trucks. Mr. Anderson stated that minor amendments could be made if the Council would like. Mayor Graves asked if the number of food trucks in the City was considered. Mr. Anderson stated there is not an inventory of food trucks in the City. Councilmember Kragness asked how the length was chosen by Staff for the amendment. Mr. Anderson stated Staff didn’t measure every food truck in the City. Instead, they measured a handful of food trucks and other common vehicles that Staff has seen frequently. 9/23/24 -6- Councilmember Kragness stated Staff should do more measurements to ensure the majority of food trucks are allowed. Mr. Anderson pointed out most food trucks are not allowed under the current Ordinance, so it is possible not all food trucks would be around the City for measurements. It would take some time to inventory 7,700 properties and find all commercial vehicles. Mayor Graves asked what the downside is for implementing a longer truck length. Mr. Anderson stated there could be some parking on the grass, but that would be addressed in another ordinance. Councilmember Jerzak pointed out there are quite a few ways that food trucks are restricted already such as with height or vehicle type. Any violations are based on reports from the community. He requested the additional four feet be added to the Ordinance. If there is an issue with a maximum length of 26 feet then Staff can bring the item back to Council. Mayor Graves noted the importance of having a Councilmember with code enforcement experience. Councilmember Butler stated she is open to the proposed changes due to the clarification regarding box trucks. Councilmember Jerzak moved and Councilmember Butler seconded to open the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. Kevin S. stated trucks that are currently stored elsewhere may be stored in Brooklyn Center should the Ordinance change. Lori B. asked if there could be an exception for current business owners to follow a longer truck rule. Mayor Graves noted her agreement. There are issues with grandfathering some people in because it gets confusing. The City also doesn’t know who does and who doesn’t have longer trucks currently. Councilmember Jerzak moved and Councilmember Kragness seconded to close the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Jerzak moved and Mayor Graves seconded to approve the second reading and adopt ORDINANCE NO. 2024-10; Amending Chapter 12 of the City Code of Ordinance by Adding Sections 12-309 and 12-310 regarding Property Maintenance Standards with an amendment to allow trucks up to 26 feet in length. Motion passed unanimously. 9. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS 9a. AN ORDINANCE NO. 2024-011; AMENDING SECTION 35-4103 (ALLOWED USE 9/23/24 -7- TABLE) OF THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES REGARDING PLACES FOR RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY IN THE BUSINESS MIXED-USE (MX-B) DISTRICT - FIRST READING Dr. Edwards introduced the item and invited Planning Manager Ginny McIntosh to continue the presentation. Ms. McIntosh provided an overview of zoning text amendment proposed by Applicant Trinity International Fellowship regarding Section 35-4103 of the City Code of Ordinances, and as outlined under Planning Commission Application No. 2024-011, that would allow for Places for Religious Assembly as a conditional use within the Business Mixed-Use (MX- B) District. Ms. McIntosh stated per Section 35-71301, an amendment of the City’s Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) may be initiated by the Council, Planning Commission, or a City property owner. The use is currently permitted as a conditional use in the City’s R1, R2, C, and I districts. A public hearing notice was published in the Brooklyn Center Sun Post on August 29, 2024. Mail notifications were sent to 36 property owners and physical addresses within the Business Mixed- Use District. A public hearing notice was also published on the City’s website. Ms. McIntosh stated August 2023, City Council held a concept review of a proposal to allow for places for religious assembly in the Business Mixed-Use (MX-B) District. City Staff presented the proposal to City Council, identifying points to consider regarding a proposed conversion of 6010 Earle Brown Drive from office use to a place for religious assembly, and potential impacts to other properties located within the MX-B District, of which in part included parking and traffic concerns and considerations for the greater MX-B District. Ms. McIntosh stated the applicant has spent the past year fundraising and working on plans for a potential buildout of the property. If the amendment is approved, the applicant would still need to enter into a purchase agreement with the property owner and receive separate approval of a conditional use permit (CUP). Conditional uses are generally permitted uses so long as certain conditions are met with respect to the mitigating of potentially negative impacts on neighboring properties for uses already permitted. Ms. McIntosh showed the Allowed Use Table and its proposed changes. She also showed the property of interest on a map with 2040 Planned Land Use Designations. Ms. McIntosh pointed out that the City’s Business Mixed-Use land use is a new designation under the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan and includes properties located along Earle Brown Drive and north of I-694 off Freeway Boulevard and Shingle Creek Parkway. Adoption of the City’s Unified Development Ordinance in January 2023 resulted in the retirement of the City’s long-standing I1 (Industrial Park) District, and it was, for the most part, replaced with the City’s Business Mixed- Use District. Ms. McIntosh stated the designation encouraged redevelopment or development of commercial, office, general business, and light industrial uses in coordination with supporting retail or commercial uses to encourage a more dynamic and connected experience for workers. 9/23/24 -8- Ms. McIntosh noted the City is predominantly reserved for low-density residential, such as R1, and there are limited opportunities for any new or expected additional employment opportunities with the exception of certain land use designations. Ms. McIntosh explained while the district’s predecessor, the I1 District, was very much a typical business park/light industrial district, in that the uses were limited to manufacturing activities, wholesale trade activities, service activities, public transportation terminals, foundries, and textile mills, with retail permitted via special use as an accessory use only. Ms. McIntosh stated new MX-B District does grant new flexibilities in use by allowing for non- residential educational uses like business and trade schools, medical and health uses, brewpubs, micro-wineries and distilleries, restaurants, grocery stores, indoor recreational fitness, and hospitality lodging. However, these uses function differently than a place for religious assembly might in that they are oftentimes centered around service times, and oftentimes operate outside of typical business hours. Ms. McIntosh stated the only example of a religious assembly use in a commercial area. The building was formerly a veterinary hospital turned mosque at 4900 France Avenue North. Prior to this, all places for religious assembly required primary vehicular access to be located on a collector or arterial street in order to manage traffic volumes as people arrive and leave service. The mosque is located on a dead-end cul-de-sac and, although a parking and traffic study was provided as part of their special use application, with plans to operate a shuttle given limited on-site parking, their conditions of approval are not being met and City staff has noted on-street parking during service times, which constrains emergency vehicle access to the property’s sole access, access to neighboring industrial businesses and residential homes, as well as parking occurring off-site at the Xcel Transformer Station. As its location is not served by sidewalks, this also forces members to walk in the City streets or across private properties. Ms. McIntosh pointed out assembly uses, such as religious institutions, tend to have higher parking demands than other types of uses due to the nature of their visitors. Industrial uses by contrast tend to have low parking demands relative to their square footage because these uses generally have lower employment densities, although the 2040 Comprehensive Plan seeks to add employment intensity to the B-MU land use designation. Ms. McIntosh stated places of public assembly, such as houses of worship, theatres, auditoriums, mortuaries, stadiums, arenas, and dance halls require one parking space for every three seats, or attendees, per Section 35-5506 under the City’s Unified Development Ordinance. Conversely, industry and wholesale uses, as are more typically found in the City’s MX-B District, require one space for every two employees based upon maximum planned employment during any work period or one space for every 800 square feet of gross floor area, whichever requirement is greater. In the event the latter requirement is greater, adequate land area shall be provided for the required off- street parking area, but improved space need only be provided according to the employees ratio. Ms. McIntosh showed images of the existing buildings. In reviewing the City’s existing MX-B District properties, it was noted that the majority of properties are home to uses traditionally found 9/23/24 -9- in a business park/light industrial district. These include Medtronic, Endurable Building Products, Hiawatha Rubber, Revival, RAO Manufacturing, the former Metro Transit Reuter Bus Garage, and the City’s Public Works Garage. The majority of these properties are located on minor roadways that are intended to provide access for employees, trucking, and logistics, with loading docks, gated access, or outside storage present. Although there are some properties that do not fit this description, these are the existing conditions for many of the 36 properties within the MX-B District. Ms. McIntosh added there are certain barriers that would also require consideration in retrofitting industrial or office type buildings or tenant spaces for “assembly” type uses as they require higher fire suppression standards than other types of uses due to the congregation of people that occurs within buildings and the potential need for exiting in case of an emergency. Conversion of a standalone building or tenant space would likely constitute a change of use from the perspective of the Building and Fire Code and thus would trigger a change of use from the perspective of the Building and Fire Code. Ms. McIntosh stated in the case of the few multi-tenant office buildings located off Earle Brown Drive and within the MX-B District, their building type could restrict the location of a proposed place for religious assembly type use. For example, on a 2B construction-type building, an assembly use could not be located higher than the third floor. In reviewing the standards for approving an ordinance amendment, the proposed amendment shall be consistent with and compatible with surrounding land use classifications; whether the proposal demonstrates merit beyond the interests of an owner or, in this case, an interested party, for an individual parcel. The specific policies and recommendations as outlined within the City’s Comprehensive Plan or other City plans. Ms. McIntosh explained although this is not contemplated within this application, any applicant pursuing a conditional use permit (CUP) for a “Places for Religious Assembly” use would further need to satisfactorily demonstrate that all conditional use permit criteria as outlined under Section 35-7703 (Conditional Use Permit Criteria) has been meet. These criteria include, but are not limited to whether: the establishment of the conditional use will impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district, that adequate measures have been or will be taken so as to provide ingress, egress, and parking so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets, be in accordance with the general objectives, or with any specific objective, of the City’s Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Ordinance, and not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood. Ms. McIntosh pointed out that the Planning Commission recommended approval of the requested ordinance amendment on a 3-2 vote at their September 12, 2024 meeting. No members of the public were present, nor were any comments submitted in advance of the meeting. The applicant and representation from their architect were present. 9/23/24 -10- Ms. McIntosh stated the Planning Commissioners held a lengthy discussion on the uses allowed within the MC-B district, its intended purpose, and the 2040 Comprehensive Plan land use designation of B-MU. The Planning Commission asked a number of questions. They asked if the Heritage Center was within this District. Staff confirmed the Heritage Center is a non-confirming use under the 2040 Plan and UDO and it was not a like-for-like comparison. The Commission asked whether event centers would be permitted within the MX-B District if “Places for Religious Assembly” are permitted as event centers as accessory uses. Ms. McIntosh explained the Planning Commission commented a “Places for Religious Assembly” use may be beneficial to industrial businesses in that they would operate during the off hours. If the City were to allow it, they could see what would happen. One Commissioner asked how Staff plans to address violations at 4900 France which is the only “Places for Religious Assembly” used in the District. Ms. McIntosh added Commissioners asked how likely it was that other properties in the MX-B District might convert to a “Places for Religious Assembly” use. While it cannot be a reason for determination as part of a land use application and the Planning Commission's scope of duties, there were considerations as to how “Places for Religious Assembly” would strengthen the City’s tax base. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan outlines the B-MU land use as the City’s greatest opportunity to provide employment intensity and be competitive economically as a City. Ms. McIntosh noted the Planning Commission expressed concerns regarding potential impacts to existing light industrial businesses in Brooklyn Center, the City’s support and protection of them, and whether introducing the proposed use would be consistent in providing “highest and best” uses in the area of the City. Finally, there were concerns about potential spot zoning to allow for use at a property of interest. Ms. McIntosh pointed out that the Planning Commission recommended approval of the requested ordinance amendment on a 3-2 vote at their September 12, 2024 meeting. Ms. McIntosh stated following the September Planning Commission meeting, the City Attorney informed City Staff that a Bill was passed during the legislative session regarding “sacred settlements” or “sacred communities.” The Bill went into effect on January 1, 2024. The Bill requires cities to allow religious institutions to permit micro-unit dwellings on properties owned by religious institutions as a permitted or conditional use regardless of the zoning district they are located. Ms. McIntosh explained the change is intended to provide additional means for faith communities to serve chronically homeless and extremely low-income individuals in accordance with religious vocations. Micro-units cannot exceed 400 square feet and must be built on a permanent chassis and anchored. Other minimum requirements include access to water and electricity and access to a common kitchen, toilet, bathing, and laundry consistent with boarding house requirements. City Staff doesn’t have enough information to determine whether these micro-unit dwellings would be of consideration or feasible on any of the properties within the MX-B District. Ms. McIntosh showed photo examples of micro-units. 9/23/24 -11 - Ms. McIntosh concluded City Staff remains in the position that, based on the findings presented within the provided report, the requested ordinance amendment should be denied. However, if the City Council elects to recommend approval of the request to amend Section 35-4103 to allow for Places for Religious Assembly as a conditional use in the Business Mixed-Use (MX-B) District, the motion language would need to be amended to approve a first reading and set the second reading of the ordinance amendment to October 14, 2024. Councilmember Kragness asked how the violations at 4900 France are being addressed and how the conditions are impacting Staff’s recommendation to deny the present application. Ms. McIntosh stated Staff has been paying more attention to 4900 France because of the new application. It will be handled by Code Enforcement Staff and law enforcement. Councilmember Kragness stated it is unfair for a new applicant to be hindered by another entity’s violations. Ms. McIntosh confirmed the two situations are being handled separately. The issues at 4900 France were only mentioned because it is the most similar use to the proposal. City Staff is working with other religious assemblies to expand as they are bigger than they used to be. There are requests for large auditoriums, schools, or call centers. Councilmember Kragness noted the interest in expansion is a good thing. Councilmember Jerzak explained he doesn’t like special permits or uses because each applicant would believe they are entitled to special treatment. He also supports the recommendation from Staff as they are professionals. He noted it is unclear if the entity is seeking tax-exempt status. The Planning Commission referenced the use may be beneficial to the tax base, but that has not been confirmed. Mayor Graves asked if Staff had received complaints regarding the mosque. Ms. McIntosh confirmed they have received complaints from neighboring businesses about the mosque. Mayor Graves asked if Staff would have the same recommendation to deny the application if the UDO wasn’t in place. Ms. McIntosh explained there was such a big gap between the previous code and the updated code. In 2019, the UDO guided the property as B-MU. The UDO is in line with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Mayor Graves asked for clarification on the restrictions of the UDO. Ms. McIntosh stated that Section 35-4103 of the Unified Development Ordinance outlines manufacturing, assembly, and processing of products, wholesale trade, foundries, and textile mills and mills products as uses only allowed or permitted by conditional use in the City’s MX-B and I Districts. Nyenatee Davis, Pastor of Trinity International Fellowship, introduced himself. Councilmember Jerzak asked what tax status the church plans to seek out. Mr. Davis explained they are working with an attorney to determine their tax status. Mayor Graves asked how long Trinity has been operating and how many attendees it has. Mr. Davis stated Trinity has been operating for five years, and they have around 128 regular attendees. 9/23/24 -12- Mayor Graves asked which building they were discussing. Ms. McIntosh showed an image of the building being considered. There is one user, MinMor Industries, but they have shifted their employees to primarily remote work. At most, there are about 20 employees on-site. Mayor Graves asked if Trinity had any employees. Mr. Davis stated there are four employees. Mayor Graves explained it is difficult to make decisions regarding conditional use permits, especially when a property isn’t owned by the City. The City needs a larger tax base and they need to be careful about how existing properties are redeveloped. However, they don’t want buildings to sit unused. Councilmember Jerzak moved to deny the zoning text amendment proposed by Applicant Trinity International Fellowship regarding Section 35-4103 (Allowed Use Table) of the City Code of Ordinances, and as outlined under Planning Commission Application No. 2024-011, that would allow for Places for Religious Assembly as a conditional use within the Business Mixed-Use (MX- B) District. The motion failed for lack of a second. Mayor Graves asked if there has been other interest in the building, specifically for uses that would employ people or generate taxes for the City. Ms. McIntosh stated other interests cannot be used in the decision-making process. In general, the B-MU and I Districts have been at a disadvantage for business and industrial uses because the buildings are older and don’t meet modern building standards for such uses. Many of the properties will need to be redeveloped, but there are some larger uses such as MedTronic that have found value in the area. There are limitations for assembly uses in office buildings along Earle Brown Drive because City Code will not allow for use above the third floor for assembly. There is great visibility for the area because of the bricks and its proximity to the highway. Councilmember Jerzak asked if taxes are currently being paid by the owner. Ms. McIntosh stated the current use is not exempt. Councilmember Jerzak suggested the item be tabled to allow for more information gathering. He requested information on the tax status of the proposed use. Ultimately, he doesn’t want to set a precedent or ignore Staff’s recommendation. Mayor Graves stated there could be a use similar to Resurrecting Faith World Ministries. Ms. McIntosh noted a caveat of the Tax Increment Financing (TIF) funds for Resurrecting Faith World Ministries was to create a for-profit arm because the City’s Economic Development Authority owned the property. Councilmember Jerzak moved and Councilmember Butler seconded to table consideration of the zoning text amendment proposed by Applicant Trinity International Fellowship regarding Section 35-4103 (Allowed Use Table) of the City Code of Ordinances, and as outlined under Planning 9/23/24 -13- Commission Application No. 2024-011, that would allow for Places for Religious Assembly as a conditional use within the Business Mixed-Use (MX-B) District. Motion passed unanimously. Dr. Edwards asked for the Council to notify Staff of information they would like presented on the item. Mayor Graves stated she would like more information regarding the new Bill regarding “sacred settlements” or “sacred communities.” Councilmember Jerzak stated he would like information on the current tax status of the building, the tax status of the proposed use, details on why Staff recommended the denial, and any implications from setting a precedent through allowing the application. 10. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS 10a. RESOLUTION NO. 2024-93; APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY 2025 PROPERTY TAX LEVY AND RESOLUTION NO. 2024-94; PRELIMINARY BUDGET City Manager Reggie Edwards introduced the item and provided a presentation. He thanked Staff for their work on the budget and levy. He explained the purpose of the presentation is to present the 2025 preliminary levy and budget, provide insight into the factors that guided the development of the 2025 preliminary and levy budget, provide budget highlights, note fiscal analysis and impacts, and explain next steps. Dr. Edwards noted on May 6, 2024, there was a Joint Work Session for the City Council and Finance Commission to discuss Capital Improvement Plan and Capital Funds. August 19, 2024, there was another Joint Work Session which included budget request presentations by Department leaders, debt service, and the Central Garage. Dr. Edwards pointed out that on November 18, 2024, the City Council and Finance Commission will have a Joint Work Session to cover budget request presentations on EDA, utilities, Enterprise Funds, and Grant Funds. Finally, on December 2, 2024, there will be a meeting to adopt the 2025 budget and levy. Dr. Edwards explained the mission of Brooklyn Center is to actively provide a safe, welcoming, and inclusive community. In pursuit of the vision of one Brooklyn Center, the City will provide high-quality, equitable city services that demonstrate we are inclusive and welcoming. Through its actions, the City will establish an engaged relationship with the community. This includes increasing the safety and well-being of residents, City employees, businesses, and visitors while adding a wide range of economic development improvements. All this leads to a renewed sense of pride in the City, its physical condition, and its aesthetics. Dr. Edwards noted guiding factors for the budget include recognizing unprecedented events and challenges faced by residents and staff over the past few years, the economic condition and the tax 9/23/24 -14- capacity of residents, and an intent to balance the needs for economic growth, health, and well‐ being of people, longer‐term fiscal stability, pursuit of City Council direction, and providing City services at an affordable cost for residents. Dr. Edwards stated the initial request from Departments would require a 14.22 percent levy. However, the budget was pared down to a proposed 8.96 percent. The basic costs such as debt service, salary and benefit increases, and other inflation considerations, would require a levy higher than 8.96 percent. Staff was asked to be creative about cutting funds in their Departments to lower the levy further. Dr. Edwards explained a $2.2 million investment includes $1 million for a three percent wages and benefits increase, $161,440 for a gap fill, $239,000 for a 24-hour Fire Duty Crew, $40,000 for service performance analysis, $100,00 for salary wage competitiveness, $515,000 for capital infrastructure bonding, then $136,000 for other costs. Dr. Edwards noted there were $1.3 million in reductions and adjustments. Administrative transfers accounted for $291,000, one-time funding provided $106,000, there was $35,000 from Entertainment in the Park and the Juneteenth celebration, $9,400 from interns and seasonal workers, $50,000 from a reduction in salary competitiveness, $64,000 from overtime limits, $112,000 from freezing Parks and Recreation outreach efforts, reducing prevention and intervention efforts by $25,000, City-wide landscaping for $75,000, redirecting reserve contributions by $231,000, $55,000 for maintenance on Brooklyn Boulevard, $84,000 for a shared administrative assistant, and an additional $177,600 of miscellaneous reductions. Dr. Edwards pointed out the 8.96 percent levy equates to $2,189,494 including the bonding. Staff is looking for new revenue streams and overall economic growth of the City. Director of Fiscal and Support Services Angela Holm explained the City’s current budget policies provide a basic framework and assist in the decision-making process. Policies include a balanced budget, current revenue should pay for current expenses, contingency of up to five percent of the budget, providing adequate funding for capital replacement and maintenance, the budget should describe goals, services and programs, and a targeted unassigned General Fund balance of 50 to 52 percent of the next year’s General Fund budget. Ms. Holm noted there are also revenue policies that direct how the City maintains the ability to pay for services it provides its customers. The policies include maintaining a diversified and sta- ble revenue system, an annual revenue estimates completed through an objective conservative analytical process, user fees should be reviewed and revised on an annual basis, fees and user charges for Enterprise Funds should fully support total direct and indirect costs, and user fees for City services will generally be established at a level which will recover the full cost of providing the service. Ms. Holm showed a graph of the median value homes in the City over the years. The value has been steadily increasing since 2014. The median home value in 2024 is $272,100, which is a slight increase from 2023’s median home value. She also showed a list of median home values 9/23/24 -15- in comparison to other cities. Brooklyn Center has a lower median home value than Golden Valley, New Hope, Richfield, Crystal, and Robbinsdale. The median home values in nearby neighborhoods in Minneapolis are slightly lower than in Brooklyn Center. Ms. Holm showed a table with taxable market value estimates. Overall, there is a 0.6 percent increase from 2024 to 2025. Industrial has somewhat increased, which allowed the residential tax capacity to decrease and carry less of the burden. Ms. Holm pointed out a property tax levy increase or decrease of one percent is approximately $244,000 in revenue. The total payable levy from 2024 was around $24.4 million. The estimated total levy for 2024 is $26,625,814, which is an 8.96 percent increase. The numbers would be recalculated should the Council move forward with the proposed levy. Ms. Holm also showed a pie chart for the annual cost of government in Brooklyn Center for the median home. For example, the Police Department costs the median household $612 and the Fire Department costs $150. Ms. Holm then showed a slide with projected property tax impacts for 2025. With an 8.96 percent levy, the median single-family household would see an increase of $97 in the City portion of taxes for the year. Each percent of the levy would add or decrease $14 for the average single-family household. Ms. Holm reiterated on November 18, 2024, the City Council and Finance Commission will have a Joint Work Session to cover budget request presentations on EDA, utilities, Enterprise Funds, and Grant Funds. Finally, on December 2, 2024, there will be a meeting to adopt the 2025 budget and levy. Dr. Edwards noted there are a number of scenarios that could impact the levy. First, if the City were to receive the SAFER (Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response) Grant, the levy could be reduced to 7.96 percent. If Brooklyn Center received the Grant and restored some cuts that are reoccurring costs, then the levy could stay at 8.96 percent. If the City doesn’t receive the SAFER Grant, they could reduce the levy to 7.96 percent by postponing the 24-hour Fire Duty Crew or freeze other personnel. Alternatively, the budget and levy could stay as presented at 8.96 percent without the Grant. Councilmember Kragness asked how much the SAFER Grant would be for. Fire Chief Berg stated the grant would be $1.3 million for three years. Councilmember Butler asked what impacts Brooklyn Center would see should the Duty Crew be postponed. Dr. Edwards stated they would seek out the SAFER Grant again and wait until a future budget cycle to implement a Duty Crew. In 2024, two positions were budgeted for. The Duty Crew requires five personnel, so the Crew couldn’t be implemented without additional funds. The two positions have not been hired for. 9/23/24 -16- Fire Chief Berg pointed out that 8,790 hours need to be covered by the Duty Crew throughout the year. Councilmember Kragness stated the Grant would be for $1.3 million for three years. If the levy were to go down one percent, there would be a decrease in the budget by $244,000. However, the Grant is much higher than a one percent change. Ms. Holm stated the SAFER Grant would cover three additional personnel. The levy could go down by at least one percent because the SAFER Grant would provide $433,000 per year. Staff would need to determine if the three years could be lengthened to use the funds to create more gradual funding for the program. Councilmember Jerzak noted Staff is in a hard position to make a lot of cuts while they have interest in growing their programs. Employees are also unsure if their positions will remain funded. The Council must consider the tax impacts and rent impacts of a steep levy along with the population in Brooklyn Center. In an ideal scenario, there would be no levy. Councilmember Jerzak stated Brooklyn Center has been promising a Duty Crew to its residents. The overtime and on-call efforts for employees is unsustainable. Councilmember Jerzak pointed out that the increase for taxpayers would be more than 8.96 percent considering the County taxes, schools, and the potential referendum. There is a comment in the budget that alludes to an increase in utility costs as well. Councilmember Jerzak added another concern is the lack of money in the Emergency Fund, and there isn’t enough being put into it with the proposed budget. He would like to see any excess funds from underspending or frozen positions be attributed to the Emergency Fund. Dr. Edwards explained the Emergency Fund is to address issues such as a bridge collapse. However, there are other reserves. The City is somewhat short of its six months of reserves, but that is a guiding tenet rather than a requirement. Councilmember Jerzak noted on page 95, there was a transfer to the Economic Development Authority (EDA) budget. He asked why the transfer was made. Dr. Edwards stated the transfer was to promote balance. It is a top priority to grow the economy and maintain Staff, but they also hope to keep the levy low. The permit fees were decreased for development. They hope to grow their resources within the EDA. Councilmember Jerzak stated he tries to understand the budget in a way he can easily explain to neighbors. The monthly cost for public safety is less than $10 for the average household, and people can get behind that. Councilmember Kragness asked why Common Sense was moved from professional services to other services. Ms. Holm explained the State has identified a number of services that are considered professional services. Previously, Staff would put miscellaneous services under professional services. Now miscellaneous services are categorized under other services. The goal 9/23/24 -17- is to align their finances more closely to the State’s chart of accounts. It is a painful transition, but it will even out over the years. Councilmember Kragness noted she didn’t realize there was an 80 percent increase. There may have been a typo due to a discrepancy. She asked what else is included in an 80 percent increase in the contract. Ms. Holm stated she would need to review the contract again to provide the most accurate answer. Mayor Graves stated her preferred scenario would be to keep the levy at 8.96 percent even if the SAFER Grant were received. The City’s work around economic development is under-resourced. Brooklyn Center needs to bring in more money to offset the tax burden on the residents. Community Development funds only represent a small percentage of the services, but it needs to have a higher priority because it would help to fund the other services. Councilmember Jerzak noted his agreement with Mayor Graves. The permit revenues tend to offset Community Development’s costs. He added Council previously had a consensus to fund a Duty Crew. Councilmember Kragness stated she would like to reduce the levy to 7.96 percent if possible. She thanked Staff for their work on the budget and pointed out the process is much clearer than in previous years. Councilmember Butler agreed the process was more efficient this year. She stated she would support the scenario with 8.96 percent and the SAFER Grant. A lower levy would require a more burdensome increase in future budget cycles. Councilmember Jerzak stated he would like any restored funds to go toward the Emergency Fund. In that scenario, he could support a levy of 8.96 percent with the SAFER Grant. Mayor Graves moved and Councilmember Butler seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2024- 93 approving a preliminary tax capacity levy for the General Fund and Debt Service Fund and a market value levy for the Housing and Redevelopment Authority for property taxes payable in 2025 and to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2024-94 approving a preliminary budget for the 2025 Fiscal Year. Motion passed unanimously. 11. COUNCIL REPORT Councilmember Butler reported on her attendance at the following and provided information on the following upcoming events: • Participated in a ride-along with CEAP for meal delivery. She recommended the experience. 9/23/24 -18- Councilmember Kragness reported on her attendance at the following and provided information on the following upcoming events: • Participated in a ride-along with CEAP for meal delivery. She recommended the experience. She provided details on the routes and scope of services. There are opportunities to volunteer for deliveries. • Attended a trip to Albuquerque to learn about an extended response model. There was a lot of collaboration in the model and focused on the specific needs of the community. Services were even expanded to provide clothes for community members. • Pointed out that the deadline for Random Acts of Kindness is October 18, 2024. Councilmember Jerzak reported on his attendance at the following and provided information on the following upcoming events: • Attended the Fire Department 75th Anniversary and thanked Staff for their work on the event. • Noted he has a one-to-one meeting set up with the Hwy 252 Task Force. • Met with community members regarding the budget. Mayor Graves reported on her attendance at the following and provided information on the following upcoming events: • Attended the Fire Department 75th Anniversary. • Recorded a Mayor’s Minutes video. • Attended an event at the Brooklyn Park Small Business Center. • Participated in an interview regarding Hwy 252. • Completed administrative work related to the Tourism Board. • Attended the Crime Prevention Federal Advocacy Committee through the National League of Cities. • Met with Dr. Edwards. • Met with the various community residents. 12. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Graves moved and Councilmember Jerzak seconded adjournment of the City Council meeting at 9:20 p.m. Motion passed unanimously.