HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025.01.27 CCP REGULARCITY COUNCIL
MEETING
City Hall Council Chambers
January 27, 2025
AGENDA
1. Call to Order - 7:00 p.m.
Attendees please turn off cell phones and pages during the meeting. A copy of the full
meeting packet is available in the binder at the entrance to the Council Chambers.
2. Roll Call
3. Pledge of Allegiance
4. Informal Open Forum
This is an opportunity for the public to address the City Council on items that are not on the
agenda. It is limited to 15 minutes. It may not be used to make personal attacks, air
personal grievances, make political endorsements, or for political campaign purposes.
Council Members will not enter into a dialogue with the presenter. Questions from the
Council will be for clarification purposes only. It will not be used as a time for problem-
solving or reacting to the comments made but for hearing the presenter for informational
purposes only. The first call will be for those that have notified the Clerk that they would
like to speak during the open forum and then ask if anyone connected to this meeting
would like to speak. When called upon, please indicate your name and then proceed.
Please be sure to state your name before speaking.
a. Meeting Decorum
5. Invocation
6. Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda
These items are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one
motion. There isn't a separate discussion for these items unless a Councilmember so
requests, then it is moved to the end of the Council Consideration Items.
a. Approval of Minutes
b. Approval of Licenses
c. Resolution Accepting Additional Grant Funding for a Fifth Intensive
Comprehensive Peace Officer Education & Training (ICPOET) Position
d. Resolution Supporting the Pursuit of Minnesota Department of Employment
and Economic Development Redevelopment Grant Program Funding for the
Acquisition of the Brown College Site at 5951 Earle Brown Drive
7. Presentations/Proclamations/Recognitions/Donations
8. Public Hearings
9. Planning Commission Items
Page 1 of 52
10. Council Consideration Items
11. Council Report
12. Adjournment
Page 2 of 52
COUNCIL MEETING DECORUM
To ensure meetings are conducted in a professional and courteous manner which enables the orderly
conduct of business, all persons in attendance or who participate in such meetings shall conduct
themselves in a manner that does not interfere with the ability of others to observe and, when allowed,
to participate without disruption or fear of intimidation.
A. Decorum. Persons who attend meetings must avoid conduct that disrupts, interferes with, or
disturbs the orderly conduct of the meeting or the ability of other attendees to observe and
participate as appropriate. To that end, persons who attend meetings are subject to the following:
(1) Members of the public may only speak during meetings when allowed under Council Rules
and only after being recognized by the presiding officer. The presiding officer may establish
time limits for the acceptance of public comments or testimony.
(2) Public comments or testimony must be addressed to the presiding officer and not to other
Council Members, staff, or others in attendance.
(3) All elected officials shall be referred to by their proper title and surname.
(4) Public comments should avoid personal accusations, profanity, or other improper content for
a public meeting.
(5) Intimidating behaviors, threats of hostility, or actual violence are disallowed.
(6) Audible demonstrations intended to disrupt the meeting should be avoided, including
stomping of feet, snapping of fingers, clapping of hands, and other conduct that may be
intimidating or threatening to others.
(7) Holding, displaying, or placing banners, signs, objects, or other materials in any way that
endangers others, prevents the free flow of individuals within the chamber, or obstructs or
prevents the viewing of the meeting by others is not allowed.
B. The presiding officer shall request any person(s) who disrupt, interfere with or disturb the
orderly conduct of a meeting to cease the conduct and, as necessary, shall issue an oral
warning to the individual(s) found to be in violation. If the individual(s) persists in disrupting,
interfering with, or disturbing the meeting, the presiding officer may have the individual(s)
removed or, under appropriate circumstances, temporarily clear the gallery. If for any reason
the presiding officer fails to take such action, a majority vote may be substituted for action
by the presiding officer to maintain order and decorum over the proceedings.
C. The Council Chambers capacity is 76 persons per fire code.
Page 3 of 52
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 1/27/2025
TO: City Council
FROM: Barb Suciu, City Clerk
THROUGH: Daren Nyquist, Deputy City Manager
BY: Shannon Pettit, Deputy City Clerk
SUBJECT: Approval of Minutes
Requested Council Action:
- Motion to approve meeting minutes
Background:
In accordance with Minnesota State Statute 15.17, the official records of all meetings must be
documented and approved by the governing body.
Budget Issues:
- None
Inclusive Community Engagement:
- None
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
- None
Strategic Priorities and Values:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. 2025.01.13 SS - unapproved
2. 2025.01.13 CC - unapproved
3. 2025.01.13 WS - unapproved
Page 4 of 52
1/13/25 -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
JANUARY 13, 2025
CITY HALL – COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Study Session called to order by Mayor April Graves at
6:07 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Mayor April Graves and Councilmembers Kris Lawrence-Anderson, Dan Jerzak, Teneshia
Kragness, and Laurie Ann Moore. Also present were City Manager Reggie Edwards, City Clerk
Barb Suciu, Deputy City Clerk Shannon Pettit, and City Attorney Siobhan Tolar.
COUNCIL MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION ITEMS
DISCUSSION OF RESOLUTION 2024-138 – COMMUNITY SAFETY COMMISSION
City Manager Reggie Edwards asked if the items could be brought to a future Work Session. A
new policy would be required to allow an item to be moved to a Work Session or Study Session.
Councilmember Moore pointed out Work Sessions are an opportunity for Council to discuss an
item, but no action can be taken. A Study Session, however, an item can be moved to the regular
agenda. Dr. Edwards stated there is no written policy dictating the procedure.
Councilmember Moore noted many of the topics have been extensively discussed, and she has
participated as a resident. She stated she would like to vote on Resolution 2024-128.
Mayor Graves stated it hadn’t been the Council’s practice to move an item from a Work Session
or Study Session to the Regular Session without an overwhelming majority agreeing to do so.
Anyone could bring an item to a Study Session and subsequently request the item be voted on in
the Regular Session.
Councilmember Moore explained the item was taken at the end of a previous meeting, which
included a lame duck Councilmember. She agreed the topic had been thoroughly discussed. The
two items on the current Study Session agenda were previously voted on, but she did not vote on
them. There was dissent in the vote, and there was not a consensus. She should have the option
to move an item to the Regular Session as well.
Page 5 of 52
1/13/25 -2- DRAFT
Mayor Graves requested the existing policy be presented to the Council to ensure they abide by
their own rules. Dr. Edwards stated that the present Study Session format was a pilot format
requested during a past Council retreat. Therefore, there isn’t a policy in place.
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated an item could be moved to the Regular Session when
Mayor Wilson was on the Council.
Councilmember Jerzak pointed out Mayor Graves previously expressed openness to continued
conversation on the topic. He would like to seek out further consensus. The previous vote seemed
like a last-minute push. Also, the Daunte Wright and Kobe Dimock-Heisler Community Safety
and Violence Prevention Resolution was not fully reviewed, which was requested multiple times.
It was also problematic that the Council received the documents at the last minute.
Mayor Graves confirmed she would be open to continued conversation.
Councilmember Kragness noted if an item has been voted on, it should not be reconsidered. This
is a principle previously expressed by Councilmember Jerzak when items were presented related
to the Implementation Committee. There shouldn’t be a precedent set to vote again on items that
have been decided on, especially when there is a new Councilmember.
Councilmember Jerzak agreed he usually disagrees with revoting an item. The difference in this
situation is the lack of transparency through the document-sharing process and the lack of thorough
review of the Daunte Wright and Kobe Dimock-Heisler Community Safety and Violence
Prevention Resolution. Overall, the process was unfair and rushed.
Councilmember Jerzak stated there are several concerns with the documents such as the
introduction of bias by requiring members to have past interactions with law enforcement,
meddling with existing processes, and overall lack of clarity. Policies should only be made by the
Council. He stated he would be open to further discussion. There is already an issue with obtaining
a quorum on existing Commissions. Also, the proposed group is not intended to be punitive but
to build community.
Councilmember Moore added the Daunte Wright and Kobe Dimock-Heisler Community Safety
and Violence Prevention Resolution has been discussed for quite a while. A final vote on the
future of the Resolution has not been held. Plus, the fifth item in the Daunte Wright and Kobe
Dimock-Heisler Community Safety and Violence Prevention Resolution has not been discussed
and refined by the Council.
Mayor Graves stated staff was directed to edit the Daunte Wright and Kobe Dimock-Heisler
Community Safety and Violence Prevention Resolution based on the discussions held by the
Council. The Council received a presentation from staff, but the Council was not open to starting
the process while the Implementation Committee was still working. Multiple departments and
staff members have contributed to the proposed structure of the group. There are the same if not
more details for the Community Safety Commission in comparison to other Commissions. Any
Page 6 of 52
1/13/25 -3- DRAFT
policies suggested by a Commission still require approval by the City Council. All voting
members are residents.
Mayor Graves reviewed the details of the Community Safety Commission and read from
Resolution 2024-138.
“The scope of activity of the Commission shall consist of advising the City Council and other City
advisory commissions and committees regarding matters relevant to Community Safety and
Violence Prevention functions.
“In accordance with the Act and the findings set forth above, and in fulfillment of its purpose, the
Commission’s duties and responsibilities of the Commission include, but are not limited to, the
following: develop, advise, recommend, and upon adoption by the City Council, monitor the
execution of a comprehensive plan and recommend amendments to the plan as warranted relevant
to community safety and violence prevention matters in the City, including the Act, advise and
assist the City in the adoption of policies and procedures by the City Council responsive to
changing diverse community needs and concerns in matters of community safety and violence
prevention, annually report to the City Council regarding accomplishments toward fulfillment of
such comprehensive plan and recommend amendments to the plan as warranted, advise and assist
the City in reviewing and discussing community safety and violence prevention policies for the
City, and make recommendations to the City Council concerning community safety and violence
prevention in the City, work with City staff and other Commissions on matters regarding
community safety and violence prevention in the City, review current community safety and
violence prevention initiatives, practices, and policies, work with neighborhood committees to
understand the community safety and violence prevention needs of each area in the City, identify
high-priority areas for community safety and violence prevention in the community and analyze
methods of fulfilling these needs and interests and presenting alternative recommendations for
actions to the City Council, provide opportunities for the citizens of Brooklyn Center to voice their
concerns and opinions regarding community safety and violence prevention matters, recommend
new and innovative concepts in community safety and violence prevention for the City, advise,
review and make recommendations for the City’s response to protests, review the current
collective bargaining agreement between the City make recommendations prior to final approval
to the City Manager, and periodically make any other recommendations to the City Council related
to initiating programs or policies to improve community health in the City.
“The Commission shall be composed of a Chairperson and six voting members and four non-
voting advisors, all of whom shall be appointed and serve as set forth below. All voting members
of the Commission shall be residents with direct experience or contact with the public safety,
judicial or public health systems. Or have had direct contact or expertise with one or more of the
public safety, judicial or public health systems. All non-voting advisors shall be appointed and
serve as set forth below. All non-voting advisors shall have direct experience or contact with the
public safety, judicial or public health systems or have had direct contact or expertise with one or
more of the public safety, judicial or public health systems.”
Page 7 of 52
1/13/25 -4- DRAFT
Mayor Graves pointed out the Daunte Wright and Kobe Dimock-Heisler Community Safety and
Violence Prevention Resolution and the Community Safety Commission is in response to the
killing of Duante Wright by Brooklyn Center police. The Community Safety Commission also
derives from the settlement with the family. The goal is to improve public safety for all residents
of Brooklyn Center. The only other item that may need review is the collective bargaining
agreement. However, the agreement is a public document, and any resident may provide input to
Dr. Edwards. Overall, any issues with the Community Safety Commission are unclear.
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson noted she is disappointed the fifth section of the Daunte
Wright and Kobe Dimock-Heisler Community Safety and Violence Prevention Resolution was not
rewritten prior to the initiation of the Community Safety Commission, which is why she voted
against the Community Safety Commission at the previous meeting.
Mayor Graves stated the Council has discussed the fifth section and Resolution 2024-138 was
created by staff to encompass said discussion. Mayor Graves asked what objections
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson previously had to the fifth section of the Daunte Wright and
Kobe Dimock-Heisler Community Safety and Violence Prevention Resolution.
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson pointed out the Daunte Wright and Kobe Dimock-Heisler
Community Safety and Violence Prevention Resolution calls for a Commission with a “majority
of whose members must be City residents with direct experience being arrested, detained, or
having other similar contact with Brooklyn Center Police.”
Mayor Graves stated the membership was edited to say, “All voting members of the Commission
shall be residents with direct experience or contact with the public safety, judicial or public health
systems.”
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated staff made the changes. Mayor Graves agreed staff
made the changes based on the discussion and concerns expressed by the Council.
Councilmember Jerzak stated there wasn’t an opportunity for a complete discussion of the fifth
item. He asked why there is a requirement for the membership to have interactions with law
enforcement. Mayor Graves stated the document calls for a majority of membership with
experience with various legal systems. It means much more than people who have been arrested.
Councilmember Jerzak stated experience with various legal systems creates an implicit bias.
Mayor Graves stated nearly everyone has had experiences with public safety, judicial, or public
health systems. It is hardly exclusionary.
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson noted the Council never had a work or Study Session to
review the differences between the Daunte Wright and Kobe Dimock-Heisler Community Safety
and Violence Prevention Resolution and Resolution 2024-138. Mayor Graves explained the
purpose of the previous meeting was for comparison. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated
the conversation was too rushed.
Page 8 of 52
1/13/25 -5- DRAFT
Councilmember Kragness stated she is unsure why there is an issue with Resolution 2024-138.
Every concern expressed by the Council was incorporated into Resolution 2024-138, and the
document is a fair compromise.
Councilmember Moore pointed out she was present in the audience for the meeting. At 10:00
p.m., Mayor Graves extended the meeting until 10:30 p.m. At 10:29 p.m., Councilmember Butler
called the item to a vote, and the vote was split 3-2. For Councilmember Butler to call an item to
a vote one minute before the end of the meeting is disconcerting.
Councilmember Jerzak reiterated he has issues with the protests and the collective bargaining
agreements. He asked if there is a Council consensus to set a 45-day freeze on implementing the
Community Safety Commission. He wants to work something out. Alternatively, he offered to
make a motion to revote the item.
Councilmember Moore noted her agreement with Councilmember Jerzak. She asked Dr. Edwards
if a 45-day freeze is an option and if the timeline would work out by other scheduled topics. Dr.
Edwards stated a Study Session is an opportunity for the Council to discuss whatever they would
like. Therefore, it is the Council’s purview to determine the time frame for a freeze.
Mayor Graves reiterated her openness to further conversation. However, the details of concern
remain unclear. She requested staff draft a new version of the fifth section of the Daunte Wright
and Kobe Dimock-Heisler Community Safety and Violence Prevention Resolution reflecting past
discussions.
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she wants to review the original Daunte Wright and
Kobe Dimock-Heisler Community Safety and Violence Prevention Resolution before rewriting
anything. The item needs to be discussed. She voted against the Community Safety Commission
because she needed more time to consider the item.
Mayor Graves reiterated the remaining concerns are unclear. The process being rushed is not a
sincere concern with Resolution 2024-138. She suggested Councilmembers are being bogged
down by concerns with the original Daunte Wright and Kobe Dimock-Heisler Community Safety
and Violence Prevention Resolution rather than offering solutions.
Councilmember Moore stated Mayor Graves shouldn’t correct the feelings of others regarding the
Daunte Wright and Kobe Dimock-Heisler Community Safety and Violence Prevention Resolution.
Mayor Graves stated she is not saying anything about the feelings of Councilmember Lawrence-
Anderson. Councilmember Moore stated Mayor Graves is not Councilmember Lawrence-
Anderson’s therapist.
Mayor Graves stated Councilmember Moore doesn’t need to stand up for Councilmember
Lawrence-Anderson. Councilmember Moore stated she would be a defender of all of her
colleagues.
Page 9 of 52
1/13/25 -6- DRAFT
Mayor Graves pointed out Councilmember Moore hasn’t been recognized by the presiding officer
to speak. Councilmember Moore stated she raised a Point of Order, so she will be recognized.
Mayor Graves asked the City Attorney if it was a proper Point of Order. Councilmember Moore
stated it is a proper Point of Order in her opinion.
Mayor Graves explained she meant no offense toward Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson.
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she understood. She pointed out the Council didn’t
participate in rewriting the section in question. Instead, staff provided a rewritten version. Mayor
Graves noted that is the usual process of the Council.
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson explained she is worried the documents will be co-mingled.
She didn’t initially support the Daunte Wright and Kobe Dimock-Heisler Community Safety and
Violence Prevention Resolution due to the short time frame. Mayor Graves agreed she had
concerns with the original document, but those have been reviewed by the Council.
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she would like to review each section of the Daunte
Wright and Kobe Dimock-Heisler Community Safety and Violence Prevention Resolution and
create a new document. Mayor Graves noted they had already reviewed the sections.
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she didn’t remember having a discussion on the fifth
section.
Mayor Graves directed staff to gather minutes and dates from all previous discussions the Council
has held regarding the refinement of Daunte Wright and Kobe Dimock-Heisler Community Safety
and Violence Prevention Resolution.
Councilmember Jerzak asked if he should make a motion or seek a consensus about freezing
Resolution 2024-138 pending further discussion. City Attorney Siobhan Tolar stated a motion
would be the appropriate action.
Councilmember Jerzak moved Councilmember Moore seconded to end the discussion because
they are going in circles.
Motion passed unanimously.
Councilmember Kragness asked if Councilmembers Jerzak and Lawrence-Anderson need more
time to review the document. She also asked if they would still need more time if Councilmember
Butler were on the Council.
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated they needed more time to review the fifth section of
the Daunte Wright and Kobe Dimock-Heisler Community Safety and Violence Prevention
Resolution before forming a Commission.
Page 10 of 52
1/13/25 -7- DRAFT
Councilmember Jerzak asked if Resolution 2024-138 was frozen. Ms. Tolar explained the only
motion made was about ending the discussion.
Councilmember Jerzak moved Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson to suspend implementation
of the Community Safety Commission for up to 45 days until the Council has the time to review
Resolution 2021-73.
Councilmember Kragness and Mayor Graves voted against the same. Motion passed.
DISCUSSION OF RESOLUTION 2024-128 – CODE OF CONDUCT
Mayor Graves asked Councilmember Moore to start discussion of the item as she requested it be
on the agenda. Councilmember Moore asked if Dr. Edwards or the Mayor were supposed to
provide an overview of the item. Mayor Graves explained because Councilmember Moore
requested the topic, she should speak on the item first.
Councilmember Moore reiterated Resolution 2024-128 was passed at the last minute of a late
meeting. While she served as a Commissioner, she received a complaint about her conduct without
receiving any information about the content of the complaint. She participated in a review process,
so a process is in place. The item was voted on by a lame duck Councilmember, and the item
won’t apply to her.
Councilmember Moore noted another member of the Council was willing to wait to vote on the
item until a new Council was set. However, it wasn’t reflected in her vote. Additionally, the vote
was split showing a lack of consensus.
Councilmember Moore pointed out that the bulk of the Code of Conduct is a copy of Brooklyn
Park’s policy. The policy has the potential to be weaponized against any Commissioner,
Councilmember, staff member, or resident.
Councilmember Jerzak explained he has not been supportive of the item. Resolution 2024-128
references City Charter Section 14.04(A), but no such section exists. He pointed out that the
document would be weaponized against Councilmembers. As they are elected officials, they
should rely on the public vote to determine their place on the Council. There is ample policy in
place such as in the Charter to address conduct. Based on a recent memo on which he is not
allowed to comment, he would be open to a future conversation on the memo regarding freedom
of speech.
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson added the censure process has not been clearly determined.
There is an overall lack of clarity. She supports ethical conduct. There is an existing code, and
the two documents need to be compared.
Page 11 of 52
1/13/25 -8- DRAFT
Councilmember Kragness noted the purpose of the Code of Conduct is to promote accountability.
She confirmed she previously stated she was willing to wait to vote until there was a new Council
in place. However, she changed her mind based on comments made by Councilmember Moore
during the public comment. There was a lack of professionalism and the role of the Mayor was
not honored. Mayor Graves has a high tolerance of disrespect. As Mayor Pro Tem,
Councilmember Kragness stated she would not have such a high tolerance of disrespect.
Councilmember Kragness added the amount of pushback on the document shows the need for an
accountability measure. If the Council wants to hold the public to certain conduct standards, then
the Council itself must also be held to a high standard. Ultimately, she doesn’t have an issue with
the document because she is not disrespectful or unprofessional.
Mayor Graves explained the effort to create a Code of Conduct derived from multiple complaints
she had received. While there may be an investigative process, there is no accountability process.
The intention was for the document to apply to both Council and Commissions. There was little
to no pushback on the guidelines as they would apply to Commissioners. There is pushback from
Councilmembers likely because they have been the subject of a complaint.
Mayor Graves noted she has served on the Council for ten years and received one complaint from
another Councilmember. She sat down with the Councilmember and apologized for the contention,
and they were able to work together well. She supports the Code of Conduct in place because she
isn’t concerned about her actions being disrespectful. Also, if she had been the subject of recent
complaints, she would make the decision to abstain from the vote as it may have been a conflict
of interest.
Mayor Graves pointed out the same issues keep coming up. The initial reason for pushing back
the item was because Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson wasn’t present, and Mayor Graves was
flexible and waited to vote until all Councilmembers were present.
Mayor Graves added there is hypocrisy because the Council wants to hold others accountable but
not hold themselves accountable for their own actions. She previously expressed concern about
waiting to vote on the item as the opposition was awaiting more votes to support their perspective.
Mayor Graves read a portion of the minutes from the previous meeting:
“Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson explained she thoroughly read the minutes of the previous
conversation on the topic. She noted there is no definition for what constitutes a censure. She had
requested clarification, but she has not received a response. The only issue she has with the
document is the unclear accountability measures.
“Mayor Graves stated the first step is a verbal warning, then a written warning, and then the
Council would have to agree to censure a Councilmember. There has also been a discussion on the
accountability process for Commissions. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she would
write legal clarification of what offenses would warrant a censure.
Page 12 of 52
1/13/25 -9- DRAFT
“City Attorney Siobhan Tolar stated a violation of the policy could result in an accountability
measure. The document includes relationships between Councilmembers and various entities such
as the public, staff, and other Councilmembers. The first step is a verbal warning, the second is a
written warning, and the third would be a vote to censure.
“Ms. Tolar explained Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson previously asked for a definition of a
censure. A censure is a public admonition by the Council that declares an individual has violated
the Code of Conduct.
“Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she agrees with much of the document, but she does
agree with points made by Councilmember Jerzak. This is not an item that should be handled at
the final meeting of the year.
“Ms. Tolar added the proposed resolution includes a provision for potential future amendments.
The Council has the opportunity to revise the resolution as needed.
“Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson pointed out that the Charter also addresses conduct and
ethics. Mayor Graves stated the Charter doesn’t include any accountability measures.
“Councilmember Jerzak moved and Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson seconded to table the
Resolution Adopting a City Council Code of Conduct of Ethics… Motion failed.”
Mayor Graves stated ultimately, some members of the Council do not agree with being held
accountable for their actions.
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson agreed the Council should be held to the highest standard.
There is an existing document related to conduct, and it needs to be compared to the proposed
version. Mayor Graves stated the existing document was reviewed step by step with the City
Attorney, though Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson may not have been present. Nonetheless,
the minutes are available to read through. The primary difference between the existing documents
and the proposed one is accountability measures.
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she would like to understand what would constitute a
censure. Mayor Graves stated publicly defaming staff or Councilmembers would require some
accountability measures. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she would like examples
spelled out.
Councilmember Kragness stated if someone doesn’t want to be censured, then they should follow
the Code of Conduct.
Councilmember Jerzak explained he is open to accountability measures. However, the proposed
changes don’t account for half-truths or lies. He is not allowed to speak about his personal
experience with the complaint process, but it doesn’t feel good. The policies may be used against
those with opposing political ideals. Overall, he has been professional. Especially considering
Page 13 of 52
1/13/25 -10- DRAFT
freedom of speech, people need a thick skin. He reiterated the voters can decide whom they want
to lead the community.
Councilmember Moore asked if defaming social media posts and being berated during Open
Forum has any consequences. Dr. Edwards previously told her there is no recourse for such actions.
Councilmember Moore pointed out she doesn’t recall Mayor Graves saying she felt disrespected.
She holds the Mayor in the highest esteem. She apologized if any of her comments were
disrespectful, and she requested Mayor Graves speak to her directly about any issues.
Councilmember Moore noted her agreement with Councilmember Jerzak. The policy will be
weaponized against Councilmembers. She added Council comments are being used as weapons
against her.
Councilmember moved and Councilmember Jerzak seconded to repeal Resolution 2024-128.
Councilmember Kragness and Mayor Graves voted against the same. Motion passed.
Mayor Graves stated the rest of the agenda would have to be handled after the Regular Session.
Councilmember Jerzak pointed out there wasn’t an opportunity to discuss miscellaneous items.
Mayor Graves stated they would return to the Study Session should time allow.
CITY MANAGER MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION ITEMS
COUNCIL AGENDA PACKET DELIVERY DATE DISCUSSION
This item was discussed after the Regular Session, Work Session, and Economic Development
Authority Work Session were completed.
RECESS STUDY SESSION TO INFORMAL OPEN FORUM WITH CITY COUNCIL
Mayor Graves recessed the Study Session meeting at 7:08 p.m.
RECONVENE STUDY SESSION
The Brooklyn Center City Council reconvened the Study Session at 9:08 p.m.
CITY MANAGER MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION ITEMS
COUNCIL AGENDA PACKET DELIVERY DATE DISCUSSION
Dr. Edwards introduced the item. He explained Departments submit their materials on a Monday
for Dr. Edwards to review and revise on Tuesday and Wednesday. The goal is to distribute packets
by Thursday preceding a Council meeting. In 2021, the Council requested the packets be available
Page 14 of 52
1/13/25 -11- DRAFT
by Wednesday. At that time, the conversations were contentious and the request was not
operationally reasonable. Overall, the packets have never been available on Wednesdays, so staff
is requesting the policy that says the packets be made available on Wednesdays be reversed.
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated the Council received the packet on Wednesdays up
until Mayor Elliott served on Council. Dr. Edwards stated the past policy was for Thursdays and
the shift in 2021 was to Wednesdays.
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated there is a lot of information for the Council to review.
Thursday is hardly enough time to review the packet thoroughly before the weekend. The packets
are delivered on Fridays sometimes, and there is no time to refresh between reviewing the packet
and the Monday meeting. Dr. Edwards’ predecessor delivered the packets on Wednesdays.
Councilmember Jerzak pointed out the most recent packet was 244 pages, and he reads every page.
Staff has asked that no there be no surprises at Council meetings, but there isn’t a chance to review
the packet and email back and forth with staff if the packets aren’t ready until late Thursday or
Friday. He asked for details about what is operationally unachievable. He wants to be well-
prepared for meetings and to engage with community members.
Dr. Edwards stated the policy is not operationally achievable consistently. The policy asks for
Departments to submit their documents on Monday then it is reviewed on Tuesday. Any items
that require edits or more information from departmental staff are handled on Wednesday. If the
packets were sent out on Wednesday, the information would be incomplete or disorganized. They
also have to gather information or documents from external entities. To deliver the packet on a
Wednesday, the staff would need to submit their information the week before.
Councilmember Jerzak asked if the staff’s deadline could be pushed back to allow for the
Wednesday packet delivery. The agendas are lengthy, so pushing back less important items
wouldn’t be bad for the agendas.
Dr. Edwards explained they have already attempted to adjust the submission date. The request has
not been operationally achievable for years. When the policy changed, he spoke with his
predecessor about its unfeasibility. Staff is already challenged with the existing timeline.
Councilmember Kragness added Council has complained multiple times about missing or
incomplete information in the packet. In light of that, asking for the packet sooner doesn’t seem
reasonable. She doesn’t have time to review the packet until the weekends anyway.
Councilmember Moore noted a Deputy City Manager was hired. She asked if the new hire would
speed up the process. Dr. Edwards stated the information needed to generate the packet comes
from Departments which hasn’t changed. He is responsible for reviewing the submissions.
Councilmember Jerzak asked Dr. Edwards if staff believes the request would be burdensome.
When he was on staff, he had to submit information to the Directors by a deadline. They didn’t
Page 15 of 52
1/13/25 -12- DRAFT
miss deadlines back then.
Dr. Edwards pointed out he is part of the staff. It is not operationally achievable. He understands
the implications for all staff.
Mayor Graves noted her agreement with Councilmember Kragness. She also doesn’t have time to
review packets until the weekend. She added there is a lot of background work that goes into
simply putting a topic on the agenda.
Councilmember Moore noted her support of the staff’s request.
Mayor Graves explained there was a previous discussion of the Wall of Fame in City Hall. It was
founded in 1988. There hasn’t been another induction since 1998. Several of those recognized
were Councilmembers. The first recognition was for Mary Jane who operated the Brooklyn Center
Post. The purpose is to recognize and identify people who made a significant contribution to the
community and its development. She asked when Brooklyn Center last added someone to their
Wall of Fame. She requested images of the current Council be posted somewhere in City Hall to
be more recognizable to community members. She also requested the Wall of Fame and any
potential updates be assigned to the Cultural Arts Commission.
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson suggested the Wall of Fame be moved to the Heritage Center.
Councilmember Jerzak noted his agreement with the suggestion. The photos of current
Councilmembers should be hung in its place.
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked if the Council has a room within the Heritage Center.
Mayor Graves stated it was in a church.
Parks and Recreation Director Cordell Wiseman explained a building that used to be a stable has
historical photos in it.
Councilmember Kragness agreed with the comments of Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson and
Councilmember Jerzak. Councilmember Moore also agreed.
Councilmember Jerzak requested any historical items go to their rightful owners such as the
Historical Society. Also, he doesn’t want to dump items on the Heritage Center if they don’t have
a space available.
Dr. Edwards stated the Council will be reviewing the list of pending Work Session items at the
next Study Session.
Councilmember Jerzak asked if Councilmembers may send ideas for Work Sessions to Dr.
Edwards. For example, he wants to update the Council Policy as it is years old. Mayor Graves
confirmed ideas may be submitted to Dr. Edwards.
Page 16 of 52
1/13/25 -13- DRAFT
Councilmember Moore pointed out each Councilmember is only allowed to submit one item to
Dr. Edwards for each meeting per the Council Policy.
Councilmember Kragness noted her appreciation of the page numbers throughout the packet. She
requested the agenda have page numbers of the relevant packet pages.
ADJOURNMENT
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson moved and Councilmember Jerzak seconded adjournment of
the Study Session at 9:34 p.m.
Motion passed unanimously.
Page 17 of 52
1/13/25 -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
JANUARY 13, 2025
CITY HALL – COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1. CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Informal Open Forum called to order by Mayor April
Graves at 7:09 p.m.
2. SWEARING IN OF COUNCIL MEMBERS
2a. COUNCIL MEMBER KRIS LAWRENCE-ANDERSON
City Clerk Barb Suciu conducted the swearing in of Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson.
2b. COUNCIL MEMBER LAURIE ANN MOORE
Ms. Suciu conducted the swearing in of Councilmember Moore.
3. ROLL CALL
Mayor April Graves and Councilmembers Kris Lawrence-Anderson, Dan Jerzak, Teneshia
Kragness, and Laurie Ann Moore. Also present were City Manager Reggie Edwards, City
Engineer Ahmed Omer, City Clerk Barb Suciu, Deputy City Clerk Shannon Pettit and City
Attorney Siobhan Tolar.
4. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
5. INFORMAL OPEN FORUM
Mayor Graves reviewed the guidelines for the open forum. She then opened the meeting for the
purpose of Informal Open Forum.
Sandi R. explained Big Brothers, Big Sisters Twin Cities is a local mentoring hub. There are
volunteer opportunities ranging from 12 weeks to one year in a range of subjects. They match
mentors to youth based on shared interest and proximity to one another. There are 12 Brooklyn
Center youth awaiting a match with over 600 waiting all over the Twin Cities. She encouraged
adults to volunteer.
Page 18 of 52
1/13/25 -2- DRAFT
Julie B. stated she is embarrassed about what is happening on the Council. The level of privilege
on display is disappointing. There is a fight to protect oneself over residents. The Councilmembers
are serving in the most diverse City in Minnesota. People should not have to wait four years if a
Councilmember is being disrespectful to residents or staff.
Councilmember Jerzak noted the comments are a personal attack.
Councilmember Moore stated there should be no comments on the Code of Conduct as it was a
Study Session agenda item. Mayor Graves stated there may be comments on Study Session and
Work Session agenda items.
Julie B. stated she isn’t attacking anyone. She asked for the Council to do better because their
actions are embarrassing. She made additional comments without the microphone.
Gretchen E. pointed out she has been present for many Code of Conduct discussions. There were
no repercussions for a past commissioner who threatened a Councilmember’s daughter’s life or
for a past commissioner who stole public property. She asked if there will be a Code of Conduct
for commissions. Mayor Graves stated there has been a Code of Conduct proposed for Council
and a separate one for commissions. The Council Code of Conduct was repealed. No
accountability measures are retroactive.
Kevin S. noted the CVS recently closed. He stated the City should stop the anti-racist, anti-white,
anti-privilege commentary and focus on the economic concerns facing Brooklyn Center. The
closed pharmacy is near a living facility for disabled folks. There are several empty storefronts
and undeveloped land. The City is anti-business. The Social Security Office should have been
approved. When people aim only for perfection, progress is interrupted.
Councilmember Moore added the Zoom access has been an ongoing issue. If they maintain a live
component, it needs to be reliable. Mayor Graves noted her agreement.
Peg C. noted it is the Wolf Moon. There are many Native ceremonies that start by saying, “I am
a human being” to acknowledge one’s responsibility for the land and one another. She wished the
Council a Happy Wolf Moon.
Nahid K. pointed out it is the 21st Century, and Brooklyn Center should use a maximalist approach
for communication and make use of all communication channels. She listed several opportunities
for communication. She stated it is concerning some information is only shared on a corkboard at
the City Hall, which may as well be a cave painting. Mayor Graves stated the time limit is complete.
Councilmember Moore moved and Councilmember Jerzak seconded to close the Informal Open
Forum at 7:28 p.m.
Motion passed unanimously.
6. INVOCATION
Page 19 of 52
1/13/25 -3- DRAFT
Mayor Graves explained she has been reflecting a lot as she enters her tenth year on the Council.
She has felt both encouragement and despair in her role. She ran for Mayor to ease the pendulum
of change often created by local government, which is something she is good at. She has been a
good listener and good learner.
Mayor Graves shared a quote, “There is power of two kinds: one is obtained by fear of punishment,
the other by acts of love. The day that the power of love overrules the love of power, the world
will know peace.”
7. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Graves asked if there are any amendments to the minutes. Councilmember Jerzak noted
he submitted two changes to the minutes. On page 31 of 155 in the draft minutes on the fourth
paragraph, it referred to a certain area as light and acceptable. He requested an edit be made to
said “well-lit and acceptable.” On page 39 of 155 in the sixth paragraph, it was Councilmember
Butler who made the motion and Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson who opposed the motion.
Mayor Graves stated the page numbers changed once it was printed. She asked for more
information to find the motion in question. City Clerk Barb Suciu stated the edit is already
reflected on page 28.
Councilmember Jerzak noted Mayor Graves wasn’t listed as an appointee to the Northwest
Tourism Board, but their bylaws require a Council representative. Mayor Graves stated she plans
to attend as she is the Chair.
Ms. Suciu confirmed Mayor Graves would need to be put back on as an appointee. She added there
needs to be an alternate for the Brooklyn Bridge Alliance for Youth (BBAY). Mayor Graves stated
she is the Chair of the BBAY, and an alternate would serve in her absence. She requested
Councilmember Kragness be the alternate. Ms. Suciu stated the resolution would be edited to
reflect the change.
Councilmember Jerzak noted there is a $7,500 fee after the second year of vacancy, referring to
Consent Agenda Item 7m. Resolution Approving the Fee Schedule. He asked if the fees for the
former Sears site and the former Target are being certified. A lot of staff time goes into the
properties. City Manager Reggie Edwards stated he would coordinate with the Finance Director
to ensure they are being certified.
Councilmember Jerzak pointed out the quote for Consent Agenda Item 7t. Resolution Accepting
Work Performed and Authorizing Final Payment Improvement Project Nos. 2023-24 and 05, 2023
Trail and Parking Lot Improvements came in 13 percent under budget.
Councilmember Moore noted she would have to abstain from Consent Agenda Item 7a. Approval
of Minutes. There was consensus from the Council to approve Consent Agenda Item 7a. Approval
of Minutes in a separate motion.
Page 20 of 52
1/13/25 -4- DRAFT
Councilmember Moore added there is a long list of items on the Consent Agenda. She asked why
some of the items couldn’t be done separately to highlight them. For example, Consent Agenda
Item 7f. Resolution Recognizing the Contributions of Ethnic Populations and Heritage
Celebrations for 2025 is notable. Mayor Graves explained they have the option to highlight items
by reading them aloud into the record. She asked if any certain resolutions should be read aloud.
Councilmember Moore stated it might be helpful to read Consent Agenda Items 7d. Resolution
Appointing Mayor Pro Tem and President Pro Tem for 2025 and 7e. Resolution Declaring
Commitment to the Brooklyn Center City Charter for 2025.
Councilmember Kragness noted Mayor Graves typically reads through the appointments.
Councilmember Jerzak added each Councilmember has the option to pull a certain item from the
Consent Agenda for Council Consideration. As for the appointments, he noted the Council has to
be careful about embarrassing or speaking poorly of potential appointees as it is a public meeting.
Councilmember Moore asked if the respective liaison and representative roles for Councilmembers
are listed online. Mayor Graves stated the roster for each Commission lists the Council Liaison.
Dr. Edwards pointed out an item was added to Council Consideration Items and 11b. Code of
Conduct.
Mayor Graves moved and Councilmember Moore seconded to approve the Agenda and Consent
Agenda, as amended, to conder the following items separately: 7a. Approval of Minutes, 7f.
Resolution Recognizing the Contributions of Ethnic Populations and Heritage Celebrations for
2025, 7j. Resolution Appointing Councilmembers to Commissions and Outside Organizations for
2025, and adding Council Consideration Item 11b. Code of Conduct.
The following consent items were approved:
7a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
This item was considered following the Consent Agenda.
7b. LICENSES
MECHANICAL
Hamlin Installations 1552 97th Avenue
Hammond, WI 54015
Jackson Family Heating and Cooling LLC 5007 49th Avenue N
Crystal 55429
GASOLINE SERVICE STATION
Christy's Auto Service 5300 Dupont Avenue N
Page 21 of 52
1/13/25 -5- DRAFT
RENTAL
INITIAL (TYPE IV – six-month license)
3907 65th Avenue N Granite Peaks Llc
5341 72nd Circle Sledge Deffoe
INITIAL (TYPE III – one-year license)
3016 Quarles Road Khemchand Ramcharitar
5924 June Avenue N William Nhia Her Vang
INITIAL (TYPE II – two-year license)
5418 Penn Avenue N Sonny Vang
7001 Logan Avenue N UNICORN PROPERTIES LLC
7156 Unity Avenue N Ameen Haidari
RENEWAL (TYPE IV – six-month license)
5301 Dupont Avenue N Wright Team Properties
4748 Twin Lake Avenue Rco Holdings Llc
5337 Queen Avenue N Edith Perlin/Gregory Perlin
1619 73rd Avenue N SFR ACQUISITIONS 2 LLC
3121 Lawrence Road Empire Care Systems
4600 69th Avenue N Aisheh Wazwaz & Sami Ameri
7025 Grimes Avenue N SFR ACQUISITIONS 3 LLC
RENEWAL (TYPE III – one-year license)
4806 Twin Lake Avenue N Pheng Lee
5500 Bryant Avenue N N Mejia-morales & V Idrovo
6305 Camden Avenue N Melrose Gates Apartments
RENEWAL (TYPE II – two-year license)
4500 58th Avenue N Tln Lanel A Ltd Partnership
4220 Lakeside Avenue N R G Arntson/k J Arntson Eta
RENEWAL (TYPE I – three-year license)
Page 22 of 52
1/13/25 -6- DRAFT
5344 Russell Avenue N Cloeshette King Torboh
4207 Lakeside Avenue N, #138 Patrick Hall
1331 67th Lane N Matthew Weinacht
4734 Twin Lake Avenue N R A Becht & E A Armstrong
5300 Penn Avenue N Ashley E Sykora
6229 Brooklyn Drive Joy Vang
7024 Ewing Avenue N MOUA STAR HOMES, LLC
TOBACCO
Royal Tobacco 5625 Xerxes Avenue N
Brook Center Plus 615 66th Avenue N
7c. RESOLUTION NO. 2025-001; DESIGNATING OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER
FOR 2025
7d. RESOLUTION NO. 2025.002; APPOINTING MAYOR PRO TEM AND
PRESIDENT PRO TEM FOR 2025
7e. RESOLUTION NO. 2025-003; DECLARING COMMITMENT TO THE
BROOKLYN CENTER CITY CHARTER FOR 2025
This item was considered following the Consent Agenda.
7f. RESOLUTION NO.2025-004; RECOGNIZING THE CONTRIBUTIONS
OF ETHNIC POPULATIONS AND HERITAGE CELEBRATIONS FOR
2025
This item was considered following the Consent Agenda.
7g. RESOLUTION NO. 2025-005; DESIGNATING THE DEPOSITORIES FOR
CITY FUNDS FOR 2025
7h. RESOLUTION NO. 2025-006; OPTING NOT TO WAIVE LIMITED TORT
LIABILITY FOR 2025
7i. RESOLUTION NO. 2025-007; GRANTING CORPORATE AUTHORITY
FOR SIGNING OF CHECKS AND TRANSACTIONS OF FINANCIAL
BUSINESS MATTERS FOR 2025
7j. RESOLUTION NO. 2025-008; APPOINTING COUNCIL MEMBERS TO
COMMISSIONS AND OUTSIDE ORGANIZATIONS FOR 2025
Page 23 of 52
1/13/25 -7- DRAFT
This item was considered following the Consent Agenda.
7k. RESOLUTION NO. 2025-009; APPOINTING BROOKLYN CENTER
REPRESENTATIVES TO THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AND/OR
BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE BROOKLYN BRIDGE ALLIANCE
FOR YOUTH, HENNEPIN RECYCLING GROUP, LOCAL
GOVERNMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS (LOGIS), NORTHWEST
TOURISM, NORTH METRO MAYORS ASSOCIATION, NORTHWEST
SUBURBS CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, PETS UNDER
POLICE SECURITY (PUPS), AND TWIN LAKE JOINT POWERS
ORGANIZATION
7l. RESOLUTION NO. 2025-010; APPOINTING MUNICIPAL TRUSTEES TO
THE BROOKLYN CENTER FIRE RELIEF ASSOCIATION BOARD OF
TRUSTEES
7m. RESOLUTION NO. 2025-011; APPROVING THE 2025 FEE SCHEDULE
7n. RESOLUTION NO. 2025-012; AFFIRMING ACCEPTANCE OF
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION GRANT FUNDS
7o. RESOLUTION NO. 2025-013; APPROVING PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS,
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2025-02, 67TH AVENUE AND JAMES
AVENUE MILL & OVERLAY
7p. RESOLUTION NO. 2025-014; ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED AND
AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYMENT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS.
2023-04 AND 05, 2023 TRAIL AND PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS
7q. APPOINTMENTS TO THE SHINGLE CREEK/WEST MISSISSIPPI
WATERSHED DISTRICT
7r. RESOLUTION NO. 2025-015; ACKNOWLEDGING AWARDED FUNDS
FOR THE HENNEPIN COUNTY YOUTH ACTIVITIES GRANT AND
AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT FUNDS
7s. RESOLUTION NO. 2025-016; ACKNOWLEDGING AWARDED FUNDS
FROM THE MINNESOTA CHIEFS OF POLICE FOUNDATION AND
AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE AND EXECUTION OF GRANT FUNDS
FOR A 2025 COMMUNITY OPEN HOUSE
Page 24 of 52
1/13/25 -8- DRAFT
7t. RESOLUTION NO. 2025-017; ACCEPTING ADDITIONAL GRANT
FUNDING FOR AN ADDITIONAL INTENSIVE COMPREHENSIVE
PEACE OFFICER EDUCATION & TRAINING (ICPOET) POSITION
Motion passed unanimously.
7a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Councilmember Jerzak moved and Mayor Graves seconded to approve Consent Agenda Item 7a.
Approval of Minutes, with amendments to the Regular Session minutes of December 19, 2024 as
previously discussed:
1. December 9, 2024 – Study Session
2. December 9, 2024 – Regular Session
3. December 19, 2024 – Special Council Meeting
Councilmember Moore abstained. Motion passed.
7e. RESOLUTION NO. 2025-003; DECLARING COMMITMENT TO THE
BROOKLYN CENTER CITY CHARTER FOR 2025
Mayor Graves read the Resolution Declaring Commitment to the Brooklyn Center City Charter
for 2025 in full.
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson moved and Councilmember Jerzak seconded to adopt
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-003; Declaring Commitment to the Brooklyn Center City Charter for
2025.
Motion passed unanimously.
7f. RESOLUTION NO. 2025-004; RECOGNIZING THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF
ETHNIC POPULATIONS AND HERITAGE CELEBRATIONS FOR 2025
Mayor Graves read the Resolution Recognizing the Contributions of the Ethnic Populations and
Heritage Celebrations for 2025 in full.
Councilmember Moore moved and Councilmember Jerzak seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO.
2025-004; Recognizing the Contributions of the Ethnic Populations and Heritage Celebrations for
2025.
Motion passed unanimously.
7j. RESOLUTION NO. 2025-008; APPOINTING COUNCIL MEMBERS TO
COMMISSIONS AND OUTSIDE ORGANIZATIONS FOR 2025
Page 25 of 52
1/13/25 -9- DRAFT
Mayor Graves read the Resolution Appointing Councilmembers to Commissions and Outside
Organizations for 2025.
Councilmember Moore moved and Councilmember Jerzak seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO.
2025-008; Appointing Councilmembers to Commissions and Outside Organizations for 2025.
Motion passed unanimously.
8. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS/RECOGNITIONS/DONATIONS
8a. MINNEAPOLIS NORTHWEST TOURISM ANNUAL REPORT
Leslie Wright, President and CEO of the Minneapolis Northwest Tourism Board, introduced
herself. She showed a table depicting the 2025 budget. Between COVID-19 and Maple Grove
leaving the group, there was an immense impact on the total revenue.
Ms. Wright showed graphs depicting the occupancy rates. Hotels are measured by Average Daily
Rate (ADR) and Revenue Per Available Room (RevPAR). In 2024, the ADR was 108.94, which
was an increase from 2023’s 107.34. The RevPAR increased from 61.56 in 2023 to 64.55 in 2024.
Also, the occupancy rate rose from 57.4 to 59.2.
Ms. Wright explained the staff is working with local facilities to increase the number of guests. It
has been difficult for the travel industry after COVID-19. Brooklyn Center and the surrounding
areas also had an extremely positive 2018 due to the Super Bowl.
Ms. Wright showed examples of marketing newsletters and promotions.
Ms. Wright explained staff has attended a number of meetings recently such as Small Market
Meetings in September, Northstar Travel Small Meetings Fall in October, and US Sports Congress
in December. With approval, the staff offers incentives to promote Brooklyn Center hospitality.
Ms. Wright pointed out Gus Macker occurred in 2024 after quite some time. She showed
promotional materials for Gus Macker from both digital and print. They even created a mascot.
Goals for the Gud Macker event included a wholesome, family-oriented event, a tournament
designed for players, a value to sponsors, a fundraising event for the community, a major media
sporting event, entertainment for spectators, community unification, breaking the female player
percentage record, heightening the perception of the Brooklyns, and generating hotel room stays.
Ms. Wright added there was a goal of 150 teams, and there were 160 in total. Another goal was
raising $20,000 for the six nonprofit beneficiaries, but they almost doubled the goal with $37,500.
Plus, they set a record of having nearly 30 percent of registered players being girls and women.
Finally, 74.9 percent of visitors observed in the destination around the event were from out of
Minnesota.
Page 26 of 52
1/13/25 -10- DRAFT
Ms. Wright stated the preliminary strategy for 2025 includes plans to conduct Listening Sessions
with residents and businesses, update the website and other photography to enhance traffic, create
an updated newsletter and focus on increased distribution, conduct a Familiarization Tour for
meeting planners and media, participate in tradeshows and events to promote tourism and leads,
host the Gus Macker tournament with board approved revisions, continue to update hotel partners
on information received and best practices in the industry, continue the blog and feature partners
to highlight activities in the Brooklyns, and determine if rebranding is necessary.
Councilmember Jerzak requested the details of the $37,500 distribution be provided to Dr.
Edwards. He thanked Ms. Wright for her work. He asked for data to reflect the financial impacts
of the Minneapolis Northwest Tourism Board specifically in Brooklyn Center.
Councilmember Moore thanked Ms. Wright for the presentation. She asked if the budget slide
included both Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Park. Ms. Wright stated the budget is for work in
both cities.
Councilmember Moore asked if Brooklyn Center pays an equal amount as Brooklyn Park for the
Board’s work. Ms. Wright confirmed each city pays around $600,000.
Councilmember Moore asked if the occupancy data was for both cities or just Brooklyn Center.
Ms. Wright confirmed it was for both cities. The Board subscribes to certain types of data
collection. Requesting separate data could form an antitrust issue.
Councilmember Moore stated the taxpayers are on the hook for $600,000, but they will never get
the data for Brooklyn Center hotels due to antitrust concerns. Ms. Wright stated hotel visitors are
on the hook for lodging tax rather than residents. Councilmember Moore stated the City of
Brooklyn Center pays $600,000 to the Board each year regardless of lodging tax.
Councilmember Moore asked if Brooklyn Center extended its contract in 2024. Dr. Edwards
confirmed the partnership was agreed upon and the contract was signed again in 2024.
Councilmember Moore asked if the payment to the Minneapolis Northwest Tourism Board is
reviewed during the annual budget process. Dr. Edwards stated the lodging tax pays the $600,000.
Mayor Graves noted lodging tax can only be spent on certain items.
Mayor Graves added there is a public meeting for the group coming up. Ms. Wright stated the
meeting will be on January 23, 2025, at North Hennepin Community College.
Mayor Graves explained several staff attended the meeting to share details of community events.
Councilmember Jerzak requested the Minneapolis Northwest Tourism Board meeting be on the
Council’s calendar. Mayor Graves pointed out she requested all events be on the Council calendar
regardless of if they are required to attend.
Page 27 of 52
1/13/25 -11- DRAFT
Councilmember Kragness stated she was part of the planning effort for the Gus Macker event, and
they worked extremely hard to find an event space in Brooklyn Center to host it. Mayor Graves
agreed several sites were considered, but the logistics didn’t work out in the City’s favor.
Councilmember Jerzak thanked Mayor Graves and Councilmember Kragness for their work on
the event.
Mayor Graves asked if a motion is required. Dr. Edwards stated a motion is not required, but it is
the City’s usual practice.
Mayor Graves moved and Councilmember Jerzak seconded to accept the Minneapolis Northwest
Tourism Board annual report presentation.
Motion passed unanimously.
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS
9a. RESOLUTION NO. 2025-018; CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2025-02, 67TH AVENUE AND JAMES AVENUE
MILL & OVERLAY TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS
City Manager Reggie Edwards introduced the item and invited City Engineer Ahmed Omer to
continue the staff presentation.
City Engineer Ahmed Omer pointed out the 2025 Assessment Rates were established on
November 25, 2024, along with the call for the present Public Hearing. The plan is to begin the
project in the summer of 2025 with substantial completion by the fall.
Mr. Omer explained the project includes street and drainage improvements such as pavement mill
and overlay, spot curb and gutter replacement, and casting replacement. The proposed utility
improvements include sanitary casting replacement and spot hydrant and valve replacement. The
storm main was televised and shown to be in good condition. The existing water main is an 8-inch
cast iron pipe from 1970, and it is not at the end of its useful life. There are no proposed lighting
improvements. He showed a map with the streets included in the project.
Mr. Omer showed a table depicting the project funding breakdown. The special assessment covers
48.1 percent of the project. The Street Reconstruction Fund would pay for 22.8 percent, the
Sanitary Sewer Utility money is intended to cover 3.8 percent, the Water Utility money is planned
for 11.4 percent, and the Storm Drainage Utility money is intended for the remaining 13.9 percent.
He pointed out the numbers are merely an estimate ahead of the bidding process.
Mr. Omer stated the entirety of the project exists in a commercial area. Per the City Assessment
Policy, the assessment rate was set. There will be a seven percent interest rate based on the most
recent Brooklyn Center Bonding and Rate Policy.
Page 28 of 52
1/13/25 -12- DRAFT
Mr. Omer there are three options for special assessment payments. First, the assessment may be
paid whether in full or partially before September 30, 2025, with no interest. Second, the
assessment may be paid, whether in full or partially between October 1, 2025, and November 14,
2025, with interest calculated from the October 1, 2025, date. Third, the assessment may be paid
in installments with property taxes over a ten-year period starting in 2026.
Mayor Graves requested the recommended actions be included in the agenda for future ease.
Mayor Graves moved and Councilmember Jerzak seconded to open the Public Hearing.
Motion passed unanimously.
No one appeared to address this item.
Mayor Graves moved and Councilmember Jerzak seconded to close the Public Hearing.
Motion passed unanimously.
Councilmember Moore moved and Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson seconded to adopt a
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-018; certifying special assessments for Improvement Project No. 2025-
02, 67th Avenue and James Avenue Mill & Overlay to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls.
Motion passed unanimously.
10. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS
None.
11. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS
11a. CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENTS TO CITY COMMISSIONS
Mayor Graves explained she submitted recommendations for appointments to the City Clerk. She
recommended Marie Martin and Michelle Thayer be appointed to the Cultural and Public Arts
Commission and for Jill Dalton and Jack MacMillan to be appointed to the Parks and Recreation
Commission. They each have experience and interest in their respective commissions.
Councilmember Moore stated she did not receive any information such as applications regarding
the appointees.
Councilmember Jerzak pointed out he has no objections to the appointments as the Charter clearly
charges the Mayor with Commission appointments. In the future, it may be beneficial to review
the recruitment, application, and appointment process for Commissions. Mayor Graves noted her
agreement with the suggestion.
Page 29 of 52
1/13/25 -13- DRAFT
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson noted the Council usually receives a copy of the applications
along with the packet, but they did not receive any applications. She is unfamiliar with the Cultural
and Public Arts Commission appointees. She requested the applications be provided to the Council
in the future.
There was Council consensus that potential appointee applications be provided to the Council.
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson added the advanced notice of potential appointees would
allow for time to call and ask more detailed questions of the applicants. There is an ongoing issue
with Commission attendance.
Mayor Graves explained there is a policy regarding Commissioner attendance. A particular
number of absences results in the removal from a commission. It is typically the responsibility of
the Liaison to report back to the Council on attendance issues. From there, the Mayor could reach
out to seek a resolution. She is hesitant to have multiple council members reach out and question
applicants as it may be a turn-off. However, it is entirely reasonable for all council members to
review applications.
Councilmember Moore asked if anyone besides Mayor Graves reviewed the applications. Mayor
Graves confirmed she was the only one to receive and review the applications. Councilmember
Moore stated there needs to be a consistent application process. Each commission has its own
bylaws. She requested the various bylaws be reviewed for consistency.
Ms. Suciu stated all applications are received by the City Clerk’s Office. She redacts them before
passing them along to Councilmembers for review. The completed applications were sent out at
the beginning of December 2024.
Councilmember Jerzak and Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson confirmed they each received
the applications for review, but their emails were separate from Mayor Graves.
Councilmember Jerzak pointed out it is the responsibility of a judge to appoint commissioners to
the Charter Commission. If there is an opening for more than 30 days, then the responsibility falls
to the Council.
Councilmember Jerzak added he has attended each Highway 252 Project Task Force, but he had
been negligent in his duties as he has never taken attendance nor received a list of members.
Dr. Edwards explained the staff liaison is responsible for taking attendance rather than the Council
Liaison.
Mayor Graves apologized for the miscommunication.
Dr. Edwards asked if the applications should be included in the packet or simply sent to
Councilmembers. Mayor Graves stated email would be preferred for privacy, though the emails
could still be obtained through a data request.
Page 30 of 52
1/13/25 -14- DRAFT
Councilmember Moore asked if she should abstain from the vote as the applications were from
2024. Mayor Graves pointed out Councilmember Moore didn’t have an issue discussing the Code
of Conduct from 2024.
Councilmember Kragness moved and Mayor Graves seconded to ratify the following Mayoral
Appointments to City Advisory Commissions:
Cultural and Public Arts
Marie Martin
Michelle Thayer
Park & Recreation Commission
Jill Dalton
Jack MacMillan
Motion passed unanimously.
11b. CODE OF CONDUCT
Mayor Graves pointed out there was a Council consensus to move the item to Council
Consideration.
Councilmember Moore moved and Councilmember Jerzak seconded to repeal Resolution 2024-
138, Code of Conduct.
Councilmember Kragness and Mayor Graves voted against the same. Motion passed.
Mayor Graves advised people to be careful what they ask for.
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she would like a copy of the existing Code of Conduct.
Mayor Graves stated there is no Code of Conduct in existence as it was just repealed.
Ms. Tolar confirmed there is a Rules of Procedure document available online, but there is not a
Code of Conduct.
Councilmember Jerzak requested the Code of Conduct for Commissioners be discussed at a Work
Session. Mayor Graves stated it seems hypocritical, but she is not opposed to it as a Code of
Conduct should be implemented for both Council and Commissions. Councilmember Jerzak
explained his request is a response to the most recent memo.
Councilmember Kragness agreed the request is hypocritical. If the Commissioners must abide by
a Code of Conduct, then the Council needs to abide by one as well.
Page 31 of 52
1/13/25 -15- DRAFT
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she is not happy with the proposed Code of Conduct
document, but she doesn’t oppose any Code of Conduct. She stated she wants clarity about the
censure and what actions would result in censure.
Mayor Graves stated similar to the failed item about traffic stops from last year, a Code of Conduct
cannot be voted on again for one year. She pointed out she would not forget about the Code of
Conduct, and she will see how many complaints are reported to her.
Councilmember Moore noted other councilmembers or staff also receive reports of complaints.
Mayor Graves explained staff doesn’t have authority over the Council or Commissions. As there
is no policy or procedure in place to handle complaints, they have just ended up with her.
Councilmember Moore stated when she received a complaint as a Commissioner, she spoke with
Dr. Edwards about it, meaning there is a process in place. She asked if all complaints go directly
to Mayor Graves. Mayor Graves stated not all complaints are reported directly to her, but they
end up with her because staff doesn’t have the authority to do anything with the complaints if they
are about Councilmembers or Commissioners.
Dr. Edwards explained staff received complaints, completed investigations, and provided a memo
to Council. There is no policy in place to handle the complaints, so the investigations were closed.
12. COUNCIL REPORT
13. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Graves moved and Councilmember Kragness seconded adjournment of the City Council
meeting at 8:36 p.m.
Motion passed unanimously.
Page 32 of 52
1/13/25 -1- DRAFT
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL/ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND
THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
WORK SESSION
JANUARY 13, 2025
CITY HALL – COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center City Council/Economic Development Authority (EDA) met in Work Session
called to order by Mayor/President April Graves at 8:38 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Mayor/President April Graves and Councilmembers/Commissioners Kris Lawrence-Anderson,
Dan Jerzak, Teneshia Kragness, and Laurie Ann Moore. Also present were City Manager Reggie
Edwards, Economic Development Manager Ian Alexander, Planning and Zoning Administrator
Ginny McIntosh, City Clerk Barb Suciu, Deputy City Clerk Shannon Pettit, and City Attorney
Siobhan Tolar.
MORTY’S BARK AND BREW CONCEPT REVIEW AT 57TH AND LOGAN
City Manager Reggie Edwards introduced the item and invited Economic Development Manager
Ian Alexander to continue the staff presentation.
Economic Development Manager Ian Alexander noted the owner of Morty’s Bark & Brew was
present to provide comments as needed. The company was organized in 2020. It is a dog-friendly
brewery with an integrated indoor and outdoor dog park. It is a woman-and minority-owned
business. The flagship is in Brooklyn Center.
Mr. Alexander explained they need a 5,000-square-foot building, adequate space for an outdoor
dog park and vehicle parking, and two acres or more of land. The parcel at 57th and N Logan
Avenue is a good fit, and it is already zoned appropriately.
Mr. Alexander stated the concept includes a 5,000-square-foot taproom with an indoor dog play
area. The outdoor dog park will have separate areas for large and small dogs. Access to the site
would be from North Logan Avenue with an easement for drive lane and bike or trail access. The
adjacent parcel may be rented to the developer at a low cost for additional dog park space until
additional development occurs, providing a valuable public amenity maintained by the developer.
Councilmember/Commissioner Lawrence-Anderson thanked Mr. Alexander for the presentation
she asked where the proposed project is in comparison to Speedway. Mr. Alexander stated
Page 33 of 52
1/13/25 -2- DRAFT
Speedway is across the street from the proposed site. Councilmember/Commissioner Lawrence-
Anderson pointed out the location was her original suggestion for a dog park.
Councilmember/Commissioner Lawrence-Anderson stated she isn’t opposed to the idea. She
asked how many similar concepts are in the area. She added there are concerns about the City’s
liability for dog bites or similar issues. The alcohol would only add to the concern.
Air Gustafson, founder of Morty’s Bark & Brew, explained the concept has been around for about
one decade. There are two similar spaces in the area. First, there is one by the Lyndale Farmer’s
Market, and there is another one in Plymouth. The concern regarding alcohol and dogs is
reasonable. However, there would be a required orientation with educational components prior to
accepting someone as a member.
Councilmember/Commissioner Lawrence-Anderson asked if there is a requirement for
vaccinations for the dogs. Ms. Gustafson noted the topic is tricky. Councilmember/Commissioner
Lawrence-Anderson stated rabies could be an issue. Ms. Gustafson stated the issue is arguable.
The orientation will provide information for potential members to decide what they are
comfortable with.
Councilmember/Commissioner Moore pointed out she has been to the other two locations. Dog
owners must have responsibility for their pets, and she wouldn’t bring her dog to a public space
without vaccinations. Also, the establishment will have its own insurance. If something
unfortunate happens, it would be a small claims issue between the dog owners. Ms. Gustafson
confirmed that was correct.
Councilmember/Commissioner Moore asked if food would be available. Ms. Gustafson stated
there would be a limited menu available.
Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak expressed his support for the concept, minority business
owners, and new business owners.
Dr. Edwards pointed out that the city requires some food to be offered at any facility with a liquor
license. He asked the City Attorney what liability Brooklyn Center would carry for the proposed
project. Ms. Tolar stated all liability is on the business as it is a privately owned business.
Mr. Alexander noted the business’s rental of the City-owned lot may create a liability issue. He
added because the business is privately owned, there aren’t tagging or registration requirements
that could be enforced on-site.
Ms. Gustafson thanked the City Council/EDA for their support.
NEW HORIZON CONCEPT REVIEW AT 7000 BROOKLYN BLVD
City Manager Reggie Edwards introduced the item and invited Economic Development Manager
Ian Alexander to continue the staff presentation.
Page 34 of 52
1/13/25 -3- DRAFT
Mr. Alexander noted representatives of New Horizon are present and available for comments.
New Horizon Academy was founded in 1971 in Brooklyn Center and has operated continuously
in the City since opening. There are now over 100 locations.
Mr. Alexander explained the current location is approximately 6,000 square feet at 6842 Humboldt
Avenue North. They are seeking a 12,500-square-foot location to allow for more space and
expanded preschool services.
Mr. Alexander showed an aerial image of 7100 and 7014 Brooklyn Boulevard and 7015 Kyle
Avenue North. There are three parcels on the site at 1.47 acres. It is approximately two miles
from the current New Horizon Academy location. There was a previous discussion of a liquor
store at the site, but the church wasn’t supportive. The site use requires easement from St.
Alphonsus Church as they are the adjacent property. The 12,500-square-foot building exceeds the
current zoning limit.
Mr. Alexander stated the concept addresses the City’s need for more childcare options, offers more
job opportunities, and supports economic development in Brooklyn Center. The business has been
good to the community, and they have thrived as well.
Councilmember/Commissioner Moore stated there were past concerns about access to the site on
Kyle Avenue and the traffic flow. Mayor/President Graves noted the primary concern about the
previous proposal was the proposed use.
Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak pointed out that the County won’t allow for more curb cuts,
so there couldn’t be any access from Brooklyn Boulevard. He added he was the Project Manager
when the previous buildings were torn down. He urged staff to work out an agreement for the
proposed project.
Councilmember/Commissioner Lawrence-Anderson asked where the current location is. Jill
Dunkley, representative of New Horizon Academy, stated the current location is 6842 Humboldt
Avenue North. Their current landlord is uninterested in putting money into the building. Students
and teachers deserve to have beautiful spaces to learn and teach in.
Councilmember/Commissioner Lawrence-Anderson noted the best location for the business would
be Shingle Creek Crossing, but she read the comments from Gatlin about why that is not an option.
Ms. Dunkley stated they don’t want to have a discontinuation of services, and they want to continue
investing in Brooklyn Center. The site is on a bus line, and they considered the needs of their
students and staff.
Councilmember/Commissioner Moore asked why the former Target site isn’t an option for New
Horizon Academy. Mayor/President Graves stated the rejection was likely related to the principle
of highest and best use.
Page 35 of 52
1/13/25 -4- DRAFT
Councilmember/Commissioner Moore asked if Dr. Edwards and the Community Development
staff made the decision. A statement on the highest and best use would ultimately come from the
Council/EDA. Dr. Edwards explained staff is working daily to promote development in the City,
and there are other ideas for the former Target site.
Planning and Zoning Administrator Ginny McIntosh added the time frame is a hindrance for the
school because the former Target site is still being demolished, and New Horizon would like to be
in a new location before the end of 2025. There is a different daycare going in close to the former
Target site. Plus, there is an easement in place they would have to navigate.
Councilmember/Commissioner Moore asked if New Horizon Academy is comfortable with the
answers received from staff and the final site. Ms. Dunkley confirmed they are pleased with the
process so far. It will take ample partnership and urgency to make the project happen.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor/President Graves adjourned the City Council/Economic Development Authority Work
Session at 9:08 p.m.
Motion passed unanimously.
Page 36 of 52
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 1/27/2025
TO: City Council
FROM: Shannon Pettit, Deputy City Clerk
THROUGH: Barb Suciu, City Clerk
BY: Shannon Pettit, Deputy City Clerk
SUBJECT: Approval of Licenses
Requested Council Action:
- Motion to approve the licenses as presented.
Background:
The following businesses/persons have applied for City licenses as noted. Each
business/person has fulfilled the requirements of the City Ordinance governing respective
licenses, submitted appropriate applications, and paid proper fees. Applicants for rental dwelling
licenses are in compliance with Chapter 12 of the City Code of Ordinances unless comments
are noted below the property address on the attached rental report.
Mechanical
Owens Companies, Inc.
500 West 92nd Street, Bloomington 55420
SPI Mechanical LLC
1116 Lincoln Street NE, Minneapolis 55413
Sign Hangers
DeMars Signs
410 93rd Ave, Coon Rapids 55433
Gasoline Service Station
Holiday #292
420 66th Ave N
Budget Issues:
- None
Inclusive Community Engagement:
- None
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
- None
Strategic Priorities and Values:
ATTACHMENTS:
Page 37 of 52
1. Rental Criteria
2. For Council Approval 1.27.25 FOR COUNCIL 12.31.24 to 1.14.25
Page 38 of 52
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
Page 39 of 52
Location Address License Subtype Renewal/Initial Owner
Property
Code
Violations License Type Police CFS*
Final License
Type**
Previous
License
Type***
Consecutive
Type IV's
3513 47th Ave N
Multiple Family
1 Bldg 11 Units Renewal 6939 Baird Llc 34 = 3.1 per unit Type IV 0 Type IV Type IV 4
3601 47th Ave N
Multiple Family
4 Bldgs 44 Units Renewal
8411 Balboa Llc
Met Requirements 85 = 1.9 per unit Type III 0 Type III Type IV N/A
4204 Lakebreeze Ave N
Multiple Family
1 Bldg 4 Units Renewal
AZ RENTAL APARTMENTS LLC
Met Requirements 2 = 0.5 per unit Type I 0 Type I Type IV N/A
7230 West River Rd
Multiple Family
1 Bldg 4 Units Renewal
7230 Riverside Property Llc
Did not meet requirements 6 = 1.5 per unit Type II 0 Type IV Type IV 3
2018 55th Ave N Single Renewal
Lancelot Properties Llc
Met Requirements
1 Type I 0 Type I Type III N/A
3018 Nash Rd Single Renewal T R CAVANAUGH REV LIV TRUST
2 Type I 0 Type I Type II N/A
3708 66th Ave N Single Renewal
Maxima Martinez Perez
Met Requirements 1 Type I 0 Type I Type IV N/A
4007 Joyce La Single Renewal John Jorgensen
1 Type I 0 Type IV Type IV 3
4118 Woodbine La Single Renewal Investment Solutions Llc
4 Type II 0 Type II Type II N/A
5319 Knox Ave N Single Renewal Sydney 1 Llc
4 Type II 0 Type II Type II N/A
5332 Humboldt Ave N Single Renewal C A Morales & Z A Contreras
0 Type I 0 Type I Type IV N/A
5437 Logan Ave N Single Renewal Nicholas Kaufman
0 Type I 0 Type III Type III N/A
5606 Bryant Ave N Single Renewal Mnsf Ii W1 Llc
7 Type III 0 Type III Type I 0
5614 Bryant Ave N Single Renewal Lin Shuang Llc
4 Type II 0 Type II Type I N/A
5819 Knox Ave N Single Renewal G.b. Homes Llc
2 Type I 0 Type IV Type IV 4
6018 Camden Ave N Single Renewal Gb Homes Llc
5 Type II 0 Type IV Type IV 9
6215 Bryant Ave N Single Renewal Tuuyen D Tran & Lan Tran
1 Type I 0 Type I Type I N/A
6445 James Cir N Single Renewal Kaswa Hospitality Inc
0 Type I 0 Type IV Type IV
6812 Fremont Pl N Single Renewal Sharon K Mcgary 3 Type II 0 Type II Type II N/A
7013 Knox Ave N Single Renewal HPA II BORROWER 2021-1 LLC
12 Type IV 0 Type IV Type III 0
Rental Licenses for Council Approval 1.27.25
Page 40 of 52
7121 Knox Ave N Single Renewal
Seigonghyr W Korti Jr
Did not meet requirements 4 Type II 0 Type IV Type IV 2
*CFS = Calls for sesrvice for renewal licenses only (Initial licenses are not applicable to CFS and will be listed as N/A)
**License type being issued
***Initial licenses will not show a Type I = 3 year, Type II = 2 year, Type III = 1 year, Type IV = 6 months
All properties are current on City utilities and property taxes
Page 41 of 52
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 1/27/2025
TO: City Council
FROM: Garett Flesland, Chief of Police
THROUGH: Reggie Edwards, City Manager
BY: Garett Flesland, Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Resolution Accepting Additional Grant Funding for a Fifth Intensive
Comprehensive Peace Officer Education & Training (ICPOET) Position
Requested Council Action:
- Motion to approve the resolution authorizing acceptance and execution of additional awarded funds
for a fifth Intensive Comprehensive Peace Officer Education & Training position.
Background:
On November 25, 2024, the Brooklyn Center City Council previously approved the acceptance of an
initial $150,000 in Intensive Comprehensive Peace Officer Education & Training (ICPOET) program
grant funding from the Minnesota Department of Public Safety Office of Justice Programs (OJP) for
three ICPOET candidate positions.
On January 7, 2025, the OJP notified the City of Brooklyn Center that they would be adding an
additional $50,000 to the city's 2025 ICPOET grant for a fourth candidate position through an
amendment to the original grant agreement. On January 13, 2025, the Brooklyn Center City Council
approved the acceptance of this additional $50,000 in grant funds.
On January 14, 2025, the OJP notified the City of Brooklyn Center that they would be adding an
additional $50,000 to the city's 2025 ICPOET grant for a fifth candidate position through an
amendment to the original grant agreement.
Budget Issues:
Inclusive Community Engagement:
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
Strategic Priorities and Values:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. ICPOET Resolution for Additional Funds (for fifth position)
Page 42 of 52
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING ADDITIONAL GRANT FUNDING
FROM THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS FOR A FIFTH INTENSIVE
COMPREHENSIVE PEACE OFFICER EDUCATION &
TRAINING (ICPOET) POSITION AND AUTHORIZING
EXECUTION OF GRANT AMENDMENT
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Public Safety Office of Justice Programs initially
awarded $150,000 in grant funding to the City of Brooklyn Center Police Department through the
ICPOET program to support three new ICPOET cadet positions; and
WHEREAS, the City Council previously approved acceptance of the initial $150,000 in
ICPOET grant funding through Resolution No. 2024-111 on November 25, 2024, and subsequently
approved additional funding for a fourth ICPOET position; and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Public Safety Office of Justice Programs has
now awarded an additional $50,000 in grant funding to support a fifth ICPOET cadet position,
further enhancing law enforcement capacity within the community; and
WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center acknowledges the importance of this funding in
addressing recruitment challenges, fostering a diverse workforce reflective of the community
served, and creating further opportunities for community members to pursue careers in law
enforcement; and
WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center Police Department, under the leadership of Chief of
Police Garett Flesland, will use the funding to support personnel wages, academic tuition, and
essential training resources for the additional ICPOET cadet position; and
WHEREAS, the City certifies compliance with all applicable laws and regulations as stated
in the amended grant agreement; and
WHEREAS, the additional grant award amount of $50,000, with no matching requirement,
will cover wages, fringe benefits, contracted services, program expenses, and office expenses as
outlined in the amended grant budget;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that after appropriate examination and due
consideration, the governing body of the City:
1. Acceptance of Additional Grant Funding: The City Council formally accepts the additional
$50,000 in grant funding awarded for a fifth ICPOET position.
Page 43 of 52
2. Authorization to Execute Amendment: The City Council authorizes City Manager Dr.
Reggie Edwards and Chief of Police Garett Flesland to execute any necessary agreements,
amendments, or other documents related to the ICPOET grant funding on behalf of the City.
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.
Page 44 of 52
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 1/27/2025
TO: City Council
FROM: Ian Alexander, Economic Development Manager, Amy Loegering,
Associate Planner
THROUGH: Jesse Anderson, Community Development Director
BY: Amy Loegering, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Resolution Supporting the Pursuit of Minnesota Department of
Employment and Economic Development Redevelopment Grant Program
Funding for the Acquisition of the Brown College Site at 5951 Earle Brown
Drive
Requested Council Action:
Motion to approve Resolution Supporting the Pursuit of Minnesota Department of
Employment and Economic Development Redevelopment Grant Program Funding for
the Acquisition of the Brown College Site at 5951 Earle Brown Drive for Redevelopment
Background:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Resolution Supporting the Pursuit
of the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development
Redevelopment Grant Program Funding for acquisition of the Brown College site at
5951 Earle Brown Drive for redevelopment.
The purpose of the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development
(“DEED”) Redevelopment Grant Program is to provide funding for a variety of
redevelopment-related activities, including acquisition costs to enable repurposing of
land to a different and/or more productive use. Eligible costs include public acquisition,
demolition costs, interior environmental abatement, public infrastructure improvements,
environmental infrastructure and geotechnical soil correction. This grant program
requires a 50% match.
The Brown College site is a prime location for redevelopment by EDA and has available
infrastructure connections (sewer/water/electric) that are unavailable on other EDA
owned parcels in the Opportunity Site, making this site very desirable to EDA as
redevelopment on this site will be more cost effective than redevelopment on a site
without infrastructure connections.
The Brown College Site is adjacent to the EDA-owned former Target Site, and the
combined size of the two parcels is 15.56 acres, all located along the north-west
perimeter of the Opportunity Site. The combined parcels account for approximately
two-thirds of the land between Summit Drive and John Martin Drive. Due to the size
and location of the Brown College site, it is a prime acquisition opportunity.
The Brown College site is a tax-forfeited property currently assessed at $2,361,000. The
Page 45 of 52
City is actively working with Hennepin County to explore options for acquisition from
Hennepin Tax Forfeiture Services.
EDA is currently engaged with development groups for a number of potential
redevelopment concepts either on the Brown College site or utilizing both the Brown
College site and the former Target site. Potential redevelopment opportunities may
include an entrepreneurial market plaza, a joint public safety training facility and a youth
sports facility.
The DEED Redevelopment Grant Program funds will be utilized to one-half of the
acquisition costs ($2,361,000) and demolition expenses ($500,000), which are critical to
preparing the site for future uses.
Budget Issues:
There is a 50% grant match requirement, which EDA is pursuing other grants and
partnerships to provide matching funds from other sources.
Inclusive Community Engagement:
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
Strategic Priorities and Values:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution DEED Redevelopment Grant Program
2. DEED Redevelopment Grant Program Overview
3. DEED Redevelopment Grant Program Summary
Page 46 of 52
Member introduced the following resolution
and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. _______________
RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE PURSUIT OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF
EMPLOYMENT AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REDEVELOPMENT GRANT
PROGRAM FUNDING FOR THE ACQUISTION OF THE BROWN COLLEGE SITE AT
5951 EARLE BROWN DRIVE FOR REDEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic
Development (DEED) allocates funds to help communities with the costs of redeveloping
blighted industrial, residential, or commercial sites via its Redevelopment Grant Program; and
WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Grant Program prioritizes both the need for
redevelopment in conjunction with contamination remediation needs as well as redevelopment
potential; and
WHEREAS, DEED has made $2 Million available during this funding
solicitation and each grant may pay for up to 50% of the redevelopment costs for a qualifying
site; and
WHEREAS, the location of the Brooklyn Center Opportunity Site offers great
redevelopment potential as it is in the central area of Brooklyn Center and is adjacent to
Centennial Park as well as Highways 100 and 694; and
WHEREAS, the opportunity site is predominantly vacant and was formerly
mostly used for commercial purposes, necessitating contamination remediation prior to
redevelopment; and
WHEREAS, the Brown College site is located in Brooklyn Center’s
Opportunity Site and represents a significant redevelopment opportunity for the City. The grant
funds will be used to acquire the property and demolition expenses.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota has approved the Redevelopment Grant application submitted to the
Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) on February 3, 2025, by the
City of Brooklyn Center for the acquisition of the Brown College site at 5951 Earle Brown Drive
for redevelopment.
BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Brooklyn Center acts as the legal sponsor for
the project contained in the Redevelopment Grant Program application to be submitted on
February 3, 2025, and that Ian Alexander, Economic Development Manager, is hereby
authorized to apply to the Department of Employment and Economic Development for funding
of this project on behalf of the City of Brooklyn Center.
Page 47 of 52
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Brooklyn Center has the legal
authority to apply for financial assistance, and the institutional, managerial, and financial
capability to ensure adequate project administration.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the sources and amounts of the local match
identified in the application are committed to the project identified.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if the project identified in the application
fails to substantially provide the public benefits listed in the application within five years from
the date of the grant award, the City of Brooklyn Center may be required to repay 100 percent of
the awarded grant per Minn. Stat. § 116J.575, Subd. 4.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Brooklyn Center has not violated
any Federal, State, or local laws pertaining to fraud, bribery, graft, kickbacks, collusion, conflict
of interest, or other unlawful or corrupt practice.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon approval of its application by the state,
the City of Brooklyn Center may enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota for the
above-referenced project, and that the City of Brooklyn Center certifies that it will comply with
all applicable laws and regulation as stated in all contract agreements.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mayor and the
Clerk are hereby authorized to execute such agreements as are necessary to implement the
project on behalf of the applicant.
I CERTIFY THAT the above resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn
Center on January 27, 2025.
Mayor Date
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.
Page 48 of 52
DEED Redevelopment Grant Program
The Redevelopment Grant Program helps communities with the costs of redeveloping blighted
industrial, residential, or commercial sites and putting land back into productive use.
Overview
Grants pay up to half of the redevelopment costs for a qualifying site, with a 50% local match.
Eligible applicants are cities, counties, port authorities, housing and redevelopment authorities, and
economic development authorities.
Grants can assist with the cost of public land acquisition (if public ownership is necessary to facilitate
redevelopment), building and site demolition, infrastructure improvements, soil stabilization,
ponding or other environmental infrastructure, and costs necessary for the adaptive reuse of
buildings, such as asbestos abatement and lead paint mitigation. Grants do no provide assistance
for building construction, renovation, or rehabilitation.
At least half of the grant funds available will be awarded to sites located outside of the seven-county
Twin Cities metropolitan area, given that a sufficient number of eligible applications are received
from outstate applicants.
View more information about the Redevelopment Grant Program.
•Program Information
Who is eligible?
Eligible applicants for this program are statutory or home rule charter cities, economic
development authorities, housing and redevelopment authorities, counties, or port
authorities. While these are the eligible applicants, the site can be either privately or publicly
owned.
What sites are eligible?
Only sites that have been previously developed, and the need to redevelop the land into a
different and/or more productive use exists, qualify for a Redevelopment Grant. Sites which
were never historically developed with buildings or infrastructure (i.e., cornfield) do not
qualify. This program is not intended for parties that have operated on the site long-term,
but rather to assist new parties with site redevelopment. The Redevelopment Grants pay for
up to 50% of the redevelopment costs for a qualifying site.
Eligible and Ineligible Costs
Eligible Costs
•Public acquisition*
Page 49 of 52
•Demolition costs (as defined by Minn. Stat. 116J.572)
•Interior environmental abatement (e.g., asbestos abatement, lead paint
abatement)
•Public infrastructure improvements** (e.g., water, sanitary, and storm
connections, public sidewalks, public street or sidewalk lighting, public roads,
etc.)
•Environmental infrastructure (e.g., stormwater ponding or system, etc.)
•Geotechnical soil correction (must submit a geotechnical soil evaluation)
*Although the statute recognizes acquisition as an eligible expense, DEED will only consider public
acquisition, and these costs are only eligible as matching costs.
**Although these costs are eligible, they should not be the sole costs of the grant request.
Ineligible Costs
•Construction costs
•Building rehabilitation costs (including interior demolition)
•Environmental remediation (i.e., soil, groundwater, and/or vapor contamination)
•Project/grant administration
•Work performed or fees charged by the grantee or another public entity
•Costs of appraisals or other application costs
•Streetscaping/landscaping (including rain gardens)
•Soft costs (e.g., performance bonds, insurance, etc.)
•Contingencies
Priorities
1. Need for redevelopment in conjunction with contamination remediation
needs. Maximum = 15 points.
2. Redevelopment project meets current tax increment financing requirements for a
redevelopment district and tax increments will contribute to the project. Maximum = 25
points.
3. Redevelopment potential within the municipality. Maximum = 85 points.
4. Proximity to public transit if located in the metropolitan area. Maximum = 5 points.
5. Multi-jurisdictional projects that consider the need for affordable housing,
transportation, and environmental impact. Maximum = 15 points
Page 50 of 52
Page 51 of 52
Page 52 of 52