Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025.08.11 CCP REGULARCITY COUNCIL MEETING City Hall Council Chambers August 11, 2025 AGENDA 1. Call to Order - 7:00 p.m. Attendees please turn off cell phones and pagers 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 - Jerzak 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. Request for Council Support for Application to Minnesota DNR Conservation Partners Legacy Grant Program for Wildlife Habitat Enhancement at Palmer Lake Parks d. An Ordinance vacating easements within Lot 1, Block 1 of the plat of 7100 Corporate Plaza 2nd Addition in the City of Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County, Minnesota (1st Reading) e. Resolution Accepting Work Performed and Authorizing Final Payment, Project No. 2024-06, 2024 Pond 48-001 Maintenance Page 1 of 116 f. Resolution Canceling Certified Delinquent Utility Assessment for 6900 Unity Avenue North g. Ordinance 2025-07 - Setting the Public Hearing for August 25, 2025, Regarding the Establishing Chapter 23-2750 in the Brooklyn Center City Code of Ordinances to Regulate Temporary Cannabis Events 7. Presentations/Proclamations/Recognitions/Donations 8. Public Hearings 9. Planning Commission Items 10. Council Consideration Items a. Centerbrook Golf Course 2025 Mid-Year Update and Budget Revision 11. Council Report 12. Adjournment Page 2 of 116 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 116 Council Regular Meeting DATE: 8/11/2025 TO: City Council FROM: THROUGH: BY: Shannon Pettit, City Clerk SUBJECT: Approval of Minutes Requested Council Action: - Motion to approve... Background: Budget Issues: Inclusive Community Engagement: Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect: Strategic Priorities and Values: ATTACHMENTS: 1. 2025.07.28 CC 2. 2025.07.28 SS Page 4 of 116 7/28/25 -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 JULY 28, 2025 CITY HALL – COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. INFORMAL OPEN FORUM WITH CITY COUNCIL The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Informal Open Forum called to order by Mayor April Graves at 7:11 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL Mayor April Graves and Councilmembers Dan Jerzak, Kris Lawrence-Anderson, and Laurie Ann Moore. Also present were City Manager Reggie Edwards, City Planner Krystin Eldridge, City Clerk Shannon Pettit, and City Attorney Siobhan Tolar. 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 4. INFORMAL OPEN FORUM Mayor April Graves opened the meeting for the purpose of Informal Open Forum and reviewed the Rules of Decorum. Alfreda D. stated that, as a resident of Brooklyn Center and a member of the Liberian Community, she wanted to extend her deepest gratitude for the event that took place on Saturday, July 26. She noted that for the first time in the history of the City of Brooklyn Center and the entire country, a Liberian Independence Day parade was held, and it was more than just an event. It was a moment of pride, visibility, and joy for many of the Liberian community. She stated that this has set the stage for something big and powerful, and put Brooklyn Center in the lead nationwide for being welcoming to its immigrants. She noted that seeing the Liberian flag wave down the streets of Brooklyn Center to hear the music of her homeland and watch the children walk with pride was incredibly moving for many in the community. She stated this was the first time she felt fully seen and embraced by the City that they all call home. She stated she was thankful and grateful to LaToya from the office of Community Engagement for her unwavering support. She recognized LaToya for her efforts in helping a dream turn into a reality. She recognized the City Manager and the Brooklyn Park Police Department for their commitment to the safety of all the participants and cooperation throughout the day. She stated that the Police Department's presence and professionalism helped create a welcoming and secure environment where families felt free to celebrate. She added that the event had a powerful economic impact on the City, with local residents, vendors, and small businesses seeing an increase in traffic and revenue that day. She Page 5 of 116 7/28/25 -2- DRAFT stated this is a prime example of what can happen when culture and commerce come together. She stated that she is already looking forward to next year, and is committed to working with the City early on to build on success and make sure things go as smoothly as possible, and to address some of the issues and concerns that were discussed earlier. She continued that this is what is possible when the City listens and uplifts every voice in its community. Mayor Graves thanked Alfreda D. for speaking. Nehemiah stated he has been in Brooklyn Center for almost 34 years, and the Liberian Celebration was very proud, and he thanked the Council. He noted that the kids had an opportunity to see what diversity looks like, and he stayed to clean afterwards. He noted that LaToya went as far as to supply attendees with water. He noted that he stayed until 10:00 p.m., cleaning to make sure the park was clean and did the best he could. He reiterated how grateful he was for the event, as well as waking up to phone calls from people who saw the stream from Liberia and Washington, DC. He stated he is looking forward to next year and much more collaboration for the event next year. Kamadi D. stated he wanted to extend his sincere thanks for the Liberian Celebration to the Mayor, City Manager, the Police Chief, and all the City Staff. He noted that this weekend was truly successful and rewarding, and witnessed vibrant cultural festivities that created a wonderful atmosphere for residents and visitors alike. He said this event represents a win-win for the City, fostering spiritual and economic growth, and he hopes that Brooklyn Center will continue hosting such events, serving as a positive example for other cities to emulate. He said that the Mayor of Brooklyn Park spoke with him and asked if this event could be duplicated next year in Brooklyn Park instead of Brooklyn Center. Mayor Graves said she was not surprised. Kamadi said if Brooklyn Center wants to hold it down, he would be glad to. He thanked the Council on behalf of Liberia of Minnesota and said it was an awesome event. Julie B. called in via Zoom. She stated that she was also in attendance at the Liberian celebration and wanted to share gratitude with the City of Brooklyn Center for allowing it to host the first Liberian independent state celebration. She stated she was thrilled to see the robust crowd in the City. She noted that she heard a lot of positive feedback about the celebration from Staff and participants, and was happy to see so many people in attendance. She stated she was disappointed to hear that the first thing shared about the celebration that night was a complaint. Councilmember Moore called for a point of order. Mayor Graves asked what the point of order was. Councilmember Moore said Julie B. did not need to make disparaging comments about a Councilmember who made comments during a week session, and asked if the Council could move on to the next speaker. Mayor Graves said she did not hear the speaker make any disparaging comments about a specific Councilmember and asked Julie B. to wrap up her statements. Councilmember Moore asked again if the Council could move on to the next speaker. Mayor Graves said Julie B. was past the two-minute speaking time anyway, and this was not the time to go back and forth with a fellow Councilmember. Mayor Graves thanked Julie B. for calling in. Councilmember Moore asked if Julie B. could be muted. Mayor Graves stated she heard what Julie B. was saying, and her point was received. Mayor Graves asked if anyone else wanted to speak. Page 6 of 116 7/28/25 -3- DRAFT Naheed K. stated she also attended the Liberian Celebration and went to the library to watch the parade. She noted that the parade had quite a few interesting cars, which she and her husband enjoyed. She said she and her husband walked around the whole park, and it was a friendly environment full of young people, families, and kids. She stated she did not see any trash, and she was there until after three o'clock. She said that despite the heat, she did not see any heat emergencies of any kind. She said she is glad that this event was held in Brooklyn Center, making it unique to Brooklyn Center, and hopes that Brooklyn Center will continue to focus on events like that to build up the community identity. She thanked City Staff for all of their work on the event and said they did a great job. Famada Z. stated she served on the Sister City Commission and is currently with the City of Brooklyn Center, and is the president of the Organization of Liberian Women in Minnesota. Famada said she was there to thank the Council for hosting the first Liberian Celebration of their 178th Independence Day. She thanked LaToya and the City Staff who were out on Saturday to support them. She said she looks forward to future partnerships with the City. Mayor Graves and Councilmember Moore thanked Famada Z. for speaking and for being on one of the City’s Commissions. (1:15:00) Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson moved and Councilmember Jerzak seconded to close the Informal Open Forum at 7:24 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. 5. INVOCATION Councilmember Kragness read a quote, "It's not about perfect. It's about effort. And when you implement that effort into your life every single day, that's where transformation occurs. That's how change happens. Keep going. Remember why you started." She read another quote by James Clear that asked, "How long will you put off what you're capable of doing just to continue what you're comfortable doing?" 6. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA Councilmember Jerzak moved and Councilmember Kragness seconded to approve the Agenda and Consent Agenda, as amended, with amendments to the minutes as stated during the Study Session, item 6c. Resolution Identifying the Need for LCA Predevelopment Funding and Authorizing an Application for Grant Funds for Amani Construction & Development, LLC for Townhomes at the 5400 Block of Brooklyn Blvd was moved to become item 10a. Resolution Identifying the Need for LCA Predevelopment Funding and Authorizing an Application for Grant Funds for Amani Construction & Development, LLC for Townhomes at the 5400 Block of Brooklyn Blvd, Study Session Item Strategic Planning Update and Reporting to become Item 7a. Strategic Planning Update and Reporting, and 7a. 2025 Mid-Year Crime Reduction & Strategy Update to become 7c. 2025 Mid-Year Crime Reduction & Strategy Update, and the following consent items were approved: Page 7 of 116 7/28/25 -4- DRAFT 6a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. July 14, 2025 – Study Session 2. July 14, 2025 – Regular Session 6b. LICENSES AMUSEMENT DEVICES New King Buffet 5927 John Martin Drive RENTAL INITIAL (TYPE II – two-year license) 5901 Aldrich Avenue N EDWIN CRUZ GUERRERO INITIAL (TYPE I – three-year license) 5342 70th Circle Pai Lor RENEWAL (TYPE II – two-year license) 5415 69th Avenue N Phs Maranatha Inc 3018 Ohenry Road Godiva Properties Llc 7025 Drew Avenue N SFR BORROWER 2022-1 LLC RENEWAL (TYPE I – three-year license) 5207 Xerxes Avenue N Djwb Inc 5235 Drew Avenue N Jay Nelson Battenberg 3121 Lawrence Road Empire Care Systems 5818 Emerson Avenue N New Prospect Holdings 1606 71st Avenue N G A Lang & V L Lang Rev Trst 6000 Bryant Avenue N Rto Investments Llc 6407 Orchard Avenue N Hpa Borrower 2018-1 Ms Llc 6436 Dupont Avenue N AA Homes LLC 6c. RESOLUTION IDENTIFYING THE NEED FOR LCA PREDEVELOPMENT FUNDING AND AUTHORIZING AN APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS FOR AMANI CONSTRUCTION & Page 8 of 116 7/28/25 -5- DRAFT DEVELOPMENT, LLC FOR TOWNHOMES AT THE 5400 BLOCK OF BROOKLYN BLVD This item was considered as 10a. Resolution Identifying the Need for LCA Predevelopment Funding and Authorizing for Grant Funds for Amani Construction & Development, LLC for Townhomes at the 540 Block of Brooklyn Blvd. 6d. RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL REPORT OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2024 7. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS/RECOGNITIONS/DONATIONS 7a. STRATEGIC PLANNING UPDATE AND REPORTING Dr. Edwards explained this the first time that there have been presentations on strategic directions, goals, and progress, and it is an opportunity for everyone to learn. Dr. Edwards said this allows the City to align its work strategically across the organization, holds the City accountable for the things it sets out to do, and provides transparency in educational opportunities. This also provides a means for the City to identify the progress that it is making and the ability to adjust. He noted that this first iteration is primarily projects and activities, and as this process matures, city staff will begin to identify outcomes in the years to come. Dr. Edwards said that it has been articulated that the City wants to be outcome-based through outcome budgeting, and this is a first step in identifying the City's actions and measuring and reporting on that progress. Dr. Edwards introduced Deputy City Manager Darren Nyquist to present on this item. Dr. Edwards wanted to note that this is not a punitive process, but an opportunity as a City organization to declare what the City is doing on behalf of increasing the life of residence and specific and strategic actions for three is going to take how they are going to take those action and checking in with one another as it relates to the progress on that. Mr. Nyquist stated he was going to talk about the process and the focus on achieving strategic priorities, as well as first steps and the intent behind what the City is doing. He also noted that he will go over the future and current states of priority projects. Mr. Nyquist noted that the strategic plan is wrapped around the previous Strategic Plan that was completed in 2023. The strategic plan completed in 2023 pre-dates Mr. Nyquist, but his experience as a former consultant has given him a great foundation to tackle this mission. He noted that the priority projects he would be talking about fit into five buckets: enhancing economic growth, developing financial stability, increasing safety for the community and employees, improving employee engagement, and improving communication. Mr. Nyquist detailed the process of getting the project off the ground. Inside, here are three things that he looks at to push the project forward: focus, visibility, and ownership. Focus pertains to how the City will use limited resources, time, and money effectively to complete projects. Visibility is about making sure the City is not doing duplicate work across the organization and Page 9 of 116 7/28/25 -6- DRAFT getting projects and strategies out for Staff and the public to see. Ownership is all about who is responsible for driving the work that is happening, and execution comes down to consistency in the process. He highlighted that he and Dr. Edwards do not want to focus on the achievement or success of any individual, but that they win or fail as a team. He mentioned that he has seen other organizations with strategic planning that focus too much on individual wins and losses, and it can have a negative effect. There will be ownership of the work and process, but it will never be punitive. Mr. Nyquist said that the City Manager meets individually with Department Directors to help achieve the goals of focus, visibility, and ownership, and discusses Department priorities and goals and priority projects. Mr. Nyquist stated that he has a monthly meeting with those Department heads, and his role is to check in on said projects and their progress and maintain momentum. Mr. Nyquist built a document that tracks all progress on projects to measure that progress. The future process will include the City Council determining high-level priorities and where the Council wants the City as an organization to go with high-level objectives that have vision and impact. To foster visibility, documentation will be made internally with the Staff so all Staff can see where their project is progressing and the Department can keep tabs on the project as a way to develop accountability across the organization. To foster ownership, he explained that each priority has an owner who is responsible for pushing that priority forward, and priorities do not change without discussion. Mr. Nyquist explained that there are 64 priority projects currently, seven to enhance economic growth, 13 to develop financial stability, 14 to increase safety for the community and employees, 13 to improve employee engagement, and 17 to improve communication. Mr. Nyquist highlighted the current status of the following projects: by the end of 2025 to ensure the development and beginning implementation of an Economic Growth Plan, to develop financial stability they will develop the 2025 Capital Plan, to increase thank you for trying to be employee they will be an upgrade to City Hall security cameras and telecom, to improve employee engagement there will be an update on new employee orientation to improve experience and ensure policy trainings are accurate, and to improve communication there will be an implementation of monthly Staff meetings with the City Manager. He explained that some of the statuses are project processes and some are higher levels of strategy, but that's where he would like to go strategically to accomplish the projects. Mayor Graves asked if there would be some additional priorities that come forward as part of the economic growth plan. Mr. Nyquist anticipated that there would be new priorities that come forward as more conversations happen on where there needs to be more focus. Mr. Nyquist discussed the current status of projects and the phases of completion. He noted that three percent of projects have not started, 83 percent of projects are on track or completed, and 15 percent, or six projects, are at risk or off track. He noted that those six projects are still in the budget development phase and are not critical, but those issues are being worked out. One of the projects that has not been completed belongs to Mr. Nyquist, and it is regarding cleaning up the City's website. He explained that his team has been jammed, but by the end of the year, the website project should be done. Page 10 of 116 7/28/25 -7- DRAFT Mr. Nyquist displayed a slide that shows how the priority of a project will be tracked with a meter that shows red, yellow, or green. As project completion increases, the meter will show green. He explained that this is a rough measurement, and as time goes on, he will fine-tune impact measurements, but he is not quite there yet. Mr. Nyquist asked if the Council had any questions for him and noted that he meets regularly with Dr. Edwards to report back on his strategic planning progress. Dr. Edwards asked Mr. Nyquist if he would explain that projects that may not start until the fourth quarter may not display progress the same way that other projects would. Mr. Nyquist responded that tracking is based on completion of the project, and most projects are completed by December. At the halfway point, if those projects are in the yellow, that means they are on track to meet their deadline. If the project is in the red by mid-year, that means there has been a delay somewhere. Councilmember Jerzak noted that this process is in its beginning stages, but wanted to offer some constructive criticism that if everything is important, then nothing is important. His fear is that the City will develop a huge bureaucracy that will cave in on itself. He noted that Dr. Edwards and the Staff have a limited capacity and encouraged Dr. Edwards to focus on the energies and work that have the most impact and create the most good. He recognized that from the beginning, the Mayor had suggested an analyst who could help focus projects to have the greatest outcome, and he thought that that would be very beneficial. He thanked Dr. Edwards for getting this up and going and noted that the government moves very slowly, but nevertheless, the process has been started. Mayor Graves said she was excited to see the progress and that the process is moving forward. She noted that she had a conversation with the former City Manager, who discussed how to align strategic goals within the City budget. She agreed that she does not want this process to become overly burdensome, but thinks it is an opportunity for employees to do some self-reflection and to have documentation of the work that they have completed and the milestones that they have met. She noted that this type of documentation for projects could be used to help City Staff get a promotion or transition to work somewhere else, as they can show the projects with specific outcomes that they were a part of. Project documentation could also be helpful to the rest of the community to see the important work that the Staff is doing, and the residents can see how tax dollars are being used. She said he is very excited about this process and is patiently waiting for the next presentation. Councilmember Jerzak noted that on page 17 in the packet, the sum adds up to 101 percent. Mr. Nyquist noted that it was an Excel rounding error. Councilmember Kragness appreciated the visibility in establishing accountability, as well as the graph that shows the Council the progress made on each type of project. Councilmember Moore stated that she appreciated the handout and the specifics around the presentation items. She had not had time to go through it yet, but would ask any follow-up questions later. She agreed with Councilmember Kragness about accountability. She noted that the priorities are the 2025 priorities that were developed by the previous Council in collaboration Page 11 of 116 7/28/25 -8- DRAFT with City Staff and the City Manager. She stated she looks forward to offering more constructive feedback at a later time. She noted that the Brooklyn Center Business Association is something that she would like to bring up in a future council member work session. She thanked Mr. Nyquist for his presentation. Mayor Graves moved and Councilmember Moore seconded to approve the presentation on the 2025 Mid-Year Crime Reduction & Strategy Update. Motion passed unanimously. 7b. PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURES AND ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER REVIEW Dr. Edwards stated that the Council had desired to review the policy related to parliamentary procedure as well as Robert's Rules of Order. He explained that the City has a modified version of parliamentary procedure and Robert's Rules of Order. Dr. Edward introduced Ms. Tolar to present this item. Ms. Tolar explained that pursuant to the City Charter, Chapter 303, the City shall determine its own rules of order and business in its parliamentary procedure. She noted that Robert's Rules of Order are very complicated and are not compliant with Minnesota law; therefore, Brooklyn Center has a modified version. Ms. Tolar noted that the purpose of parliamentary procedure is to establish orderly meetings and conventions, create a clear record of council decisions, and help members of the public follow the meeting. The guiding principles of Robert’s Rules and Brooklyn Center parliamentary procedure include; everyone has a right to participate in discussion if they wish, before anyone may speak a second time; everyone has the right to know what is going on at all times, only urgent matters may interrupt the speaker, and only one motion can be discussed at a time. Ms. Tolar explained that Brooklyn Center's parliamentary procedures include Section 1.3, which outlines Brooklyn Center's parliamentary procedures. Sections 1.10 through 11 outline what is in those rules of parliamentary procedure, which include points of order, parliamentary appeal, decorum, enforcement of decorum, conflict of interest, limitation of debate, dissents and protests, and rules of the presiding officer are final unless overruled. Sections 1.10-1.14 discuss additional parliamentary procedure; section 1.13 discusses motions, which will be reviewed in depth. Ms. Tolar explained the role of the presiding officer. She noted all members of the Council have an equal voice and an equal vote; however, section 2.06 of the Brooklyn Center City Charter designates the Mayor as presiding officer of the city Council and a mayor pro tem who serves as Mayor in the Mayor's absence. In the absence of the Mayor and Mayor pro tem, the acting Mayor pro tem shall preside. The most senior Councilmember shall be designated as acting Mayor pro tem. The presiding officer determines all points of order subject to the right of any Councilmember to appeal to the Council, recognizes speakers on the Council and other speakers at the meeting, calls speakers to order, may order the removal of any person who makes inappropriate remarks or Page 12 of 116 7/28/25 -9- DRAFT becomes boisterous while addressing the Council and bar that person from further audience with the Council. The presiding officer directs and leads the meeting through the Council agenda, maintains general order of the meeting, decides all questions of interpretation of the rules of procedure, points of order, and other questions of procedure requiring rulings. A ruling shall be final and binding for purposes of the matter under discussion. The presiding officer also revises the order of business with the exception of noticed public hearings. Ms. Tolar explained the parliamentary appeal. Any member of the Council may appeal to the Council from a ruling of the presiding officer. If the appeal is seconded, the member may speak solely on the question involved. The presiding officer may explain his or her ruling, but no other councilmember shall participate in the discussion. The appeal should be sustained if it is approved by a majority of the members present, exclusive of the presiding officer. Ms. Tolar moved on to motions. Motions are a topic under discussion. After being recognized by the presiding officer, the Councilmember can introduce a motion as long as no other motion is on the table. A motion requires a second to be considered. Each motion must be addressed, passed, defeated, labeled, or postponed indefinitely. There are four types of motions: the main motion, which introduces items for consideration, subsidiary motions that change how the motion is handled, privileged motions, which are used to bring up items that are unrelated but urgent enough to interrupt consideration of the existing motion, and incidental motions, which provide means of questioning procedure or other motions. Ms. Tolar gave examples of types of motions. A main motion is a motion to adopt the consent agenda, a subsidiary motion is a motion to amend a pending motion, a privileged motion is a motion to adjourn or recess, and an incidental motion is a motion for a point of information. Ms. Tolar gave examples of incidental motions and the actions that would require them. She stated that when a Councilmember wants to inquire about the facts affecting the business at hand, they would motion for a point of information. She stated that if a council member wanted to remove the question from consideration after the motion had been re-stated by the presiding officer, the council member would move to be allowed to withdraw the motion. If a Councilmember would like the opinion, not a ruling of the presiding officer on a matter of parliamentary procedure as it relates to the business at hand, the Councilmember would motion for a parliamentary inquiry. If the Councilmember wanted to challenge an error in procedure and require a ruling by the presiding officer, the council member would motion for a point of order. Ms. Tolar gave examples of subsidiary motions and the actions that would require them. She stated that when a councilmember changes their mind about something that was voted on earlier in the meeting, for which they were on the winning side, the council member would move to reconsider. If the council member wanted to change an action voted on at an earlier meeting, the council member would make a motion to rescind. If the Councilmember wanted to change some of the wording in a motion under discussion, the Councilmember would move to amend the motion with the new wording of their choice. If a Councilmember liked the idea of the motion being discussed but needed to reword it beyond simple changes, the Councilmember would move to Page 13 of 116 7/28/25 -10- DRAFT substitute the motion for the wording of their choice, and after the motion is seconded, discussion will continue on both motions, and the body will vote on the motion they prefer. Ms. Tolar noted that in the Brooklyn Center Council rules, in section 1.13 of the rules of procedure, if a motion is made and seconded, it shall be stated by the presiding officer before defeat, and a motion shall not be withdrawn by the mover without the consent of the person seconding it. Motions out of order, with majority consent of the Council, the presiding officer may make at any time, allowing the item to be considered out of the regular agenda order. Ms. Tolar explained that if the question contains two or more propositions, the presiding officer, at the request of a member, may divide it. Ms. Tolar explained the precedence of motion is when a motion is before the Council, and no other motion will be entertained except the following, which shall have precedence in the following order: adjourn, fix hour of adjournment, table, limit or terminate discussion, and amend or postpone. Ms. Tolar discussed motions in the Council’s rules of procedure. A motion to adjourn that is not debatable is a motion to adjourn and shall be in order at any time except when made as an interruption of a member while speaking, or when a discussion has ended and a vote on a motion is pending, or while a vote is being taken. A motion to adjourn to another time shall be debatable only as to the time to which the meeting is adjourned. A motion to fix the hour of adjournment is when all meetings and Work Sessions of the Council shall be adjourned by 10:00 p.m. unless otherwise agreed to by at least a majority of the Council. A motion to set a different, specific time at which to adjourn shall be undebatable and shall be unamendable except by extraordinary vote (4/5). Ms. Tolar explained a motion to table. A motion to table shall be undebatable and shall preclude all amendments or debate of the subject under consideration. If the motion prevails, the matter shall be taken from the table at any time prior to the end of the next regular meeting, unless the motion is to either table indefinitely or to a date certain. If the motion is to be tabled indefinitely, the matter shall not be rescheduled without at least a majority approval from the Council. Ms. Tolar explained the motion to limit or terminate the discussion. A motion to limit or terminate discussion may be used to limit or close debate on, or prohibit further amendment to, the pending motion. It is undeniable. If the motion fails, debate shall be reopened; if the motion passes, a vote shall be taken on the pending motion. Ms. Tolar explained the motion to amend. A motion to amend shall be debatable only as to the amendment. A motion to amend an amendment shall be in order, but a motion to amend an amendment to an amendment shall not be in order. An amendment modifying the intention of the motion will be in order, but an amendment relating to a different matter shall not be in order. A substitute motion on the same subject shall be acceptable and voted on before a vote on the amendment. Amendments shall be voted on first, then the main motion as amended. Ms. Tolar explained a motion to continue. A motion to continue to a definite time shall be amenable and available as to the propriety of postponement and the time set. Page 14 of 116 7/28/25 -11- DRAFT Ms. Tolar noted that important things to remember are to speak, all Councilmembers must be recognized by the presiding officer, all motions must be seconded and voted on unless amended or rescinded, and making and preserving a good record is more important than the procedure itself. Ms. Tolar stated that making an accurate record is important, especially when doing things of an official nature for the Council. She gave the example of a previous Council meeting with the Hospitality Accommodation License revocation and explained how important correct documentation is for the record. Ms. Tolar asked if anyone had any questions. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated that she needed a clean copy of the rules, as hers had portions blocked out by a graphic. She asked about the rules and procedures regarding limiting the speaker in the audience. She noted that in the past, there have been disruptive people in the audience, and the Council was told that they could not do anything due to freedom of speech. She said that there have been times when the Council was physically feeling threatened, and the Council had to let them speak. Ms. Tolar responded that freedom of speech is definitely important, but the policy in front of them was presenting what the current presiding officer may do, not necessarily what the presiding officer should do. She explained that in situations like that, the presiding officer has the ability to remove that individual from the audience, which does not necessarily mean that they will. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson said she can only speak for herself, but she would like more clarity around how this differs from First Amendment rights. She stated that if there was a PowerPoint that could be emailed for clarity, she would like that. Dr. Edwards asked if this was something that he could provide to the Council in a memo. Mayor Graves said that as the presiding officer, it has to be gauged how disruptive or threatening the behavior is in order to remove a person physically from the space, and whether or not it would make more sense to go into a recess or adjourn the meeting. She noted that removing someone from the meeting could mean a potential legal issue around someone's First Amendment rights as well. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson said that maybe the Council should have a conversation about what point it should get to with a disruptive individual, before saying the meeting needed to be adjourned. Mayor Graves said she adjourned one meeting when she felt it got too volatile in chambers. There was no vote taken at the moment, but everyone said aye when the motion was made. She noted that as the presiding officer, it is her call to make, but she cares about how her fellow Councilmembers feel. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson said she knows it would be a last resort to remove someone from the meeting, and she has had really good experiences for the most part, but there have been a few times when it was not. Mayor Graves said she has never felt physically afraid for her safety, more so offended or hurt. Councilmember Jerzak asked if a Councilmember felt threatened, could they make a motion to adjourn or recess, and if it got seconded, it would pass, or is that something only the presiding officer can do. Ms. Tolar responded that anyone can make a motion; it just has to be seconded. Councilmember Jerzak stated that it gives him a level of comfort to know that that was an option. Page 15 of 116 7/28/25 -12- DRAFT Councilmember Moore stated there have been examples where a Councilmember has called a point of order that has not been acknowledged by the presiding officer, and asked if it is the process that if a point of order is called, there has to be an official second to get acknowledgement of the point of order. She said she has felt that it has been a process trying to get things on the record in terms of point of order and point of information, if not acknowledged by the presiding officer. She stated she feels like she has been trying to keep the order by calling a point of order, and at times, it was not acknowledged in the way she wanted. She asked for future reference what a Councilmember should do if he or she calls a point of order that is not acknowledged by the presiding officer. Mayor Graves responded that there has to be a stated reason for the point of order. She stated from her perspective that there was no reason stated. Councilmember Moore asked to call a point of order because she wanted to hear what the City Manager and Counsel had to say about this, and then Mayor Graves could retort. Mayor Graves said she would not retort; she would tell the truth. Ms. Tolar responded that Mayor Graves was correct in her response and that a point of order had to have a reason. Ms. Tolar said the point of order has to be about a particular issue as it relates to the order on the table, and with specifics. Ms. Tolar gave an example of calling a point of order for not following proper procedure, a person speaking out of turn, or the Council not correctly conducting a public hearing; whatever the case may be, the point of order has to be specific. Mayor Graves stated that after a point of order is called, if the presiding officer does not agree, then an appeal can happen, and that process is outlined in the document. Councilmember Moore said she was aware of the appeal process. Mayor Graves asked if anyone had any other questions about the presentation. Councilmember Jerzak asked if there was any interest from the Council in having a document with a list of Robert's Rules of Order on their desks that could be made available so the Council can have some clarity sometimes on what to say or how to say it. Mayor Graves said she, too, does not always know how to say things correctly for Robert's Rules of Order either, and that is why they have the City Attorney, but the City Attorney may not always know either, since Robert's Rules of Order is such a large document. Dr. Edwards said the City has a modified version of Robert's Rules of Order anyway, so the Council would not want all of Robert's Rules on their desk. City Staff could work with the City Attorney to come up with a frequently asked questions cheat sheet that would help out the Council. He said City Staff would look into the cheat sheet and bring it back to the Council for deliberation to make sure it has everything that the Council needs at a later date. Councilmember Kragness said she appreciates Ms. Tolar’s presentation and comments, and feels like every time Ms. Tolar talks, she is educating the Council. Mayor Graves motioned and Councilmember Moore seconded to accept the presentation on Parliamentary Procedures and Robert's Rules of Order Review. Page 16 of 116 7/28/25 -13- DRAFT Motion passed unanimously. 7c. 2025 MID-YEAR CRIME REDUCTION & STRATEGY UPDATE Dr. Edwards explained that the City has tried to address this issue for the last two years. He noted that the City has been trying to develop strategies around crime reduction and focusing on the peak times of the year for crime, which are spring and summer. He said at the beginning of this year, he asked the Police Chief to work with Departments to develop a game plan around crime reduction. The presentation will not only be about the plan in place, but also a report on the progress. Dr. Edwards said he is very pleased with the Police Chief and the work he has done, as well as all the departments that have come together to make a plan. He noted that in the future, the City may develop an even more comprehensive plan with Health and Safety to broaden to include prevention, intervention, response, and recovery. Dr. Edwards introduced Police Chief Flesland to present this item. Chief Flesland gives a quick overview of what he would cover at the presentation, key crime trends, highlights the importance of targeted efforts, and the impact of targeted efforts in deployment, and briefly shares a prediction as to crime trends for the next few months. Chief Flesland gave a violent crime mid-year comparison from mid-July 2024, and violent crimes have dropped nearly 23 percent. Robberies and aggravated assaults are expected to continue to trend downward. Chief Flesland said the Police Department is closely monitoring the modest increase in reported sexual assaults and a slight increase in domestic-related aggravated assaults. He noted that in general, this is the lowest violent crime total since 2020 and the lowest in 2025 so far in the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) Era. NIBRS started in the fall of 2020 and provides a more detailed way of tracking crime incidents compared to the previous methodology. Through July 15, 2025, property crime has also trended downward in most areas. Auto thefts are down more than 42 percent, and burglaries are down by a third. Thefts are up slightly, but the overall total property crime is down over nine percent. He noted that no decline in crime is ever fast enough, but these reductions are still meaningful, and in his opinion, point to a growing momentum. Chief Flesland displayed a chart showing violent crime in geographic areas in 2025 compared to 2024, with several areas showing improvement around the City in violent crime. He noted the collaboration across City Departments, including Crime Reduction Strategy (CRS) monthly meetings, which include representatives from the Fire Department, the Office of Community Prevention, Health, and Safety, Parks and Recreation, and Community Development. Other strategies include evolving communication between all Departments within the City, Parks and Recreation Outreach Teams deployed in parks, Community Crisis Response Team meetings ongoing monthly, a hotel work group, youth-focused pop-up events, and business engagement. Chief Flesland stated that the City's Office of Community Prevention, Health, and Safety has allowed Chief Flesland to integrate community resources into many aspects of its Public Safety efforts. Their presence helps build trust and seeks to address the root causes of conflict. The Police Department is conscious of striving for long-term community involvement and investment into solutions, not just quick fixes. Page 17 of 116 7/28/25 -14- DRAFT Chief Flesland discussed hotspot patrolling as a regular part of the Public Safety strategy. The crime analyst is constantly identifying and revising the crime hotspots, and sector Sergeants then lead efforts in those areas that include directed patrols, overtime details, camera trailer deployments, and take advantage of community engagement opportunities with community members and business owners during regular patrols. The areas that the Police Department is focusing on this year include the City's commercial areas, the Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor, and Humboldt Avenue, especially between 65th Avenue North and 69th Avenue North. Chief Flesland said the mobile Camera Trailers have served as a visible deterrent and strong technological force multiplier. The Police Department has been strategic about the location of camera deployments, and while it is difficult to quantify the statistical impact, the perception of safety has clearly improved. Several business owners have requested extended deployments of the Camera Trailers on their properties, even knowing that the units must rotate throughout the City. Business owners report an increased sense of security when the Camera Trailers are deployed in their area. Shorter deployments of the Camera Trailers are typically two to five days for specific events, while longer deployments between 15 and 26 days were in response to ongoing crime concerns in that area. Crime deterrence and investigation accounts for over 60 percent of the Camera Trailer deployments, and a significant portion of the deployments have been for security at various events, which accounts for 21 percent of the Camera Trailer deployments. Chief Flesland explained that the proactive Policing trends do not mean aggressive enforcement that is being implemented. Policing trends mean the Police are not sitting back and waiting for residents to witness crimes and call 9-1-1; instead, the Police are taking a thoughtful, intentional, visible approach to deter crimes before they happen. Chief Flesland met with Patrol Officers and Patrol Sergeants to lay out expectations, which include an emphasis on increased visibility throughout the community, speed and curfew overtime details, and reinstituted Towards Zero Death (TZD) traffic enforcement for the first time since 2019-2020. Mayor Graves asked what had made the TZD traffic enforcement possible again. Chief Flesland said it came down to Staffing. Other Departments have been collapsed to free up Staff, and now that Patrol has a healthy number of Staff, it has enabled the Department to conduct the mandated training in order to be eligible for the TZD program. Chief Flesland stated that during his March 24 meeting with the Council, it was reported that the Police were deployed on a series of proactive details based on identified crime trends and hot spot areas. Chief Flesland went on to explain that the details from that meeting included moving and traffic violation enforcement, curfew, retail theft, and other targeted patrols based on identified crime trends, as well as feedback from the community. Chief Flesland was happy to report that those proactive items have begun, and the Police are calling them Tiger Teams during their deployments. Tiger Teams is a term borrowed from Chief Flesland’s time in the Navy and was used to describe a group of subject matter experts pulled together to solve a specific urgent problem. Tiger Teams is not a long-term unit; it is about being precise, responsive, and professional in solving problems together. Tiger Teams has shown a clear, measurable impact after just two deployments, one week in March and one week in June, with a third week just recently completed. Page 18 of 116 7/28/25 -15- DRAFT Chief Flesland explained that the first two Tiger Team weeks, one in May and one in June, were combined in analysis. He explained that the targeted call types data is a group of calls combined that include disturbances, fights, juvenile problems, loud music and parties, narcotics, suspicious activity, trespassing, and unwanted persons. Chief Flesland noted a chart with the left side showing the weeks before the Tiger Team deployments, and the right side of the chart shows the percentage change track from the week before to the week after the deployments. Chief Flesland said there are measurable results from these two deployments; violent crime fell by 15 percent, targeted call types fell by 11 percent, self-initiated traffic stops and subject stops increased by over 180 percent, and there was a 200 percent increase in weapons recovered during the Tiger Team deployments. He noted that while the results are encouraging, he will acknowledge that crime data can fluctuate and change over time as more reports are received, and long-term monitoring will continue to assess the impact. The Tiger Teams were deployed in multiple areas of the City, but primarily in the Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor and Humboldt Avenue between 65th and 69th. After each deployment, Chief Flesland saw improvements in crime reduction, with a chart showing a comparison between serious crime and violent crime. Chief Flesland showed a chart with targeted call types comparison, with a slight increase in calls during the Tiger Teams week, which makes sense, since the Tiger Teams were actively seeking out various crimes and suspicious activities, but in the week after the deployment, targeted call types decreased by 11 percent. Chief Felsland showed a map with violent crime variation during proactive policing, as well as traffic and subject stops in the areas where the Tiger Teams were deployed, showing a significant reduction. Chief Flesland discussed the forecasted prediction that violent crime will continue to decline, and while he knows this is not a guarantee, he is cautiously optimistic that this trend will continue. Similarly, part one of crime appears to be tracking at reduced levels for the next quarter. He noted that crime is down, collaboration is working, and momentum is building; the forecast is optimistic, but the work is not finished. Chief Flesland said he will continue to deploy flexible, coordinated efforts and adjust strategies based on emerging trends and feedback. He noted that another mobile surveillance trailer was ordered for the fleet earlier this year, and it has enhanced Police presence in problem areas while being responsive to residents' and businesses' concerns. Chief Flesland said he believes that the City and Police Department are heading in the right direction with visibility, responsiveness, and collaboration remaining the guiding priorities as the Police continue to work to protect the vulnerable from harm. Chief Flesland asked the Council if they had any questions. Mayor Graves thanked Chief Flesland for his presentation and asked if the Council had any questions. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson thanked Chief Flesland for his presentation, and said she has noticed in the last few weeks that the number of people getting pulled over on 63rd has increased, and she does not know if that is a coincidence, but she is pleased with the increase. Chief Flesland said that traffic stops have increased, and the Police are consciously focusing on traffic and moving violations. He continued that the two most common complaints he receives as a Police Chief are traffic-related violations and parking issues, so the Police have made it a priority to address those issues, and it is making an impact. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson said that since the 63rd Page 19 of 116 7/28/25 -16- DRAFT has been reconstructed to only one lane, traffic is not going 30 mph, and she thanked Chief Flesland for coming up with a good strategy to address that and wished him luck. Councilmember Kragness thanked Chief Flesland and asked what type of data is statistically shared when doing recruiting to bring on new Staff to help with the initiative of what the Police are trying to do in Brooklyn Center. Chief Flesland said he did not understand the question. Councilmember Kragness asked if new recruits are shown the plan in place to reduce crime in different areas of the City, so that new recruits know what they are walking into and how they could fit into that plan. Chief Flesland said recruiting has changed a little bit, and the Police have recognized that they need to have a personal connection and track an applicant through the whole process. Applicants are invited for multiple ride-alongs where applicants spend a couple of hours with a handful of different officers, where they can have honest conversations about what the City's Police Department is doing. There is a public-facing dashboard with all crime that is up to date within 24 hours, so the Police point everyone to that dashboard to see near real-time crime. Chief Flesland said that the dashboard is underutilized by the community, and it is raw data that is not twisted and is searchable by a variety of means. He noted that recruitment comes down to conversations, and it is the panel interview of the applicant and the background process, and then he sits down with the applicant to have a private interview, where a frank conversation happens about where the Police want to get to. He noted that a lot of applicants seek out Brooklyn Center because of the things that the Police Department is doing and the equipment that they are able to use to make the community safer. Councilmember Moore thanked Chief Flesland for his presentation. She asked about data results from the triage of 911 calls, potentially from a Police Officer to either one of the expanded response teams through Canopy and North Memorial Hennepin County. Chief Flesland said he wished they had more capability and more expanded responders out there. He noted that this presentation was really focused on crime reduction, and ideally, preventing future crime is difficult to quantify statistically. He said he is part of regular conversations where data is discussed to make sure the Police are collecting correct and appropriate data, and how that data is evaluated and presented. Chief Flesland gave an example that when Police are patrolling a neighborhood at 3 a.m., there is no way to know how many burglaries they prevented. He believes that prevention is happening by their presence, but the number and statistics will always be unknown. Chief Flesland continued that there will be additional dialogue as the pilot project comes to the Police Department, and what they can improve on. He noted that he would make sure Hennepin County dispatch codes things in a particular way that is searchable and easily digestible, so those numbers can be analyzed long- term once they are available. Councilmember Moore appreciated Chief Flesland’s personal examples and specific information about the Tiger Teams. Councilmember Jerzak admitted his bias upfront, but he knows a little bit about the mobile cameras and said it is one of those things that is impossible to measure, but it does have an impact on prevention. He said that, at one time, there was some discussion about it, but he hoped that every sector would at some point have its own mobile camera. Page 20 of 116 7/28/25 -17- DRAFT Mayor Graves thanked Chief Flesland and said that some of the things that she appreciated the most were the focus on collaboration across the different departments that are responsible for safety in the City. She was excited to hear about the proactive Policing and the focus on business areas, and speeding and traffic violations. She was happy to hear that the Police are focusing on moving traffic violations rather than some of the less safety-focused issues that could lead to a traffic stop. She said she appreciates the ability of businesses to feel supported and knows that prevention and presence go hand in hand. She told Chief Flesland to continue to do the amazing work that he is doing. Mayor Graves moved, and Councilmember Jerzak seconded to accept the presentation on the 2025 Mid-Year Crime Reduction & Strategy Update. Motion passed unanimously. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS 10. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS 10a. RESOLUTION IDENTIFYING THE NEED FOR LCA PREDEVELOPMENT FUNDING AND AUTHORIZING AN APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS FOR AMANI CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT, LLC FOR TOWNHOMES AT THE 5400 BLOCK OF BROOKLYN BLVD Dr. Edwards explained that this was a Consent Agenda item that was moved to the regular agenda as the Council wanted to have a discussion about it. He thanked Economic Developer Ian Alexander for coming in at the last minute to make a presentation on this item. He noted that Director Jesse Anderson could not be present. Mr. Alexander said it is always a pleasure to be there. A quick background of the project is that on January 27th, there was a Work Session with the Council where Armani Construction was discussed and a proposal was brought forward to purchase and develop the EDA property located at 5400 Brooklyn Boulevard. The developer is seeking pre-development funding to assist in activities like acquisition, architecture, design, and financing. The pre-development grant is funded at up to $300,000, and the current grant request is $152,500. The City would apply on behalf of the developer to the Metropolitan Council's LCA's pre-development fund to address activities related directly to the development of the site, prior to beginning construction. The grant is allocated every year in two rounds and is highly competitive for real estate development. The funds that Armani has applied for are related to planning the site and monitoring the land. Mr. Alexander met with Armani in February, and there was a gap in funding for what Armani could and could not accomplish. Mr. Alexander had a conversation with Armani about the property and what it could be used for, and based on the conversation with the Council, it was proposed for housing and townhomes. The proposal is for 11 townhomes, three to four bedrooms per unit, two- stall back-load garage per unit, private front yard and deck or balcony, and 15 visitor parking stalls Page 21 of 116 7/28/25 -18- DRAFT with a small playground and shared greenspace, and proposed at 80 percent AMI for ownership. Mr. Alexander noted that the townhomes would be built for the income of people in the area, and they provide residents the ability to purchase and own their own homes and build equity in the community. The lot is a lot that has been sitting for quite a while, and Armani has a decent track record of getting these types of projects accomplished. Mr. Alexander said Armani has already applied for the grant and wants a resolution to show that they have support for this type of development. Mr. Alexander explained that the Metropolitan Council provides funding for development to foster economic growth by increasing density, adding new housing or jobs, minimizing climate impact, or furthering equity outcomes and mitigating specific barriers to access for historically marginalized populations. The City encouraged the developer to apply for this grant. The future steps for this project will include the grant, helping to fund the planning and design phase of the project, the Council's action to accept, if the grant is awarded, and a development agreement and planning application brought to the Council for approval. He explained that City Staff recommends that the Council execute the resolution identifying the need for the Livable Communities Demonstration Account and authorizing an application for grant funds for Armani Construction and Development. Councilmember Moore thanked Mr. Alexander for his presentation and asked to see the images of the townhomes concept and the parcel they would be built on. Mr. Alexander showed images of a previous home that Armani has built. Councilmember Moore asked if the grant application is dependent on its affordability at 80 percent of the average or adjusted median income for Brooklyn Center. Mr. Alexander said that if the applications are applying for those funds, the funds are awarded based on the AMI amount. The AMI was 80 to 120 percent, but the City is about 80 percent AMI, and this was to provide home ownership for residents as opposed to renting. Councilmember Moore asked if townhome units are affordable. Mr. Alexander said it is affordable at the rate that the applicant pays. Mr. Alexander noted that the current problem is that it is too expensive to build, and if the City were to build these units, they would cost far outside the range of what people could afford, according to the current area median income. He noted that luxury units could be built there and people could purchase them, but the City would have to be able to afford them, and no bank would finance that in the City’s current situation. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked where this specific parcel is. Mr. Alexander explained it is right in front of Northport. Mayor Graves pointed out the driveway to the school parking lot. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked if all that land is vacant. Mr. Alexander confirmed that all that land is vacant, and a road winds around that area. Mayor Graves said that the road he referred to is called the Brooklyn Boulevard Frontage Road. Mr. Alexander explained that it was an oddly shaped parcel, and Armani came up with a pretty good design, considering that this parcel was a remnant parcel and was hard to develop. Mr. Alexander noted that most developers want five or six acres, and this property is obviously much smaller than that. Page 22 of 116 7/28/25 -19- DRAFT Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked if Armani is looking for City money. Mr. Alexander said no, not at this time, this project would use grant funding that they are applying for, but there might be a conversation in the future about LAHA funding. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked what LAHA funding is. Mr. Alexander said he cannot remember what the LAHA acronym stands for. Councilmember-Lawrence said her position on the project is neutral, but she does not want to give the bank away on any more EDA projects. Mr. Alexander said this is not a project where he is asking for money; this is a project where Armani is bringing their own money and is applying for a grant. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she just does not want Armani to ask the City for money. Mayor Graves said LAHA stands for Local Affordable Housing Aid. Councilmember Jerzak said that on January 27, the Council was provided a concept plan, but it was light on details. He noted that one helpful thing was that Mr. Alexander provided excellent details that the Council did not have before. He noted that he and Dr. Edwards respectfully disagree about what goes on the consent agenda, and anything that is major policy or major dollars might expect a robust discussion. He said the negotiated price of that land is worrisome to him, and the City has invested at least $825,000, and $560,000 of it was proposed to be paid for the Capital Improvement Program, and asked if that work had been done. He said if Mr. Alexander did not have the answers to those questions, he could get back to the Council, but that is critical information that would be important to him as a Councilmember. He noted that the days of the City giving things away are done. Councilmember Jerzak asked if the project is dependent on Armani getting that grant, and if Armani is expected to seek additional funds. He understands that Armani is not expecting any funds from the City at this time, but Armani is seeking additional funds in the form of a grant for development costs right now, and he asked what is going to happen in the future. Mr. Alexander explained that Armani had not asked for any funds from the City, and his Department was very clear that they would not be providing Armani with any funds. He noted that most developers are going to ask for pre-development because the cost of everything has increased so dramatically. Mr. Alexander said his Department actually requested that Armani apply for funds from the Metropolitan Council because those funds are available for pre-development, and Armani did request money from the Metropolitan Council for geotechnical soil testing, which is not unreasonable. Councilmember Jerzak said that having that information available makes it a lot more palatable. He asked if it was too premature for a planning application. Mr. Alexander explained that Armani has not submitted a planning application yet. Councilmember Jerzak said from his perspective, the Council still has the option, even if Armani submits the grant proposal, to accept the project or not. His only concern is that Armani is not awarded the grant, then there is a lot of City Staff time that has been spent on a project that will never happen. Mr. Alexander said that his Department will always spend a lot of time on projects that might never take off, but in his opinion, this is a project that lines up with future projects. Mr. Alexander said that Brooklyn Center is a great City, with wonderful neighbors and the Police are wonderful to work with, but the challenge is that it is too expensive to build anything for the majority of the people that live in Brooklyn Center, because construction prices are so high. Mr. Alexander gave the example that if he charged $300 a square foot to build a luxury home, would he be able to sell a 1,000 square foot home to people that want to live there, no, he would be able Page 23 of 116 7/28/25 -20- DRAFT to sell a 2,000 square foot home which would cost $600,000 and until the economy of those homes are more commonplace there needs to be other options. Programs like these are in place to get something done, and hopefully that will lead to other projects. Councilmember Kragness said she remembers having the conversation about this in January, and the Council was very positive about it and supported it. She said it makes sense for the Council to continue to support Armani and the City in applying for the grant on their behalf. She noted that she supports the idea of home ownership in the City over rental properties. She said it was smart of Armani to go after grant dollars, regardless of how much money they have, because it shows responsibility with the resources they have available to them. She said she would continue to support anyone who is developing anything that benefits the City and utilizing resources that are available to them. Mayor Graves thanked Mr. Alexander for coming in to make his presentation. Councilmember Kragness moved and Mayor Graves seconded to approve the RESOLUTION Identifying the need for LCA Predevelopment Funding and Authorizing an Application for Grant Funds for Amani Construction & Development, LLC for Townhomes at the 5400 Block of Brooklyn Blvd. Councilmember Moore pointed out that the purchase price for the property and other steps going forward will benefit the City. Motion passed unanimously. Mayor Graves reminded the Council that if, later on, there is a development agreement, the Council will be able to vote on that. 11. COUNCIL REPORT 12. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Graves moved and Councilmember Kragness seconded the adjournment of the City Council meeting at 9:00 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. Page 24 of 116 7/28/25 -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 JULY 28, 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 6:03 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor April Graves and Councilmembers Dan Jerzak, Teneshia Kragness, Kris Lawrence- Anderson, and Laurie Ann Moore. Also present were City Manager Reggie Edwards, City Clerk Shannon Pettit, and City Attorney Siobhan Tolar. CITY COUNCIL MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION ITEMS Councilmember Moore requested that item 6c., Resolution Identifying the Need for LCA Predevelopment Funding and Authorizing for Grant Funds for Amani Construction & Development, LLC for Townhomes at the 540 Block of Brooklyn Blvd, be moved from the consent agenda and added to the Council agenda. She stated that item 6c. Resolution Identifying the Need for LCA Predevelopment Funding and Authorizing for Grant Funds for Amani Construction & Development, LLC for Townhomes at the 540 Block of Brooklyn Blvd is regarding the Livable Communities Act (LCA) funding for the townhome Center Northport, and she does not believe that the Council has had enough information as a consent agenda item. Mayor Graves asked if there were other Councilmembers who agreed, or if questions could be answered during the Work Session. Councilmember Jerzak agreed with Councilmember Moore and expressed his concerns over an item regarding this type of policy and the implications. He said that there was a thorough work study, as he had several pages of questions regarding the topic. Dr. Edwards said this item is just a grant application on the Consent Agenda, and that is why it is on the Consent Agenda. Staff is unable to be in the Chambers but can be online to answer questions. Councilmember Moore stated she did not cite her reasons for pulling it from the Consent Agenda, but the grant application is related to the affordable housing component of the proposed townhomes, and there are other reasons, as Councilmember Jerzak mentioned, at least to the Work Session, if there is time. Page 25 of 116 7/28/25 -2- DRAFT Mayor Graves asked if the Staff is online now. Dr. Edwards confirmed the Staff is online. Mayor Graves suggested the Council open this issue up for discussion right now. Councilmember Jerzak stated he was not opposed to that, but he had a few other Consent Agenda items that he would like to discuss, which could be brought up later. Mayor Graves said to go through those items first. Councilmember Moore stated she has a motion and a second to pull item 6c from the Consent Agenda, and asked if it needed to be voted on. Mayor Graves said she did not hear a motion made. Councilmember Moore moved and Councilmember Jerzak seconded to move Item 6c. Resolution Identifying the Need for LCA Predevelopment Funding and Authorizing for Grant Funds for Amani Construction & Development, LLC for Townhomes at the 540 Block of Brooklyn from the Consent Agenda to the Regular Session. Mayor Graves voted against the same. Motion passed. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she had two corrections for the minutes for the Study Session on July 14; on page six, in the seventh paragraph, North Park should be Northport. On page three, in the second paragraph, it stated that Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked if City Staff approves the minutes, and she did not understand the wording. Mayor Graves said that it was a little bit confusing, but she thought it was asking if City Staff was proofreading the minutes for the correct titles, prior to sending the minutes to the Council. She remembered there was a conversation about a third party that prepares the minutes. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson said she thought the wording should have been City Council not City Staff. Mayor Graves said that when you read it with the paragraph before it in mind, it makes a little bit more sense. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated that City Staff does not approve the minutes, though she stated it was not a big deal, but the statement was confusing. Councilmember Jerzak stated that this is more about the process of the Mid-Season review for Dr. Edwards. He received the review for Dr. Edwards late Wednesday morning with a deadline of five o'clock. There were no attachments, and he could not rate or do anything. He immediately notified Dr. Edwards and Janice from Common Sense, as he knew he would not meet the five o'clock deadline. He requested an appointment with Janice and was informed there were no appointments available in July. In his one-on-one meeting with Dr. Edwards on Thursday, he brought this to Dr. Edwards' attention and his concerns that this is not a fair process. Councilmember Jerzak stated he did participate but did not understand the implications of having to assign points. He thought it was more of a check-in to see if he and Dr. Edwards were on the same page or needed a course correction. Councilmember Jerzak discussed his concern over the points assignment with Dr. Edwards as well. He continued that he wants to be fair to Dr. Edwards, and a lot of the goals in the review are fluid in the timeline over time and by year-end. He stated that he was finally able to make an appointment with Janice tomorrow to discuss his concerns. Councilmember Jerzak stated that he completed the Mid-Year review, and it is in the queue, but he wanted to bring this up because he did not receive the Mid-Year review in a timely manner. He Page 26 of 116 7/28/25 -3- DRAFT asked if anyone else on the Council had the same experience. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson said she also had technical difficulties, her tablet is worthless, and her phone does not have Microsoft Word; she could not do it. She alerted Janice at Common Sense and let her know why she could not complete the Mid-Year review on a device. She stated that Dr. Edwards is going to give her hard copies. Councilmember Moore stated that she replied to Dr. Edwards and Janice as well, that she never received the template to do a Mid-Year review or a reminder a day before it was due. She stated that Janice told her that the Council had discussed this last week. Councilmember Moore explained that without the template, she does not have anything to complete the Mid-Year review. She agreed with Councilmember Jerzak that the Mid-Year review is a touch point in the entire year of performance, and it would not be as lengthy for her if it were to wait until the end of the year to look at goals and accomplishments. Mayor Graves said she had no problems accessing documents, but she did see that it came in on Wednesday, and it had to be turned in by five o'clock on Thursday, which she was able to do, but she had a few problems because she was using a different device. She did complete it and turned it in. Councilmember Kragness did have some issues because she was sick for a couple of days. She discussed those issues with Janice, who informed her that the Mid-Year review was postponed, so it was okay, but she did get the attachment. Mayor Graves said the point is that the Council needs to identify a new date to come together as a Council. She thought August 11 had previously been suggested. Dr. Edwards stated that the last time the Council tried to align with Council meetings, the Council had a scheduled meeting on August 11, where the Mid-Year review could be done at that time. He knows that representatives from Common Sense are flying in and will be able to come to Council Chambers on August 11. Looking at August 11, the Council has also established a meeting on August 25. He explained that this will be a two-step process, and a meeting will happen for the Council to have conversations about the Mid-Year review on August 11. On August 25, Dr. Edwards would meet with the Council to get their feedback on his Mid-Year review. Mayor Graves asked if those meeting dates would work for all the Councilmembers. Councilmember Jerzak asked if those meetings would be at five o’clock. Mayor Graves confirmed they would be at five o’clock. Dr. Edwards stated that some of the Councilmembers have challenges getting there at five o'clock, so it was suggested that the meeting be from 5:30 to 6:30, and that the study session should be decreased to thirty minutes to accommodate that. Mayor Graves confirmed that it would just mean a shorter Work Session for that day. Page 27 of 116 7/28/25 -4- DRAFT Councilmember Jerzak said he was in agreement with those dates and asked if the Council could get calendar invites for those meetings. Mayor Graves asked if there were any other agenda items Councilmember Jerzak wanted to discuss. Councilmember Jerzak said it had all been addressed. Councilmember Moore stated this is probably the only opportunity to address the resident concerns she has received about activities in the City. She stated everyone on the Council received an email regarding Northport Park activities over the weekend, and she believes that Dr. Edwards will be responding to the appropriate Staff regarding that. She stated that this is an ongoing challenge at Northport Park, and she knows that the Council has talked about bringing this up in a Work Session in terms of permits and consequences. She also noted this past weekend was the Liberian Independence Day function, and she received multiple messages regarding trash, the size of the gathering, and other concerns. This was a City-sponsored function, and she is not sure what happened in terms of planning, but it was quite concerning regarding crowd size, trash, and other related concerns. Dr. Edwards was made aware of those concerns and is following up with the appropriate Directors. Councilmember Moore continued that because the Council is discussing strategic priorities, she wanted to call attention to a request made for the Finance Commission to discuss purchasing policy, which has not been brought back to the Council in light of the audit findings. She noted that the Council will continue following up regarding that. She stated that she is hoping that, in terms of strategic priorities, although it is important, it has been on the Work Session agenda and other meeting agendas many times, and there are other things the Council can discuss besides strategic priorities, and maybe those agenda items need to change moving forward. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson said the Council used to have all pending items on the Study Session agenda, and that practice fell off at some point. Mayor Graves asked if she meant the pending Work Session items. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson said yes and asked Dr. Edwards if, perhaps, at the next meeting, he could bring those pending items so the Council could rank and prioritize them. Dr. Edwards stated at the beginning of the year that he had come to the Council and adopted all the items that the Council wanted to, and the Council was provided with priorities and a list that was individually ranked. He stated that the Council has been working through that list, and he actually just looked through the prioritized list and reported to the Council on those items. He and City Staff have started putting the items that remain in the weekly update. He stated that the Council has ticked through three-quarters of that list, but he can bring that list back to the Council and revisit items that they feel need more discussion. He stated that the Council had also indicated that not everything on that list needed to be discussed, but could be provided in the weekly newsletters. He reiterated that he will provide that list to the Council in the weekly update, as well as an update on every item that has been brought to the Council via presentations. Councilmember Jerzak stated that one of the Work Session items that has come up is the lettering Page 28 of 116 7/28/25 -5- DRAFT mandate, which would be a new agenda item. The pet ordinance was also a new agenda item. He asked about a meeting that was scheduled for June 1, where Dr. Edwards was supposed to present about compensation for the City Council and Mayor, and asked if that had been completed. Dr. Edwards said there has been a presentation on compensation for elected officials. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson recalled that there is a deadline, and three or four years ago, it was missed, and therefore, there was no increase in compensation. She stated she knows there is a hard deadline, and if the Council does not act on it, then they have to wait a year. Dr. Edwards stated he would follow up on that issue. Councilmember Kragness said that since the Council is doing a Work Session about the Liberian Independence Day Parade and celebration, she wanted to note that she was in attendance at that event with Governor Peggy Flanagan, and that is the first time it has been held in Brooklyn Center. She has not personally received any complaints about that event, and she thought it was a very honorable activity to be a part of. The event was live-streamed back to Liberia, and it was an honor to be a part of that and to have it hosted in Brooklyn Center. She stated that Councilmember Moore got some complaints about it, but she did not receive any complaints. She was in attendance, and it was an amazing and beautiful experience. Mayor Graves said she did not get any complaints about the event via email or phone call, and walked through the park today to check it out. The park had a couple of things here and there, but noted it could have been significantly worse, considering the size of the event. She stated that the only thing she noticed was that one of the permanent outhouses needed to be cleaned up, but as she was leaving the park, she saw Staff coming to do that. She thanked Councilmember Kragness for sharing her experience and for stepping in to play Mayor Pro Tem that day and being part of the celebration. She explained that she already had commitments that day and could not attend. Dr. Edwards stated there are a couple of debriefing sessions that Staff are doing, and following those debriefings, either this Friday or the following, can put an update in the weekly report on the event with lessons learned and how the City can do better. Mayor Graves thanked Dr. Edwards for that update. Councilmember Jerzak said that he also received complaints about the event, and he forwarded everything to Dr. Edwards, who had already responded appropriately to him. He stated there might have been some confusion about whether there was police action in Brooklyn Center or Brooklyn Park. He forwarded all that information to Dr. Edwards, and Dr. Edwards indicated that the information would be in the update provided. Mayor Graves thanked Councilmember Jerzak for that information. Dr. Edwards stated that one change he would like to make is to switch items 7a. Mid-Year Crime Reduction and Strategy Update and 7b. Parliamentary Procedures and Robert’s Rules of Order Review on the Regular Agenda. Page 29 of 116 7/28/25 -6- DRAFT Mayor Graves said the Council has 35 minutes left in the Study Session, and the Council has already voted to remove it from the Consent Agenda, so she suggested that the Council move into the Study Session items. COMMISSION CODE OF RESPECT Dr. Edwards stated this item started over a year ago, and the Council at one point approved it and then repealed it. Council had the foresight to revamp it from a Code of Conduct to a Code of Respect for Councilmembers. This was an intent to have a policy that identifies the intended behavior of the Council and demonstrates respect for one another, City Staff, and the public. This Code also outlines behavior that the Council wanted to model, and it adopted the Code of Respect. He noted that the second important thing to note is that this Code identified restorative pathways for conflict, whereas the previous Code of Conduct focused on a more punitive approach. In the Code of Respect, the Council wanted to outline a restorative process to resolve conflict, and if resolution is not available, then that conflict can move through other avenues. He noted that this was a creative process that the Council came up with, and if he is meeting with City Managers across the state, he suggests this Code of Respect be modeled by other City Councils, as it is something he is very proud of. City Council had suggested that this Code of Respect not only apply to Councilmembers but also to Commissioners, so he has worked with City Attorney Siobhan Tolar, who would present on the item. Ms. Tolar stated this is a draft version that can be revised as the Council sees fit, and walk through it so the Council can get a sense of what the Code of Respect looks like. She explained that it is similar to the Council's Code of Respect but has been revised to fit City Commissioners more thoroughly. She stated she will be taking notes as they go through it, so if the Council sees things that they would like to change, let Ms. Tolar know. She started with the table of contents for the Code of Respect, and stated that it starts out with Commissioner conduct with one another, public meetings, and private encounters, then goes on to Commissioner conduct with City staff, with the public, and public meetings. The public meetings include meetings with public hearings, such as the Planning Commission. The table of contents continues with the Commissioner's conduct with the public in unofficial settings and with other public agencies. The next section moves on to the poor conduct and accountability measures, and this section will look different than what it looks like for the City Council, mainly because the City Council members are all elected officials, and it is the public who elects and removes Councilmembers, not the Council itself. She noted that in this instance, the Council would be able to remove as a final sanction any Commissioners who had conducted themselves poorly. She noted that the next section is the Code of Ethics, which the Council is all familiar with because it is in their Code of Respect as well. Ms. Tolar moved on to the actual document itself on page two, the Commission Code of Respect and Ethics. She stated she would not read it out to the Council verbatim because the Council had already agreed on the conduct that should be modeled in public meetings. This section also talks about the Commissioners' interaction with each other and the fact that Commissioners agree to practice civility, professionalism, and decorum in discussions and debate. Behaviors such as shouting or physical actions that could be construed as threatening will not be tolerated, and further, Page 30 of 116 7/28/25 -7- DRAFT discuss how Commissioners are supposed to behave in a meeting. In the event of deference to order, Commissioners agree to honor the roles of Commission leadership, including the chair and co-chair, by maintaining order by deferring to their direction and guidance. It is the responsibility of the chair and co-chair to keep the Commission meetings on track during meetings. It is also the Commissioners' responsibility to set a positive example and to achieve those goals. Commissioners agree to avoid comments that personally attack other Commissioners. If a Commissioner is personally offended by the comments of another Commissioner, the offended Commissioner will make notes of the actual words used and may call for a point of order to challenge the other Commissioner to justify or apologize for the language used. These points are also in the Council's Code of Respect, and this is something that the Commissioners also have. Commissioners must also agree to collaborative problem solving, timeliness, no political endorsements, professional courtesy, and avoid personal attacks. Ms. Tolar asked if the Council had any questions about this section of the Code of Respect. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson said he read the section on personal attacks thoroughly and thinks there is no concrete definition. She gave the example of saying something that inadvertently offends someone, and she is worried about that. She stated that everyone should conduct themselves above reproach, but she has concerns that if it were volume or tone of voice, it could be interpreted subjectively. She has no issue with anyone who is serving either as an elected official or a volunteer, and everyone should hold themselves to a higher standard; she is just concerned about the subjective wording. Councilmember Moore concurred with Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson and brought this up during the Council's Code of Conduct meeting as well, and stated that this wording is subjective. Having a raised voice or animated gestures could be construed as disrespectful or disparaging by someone else. She commented on item 1A. regarding slanderous or disparaging comments, it is stated that they can again be subjective. She used the example that she could be disparaged during a Commission meeting on social media or a public event, and asked if that is not subjective as to what she believes is slanderous or disparaging in terms of her reaction. She asked if Ms. Tolar could respond to that question and if it is specific enough. Ms. Tolar responded that these provisions may be subjective, but are meant for all the Council and Commissioners to work together. If there is a situation where there is shouting or physical intimidation, that is something that, as adults, Commissioners need to work through, whether or not that behavior is appropriate. She noted that Councilmember Moore is correct in that it is subjective, but taking it out of the document would not accomplish what the Council is trying to accomplish. She stated that she thinks the Council is trying to set a baseline for how people should act and then figure out how to do that together. She gave an example that if she did something offensive to Councilmember Moore, it is incumbent upon Councilmember Moore to tell Ms. Tolar that what she did was offensive. She stated that Councilmember Moore cannot control what is offensive to another person, and the only thing that anyone can control is how they respond and react, and that is the foundation of this section of the Code of Respect. She stated that if the Council would like to remove these words, this is the Council's Code of Respect determined for Page 31 of 116 7/28/25 -8- DRAFT the Commissioners, but it is also an agreement that is meant to be a social contract among all of them that this is the way all of them should behave. Councilmember Kragness thanked Ms. Tolar for clarification, and she believes these words are necessary to hold people accountable. If people knew how to act, it would not have to be put in writing, so she believes that once it is in writing, it holds everyone accountable, and she is not opposed to the language at all. Councilmember Jerzak stated that initially, he had wanted to remove this section, but after reflecting, this is what he was hoping to accomplish, and he and Councilmember Kragness had previously discussed this. He does not think there is anything wrong with recognizing and apologizing in a softer and collaborative approach. He said it is okay to apologize and explain that a statement was not meant to be offensive to someone. He added that he is really uncomfortable with section F with the endorsement of candidates and does not think there is any place for politics in Commission meetings, and this is part of the Council’s rules of decorum and should be consistent throughout. He said he hopes his colleagues agree. Mayor Graves said she did not read section F that way, because it says it is inappropriate to mention endorsements during Commission or other official City meetings or functions. She noted that, as individuals who happen to voluntarily be on the Commission, she did not think the Council could tell Commissioners that they do not have the right to do so. She asked if Councilmember Jerzak is asking if he does not want the language in that section. Councilmember Jerzak said he wants clarity so no one takes liberty with that policy, and he understands that people go to all kinds of conventions, but he does not want it to bleed into City business. Mayor Graves stated that if it were not in writing, someone could technically try to endorse someone during a Commission meeting or a City meeting and use their role to accomplish undue influence; this policy states that it is inappropriate and a violation of the Code of Respect. If someone started doing that and it was not in the Code of Respect, there would be no grounds to hold them accountable. Councilmember Kragness suggested removing the first sentence of that section. Councilmember Jerzak stated he does not disagree with Mayor Graves' statement and understands what she is saying, but he does not want someone to use their position as a Commissioner as an inappropriate use of power. He noted that if the rest of the Council wants that wording, then he will agree to it. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson agreed and said that if the first sentence is removed from that section, it would provide more clarity. She also noted that the section is well-written but very wordy and redundant. Councilmember Kragness suggested that the policy reads that individuals have the right to endorse candidates, but when in a position, it is inappropriate during certain times. Councilmember Page 32 of 116 7/28/25 -9- DRAFT Lawrence-Anderson emphasized the word individual. Councilmember Jerzak agreed with both Councilmembers regarding their input. Ms. Tolar asked if the Council wanted her to clarify the language for that portion and note the individual resident, or delete the entire sentence. Councilmember Moore responded that the sentence should be removed. Councilmember Kragness asked how that policy is written for the City Council. Ms. Tolar said the language is identical; it just says Commissioners instead of City Councilmembers. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson clarified that Councilmembers cannot endorse a politician from the podium but can do so as individual residents. Mayor Graves asked if there was agreement from the Council on how the policy should read, and if the first sentence should be removed or just changed to " Commissioners to individuals. Councilmember Moore concurred with Councilmember Jerzak and Councilmember Lawrence- Anderson and said to strike the first sentence. Councilmember Kragness noted that she was actually the one who suggested striking the first sentence. Councilmember Moore said she was not trying to overlook Councilmember Kragness, but agreed with whoever suggested deleting the first sentence. Mayor Graves noted there was consensus now on deleting the first sentence. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated that the bylaws indicate that to be a Commissioner, they have to be a resident, which is already in the first sentence, so she thinks the first sentence is fine. Ms. Tolar asked if there were any other comments on this section. She moved on to private encounters and respectful workplace values, where Commissioners agree to continue to model respectful behavior in private, and the same level of respect and consideration of differing points of view that is deemed appropriate for the public should be the same in private. Data practices are pretty self-explanatory; they are the same policy that is in the Council's Code of Respect and are a requirement for all people who work for the City, whether they are volunteers, elected officials, or Staff. Commissioners should be cognizant of the communications sent back and forth. Public- private considerations note that even private conversations can have a public presence. City officials are always on display; their actions, mannerisms, and language are monitored by people around them whom they may not know. Lunch conversations could be overheard, or parking lot debates may be watched, and casual comments between individuals before and after public meetings may be noted. This policy states that Commissioners should be aware of their surroundings and the things they say while representing the City. Commissioners are to agree to refrain from making personal comments about other commissioners. It is acceptable to disagree, but unacceptable to make derogatory comments about other Commissioners' opinions and actions. Ms. Tolar asked if the Council had any comments about this section. Mayor Graves said there were no questions. Ms. Tolar moved on to Commissioner Conduct with City Staff and said this policy is similar to what the Council has. Commissioners must agree to uphold workplace values and agree to limit Page 33 of 116 7/28/25 -10- DRAFT City Staff contact. She noted that Commissioners have even more limited City Staff contact than the Council does. Commissioners must agree to refrain from Staff criticism, political solicitation, comments about other Commissioners, and personal attacks in front of Staff. She asked if there were any questions about this section. As there were no questions, Ms. Tolar moved on to the next section. Ms. Tolar noted she would skip the Commissioner Conduct with the Public sections because it is really only for the Commissions that have public hearings, and they are to conduct themselves identically to the City Council during public hearings. In unofficial settings, Commissioners should not be making promises on behalf of the Commission. Commissioners may be asked to explain a policy or recommendation about an issue as they meet to talk with constituents and in the community. It is appropriate to give a brief overview of City policy and to refer to City Staff for further information. It is inappropriate to overtly or implicitly promise Commission or Council action or to promise City Staff will do something. Commissioners agree to refrain from making personal comments about other Commissioners to constituents. This section is all about how Commissioners act amongst the Staff, the public, and themselves, as well as public and private conversations. Ms. Tolar asked if there were any questions about this section. Ms. Tolar moved on to the next section about the Commissioner's conduct with public agencies. When representing City or personal interests if the Commissioner appears before another governmental agency or organization to gave an statement on an issue, they must clearly state that his or her statement reflects personal opinion or is the official stance of the City and whether that is the majority or minority opinion of the Commission and when they are representing the Commission they must support and advocate the official City position on an issue, not a personal viewpoint. Councilmember Moore stated that the Council's conduct with public agencies is to act or speak on behalf of the City Council, as consensus is not allowed, and that has been the policy for the last few years. She noted that typically, the Mayor is the speaker for the consensus of the Council. In her opinion, this policy should not even be part of the document, as the Commissioners should not ever be making comments about City Council business, and if they have questions, they should be contacting the City Manager. As residents of Brooklyn Center, Commissioners could have an interview with a TV station, but should not identify themselves as commissioners of the City. She noted that, just like the City Council, those comments should be deferred to the Mayor and City Manager. She asked for clarification from her colleagues. Mayor Graves asked her what the question was. Councilmember Moore reiterated that the policy should clearly state that Commissioners cannot make any statements. She noted that the policy states that Commissioners can make a statement that reflects their personal opinion, when in reality, Commissioners should not be making any statements. Dr. Edwards stated that there may be times when the City desires a resident to speak with one of the Commissioners in the legislature, or there may be an elected official and appointed individual, Page 34 of 116 7/28/25 -11- DRAFT just to bring a voice of a resident to the meeting. While that could happen, those instances are few and far between, so the Code of Respect probably would not lose anything if that section were cut out. Ms. Tolar stated that the only other caveat would be if a Commissioner were doing some type of cross-functional meeting with another governmental agency, like a Brooklyn Park Commissioner or other public agencies, this policy could apply. Councilmember Jerzak stated he could go either way on this policy, but a sister City might be an example of two Commissioners coming together cross-functionally, but this policy is not a hill he is willing to die on, and he will go along with the majority, as he has other concerns. Mayor Graves said she does not have a problem with it, and it outlines how to best handle that situation if it should arise. If it allows people to show up and follow the guidelines, she would prefer to keep the policy. Councilmember Moore said that in light of the fact that this is a Code of Respect and collaborative, if a Commissioner was talking out of turn, it would be called out on behalf of the City, and then the Mayor and City Manager could address that. She noted that she thought there was a process for restorative strategies. She stated that she did not want Commissioners to make comments that would reflect the consensus or majority of the Council. She stated she wants those comments to come from the Mayor or City Manager. Ms. Tolar moved on to the next section, which is poor conduct and accountability measures. Commissioners who violate the Code of Conduct or Respect will be subject to accountability measures. Any violation that potentially constitutes criminal conduct should be handled by the criminal justice system. Factors that will be considered in determining an appropriate restorative measure or sanction include, but are not limited to, the seriousness of the violation and the number of preceding violations. Commissioners will also have a restorative process. It differs slightly from the Council's restorative process, where the Commissioners agree to engage in a restorative measure prior to initiating sanctions for violating the Code of Respect. The restorative measures include, but are not limited to, a private meeting between the Commissioner and the City Manager, informal mediation between involved parties, and a mediator who would issue recommendations such as training, a public apology, or perhaps even suspension from a meeting, depending on the severity of the issue. The Commissioner and or involved parties would follow the recommendations, and if they chose not to follow those recommendations, then the process moves to sanctions. It would only be in the case that the Commissioner was unwilling to engage in restorative measures of all of these types that there would be a sanction. The sanction would be the removal of the Commission for failing to engage in restorative measures or continuing violations of the Code of Respect. The process would involve a Commissioner reporting a potential Code of Respect violation by another Commissioner by bringing the matter to the attention of the official of their choice, either the Mayor or the City Manager. A Brooklyn center Staff member may report a potential Code of Respect violation by a Commissioner by bringing the matter to the attention of the City Manager or Human Resources Manager. If the potential Page 35 of 116 7/28/25 -12- DRAFT violation involves the Mayor, it should be brought to the attention of the Mayor Pro Tem, City Manager, or City Attorney. A Community member may report a potential code of respect violation by a member of the city commission to the Mayor, City Manager, or any other member of the Council. The investigation process would include a triage; the Mayor and the City manager would gather initial information and consult with the city attorney if necessary, and decide how to move forward. There would be a fact-finding process, and if necessary, the matter would be referred to the criminal justice system if it was serious enough. The Mayor and the city manager will determine whether to pursue independent fact-finding or internal fact-finding. The possible outcomes after an investigation include the City manager, in consultation with proper Staff, determining if the complaint is substantiated or unsubstantiated, and the restorative solution being sought prior to moving to a sanction. Ms. Tolar continued that if the complaint is substantiated the Commissioner will have a consultation with the City Manager and if that is unsuccessful then the parties move to a graduated resolution process which includes informal mediation with the harmed individuals and a City designee, an HR manager or someone of the like to mediate and issue recommendations to the Commissioner and involved parties. Commissioners and involved parties are to follow the recommendations. If the Commissioner refuses to follow the recommendations, then the process moves to sanctions, and this is the last resort. Ms. Tolar explained that in the process of removal, the City Manager would compile a redacted report for the Council to review. The names of the individuals, the Commission that they serve on, and other identifying information would be removed from the report, so it would be a blind evaluation by the Council. After review of the circumstances and recommendations, the Council will use a standard form provided by the administration to communicate the vote on whether or not this person should be removed from the Commission. The administration will provide the Council forms to the Mayor, and the Mayor will vote on the record. The Council will vote on the record about whether or not this person will be removed from the Commission. If the Commissioner is removed from service, the Commissioner will receive a letter of removal from the Council. Commission removal results in an automatic bar from Commission appointments for two years. Ms. Tolar stated that if the claims are unsubstantiated, the City Manager will work with the City Attorney to determine the resolution that is compliant with the Minnesota Governmental Data Practices Act. She noted that there are policies regarding conduct during meetings, but those policies are very similar to the Council's processes in their Code of Respect. Ms. Tolar asked if the Council had any questions for her about this process. Councilmember Moore asked about the terms of reporting a Code of Respect violation and asked why the Mayor or Mayor Pro Tem is involved in that investigation, and not human resources (HR) and the City Manager only. Ms. Tolar stated this policy mirrors the City Council’s process. Councilmember Moore said she had concerns about that same area in their Code of Respect as well, and asked why the Mayor or Mayor Pro Tem had to be a reporting individual or part of the investigation. Ms. Tolar explained that, outside of the reason that this policy already exists within the City Council Code of Respect, there was no other reason. She stated that if Councilmember Page 36 of 116 7/28/25 -13- DRAFT Moore would like it removed, she should speak with her fellow Councilmembers, and it can be removed. Councilmember Moore continued that she had brought this up during the Council’s Code of Respect as well, and did not know if she had the majority in terms of being against the Mayor and the Mayor Pro Tem leading both the process and the investigation. Councilmember Jerzak stated that it is by charter that members are appointed and voted on by the Council, and he feels that should remain the same. If a member of the Council is appointed as a Commission member, then a Councilmember should be part of removing or questioning that Commissioner if an issue arises. He noted that this is a friendly rebuttal to Councilmember Moore's question, that it is the Mayor's responsibility by charter, and that he is a stickler when it comes to the rules of the process. Mayor Graves asked if any other Councilmembers wanted to weigh in. No one wished to speak. Mayor Graves agreed with Councilmember Jerzak and stated that if she is the one who is making the appointments, it is her responsibility to vet if problems were to arise. She stated she understands Councilmember Moore's concerns, but ultimately, the final decision will come to the Council, which would negate any concerns around bias by the Mayor. Councilmember Moore stated respectfully that Mayor Graves was correct. Ms. Tolar moved on to the next section, which involved Ethics and Open Meeting law. She noted that everyone on the Council was aware that Commissioners are subject to the Open Meeting Law, so she was not going to go into too much detail. Minnesota Statutes 13D is the law that states City Commissioners cannot accept gifts from someone who has an interest in any matter involving the City. This law also pertains to elected officials and is pursuant to 471.875 in Minnesota Statutes as well as City Charter section 1404a. and section 22.95 of the Brooklyn Center City Code of Policies. In addition, Commission members cannot have a personal financial interest in any sale, lease, or contract with the City, and the same goes for elected officials. The Commissioner cannot participate in matters in which the Commissioner's own personal interest, financial or otherwise, is so distinct from the public interest that the Commissioner cannot be expected to fairly represent the public's interest when voting. She reiterated that this is pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 471.875 and is also part of Brooklyn Center's policies. Mayor Graves asked if any Councilmembers had questions regarding this. She also asked for thoughts about bringing back both Codes of Respect, as she knows that the Council had wanted to vote on both at the same time. Mayor Graves stated she was curious about whether the Council wanted to give a little bit of time to share the Council's Code of Respect with Commissioners, as well as allow them to review the Code of Respect for Commissioners and give feedback if needed. She stated that there could be a meeting for formal feedback from the Commissioners on it, but she is hesitant to do so as it could open a can of worms within the Commission. She stated that her thought was really just to share it with the Commissioners, and if they wanted to have a discussion, then the Council would discuss it with them, but not to necessarily give that directive. Page 37 of 116 7/28/25 -14- DRAFT Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated that she thinks the Code of Respect should go to all of the Commissions for review, and if there is any particular feedback, it could be sent to Dr. Edwards. If there were any questions, Commissioners could contact Councilmembers. She noted that overall, the Code of Respect is very thorough and common sense. Councilmember Jerzak agreed with both Mayor Graves and Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson; his only recommendation is that Commissioners who have already been appointed deserve to see the Code of Respect because it is a change in policy. He noted that this Code of Respect should also be included in the packet when someone new comes aboard any of the Commissions, and any objections could be directed to Dr. Edwards via email and discussed with the Council. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated that if and when the Council approves the Code of Respect, she thought it would be appropriate on each of the Commissions tabs on the website where an application is filled out that the Commissioners read and accept the terms of the Code of Respect, because otherwise they may not know what they are getting themselves into. Mayor Graves agreed with that statement. Dr. Edwards stated that the Council could come back to this on August 11 or August 25 with Council consideration and any feedback from the Commissions. Mayor Graves stated it should be on August 25 to give everyone a little more time. Councilmember Moore stated that the Council makes the final decision regarding the Code of Respect, and agreed it should be shared as the Council should receive any suggestions from other colleagues. She noted that Councilmember Jerzak also wanted the Council Policies and Procedures all considered at the same time, because there is some overlap between the Council policies and procedures and the Council and Commission Code of Respect. She asked if the Council wanted to separate those two discussions around policy and procedures. Mayor Graves asked if Councilmember Moore was talking about a different document, because it was noted before that the Council wanted to vote on both of the Codes of Respect for the Council and the Commission. Councilmember Moore stated she was talking about the other agenda item regarding Council policy and procedures, as well as Robert's Rules of Order. Councilmember Jerzak stated that he thinks those are two separate issues. He recalled that conversation previously, but he would like to vote on both the Commissioners' and the Council's Code at the same time. He noted that there are 311 pages of Council policies and procedures, and there is no way it can all be gone through by August 11. He suggested bringing both Codes of Respect back for discussion on August 25. Councilmember Moore thanked him for the clarification and agreed with the timeline. Dr. Edwards requested that the Regular Session Agenda be modified: add the Study Session Item Strategic Planning Update and Reporting. He added that Council salaries were set for 2026 in July of 2024. The ordinance 2024-06 states that the salaries for 2027 need to be set before the election in 2026. Page 38 of 116 7/28/25 -15- DRAFT There was no objection from Council. CITY MANAGER MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION ITEMS STRATEGIC PLANNING UPDATE AND REPORTING This item was moved to the Regular Session Agenda. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Graves adjourned the Study Session at 7:05 p.m. Page 39 of 116 Council Regular Meeting DATE: 8/11/2025 TO: City Council FROM: THROUGH: BY: Shannon Pettit, City Clerk SUBJECT: Approval of Licenses Requested Council Action: Mechanical Damyans Heating and Cooling LLC 2240 Chippewa Rd, Medina 55340 Innovative Mechanical LLC 5664 172nd Ln NW, Anoka 55303 Mike’s Custom Mechanical, Inc. PO Box 171, Champlin 55316 O’Boys Heating & Air 1550 91st Ave NE, Blaine 55449 Riccar Heating & A/C 2387 Station Parkway NW, Andover 55304 Background: Budget Issues: Inclusive Community Engagement: Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect: Strategic Priorities and Values: ATTACHMENTS: 1. For Council Approval 8.11.25 FOR COUNCIL 7.15 to 7.29 2. Rental Criteria Page 40 of 116 Location Address License Subtype Renewal/Initial Owner Property Code Violations License Type Police CFS* Final License Type** Previous License Type*** Consecutive Type IV's 6101 Colfax Ave N Single Initial Kaitlyn Padlock 0 Type I N/A Type II N/A N/A 7200 Camden Ave N Multiple Family 5 Bldgs 80 Units Renewal Namaka Evergreen, LLC Met requirements 186 = 2.33 per unit Type III 7/30/25 - Noise Type III Type III N/A 5400 Russell Ave N Two Family Renewal Tai Pham Did not meet requirements 5 Type II 0 Type IV Type IV 2 1619 73rd Ave N Single Renewal SFR ACQUISITIONS 2 LLC Did not meet requirements 10 Type IV 0 Type IV Type IV 3 3301 Mumford Rd Single Renewal Christina Duong & Danny Vo 0 Type I 0 Type I Type II N/A 3712 53rd Pl N Single Renewal SFR BORROWER 2022-A LLC Met requirements 10 Type IV 0 Type IV Type IV 3 3715 58th Ave N Single Renewal Saldi Home Improvement 4 Type II 0 Type II Type II N/A 5542 Irving Ave N Single Renewal Rifive Investments LLC 6 Type III 0 Type III Type II N/A 5712 Logan Ave N Single Renewal Penrod Llc 17 Type IV 0 Type IV Type I 0 6712 Beard Ave N Single Renewal Mlmjr Properties & Invst Llc Did not meet requirements 1 Type I 0 Type IV Type IV 6 7212 Emerson Ave N Single Renewal SFR ACQUISITIONS 3 LLC Met requirements 5 Type II 0 Type II Type III N/A 7217 Unity Ave N Single Renewal Ghulam Abbas Pyarali 3 Type II 0 Type II Type I N/A *CFS = Calls for service 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 previous Type I = 3 year, Type II = 2 year, Type III = 1 year, Type IV = 6 months All properties are current on City utilties and taxes Rental Licenses for Council Approval 8.11.25 Page 41 of 116 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 42 of 116 Council Regular Meeting DATE: 8/11/2025 TO: City Council FROM: Kory Andersen Wagner, Public Works Planner THROUGH: Kory Andersen Wagner, Public Works Planner BY: Kory Andersen Wagner, Public Works Planner SUBJECT: Request for Council Support for Application to Minnesota DNR Conservation Partners Legacy Grant Program for Wildlife Habitat Enhancement at Palmer Lake Parks Requested Council Action: Motion to express support for the City’s intent to apply for funding through the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Conservation Partners Legacy Grant Program to enhance wildlife habitat at Palmer Lake Parks. Background: The City’s 2025 Park Capital Investment Plan identified natural area enhancements as a key community priority. This project targets approximately 22 acres in West and East Palmer Lake Parks to address flooding, improve wetland and prairie habitat, manage invasive species, and expand environmental education and passive recreation opportunities. The planned enhancements include wetland restoration for flood mitigation, prairie and pollinator habitat planting, invasive species management, and community volunteer engagement. These efforts align with regional watershed restoration strategies and will improve ecological health and resident enjoyment. If awarded, staff plan to begin work in Fall/Winter 2026 and complete the project by Summer 2027. The Minnesota DNR Conservation Partners Legacy (CPL) Grant Program provides competitive matching funds for habitat projects. The City intends to submit an application requesting the maximum grant award of $500,000. The City commits to providing the required 10% local match of $50,000 from the Stormwater Utility Fund, as this project directly addresses flooding and watershed improvements in the Palmer Lake Parks area. Budget Issues: Inclusive Community Engagement: Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect: Page 43 of 116 Strategic Priorities and Values: ATTACHMENTS: 1. EastPalmerLake_RestoOppsConceptMap_20250729_reduced 2. fy25-rfp_MN DNR CPL Grant Program 3. WestPalmerLake_RestoOppsConceptMap_20250729_reduced 4. 2025 DNR Grant Staff Resolution Page 44 of 116 Page 45 of 116 Conservation Partners Legacy (CPL) Grant Program Fiscal Year 2025 Request for Proposals Page 46 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 1 Contents FY2025 Request for Proposals ...................................................................................................................................5 Eligible Applicants ...................................................................................................................................................7 Application and Proposal Requirements .........................................................................................................8 Match Requirements ..............................................................................................................................................8 Cash Match .........................................................................................................................................................8 In-Kind Match .....................................................................................................................................................8 Partnerships ........................................................................................................................................................9 Additional Funding .............................................................................................................................................9 Land Manager .........................................................................................................................................................9 Project Manager .....................................................................................................................................................9 Fiscal Contact ....................................................................................................................................................... 10 Natural Heritage Information System Review ..................................................................................................... 10 State Historic Preservation Review ..................................................................................................................... 10 Eligible Expenses .......................................................................................................................................... 11 Pre-Award Match Costs ....................................................................................................................................... 11 Personnel and Grant Administration ................................................................................................................... 11 Travel ................................................................................................................................................................... 12 Permitting and Environmental Compliance Expenses ........................................................................................ 12 Construction Projects .......................................................................................................................................... 12 Acquisition Costs ................................................................................................................................................. 12 Donation of Value for Acquisitions ...................................................................................................................... 12 Ineligible Expenses ....................................................................................................................................... 13 Facility Development ........................................................................................................................................... 13 Engineering and Design Costs ............................................................................................................................. 13 Page 47 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 2 Application Information ............................................................................................................................... 13 Dates and Deadlines ............................................................................................................................................ 14 Application Status ................................................................................................................................................ 14 Online Application System .................................................................................................................................. 14 Completing the Application ................................................................................................................................. 14 Financial Document Requirements for Nongovernmental Organizations .......................................................... 15 Application Review Process .......................................................................................................................... 15 Evaluation Criteria and Scoring ........................................................................................................................... 15 Initial Review ....................................................................................................................................................... 15 Technical Review for Statewide, Metro, and New Applicant Grant Cycles ......................................................... 16 Division Director Review for Statewide, Metro, and New Applicant Grant Cycles ............................................. 16 Final Approval for Statewide, Metro, and New Applicant Grant Cycles ............................................................. 16 ECP Grant Cycle Review ....................................................................................................................................... 16 Applications Not Selected for Funding ................................................................................................................ 16 Unawarded Funds................................................................................................................................................ 17 Award Information ...................................................................................................................................... 17 Grant Award Information .................................................................................................................................... 17 Work Plan ............................................................................................................................................................ 17 Executing the Grant Contract .............................................................................................................................. 17 Grant Period ........................................................................................................................................................ 18 Payments ............................................................................................................................................................. 18 Timeline for Reimbursement ............................................................................................................................... 18 Grant Outcome Expectations and Reporting Requirements ........................................................................... 19 Ecological Restoration Management Plan ........................................................................................................... 19 Accomplishment Reports .................................................................................................................................... 19 Real Property Interest Report ............................................................................................................................. 19 Page 48 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 3 Grant Monitoring ................................................................................................................................................. 19 Grant Accounting and Record Retention ............................................................................................................ 19 Additional Audits ................................................................................................................................................. 20 General Program Requirements ................................................................................................................... 20 Minnesota Statutes ............................................................................................................................................. 20 Commissioner’s Approval .................................................................................................................................... 20 Grantee’s Duties .................................................................................................................................................. 20 Conflict of Interest ............................................................................................................................................... 20 Conservation Corps of Minnesota (CCM) ............................................................................................................ 21 Current Conservation Science ............................................................................................................................. 21 Invasive Species Requirements ........................................................................................................................... 21 Use of Pesticides .................................................................................................................................................. 21 Pollinator Habitat Enhancement ......................................................................................................................... 21 Vegetation and Seed Requirements .................................................................................................................... 21 Prescribed Burning on State Lands ...................................................................................................................... 21 Revenues ............................................................................................................................................................. 21 Permitting and Environmental Compliance Requirements ................................................................................. 22 Insurance ............................................................................................................................................................. 22 Contractors .......................................................................................................................................................... 22 Prevailing Wage ................................................................................................................................................... 22 Grants and Public Information ............................................................................................................................ 22 Logo, Signage, and Recognition ........................................................................................................................... 23 Purchase of Recycled and Recyclable Materials ................................................................................................. 23 Acquisition Requirements ............................................................................................................................ 23 Easement Acquisition .......................................................................................................................................... 24 Conveying Land to the DNR ................................................................................................................................. 24 Page 49 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 4 Land Acquisition Fees for Acquisition of Lands to be Conveyed to the DNR ...................................................... 24 Initial Development Plan (IDP) ............................................................................................................................ 24 Acquisitions for Land not to be Conveyed to the DNR ........................................................................................ 25 Acquisition Closing Packet ................................................................................................................................... 25 Notice of Funding Restrictions (NOFR) ................................................................................................................ 25 State Agency Contact Information ................................................................................................................ 26 Appendix A: CPL Application ........................................................................................................................ 27 Appendix B: CPL Application Evaluation Criteria............................................................................................ 34 Page 50 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 5 Conservation Partners Legacy (CPL) Grant Program FY2025 Request for Proposal Grant Program Summary The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) manages the CPL program to provide competitive matching grants from $5,000 up to $500,000 to local, regional, state, and national non-profit organizations and government entities. Grants must restore, protect or enhance prairies, wetlands, forests, or habitat for fish, game, or wildlife in Minnesota. A 10% match of non-state funds is required for all grants. The match may be cash or in-kind resources. The amount and source of match must be identified at the time of application. Total project costs may not exceed $1,000,000. CPL is a reimbursement-based grant program. Applications for Round 1 of the Traditional, Metro, New Applicant, and Expedited Conservation Project (ECP) grant cycles will be accepted online beginning August 1, 2024. Applications must be submitted by September 17, 2024 at 4:00 PM for the Traditional, Metro, and New Applicant grant cycles, and by September 9, 2024 at 4:00 PM for the ECP grant cycle. Late applications will not be accepted. $14,400,000 is available for CPL grants for FY2025. View How to Apply for more information and to access the online application system. Goals and Priorities The CPL program is habitat-focused. Grant activities include the enhancement, restoration, or protection of forests, wetlands, prairies, and habitat for fish, game, or wildlife in Minnesota. All applications should identify the direct habitat benefits of the project including but not limited to specific species, ecosystems, habitat types, and natural heritage features. All projects must adhere to MS 97A.056. Restoration and enhancement projects will only be funded on lands that are: • Permanently protected by a conservation easement as defined in MN Statutes 84C.01; • in public ownership (ownership by a unit of government including tribal, federal, state, county, city, school district, special district, etc.); or • in public waters as defined in MN Statutes, Section 103G.005, subdivision 15. Acquisition projects may include acquiring land through fee title or permanent conservation easement. Lands acquired in fee title must be open to the public for hunting and fishing during all open seasons unless otherwise provided by law. Page 51 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 6 CPL Funding and Grant Cycles Funding for the CPL grant program comes from the Outdoor Heritage Fund (OHF) created by the people of Minnesota. OHF receives 33 percent of the sales tax revenues resulting from the Clean Water, Land, and Legacy Constitutional Amendment passed by the voters in the November 2008 election. For Fiscal Year 2025, a total of $14,400,000 was recommended by the Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council (LSOHC) to, and approved by, the 2024 Minnesota Legislature as M.L. 2024, Regular Session, Chapter 106, Article 1, Section 2, Subd. 5(z), the Conservation Partners Legacy Grant Program Phase 16: Statewide and Metro Habitat. Of this amount, $4,400,000 is available for grants for the Traditional grant cycle, $4,000,000 is available for grants for new applicants, $4,000,000 is available for grants for the Metro grant cycle, and $2,000,000 is available for the Expedited Conservation Projects (ECP) grant cycle. Traditional (Statewide): $4,400,000 • Up to 2 funding cycles. • All eligible projects (restorations, enhancements, or acquisitions) on all eligible lands. • Grant requests between $5,000 and $500,000. • Total project cost may not exceed $1,000,000. New Applicant (Statewide): $4,000,000 • 1 Funding Cycle. • Only open to applicants who have not previously received CPL or OHF funding. • All eligible projects (restorations, enhancements, or acquisitions) on all eligible lands. • Grant requests between $5,000 and $500,000. • Total project cost may not exceed $1,000,000. Metro: $4,000,000 • Up to 2 funding cycles. • Projects must be located within the 7- county metro area or within city limits of cities with a population of 50,000 or greater (Duluth, Rochester, St. Cloud). • All eligible projects (restorations, enhancements, or acquisitions) on all eligible lands. • Grant requests between $5,000 and $500,000. • Total project cost may not exceed $1,000,000. Expedited Conservation Projects: $2,000,000 • Grants are limited to a maximum award of $50,000 (minimum $5,000). Page 52 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 7 • Total project cost may not exceed $1,000,000. • Projects must be on the ECP Activity List. • Restoration and enhancement projects only (no acquisitions). • Projects must be on public lands or waters (no conservation easements). • Open continuously through May 12, 2025, or until funds run out, whichever comes first. o Completed applications will be pulled for review every two months on the following days at 4:00 pm:  Round 1: September 9, 2024  Round 2: November 11, 2024  Round 3: January 13, 2025  Round 4: March 10, 2025  Round 5: May 12, 2025 For the New Applicant, Traditional, and Metro cycles, a simplified application is available for applicants requesting less than $25,000. Applicants should be sure to address all items in the Evaluation Criteria within the simplified application. If more than $1 million remains after the first Traditional and/or Metro grant rounds, a second grant round will be offered, beginning January 1, 2025, and closing February 19, 2025. If less than $1 million remains, these funds will be available for the ECP grant cycle. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources reserves the rights to: • Award less than the total amount available if suitable projects are not submitted. • Make additional awards under this announcement, consistent with DNR and Outdoor Heritage Council recommendations and guidance, if additional funding becomes available, a project comes in under or over budget, or if a grantee cannot carry out their project as planned. • Award amounts less than requested if not enough funding is available for the entire request. • Award amounts less than that requested in an application should it be determined that aspects of a project are not desirable, cost-effective, or eligible for funding. Eligible Applicants Registered 501 c(3) nonprofit organizations and government entities are eligible for CPL funding. Private individuals and for-profit organizations may not apply. Partnerships are encouraged. Examples of eligible applicants include but are not limited to the following: Page 53 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 8 Non-Profit Organizations Government Entities • Land Trusts • Lakes Associations • Charitable Organizations • Private Colleges and Universities • Fishing and Hunting Organizations • “Friends of” Groups • Other Registered Non-Profits • Cities • Counties • Tribal Governments • Federal Agencies • Conservation Districts • Public Universities • School Districts • Other Units of Government State Grant Policy 08-13, Evaluating Grantee Performance, requires state agencies to consider a grant applicant’s performance on prior grants from that agency before making a new grant award of over $5,000. Applicants who performed poorly on prior grants may not be funded, or may be only partially funded until performance has improved. Application and Proposal Requirements Only complete applications will be accepted. Applications must include a signed Land Manager Review and Approval Form. Applicants requesting over $25,000 must include financial information, as described on page 8. A Public Waters Form is required for projects located in public waters. Match Requirements This program requires a 10% match of non-state funds. The match may be cash or in-kind resources. Funds used for match for CPL grants cannot be used as match for any other state grant programs. Match funds must be documented and reportable, and are subject to audit. The match amount is determined by multiplying the grant amount requested by 10%. Cash Match Cash Match is actual cash contributed to a project, either from the grantee organization or a third party. The cash match must be used for a documentable cost of the project, as approved in the Work Plan. In-Kind Match In-kind Match is non-cash donations of a good or service, such as personnel time (paid staff), volunteer time, use of equipment, and donated supplies or services. Page 54 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 9 Partnerships Applicants are encouraged to combine contributions from non-state partners to meet the match requirement. One eligible applicant must lead the partnership effort and assume program and financial responsibility for all work in the application. Successful applicants should be prepared to document matching contributions, including the number of volunteers and volunteer hours on individual projects. Match funds from partners must be supported with letters of commitment. A sample letter is available on the How to Apply webpage. Letters of commitment should include all of the following: • Be written on the contributing organization’s letterhead. • Identify the applicant and name of the project. • Identify the amount and source of funding they are committing. • Describe any time constraints or other contingencies with the funding commitment. • Be signed by member(s) of the contributing organization with authority to commit the organization to the match. Additional Funding Some large projects involve multiple funding sources that may not be eligible as match for this grant. Keep these amounts separate. There is an “Additional Funding” box in the application to list the additional funding sources and amounts. Total project cost (grant + match + additional funds) cannot exceed $1,000,000. Projects exceeding $500,000 should apply directly to the Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council. Land Manager The Land Manager is the person who manages the land where the project is located. For acquisitions, the Land Manager is the person who will manage the land after purchase. For easements, the Land Manager is whoever holds the easement. The Land Manager cannot be the same person as the Project Manager. The Land Manager will be responsible for completing the Land Manager Review and Approval Form, which is required with each application. Project Manager The Project Manager is the person applying for the grant and responsible for the project. The Project Manager cannot also be the Land Manager. The Project Manager will be the main contact and must be actively involved and available to provide information during the application period and through the life of the grant. The Project Manager must be affiliated with the grant recipient’s organization and be knowledgeable about biological, partnership, and administrative aspects of the proposal. The Project Manager is responsible for ensuring that all work is done according to grant and program requirements. Page 55 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 10 The Project Manager coordinates work with the Land Manager, and is responsible for ordering and purchasing supplies, writing and administering contracts, organizing and documenting volunteers, meeting permit requirements, etc. Some of these duties may be shared with the Fiscal Contact. Fiscal Contact The Fiscal Contact works cooperatively with the Project Manager but focuses on the fiscal side of the grant. Specific duties are determined by the grantee’s organization, but generally include grant and match fund management, bill paying, submitting payment requests, etc. The Fiscal Contact will frequently be included on emails and other communications between CPL Staff and grantees. Natural Heritage Information System Review The Natural Heritage Information System Review section must be completed on all Land Manager Review and Approval Forms for an application to be considered complete. If the Land Manager or easement holder cannot access the Natural Heritage Information System, they must contact CPL Grant Staff for assistance at least 7 days prior to the application deadline. CPL staff will complete the review free of charge. To request a Natural Heritage Information System Review please send the following information directly to LSCPLGrants.DNR@state.mn.us: • A .zip ArcGIS Shapefile or a .kml/.kmz Google Earth file of your project’s boundaries. OR • A detailed map of your project’s boundaries. • A street address or GPS coordinates of where your project is located. The results of this review must be incorporated into the Land Manager Review and Approval Form. If there are any findings, these must also be addressed in the appropriate section of the application. State Historic Preservation Review If CPL and DNR staff determine that a SHPO review is necessary, grantees are responsible for sending project information to SHPO. If SHPO determines that an archaeological survey should be completed on the project site before work begins, the grantee will be responsible for the survey and all survey costs, which can be completed with grant funds. If you believe that your project may require an archaeological survey in addition to the SHPO review, please add this into your budget. Most projects will not require a survey. Please contact CPL grant staff if you have questions about this requirement. Page 56 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 11 Eligible Expenses Eligible expenses are expenses (contracts, supplies and materials, salaries, etc.) directly incurred through project activities that are direct to and necessary for the project described in the application. These expenses must be specified in the application and documented during the grant period as indicated in the Payment Manual. Generally, if an expense is eligible as a grant cost, it is also eligible as a match cost. Some costs have limits to the amount that will be paid from grant funds; any costs above that amount may be eligible as match. All grant and match expenses must occur within the project period except for pre-award match costs, described below. The grant period begins when the final signature on the grant contract is obtained and continues until all work is completed but no later than June 30, 2028 for FY25 funds. Pre-Award Match Costs Pre-award costs are costs incurred before the grant agreement is executed. All pre-award costs are incurred at the applicant’s risk. Pre-award costs are only eligible for match, and must be identified in the application’s budget: • Insurance: Insurance costs for CPL projects are eligible only if incurred after the grantee has been formally notified that they have been awarded a grant, but before the grant is in place. • Appraisals: Appraisal fees that were incurred less than 12 months prior to the application deadline are eligible match costs. The appraisal must be for the property specified in the grant application, and must meet all requirements in the Land Acquisition Procedures documents. • Engineering and Design: Site specific engineering and design costs that were incurred within 18 months prior to the application deadline are eligible for match. Engineering and design documents must be submitted as uploads with the application in order to be used towards match. Personnel and Grant Administration Up to 10% of the grant amount may be used for personnel costs for project management and on-the-ground work. Only paid employees of the grantee organization may claim personnel costs. All others are considered volunteers and their time can be used only as in-kind match. Personnel rates include hourly wage and fringe only (FICA/Medicare, retirement, and health insurance). Bonuses, overhead, and other indirect costs cannot be included in the hourly rate. Proof of wage is required. All personnel costs must be budgeted in the approved Work Plan. All personnel time must be documented with the name of employee, date of work, hours worked, brief description of work, and hourly rate. Personnel costs beyond 10% of the grant may be used for match. Page 57 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 12 Travel Transportation and travel expenses, such as lodging, meals, and mileage of personnel directly working on the grant, are eligible expenses (grant or match) in the same manner and in no greater amount than provided for in the current Commissioner's Plan. Travel expenses shall not exceed 1 percent of the total grant funds requested, unless approved by CPL grant staff. Travel and subsistence expenses incurred outside of Minnesota are not eligible expenses unless CPL staff has given written approval. Permitting and Environmental Compliance Expenses Costs associated with permitting and compliance requirements should be listed within the Additional Budget Items line of the budget and explained in the details section. Grant or match funds can be used to pay for these costs. Construction Projects Any projects requesting money for construction activities (water control structures, etc.) must have preliminary engineering design and plans completed for the project prior to application submission. These plans are necessary to provide an accurate cost estimate and fully developed scope of work. All plans must be submitted with the application. All design, engineering, survey costs, etc. may be used as match if completed within 18 months prior to the application deadline. For more information, see “Pre-Award Match Costs” on page 7. Acquisition Costs Acquisition costs such as appraisals, boundary surveys, legal fees, and initial development costs are eligible for reimbursement if planned for and approved in the Work Plan. Any obligation to purchase property made before the grant contract is executed is made at the grantee’s risk. Acquisition costs for reimbursement and match may not exceed 110% of the appraised value. For more information on acquisition requirements, please see page 23. Donation of Value for Acquisitions A donation of value means a landowner receives less than the appraised value of the land. The difference between the appraised value and the amount the landowner receives is considered a cash match donation towards the grant. The donation may be only part of the difference or the entire amount. Any difference between the amount paid to the seller and the appraised value must be reported to CPL staff. Page 58 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 13 Ineligible Expenses Indirect costs (overhead costs for basic operational functions such as lights, office rent, water, phone) are not eligible grant or match expenditures. Below are some common requests for funding that the CPL program will NOT fund with grant dollars or allow as match (unless specified). These requests will be removed from any application prior to review and may result in the rejection of the entire application. • Work on project sites not identified in the project’s Work Plan or approved by CPL staff. • Research, education, interpretive signs, or planning activities. • Capital equipment including but not limited to vehicles, trailers, chainsaws, sprayers, etc. • Acquisition of land that is currently owned by the state or a political subdivision of the state. • Activities that are the responsibilities of landowners under the terms of the easement. Facility Development Facility development or improvement projects including but not limited to parking lots, roads, picnic areas, fishing piers, waste disposal areas, camping areas, and hunter blinds are not considered habitat projects and are ineligible for grant funding. Limited approval of these developments such as temporary equipment access roads will be permitted only as part of the initial development of newly acquired lands. Engineering and Design Costs Grant funds may not be used to pay for engineering and design costs for any activity. Engineering and design work must be substantially complete before requesting grant funds for a project. CPL staff may request engineering and design plans from applicants during the review process to validate cost estimates and ensure the project will be completed within the allowed timeline. These costs may be used for Pre-Award Match if incurred within 18 months prior to the application submission date. See page 7. Application Information All applications must be submitted online using the CPL Online Application System. Organizations may submit multiple applications; however, it is helpful to indicate in the application summary which project is the highest priority. Page 59 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 14 Dates and Deadlines Applications for Round 1 of the Statewide, Metro, and New Applicant grant cycle will be accepted from August 1 until September 17, 2024 at 4:00 PM, CST. Grants for Round 1 will be selected by December 30, 2024. If funding remains, Round 2 will open on January 3, 2025 and close on February 19, 2025 at 4:00 PM, CST. Grants for Round 2 will be selected by May 9, 2025. See the Application and Funding Schedule for a list of ECP dates and deadlines. Application Status The DNR will notify all applicants of their status via email by December 30, 2024 for the first round of grants and by May 9, 2025 for the second round of grants, if applicable. This notification is not an authorization to begin work. ECP applicants will be notified within 4 to 6 weeks of the deadline for the round in which they applied. Online Application System All application information, including the required and optional forms, instructions, and the application system link can be found on the Traditional, Metro, ECP, or How to Apply webpages. All grant applications must be submitted using the online application system. Applicants must create an account and password the first time they access the system. The system allows applicants to save their application and return to it as many times as needed before submitting. Once as application is submitted, only CPL staff will be able to make changes. Completing the Application • Applications must have a project manager, land manager, and a fiscal contact. The project manager and fiscal contact may be the same person, but neither can also be the Land Manager. • A valid email address for the project manager and fiscal contact is required. Most initial correspondence with CPL staff will be by email. • Financial documentation must be submitted for nongovernmental organizations requesting over $25,000. • Each project site must be mapped using the online mapping system. • Each applicant must submit a completed Land Manager Review and Approval Form, including the Natural Heritage Database Review section, signed by the Land Manager or Easement Holder and uploaded electronically to the application. • For work on private lands, the permanent conservation easement documentation must be uploaded. • Projects occurring within public waters must submit a Public Waters Project Form in addition to the Land Manager Review and Approval Form. This form should be completed and signed by the DNR Area Hydrologist. Page 60 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 15 • Call or Email CPL Grant Staff with any questions and for any clarifications. Applicants planning to work in public waters should review Requirements for Projects Involving Public Waters Work Permits and Do I need a Permit? prior to applying for funding. Applicants are responsible for the content of their application. It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure that all forms are completed, signed and uploaded. Applications with missing or incomplete forms will not be accepted. Applicants must click on the “submit application” button to submit their application. Once submitted, no changes can be made by the applicant. CPL staff may be able to help with minor changes. For a full description of the CPL application, please see Appendix 1: CPL Application. Financial Document Requirements for Nongovernmental Organizations Nongovernmental organizations requesting over $25,000 are required to submit financial documentation to meet the State Grant Policy 08-06. The application system will prompt the user for this information, which will be reviewed by CPL staff. Required documentation is based on annual income: a) Less than $50,000 - most recent board-reviewed financial statements. b) $50,000-$749,999 - most recent IRS Form 990. c) $750,000 and up- most recent certified financial audit. Application Review Process Evaluation Criteria and Scoring The Evaluation Criteria used to evaluate grant applications has been developed by the MN Legislature, LSOHC, Office of Grants Management, and CPL Staff. Applicants should review the Evaluation Criteria Table found at the end of this document to make sure all the information needed to fully evaluate their application is included in their applications. Traditional and Metro applications will be scored on all six criteria found in the table, with equal weight given to each of the six categories. ECP applications will be reviewed with the same criteria, but will not be given a score. Initial Review CPL staff will review all applications for completeness and eligibility. If submitted prior to the deadline, CPL staff may have a chance to contact applicants for missing information. Page 61 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 16 Technical Review for Statewide, Metro, and New Applicant Grant Cycles Technical review of applications will be performed by a Technical Review Committee (TRC) and by DNR Regional Directors. TRC committees include habitat experts from both nonprofit organizations and government agencies including DNR, BWSR, the US Fish and Wildlife Service, the US Forest Service, local governments, and universities. The TRC will score each application based on the Evaluation Criteria. Based on these scores, the TRC will provide a funding recommendation ranking for DNR Division Directors Review. Division Director Review for Statewide, Metro, and New Applicant Grant Cycles The Division Directors of DNR Fish and Wildlife, Ecological and Water Resources, and Forestry will review all applications and make a final recommendation to the DNR Commissioner based on the following: • TRC scores, comments, and recommendations. • DNR Regional Director comments. • Public agency’s ability and/or readiness to support proposed project activities. • Applicants’ ability to successfully complete work. • Geographical distribution of funding. Final Approval for Statewide, Metro, and New Applicant Grant Cycles The Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources must give final approval as to which projects to fund, based on all information provided by the Technical Review Committee(s), Regional Managers and Division Directors. The DNR reserves the right to reject any and all applications which do not meet the requirements of this RFP or are outside the scope of the Conservation Partners Legacy Grant Program. ECP Grant Cycle Review ECP applications will be reviewed by DNR habitat experts using the Evaluation Criteria as the foundation for a pass/fail decision. The Commissioner has granted approval authority for the ECP grants to the DNR’s Fish and Wildlife Division Director. The DNR reserves the right to reject any and all applications which do not meet the requirements of this RFP or are outside the scope of the Conservation Partners Legacy Grant Program. Applications Not Selected for Funding Applicants not selected for funding will be notified of their status at the time the awards are announced. CPL staff will include information on why their applications were not selected for funding, and ways to improve their applications for future grant rounds. Applicants who are not awarded funding may ask for their applications to Page 62 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 17 be reactivated, which will make them editable again should funding remain for a second grant round. Applications will then need to be resubmitted after editing to be considered for the next grant round. Unawarded Funds If more than $1 million remains after the first Statewide, Metro, and New Applicant grant rounds, a second grant round will be offered. If less than $1 million remains after the first grant round, these funds will be available for the ECP grant cycle. Any unawarded funds after Round 2 will be available for the ECP grant cycle. Any unawarded funding from ECP after the 5th funding round in May 2025, will be rolled into available funds for FY26 CPL grants. Award Information Round 1 of Statewide, Metro, and New Applicant Grants is expected to be announced by December 30, 2024. Round 2 of Statewide, Metro, and New Applicant Grants is expected to be announced by May 9, 2025. Grant Award Information Successful applicants will be notified via email. All grants will be awarded using a grant contract. The grant contract is the legal document between the award recipient (grantee) and the State of MN. Upon request by CPL staff, grantees will need to submit an insurance certificate, conflict of interest form, CCM contact email, opportunities for youth email and Work Plan approval. Once these items are submitted, CPL staff will set up the grant contract. CPL staff will provide further instructions to grantees after the initial award notification. Work Plan The awarded grant application will become the Work Plan, which is incorporated into the grant contract. The grantee will have a chance to review their application for any minor changes before it becomes their official Work Plan. Once the grant contract is executed, project changes may need a formal amendment. Any changes made to the Work Plan without CPL staff approval may result in not being reimbursed for expenses related to those changes. Executing the Grant Contract Grantees will need to register with the State Vendor System before they can enter into a grant contract with the State. A federal tax identification number is required to register. Once the grantee has a state Vendor ID number, CPL staff may begin to set up their contract. Grant contracts require a minimum of three signatures, signed in this order: Page 63 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 18 1. State Encumbrance Verification by a DNR fiscal staff member. 2. Grantee Signature by the member(s) of the grantees’ organization who have the authority to sign legal documents on behalf of the organization. 3. State Agency signature by a DNR Division Director or other staff with delegated authority to approve the grant and expenditure of state funds. The grant contract is “executed” when all the above signatures have been obtained. Work may not begin until the grant contract is executed, and the grantee is notified by CPL staff. Once the grant contract is executed, no changes may be made without approval from CPL staff. CPL staff may grant permission for minor changes, but most changes will require a formal grant contract amendment. Grant Period The grant period starts when the grant contract is “executed,” meaning all required signatures have been obtained, and typically lasts 3 to 3 ½ years. The end date is determined by the appropriation language. Projects funded with FY25 funds must be completed by June 30, 2028. Any work occurring outside of the grant period is not eligible for reimbursement and cannot be used as match, except for the exceptions listed under “pre- award match costs.” Grant period extensions are not allowed. Payments Grantees will be paid on a reimbursement basis. All requests for payment must be emailed directly to CPL Staff. Organizations with limited cash flow may request payment for services rendered upon approval from CPL staff. Advance payments may be provided for acquisitions if requested 30 days prior to the scheduled closing. Shorter time periods may be accommodated, but cannot be guaranteed. Five percent of every grant (including advance acquisition payments) will be held back until the project is completed and a Final Report has been submitted. State Grant Policy 08-08, Grant Payments has more information on grant payment methods, schedules, and other payment information. Please also see the CPL Payment Manual. Timeline for Reimbursement The state has up to 30 days to process payment requests once all required documentation is received. The fastest way to receive payments is by signing up for Electronic Funds Transfers (EFT) using a state vendor number. This system allows grantees to review their payment information online. Page 64 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 19 Grant Outcome Expectations and Reporting Requirements Ecological Restoration Management Plan An Ecological Restoration and Management Plan must be prepared for all awarded grant projects and is due with the first payment request. Accomplishment Reports Accomplishment Reports must be submitted by December 31 of each year that the grant is active. The Accomplishment Report form is designed to be cumulative and updated each year until it becomes the Final Report. A Final Accomplishment Report must be submitted with the final payment request. Payments requested by grantees with outstanding reports will not be processed. Grantees are expected to meet or exceed the planned accomplishments as outlined in their Work Plan. Real Property Interest Report An annual Real Property Interest Report will be required of grantees that acquire land in fee title or easement so long as they hold the interest in real property. This requirement will be transferred along with conveyance of land. Grant Monitoring State Grant Policy 08-10, Grant Monitoring, requires state agencies to conduct at least one monitoring visit and financial reconciliation per grant period on all state grants over $50,000 and to conduct at least annual monitoring visits on grants over $250,000. Monitoring may be done in person or by telephone, at the discretion of CPL staff. Field reviews are intended to ensure that work was performed as described in the grant contract. Financial audits ensure grant funds and match funds are properly spent and accounted for. Grants under $50,000 are occasionally subject to monitoring, based upon grantee performance, history of grants management, and the activity funded. Grant Accounting and Record Retention The grantee is responsible for maintaining fiscal controls and fund accounting procedures that are based on generally accepted accounting standards and principles. All grant records must be saved by the grantee for a minimum of six years following the final report. Records are subject to audit. Page 65 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 20 Additional Audits The DNR and/or Legislative Auditors may also conduct financial reconciliation audits. As per M.S. 97A.056, Subd. 10, a technical panel was created to evaluate restoration projects funded by the Outdoor Heritage Fund. CPL projects may be subject to this evaluation. General Program Requirements This program is funded by state dollars and requires a significant amount of documentation and transparency. All expenditures and work completed with these funds must adhere to federal, state, and local laws, regulations, policies, and codes, as applicable. Minnesota Statutes Projects must meet the requirements set out by M.L. 2024, Regular Session, Chapter 106, Article 1, Section 2, Subd. 5(z) and MS 97A.056. Projects on public lands, and any project receiving state funds, may require more approvals and/or permits than other projects. It is the applicants’ responsibility to obtain all required approvals and permits. Applicants must coordinate with public Land Managers, Easement Holders, and/or private landowner(s) before any work begins. Commissioner’s Approval The Commissioner of Natural Resources must approve all projects. All projects must conform to the MN Statewide Conservation and Preservation Plan. Wildlife projects must conform to the State Wildlife Action Plan. Grantee’s Duties Grantees must be willing and able to perform all work required to complete the projects they are requesting funds for. This includes managing any bid, contract or purchasing process necessary to complete work under the grant. The grantee is also responsible for project oversight and management. DNR or other public Land Managers or Easement Holders may provide technical guidance to the grantee, but are not responsible for the work. Grantees are also responsible for understanding and following all program requirements and procedures. Conflict of Interest State Grant Policy 08-01, Conflict of Interest for State Grant-making, also applies to grantees. Please review this policy to ensure there are no conflicts of interest. Applications may be rejected or grants cancelled if conflicts are found and not resolved to the State’s satisfaction. Grantees will be required to sign a conflict of interest form. Page 66 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 21 Conservation Corps of Minnesota (CCM) Recipients of CPL grant funds must give consideration to and timely written contact to CCM for consideration of use of their services for restoration and enhancement work. CPL staff will help facilitate this requirement. Current Conservation Science All restorations must use current conservation science to achieve the best restoration results possible. Invasive Species Requirements The DNR requires active steps to prevent or limit the introduction, establishment, and spread of invasive species during all activities performed on all lands. Grantees must follow the procedures provided in Operational Order 113 (Invasive Species). Use of Pesticides DNR Operational Order 59 (Pesticides and Pest Control) and other appropriate discipline guidelines must be followed when using pesticides on all lands and waters, regardless of ownership. Pollinator Habitat Enhancement Habitat restoration or enhancement on DNR lands and prairie restorations using state funds must follow the DNR’s Specific Pollinator Best Management Practices. Vegetation and Seed Requirements Seed mixes and plant lists must be approved by the Land Manager of the project site and shared with CPL Staff. Prescribed Burning on State Lands For prescribed burns on state lands, contractors must meet the equipment and personnel requirements (including training and experience) called for in the prescribed burn plan provided by the State. Additional requirements are described in the MN DNR Prescribed Burn Handbook. Revenues Any revenues generated during the grant period from activities on land acquired, restored, or enhanced with CPL funding must be disclosed to CPL staff and used for habitat purposes to be agreed upon. Page 67 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 22 Permitting and Environmental Compliance Requirements The DNR, grantee, and contractors must comply with permitting requirements and environmental laws. Such compliance requires the participation and cooperation of the DNR, CPL grant applicant, appropriate Land Manager, and/or Easement Holder. The grantee is responsible for understanding and following all these requirements. These requirements apply to all projects. Insurance Grantees are required to carry insurance that meets or exceeds the requirements of the landowner whose land they will be working on. Insurance requirements for working on state lands are available on the CPL website. For all other lands, grantees should discuss insurance with the landowner/ land manager and follow their requirements. Proof of insurance will be required prior to a grant being executed. Applicants should investigate the cost of insurance before submitting an application. Contractors Contractors must be selected using the state’s bidding process as outlined in the grant contract. Records of the bidding process must be retained in the grantee’s file in case of audit. Contractors are subject to the same requirements as the grantee. It is strongly recommended that all contractors meet the same insurance requirements as the grantee. An organization’s conflict of interest policy must be followed when selecting contractors. Contractors will be required to certify that they have not been debarred or suspended from participation in federal assistance awards in accordance with 40 CFR Part 32. Suspended or debarred vendors may not be used for a CPL project, regardless if grant or match funds are being used to pay for contracted services. See the State of MN’s Suspended/Debarred Vendor Report to check for potential conflicts before hiring contractors. Prevailing Wage It is the responsibility of the grant recipient or contractor to pay prevailing wages on construction projects to which state prevailing wage laws apply (MN Statutes 177.42-177.44). Examples of applicable projects include construction or maintenance of roads, buildings, bridges, dams, and utilities. Additional information is available on the Department of Labor and Industry (DOLI) website. Questions should be directed to DOLI at 651-284-5091. The Grant recipient is solely responsible for payment of all required prevailing wage rates. Grants and Public Information Under MN Statutes 13.599, responses to a RFP are nonpublic until the application deadline is reached. At that time, the name and address of the applicant and the amount requested becomes public data. After the application evaluation process is completed, all application data (except trade secret data) becomes public. Data Page 68 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 23 created during the evaluation process is nonpublic until the negotiation of the grant agreement with the selected grantee(s) is completed. Sensitive information, such as Natural Heritage Database review information, will remain nonpublic. MN Statutes 13.44 categorizes estimated or appraised value of real property prior to purchase and sale as confidential data on individuals, or protected nonpublic data. Once property transactions are completed, the location and landowner information will become public information. See the Minnesota Government Data Privacy Act for more information. Logo, Signage, and Recognition Recipients must display a sign with the Legacy logo at all project sites near an access or entrance point. These signs are provided for by the CPL program, and will be delivered to the grant recipient or land manager for installation. Sign orders will be collected by CPL staff from project managers via email in February 2025. The Legacy logo shall be incorporated, where practical, into printed and other materials funded with CPL funds. The Legacy logo may be downloaded from the Minnesota Legacy website’s Legacy Logo page for publications, press releases or other printed documents. Only the approved logo may be used. All press releases, bid solicitations, statements or other documents issued describing the project should acknowledge the Outdoor Heritage Fund primarily, and may secondarily acknowledge the Department of Natural Resources and the Conservation Partners Legacy Grant Program. Purchase of Recycled and Recyclable Materials Grantees and any subgrantees must use grant funds in compliance with Minnesota Statue sections 16C.0725, regarding purchase of recycled, repairable, and durable materials, and 16C.073, regarding purchase and use of paper stock and printing. Acquisition Requirements Applicants applying for fee title acquisitions should review the requirements and information found on the Land Acquisition page of the CPL website prior to applying for funding. Grantees must follow all requirements set in MS 97A.056. Applicants should especially note Subd. 8 Land revenues, Subd. 15. Land acquisition restrictions, and Subd. 16. Real property interest report. Acquisitions must be from willing sellers, and potential tracts must be identified in the application. Acquisitions may not impede existing snowmobile trails. The final title holder and land manager must be specified in the application. Lands that will be conveyed to a public agency must be donated to that agency. Page 69 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 24 Easement Acquisition Applications intending to acquire permanent conservation easements must follow the requirements as described in MS 97A.056 and meet MN Statutes 84C. All easements must: • Be permanent; • Specify the parties to an easement in the easement; • Specify all the provisions of an agreement that are permanent; • Specify the habitat types and location being protected; • When appropriate for conservation or water protection outcomes, require the grantor to employ practices retaining water on the eased land as long as practicable; • Specify the responsibilities of the parties for habitat enhancement and restoration and the associated costs of these activities; • Include a long-term stewardship plan and funding for monitoring/enforcing the agreement; and • Identify the parties responsible for monitoring and enforcing the easement agreement. The proposed easement and stewardship plan must be sent to the DNR for review prior to closing. Appraisals for conservation easements must be done by a trained and experienced appraiser. If the DNR will be a party to the easement, appropriate DNR staff must be involved in easement discussions and stewardship plan writing. Conveying Land to the DNR Applicants intending to acquire land that will be conveyed to the DNR must follow Land Acquisition Procedures for Land to Be Conveyed to DNR. All proposed tracts must be on the DNR’s approved acquisition priority list prior to the application deadline. Applicants should work with the DNR manager who will manage the land to make sure all parcels have the prior approvals needed. Land Acquisition Fees for Acquisition of Lands to be Conveyed to the DNR A DNR acquisition specialist will be assigned to each awarded project involving the purchase of land to be conveyed to the DNR. To pay for these costs, a fee of $10,000 for each parcel should be included in the grant proposal budget. These costs count towards the maximum grant award of $500,000. If the initial planned parcel(s) falls through and the grantee seeks permission to pursue a new parcel, the grantee may be asked to cover added staff time fees out of their grant budget. New parcels must provide comparable habitat value. Initial Development Plan (IDP) Initial Development Plans (IDPs) are required on all fee-title acquisitions that will be transferred to the DNR, and may be required by other entities that will own or manage lands acquired with CPL funds. These plans lay out the specific work necessary to bring a parcel up to minimum standards for public use, including boundary posting, signs, parking lots, habitat development and site clean-up. The IDP may be paid for with either grant or Page 70 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 25 match funds, and those plans are incorporated into the Land Manager Review and Approval Form. The application’s budget page must reflect the information contained on the IDP form if grant or match funds are to be used. See DNR Development Standards for WMA/AMAs for more information for lands that will be conveyed to DNR as Wildlife Management Areas (WMAs) or Aquatic Management Areas (AMAs). Contact the appropriate Land Manager for information on other lands. Acquisitions for Land not to be Conveyed to the DNR Applicants intending to acquire land that will not be conveyed to DNR must follow Land Acquisition Procedures for Land NOT Conveyed to DNR. Applicants should discuss requirements and approvals with the entity that will be receiving the land prior to application. The appraisal and appraisal review must be submitted to CPL staff. Acquisition Closing Packet For all acquisitions, grantees must submit an acquisition packet within 60 days of the closing. This packet must contain: • Documentation of the selection process used to identify the parcels acquired; • Documentation of all related transaction costs for all parties involved in the transaction, including but not limited to appraisals, legal fees, recording fees, commissions, and donations; • Documentation of any difference between the acquisition amount paid to the seller and the state- certified or state-reviewed appraisal; and • An analysis describing the increased operations and management costs likely to be incurred by public entities as a result of the acquisition, and how these costs will be paid. Notice of Funding Restrictions (NOFR) Grantees who acquire land in fee title or easement must record a Notice of Funding Restrictions (NOFR) in the local government office where the conveyance of the interest in real property is filed. The NOFR must contain: • A legal description of the property. • A reference to the grant contract. • A reference to 97A.056, Subd. 15(c). • The following statement: "This interest in real property shall be administered in accordance with the terms, conditions, and purposes of the grant agreement controlling the acquisition of the property. The interest in real property, or any portion of the interest in real property, shall not be sold, transferred, pledged, or otherwise disposed of or further encumbered without obtaining the prior written approval of the Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council or its successor. The ownership of the interest in real property transfers to the state if: (1) the holder of the interest in real property fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the grant agreement or accomplishment plan; or (2) restrictions are placed on the land that preclude its use for the intended purpose as specified in the appropriation.” Page 71 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 26 State Agency Contact Information David Stein, CPL Program Coordinator 651-259-5375 David.stein@state.mn.us Division of Fish and Wildlife MN Department of Natural Resources 500 Lafayette Road, Box #20 Saint Paul, MN 55155-4020 Rob Rabasco, CPL Program Administrator 651-259-5216 Rob.rabasco@state.mn.us Division of Fish and Wildlife MN Department of Natural Resources 500 Lafayette Road, Box #20 Saint Paul, MN 55155-4020 Page 72 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 27 Appendix A: CPL Application Section 1: Project Contact Information and Overview Project Contact Information • Project Name • Organization Name • Organization Type • Mailing Address • City, State, and ZIP Code • Project Manager Name • Project Manager Title • Project Manager Phone • Project Manager Email Project Overview • County Name • Project Site Name • Total Project Sites • Total Project Acres • Primary Land Ownership • Additional Land Ownership • Primary Habitat Type • Additional Habitat Types • Primary Activity • Additional Activities • ECP Activities (For ECP applications only) Project Funding Summary • Grant Type • Grant Request Level • Total Grant Amount Requested • Total Match Amount Pledged • Additional Funding Amount • Total Project Cost Page 73 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 28 Section 2: Project Summary Has your organization ever received CPL or OHF funds before? Project Location Summary • Primary County • Project Site Name • Primary Land Ownership Habitat and Activity Summary • Primary Habitat Type • Primary Activity • Total Project Sites • Total Project Acres Question 1: Summary (2500 Characters) Provide a clear, concise summary of what your proposal is about. This summary will be used to describe your project to reviewers and other parties. Question 2: Problem Statement (2500 Characters) Describe the specific need or problem that is being addressed, why it is important, how it was identified, and what is affected by it. Include any facts or statistics that support it, and a pre-project description of the site(s). Question 3: Project Objectives (2500 Characters) Explain the expected results and benefits of the project. List specific, measurable results that you expect to accomplish. Specifically provide information on any and all habitat benefits of the project, and how the budget is cost effective. Indicate if site is adjacent to protected land and if there are multiple benefits resulting from the project. Question 4: Methods (2500 Characters) Describe in detail the activities that will take place in order to achieve the desired results and WHY you have chosen them. Include methods, materials, and who will do the work. Question 5: Experience/Abilities (1500 Characters) Describe your organization's ability to successfully complete this work, including experience in the area of interest and ability to successfully implement the proposed project. Include descriptions of your most recent grant experience and if the expected outcomes were achieved. Page 74 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 29 Question 6: BIPOC and Diverse Communities (2500 Characters) How will your organization directly involve, engage, and benefit BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, People of Color), diverse, and other underrepresented communities with this project or through other activities? Question 7: Project Timeline Please provide measurable project goals and the time frame (month, season, and/or year) that your organization plans to achieve those goals. Question 8: Estimated Project Completion Date When do you expect your project to be completed? Projects must be completed by June 30, 2028. Section 3: Budget Fiscal Contact Information • Fiscal Contact Name • Fiscal Contact Title • Fiscal Contact Email Address • Fiscal Contact Phone Number • Fiscal Contact Street Address • Fiscal Contact City, State, and Zip Code Budget Details All budget items must be added to the correct budget category using the on-screen instructions. Grant and Match descriptions must be on separate lines. Use whole dollar amounts only with no commas or decimals. Grant Funds: Expenditures to be reimbursed from the grant. This may include up to 10% for personnel costs (can be used for both administrative and for on-the-ground project work). Match Funds: A 10% minimum match is required. Match must come from the applicant or partner contributions and originate from a non-state source. Budget categories include the following: • Personnel • Contracts • Fee Acquisition with PILT (For acquisition projects only) • Fee Acquisition without PILT (For acquisition projects only) • Easement Acquisition (For acquisition projects only) Page 75 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 30 • Travel (In-State) • Professional Services • DNR Land Acquisition Costs (For acquisition projects only) • Equipment/Tools/Supplies • Additional Budget Items Additional Funding Amount Additional funds are dollars used toward the project that are not grant funds or counted as match. You must describe the source of any additional funding and how the funds will be applied to the project. Section 4: Project Information (For Statewide, Metro, and New Applicant Projects Only) Please answer each of the following questions in 1000 characters or less: Question 1: Collaboration Describe the degree of collaboration and local support for this project. Question 2: Urgency Describe any urgency associated with this project. Question 3: Funding Discuss if there is full funding secured for this project, the sources of that funding and if CPL Grant funds will supplement or supplant existing funding. Question 4: Public Access Describe public access at project site for hunting and fishing, identifying all open seasons. Question 5: Native Vegetation Discuss your project’s use of native vegetation (if applicable). Question 6: Budget Discuss your project’s budget and why it is cost effective. Page 76 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 31 Question 7: Culture of Conservation Provide information on how your organization encourages a local conservation culture. This includes your organization's history of promoting conservation in the local area, visibility of work to the public and any activities and outreach your organization has completed in the local area. Question 8: Invasive Species Does your project involve the removal of invasive species? If yes, please describe your long term management plan after the project has been completed. If you have a plan you would like to submit with the application (recommended), please attach it on the attachments tab. Question 9: Wildlife What specific species of wildlife will benefit from your project? Please provide details of how these species’ habitats will be restored, enhanced, or created. Section 5: Site Information Land Manager Information • Land Manager Name • Land Manager’s Organization • Land Manager’s Title • Land Manager’s Phone Number • Land Manager’s Email Address The signed Land Manager Review and Approval Form must be uploaded in this section. Site Information Your site must be mapped using the online site mapping tool in this section. Instructions for how to use this tool are found on the CPL Online Application System. • Site Name • Habitat Type • CPL Activity • Land Ownership • Project Acres • Is the site open to public hunting? • Is the site open to public fishing? • Have you ever had OHF grant funding for a project on this site? • Will you receive any revenues during the grant period from activities on this land? Page 77 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 32 If your project will take place in a public water, you must also have the DNR Area Hydrologist complete the Public Waters Project Form and upload it in this section. Section 6: Natural Heritage Database Review A Natural Heritage Database Review must be completed prior to the applicant completing this section. If the Project Manager, Land Manager, or easement holder cannot access the Natural Heritage Information System, they must contact CPL Grant Staff for assistance at least 7 days prior to the application deadline. CPL staff will complete the review free of charge. To request a Natural Heritage Information System Review please send the following information directly to LSCPLGrants.DNR@state.mn.us: • A .zip ArcGIS Shapefile or a .kml/.kmz Google Earth file of your project’s boundaries. OR • A detailed map of your project’s boundaries. • A street address or GPS coordinates of where your project is located. Once the review has been completed, please answer the following questions: Question 1: Were any Natural Heritage elements found within one mile of your project sites? Question 2 (1200 Characters): List all Natural Heritage elements found within one mile of your project’s site(s) and discuss how you will mitigate or avoid impacts to these elements. Section 7: Attachments Financial Information (For Non-Profit Applicants Requesting Over $25,000 Only) Please submit financial documentation based on your organization’s annual income: a) Less than $50,000 - most recent board-reviewed financial statements. b) $50,000-$749,999 - most recent IRS Form 990. c) $750,000 and up- most recent certified financial audit. Additional Documentation Attach additional documentation as applicable using the appropriate categories below. If you exceed the size limit while uploading, contact CPL staff to discuss your options. Page 78 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 33 Additional Attachment Categories Include: • Letters of Support • Partner Commitment Letters • Photos • Restoration Plans • Engineering/Survey/Design Plans • Supplemental Documents Section 8: Final Application Submission Please take the time to revisit the previous sections and make sure you have entered everything completely and correctly. Once you hit the submit button, you will not be able to return to your application to make changes. Please certify the following statements to submit your application: 1) I certify that I have read the Conservation Partners Legacy Grants Program Request for Proposal, Program Manual and other program documents, and have discussed this project with the appropriate public land manager, or private landowner and easement holder. 2) I certify that all of the information contained in the application is correct as of the time of the submission. If anything should change, I will contact CPL Grant Staff immediately to make corrections. 3) I certify that if funded I will give consideration to and make timely written contact to Minnesota Conservation Corps or its successor for consideration of possible use of their services to contract for restoration and enhancement services. I will provide CPL staff a copy of that written contact within 10 days after the execution of my grant, should I be awarded. 4) I certify that I am aware at least one Land Manager Review and Approval form is required for every application and at least one Public Waters Contact form is required for all public waters work. I am aware I must submit all completed forms by uploading them into this application. I have attached the required type and number of forms as necessary for this project. 5) I am aware that by typing my name in the box below, I am applying my signature to this online document. Page 79 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 34 Appendix B: CPL Application Evaluation Criteria Traditional, Metro, and New Applicant applications are scored based on the 6 criteria listed below, using only the information provided within the application. Applicants should be sure their applications contain enough information for reviewers to consider all 6 criteria. This table is also available as a stand-alone document on the CPL website. 1: Overall Project Value Critical habitat corridor; habitat quality/quantity Amount, quality and/or connectivity of habitat restored, protected and/or enhanced. Consistent with current conservation science Project use of currently accepted science and methods, increased efficiency and life expectancy of work completed. Sustainability Overall life expectancy of project Use of native plants Use of local ecotype, native vegetation in form of seed, seedlings, root stock, etc. Seed and plant lists attached to application. 2: Applicant Performance Encouragement of local conservation culture Applicant’s past activities with local community in regards to conservation Collaboration and local support Applicant’s current interaction with other groups or agencies; current application support by multiple entities Capacity to successfully complete work Applicant’s history of receiving and successfully completing conservation work and grants 3: Project Benefits Multiple benefits Multiple or diverse species benefits; project directly improves intended species, indirect benefit to others Page 80 of 116 2025 CPL Request for Proposals 35 Habitat benefits Multiple or diverse habitat benefits; project directly improves intended habitat, indirect benefit to others 4: Benefits to the Public Adjacent to protected lands Project site(s) proximity to current protected land (public or private) Public access Project site(s) availability for hunting, fishing and other wildlife-based recreation. 5: Financial Assessment Full funding of project All costs are identified and accounted for; all partners have submitted letters committing funds Supplements existing funding Project would not be completed without CPL funding; CPL does not replace traditional sources of funding Budget and cost effectiveness Project is succinct- no unnecessary costs or work has been added; costs are relative to location of project 6: Project Urgency Urgency Funding importance at this time: species or opportunity potentially lost Page 81 of 116 Page 82 of 116 Member _____________ introduced the following resolution and move its adoption RESOLUTION NO. _______________ RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE REQUEST FOR COUNCIL SUPPORT FOR APPLICATION TO MINNESOTA DNR CONSERVATION PARTNERS LEGACY GRANT PROGRAM FOR WILDLIFE HABITAT ENHANCEMENT AT PALMER LAKE PARKS WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center owns and operates West and East Palmer Lake Parks, which contain natural areas identified for enhancement in the City’s 2025 Park Capital Investment Plan developed through community engagement; and WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Conservation Partners Legacy Grant Program provides competitive matching funds to restore, protect, and enhance fish, game, and wildlife habitat; and WHEREAS, the City intends to submit an application requesting the maximum grant award of $500,000 to support habitat enhancement projects at Palmer Lake Parks; and WHEREAS, the City commits to providing the required local match of $50,000 from the Stormwater Utility Fund, reflecting the project’s benefits for flood mitigation and watershed health; and WHEREAS, if awarded, staff plan to begin work in Fall/Winter 2026; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: I. The City Council expresses its support for the application to the Minnesota DNR Conservation Partners Legacy Grant Program for wildlife habitat enhancement at Palmer Lake Parks. II. The City Council affirms its commitment to provide the required local match of $50,000 from the Stormwater Utility Fund in support of this grant application. III. The City Manager and Director of Public Works, or their designees, are authorized to take necessary steps to prepare and submit the grant application. 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 83 of 116 Council Regular Meeting DATE: 8/11/2025 TO: City Council FROM: Lydia Ener, Assistant City Engineer THROUGH: Elizabeth Heyman, Director of Public Works BY: Lydia Ener, Assistant City Engineer SUBJECT: An Ordinance vacating easements within Lot 1, Block 1 of the plat of 7100 Corporate Plaza 2nd Addition in the City of Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County, Minnesota (1st Reading) Requested Council Action: Motion to approve a first reading of the requested ordinance vacating easements located in the 7100 Brooklyn Boulevard site redevelopment in connection with the proposed final plat of 7100 Corporate Plaza 2nd Addition and set a second reading and public hearing for August 25, 2025. Background: The Planning Commission has reviewed the final plat for 7100 Corporate Plaza 2nd Addition. In connection with the final plat and easement dedication proceedings, the developer is requesting release and termination of easements that are either no longer needed or are being replaced by new easements. The following easements are proposed to be released and terminated as indicated in Exhibit A and Exhibit B. It is staff’s opinion that the easement proposed to be vacated are no longer needed and should not negatively affect rights to public easements. We are unaware of any entity objecting to the proposed vacation. Consistent with the City’s Charter, a first reading of the proposed ordinance to vacate certain easements is requested, with a subsequent request to schedule the second reading and public hearing on August 25, 2025. A public hearing notice was submitted to the Brooklyn Center Sun Post for publication on July 24, 2025. Budget Issues: NA Inclusive Community Engagement: NA Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect: NA Strategic Priorities and Values: Page 84 of 116 ATTACHMENTS: 1. NHA Easement Vacation Ordinance 2. Exhibit A NHA Easement Vacation 3. Exhibit B NHA Easement Vacation Page 85 of 116 1 BR291\10\1040935.v1 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Please take notice that the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center will hold a public hearing on Monday, August 25, 2025 at approximately 7:00 p.m. at Brooklyn Center City Hall, located at 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. Said public hearing will include a second reading and proposed adoption of an ordinance vacating certain easements over, under and across Lot 1 of Block 1 within the plat of 7100 Corporate Plaza 2nd Addition. Meeting materials can be accessed by visiting the City of Brooklyn Center’s website at: https://www.ci.brooklyn-center.mn.us/. A definite time for this application to be considered cannot be given as it will depend on the progression of the agenda items. Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the City Clerk at (763) 569-3300 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. _____ AN ORDINANCE VACATING CERTAIN EASEMENTS LOCATED WITHIN LOT 1, BLOCK 1 OF THE PLAT OF 7100 CORPORATE PLAZA 2ND ADDITION IN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center (the “City”) is a municipal corporation, organized and existing under the laws of Minnesota and the City Charter of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (the “Charter”); and WHEREAS, the City’s Planning Commission (“Planning Commission”) has recommended approval for the plat of 7100 Corporate Plaza (“Plat”) based on certain conditions as set forth in the City Council Resolution No. 2025-047; and WHEREAS, the Plat includes Lot 1, Block 1, 7100 Corporate Plaza 2nd Addition which is situated in the City at 7100 Brooklyn Boulevard (PID 2711921330097) (the “Property”); and WHEREAS, a drainage and utility easement dedicated to the City in the plat of 7100 Corporate Plaza 2nd Addition and an access easement granted to the City over the Property, which as a result of the future development of the Property are no longer needed, will interfere with the proposed development, and are being replaced by new dedicated easements covering the Property within the Plat; and WHEREAS, the drainage and utility easement proposed to be vacated is legally described and as shown in the cross hatched area on the attached Exhibit A (the “Drainage and Utility Easement”); and WHEREAS, the City was granted an access easement pursuant to that certain Access Easement and Utility Facilities Agreement between Spire Credit Union and the City of Brooklyn Center dated March 16, 2023, recorded on March 16, 2023 as Document No. 11188033; and Page 86 of 116 2 BR291\10\1040935.v1 WHEREAS, said access/ingress/egress easement proposed to be vacated is legally described and as shown in the cross hatched area on the attached Exhibit B (the “Access Easement”); and WHEREAS, City staff has determined that there is no public need to maintain the Drainage and Utility Easement and the Access Easement; and WHEREAS, the City Council does not object to the vacation of the Drainage and Utility Easement and the Access Easement; and WHEREAS, after due notice and public hearing, the City Council has determined that the Drainage and Utility Easement and the Access Easement will no longer be needed and it is in the public interest to vacate both easements; and NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center does ordain as follows: Section I. Recitals. The above recitals are hereby adopted as findings and incorporated into this Ordinance. Section II. Easement Vacation. The Drainage and Utility Easement and the Access Easement are hereby vacated. Section III. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be effective after adoption and thirty days following its legal publication. Section IV. Notice of Completion. Upon the Ordinance becoming effective, the City Clerk is directed to prepare a Notice of Completion of Vacation Proceedings and to record it with the Hennepin County Recorder or Hennepin County Registrar of Titles, as appropriate. Adopted this ___ day of __________, 2025. ____________________________ April Graves, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________ City Clerk Date of Publication _________________________ Effective Date _____________________________ Page 87 of 116 BR291\10\1040935.v1 EXHIBIT A Page 88 of 116 BR291\10\1040935.v1 EXHIBIT B Page 89 of 116 Page 90 of 116 Page 91 of 116 Council Regular Meeting DATE: 8/11/2025 TO: City Council FROM: Lydia Ener, Assistant City Engineer THROUGH: Elizabeth Heyman, Director of Public Works BY: Lydia Ener, Assistant City Engineer SUBJECT: Resolution Accepting Work Performed and Authorizing Final Payment, Project No. 2024-06, 2024 Pond 48-001 Maintenance Requested Council Action: Motion to approve a resolution accepting work performed and authorizing final payment, Improvement Project No. 2024-06 2024 Pond 48-001 Maintenance Project Background: On November 25, 2024, the City Council awarded Improvement Project No. 2024-06 2024 Pond 48-001 Maintenance Project to New Look Contracting, Inc. of Rogers, Minnesota for the 2024 Pond Maintenance Project. New Look Contracting, Inc. has successfully completed the work and is requesting final payment for the project. Budget Issues: The original contract amount with New Look Contracting, Inc. for the improvements was $122,286.00. The total value of work certified for final payment is $112,422.00. The total project cost including contingencies/administration/engineering/legal is $140,311.00 and was completed 56.0 percent under budget in the amount of $185,256. The attached resolution provides a summary of the final amended costs and funding sources for the project. Inclusive Community Engagement: NA Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect: NA Strategic Priorities and Values: ATTACHMENTS: 1. 250811 Pond Maintenance-Final Payment Res Page 92 of 116 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO._______________ RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED AND AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYMENT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2024-06 2024 POND 48- 001 MAINTENANCE PROJECT WHEREAS, pursuant to a written contract signed with the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, New Look Contracting, Inc. of Rogers, Minnesota has completed the following improvements in accordance with said contract: Project No. 2024-06, 2024 Pond 48-001 Maintenance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. Final payment shall be made on Project No. 2024-06, 2024 Pond 48-001 Maintenance Project, taking the contractor’s receipt in full. The total amount to be paid for said improvements under said contract shall be $140,311.00. 2. The estimated project costs and revenues are hereby amended as follows: COSTS As Awarded As Final Construction Cost $ 122,286.00 $ 112,422.00 Engineering and Administrative $ 153,278.84 $ 27,889.00 Contingency $ 50,002.16 $ 0.00 TOTAL $ 325,567.00 $ 140,311.00 REVENUES As Awarded As Final Storm Drainage Utility Fund $ 325,567.00 $ 140,311.00 August 11, 2025 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: Page 93 of 116 RESOLUTION NO. _______________ whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Page 94 of 116 Council Regular Meeting DATE: 8/11/2025 TO: City Council FROM: Angela Holm, Director of Finance THROUGH: Reggie Edwards, City Manager BY: Angela Holm, Director of Finance SUBJECT: Resolution Canceling Certified Delinquent Utility Assessment for 6900 Unity Avenue North Requested Council Action: Background: On October 14, 2024 City Council approved Resolution 2024-102 certifying delinquent public utility accounts to the Hennepin County Property Tax Roles as Assessment Roll No. 25051. One of these accounts was 6900 Unity Avenue (PID 28-119-21-43-0047). In July 2025, City staff was notified by the property owner that the assessment had been certified to their property in error. City staff reviewed the account and confirmed that the delinquent charges were not the responsibility of the property owner. The property in question is a member of a townhome association that provides property maintenance services including lawn irrigation. The charges are the responsibility of the association. City staff contacted Hennepin County regarding the process to have the assessment removed from the tax statement. Staff were advised to obtain a resolution from City Council authorizing removal of the assessment. The property management company that provides administrative services to the association has acknowledged their obligation to pay the charges and has made arrangements with staff to receive any future utility bills for the association. In the event the management company does not pay the charges and has an outstanding balance as of the date of consideration for certification, the charges will be certified to Hennepin County under the PID for the association. Staff are recommending approval of a resolution to request Hennpin County remove the delinquent utility assessment from the property located at 6900 Unity Avenue. Budget Issues: Inclusive Community Engagement: Page 95 of 116 Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect: Strategic Priorities and Values: ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution - Cancelling Delinquent Utilities Assessment Page 96 of 116 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION CANCELLING CERTIFIED DELINQUENT UTILITY SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR 6900 UNITY AVENUE NORTH WHEREAS, Minnesota Statues 444.075 and City Ordinances, Section 4-105 and 4-201 authorize certification of such delinquent public utility accounts to the County property tax rolls for collections; and WHEREAS, City Council had previously held a public hearing for unpaid assessments for 6900 Unity Avenue North; and WHEREAS, The special assessment roll of public utility accounts was adopted as Assessment Roll No. 25051; and WHEREAS, The property located at 6900 Unity Avenue North (PID 28-119-21- 43-0047) is a member of Mallard Creek Townhome Association whose communal operations including water irrigation systems are administered by a property management company; and WHEREAS, The lawful owner of the property located at 6900 Unity Avenue North has demonstrated that the delinquent utility charges are not a result of activity at that address; and WHEREAS, The property management company responsible for administration of communal activity has acknowledged their responsibility for payment of the charges. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The previously assessed amount to PID 28-119-21-43-0047 of $12,766.73 is cancelled. RESOLUTION NO. _____________ August 11, 2025 ________________________________ Date Mayor Page 97 of 116 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: whereon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Page 98 of 116 Council Regular Meeting DATE: 8/11/2025 TO: City Council FROM: Shannon Pettit, City Clerk THROUGH: Daren Nyquist, Deputy City Manager BY: Kat Ellgren, Administrative Assistant SUBJECT: Ordinance 2025-07 - Setting the Public Hearing for August 25, 2025, Regarding the Establishing Chapter 23-2750 in the Brooklyn Center City Code of Ordinances to Regulate Temporary Cannabis Events Requested Council Action: -Motion to approve setting the Public Hearing for August 25, 2025, regarding the Establishing of Chapter 23-2750 in the Brooklyn Center City Code of Ordinance to Regulate Temporary Cannabis Events. Background: Council received a presentation regarding the regulation of Temporary Cannabis Events on June 23, 2025. Since then, it was discovered that the first reading did not set the date for the public hearing. Tonight, we'd like to request the approval of the ordinance with no updates, aside from the setting of the public hearing on August 25, 2025. Budget Issues: Inclusive Community Engagement: Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect: Strategic Priorities and Values: ATTACHMENTS: 1. 2025-07 Temp Cannabis Events Page 99 of 116 1 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 25 day of August, 2025, at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard to consider an ordinance related to Temporary Cannabis Events. City Council meetings are being conducted by electronic means under Minnesota Statutes, section 13D.021, and information on how to connect to the meeting is provided on the City’s website. Please notify the City Clerk at 763-569-3308 if there are any questions about how to connect to the meeting. ORDINANCE NO. 2025-07 AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING CHAPTER 23-2750 TO REGULATE TEMPORARY CANNABIS EVENTS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Article I. Brooklyn Center City Code, Chapter 23 is amended by adding the following double- underlined language and deleting the following stricken language: Section 23-2750. TEMPORARY CANNABIS EVENT REGULATIONS Section 23-2751. PURPOSE AND FINDINGS. The City of Brooklyn Center makes the following legislative findings: A. Purpose. The purpose of this ordinance is to protect the public health, safety, and welfare in the City by implementing regulations pursuant to M.S. §342 related to cannabis and hemp businesses within the City. B. Findings. The City finds and concludes that these regulations are appropriate and lawful, that the proposed amendments will promote the community’s interest in reasonable stability in the development and redevelopment of the City for now and in the future, and that the regulations are in the public interest and for the public good. Section 23-2752. DEFINITIONS. Unless otherwise noted in this section, words and phrases contained in M.S. §342.01 and the rules promulgated pursuant to any of these acts, shall have the same meaning in this ordinance. A. Applicant means individual or an organization applying for a Temporary Cannabis Event Permit as issued by the City of Brooklyn Center. Page 100 of 116 2 B. Cannabinoid Products mean a cannabis product, a hemp derived consumer product, or a lower-potency hemp edible as defined in M.S. §342.01. C. Residential Treatment Facility means Any facility licensed or regulated by the Minnesota Department of Human Services that provides 24-hour-a-day care, lodging, or supervision outside a person's home and which also provides chemical dependency or mental health services. D. School means a public school, as defined in M.S. §120A.05, subd. 9, 11,13, and 17, or a nonpublic school, or church or religious organization in which a child is provided instruction in compliance with this section and M.S. §120.24 but does not include a home school. E. Special Services mean the exclusive allocation of city resources, including, but not limited to, city personnel, equipment, rights-of-way, property or facilities for use in conjunction with a specific event or activity, as requested by the host or sponsor of the event, or as requested by or on behalf of any person attending the event, or deemed necessary by city staff in order to maintain public safety. Special Services shall include, but not be limited to, any of the following: street closures; requiring police officers to stop or reroute traffic; special police protection; stationing emergency vehicles at or in the immediate vicinity of the event; exclusive use of city streets or property as a staging area or for event parking; additional street cleaning and garbage removal services; special signage, such as temporary no parking signs; the use of any city building, equipment or other property for any purpose other than the normal operations of the facilities; or the City otherwise providing exclusive services. This definition also includes the definition of “Support Services” in Section 23- 2601(k). F. Temporary Cannabis Event means A special event, held on public or private property, hosted by an individual or an organization holding a Temporary Cannabis Event Organizer license issued under M.S. §342.39. G. Temporary Cannabis Event Organizer means an individual or an organization licensed by the State of Minnesota to hold a Temporary Cannabis Event, as described in M.S. §342.39 and 342.40. Section 23-2753. TEMPORARY CANNABIS EVENT, PERMIT REQUIRED. Any person or organization desiring to hold a Temporary Cannabis Event in the City must first obtain a Temporary Cannabis Event Permit. Commented [ST1]: For Council: Do you want to establish a limit how many TCE permits the City issues? Commented [SP2R1]: Per the state: May not be held at any single location more than 4 times in a calendar year or for more than 3 consecutive days. Page 101 of 116 3 Section 23-2754. PERMIT APPLICATION. A. Form. Any person or organization desiring to hold a Temporary Cannabis Event in the City of Brooklyn Center must apply for a permit using the application provided. Incomplete applications will be returned to the applicant with details on how to make the application complete. In addition to other relevant information, the application must contain the following: 1. Applicant name, address, phone number; 2. Address of proposed Temporary Cannabis Event; 3. Dates and hours during which the Temporary Cannabis Event will take place; 4. Name of property owner, if different from applicant, and signature of property owner authorizing use of property for the Temporary Cannabis Event; 5. Name of the Temporary Cannabis Event; 6. A diagram of the Temporary Cannabis Event showing: a. The physical layout of the Temporary Cannabis Event showing where the event will take place on the grounds; b. All entrances and exits that will be used by participants during the event; c. All cannabis consumption areas, d. All cannabis retail areas where cannabis flower, cannabis products, lower-potency hemp edibles, and hemp-derived consumer products will be sold, e. The location where cannabis waste will be stored and any location where cannabis flower, cannabis products, lower-potency hemp edibles, and hemp-derived consumer products will be stored; f. Location and description of sanitary facilities meeting federal and state requirements; g. Location and description of solid waste disposal facilities meeting state and local regulations; h. Location and description of mobile food vending to be offered at the Temporary Cannabis Event; proof of license and permit for vending must be submitted at least seven days prior to the event and kept on site for immediate inspection. 7. A list of the name, number, and type of cannabis businesses and hemp businesses that will sell cannabis plants, adult-use cannabis flower, adult-use cannabis products, lower- potency hemp edibles, and hemp-derived consumer products at the event, which may be Page 102 of 116 4 supplemented or amended within 72 hours of the time at which the cannabis event begins; 8. Security: In addition to meeting the requirements of M.S. §342.40, subd. 3, the City may require the applicant employ, at their own expense, additional security personnel necessary to protect maximum number of persons permitted to attend the event and to preserve order in and around event site as determined by the City. No permit shall be issued unless the City police and fire departments have approved the security plan. The Security Plan must also include mechanisms to alert the pubic regarding age, alcohol, and smoking restrictions. Applicant must also institute a check-point for age verification. 9. Emergency Plan: Applicant shall provide the City with an emergency plan that details procedures for managing or responding to emergencies as required by the Minnesota State Fire Code. In addition, for events where there is a possibility for more than 1,000 people to congregate, the applicant shall provide trained crowd managers. The minimum number of crowd managers shall be established at a ratio of one crowd manager to every 250 persons. Where approved by the official fire code, the ratio of crowd managers may be permitted to be reduced only when the facility is fully equipped with an approved automatic sprinkler system or based upon the nature of the event. The emergency plan and the number of crowd managers must be approved by the fire department. 10. Parking and Traffic Plan: The City will require the applicant to submit a parking and traffic plan, and provide, install, and remove all traffic control equipment if necessary. Applicants are required to pay all costs for traffic control measures and traffic control personnel. Applicants must provide individual property owner consent if the Special Event will have off-site parking. 11. A description of any Special Services, city personnel, city equipment and city property which the applicant requests the City to provide, including the applicant's estimate of the number and type needed, and the basis on which the estimate is made. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City retains sole discretion to determine the number and type of Special Services required for the event. 12. Whether the Temporary Cannabis Event intends to permit on-site cannabis product consumption. 13. Whether the Temporary Cannabis Event Organizer intends to charge an entrance fee, and what the fee will be. 14. If the applicant proposes using sound amplification or a public address system or if there will be any playing of any music or musical instruments, the identity of the designated individual responsible for monitoring sound levels and the name and contact information for a person on-site during the event that will be able to respond to noise complaints. Commented [ST3]: Flag - was this in statute? Commented [ST4R3]: FOR CANNABIS TEAM: This is allowed per statute. See 342.40: Subd. 2.Charging fees. (a) A cannabis event organizer may charge an entrance fee to a cannabis event. (b) A cannabis event organizer may charge a fee to a cannabis business or hemp business in exchange for space to display and sell cannabis plants, adult-use cannabis flower, adult-use cannabis products, lower-potency hemp edibles, and hemp-derived consumer products. Any fee paid for participation in a cannabis event shall not be based on or tied to the sale of cannabis plants, adult-use cannabis flower, adult-use cannabis products, lower-potency hemp edibles, or hemp-derived consumer products. Page 103 of 116 5 B. Time for filing. A Temporary Cannabis Event permit application must be filed with the City at least 45 days in advance of the date in which the Temporary Cannabis Event is to occur. Applications received less than 45 days in advance of the date of the event will be rejected. For events with anticipated attendance of 1000 people or more, a Temporary Cannabis Event permit application must be filed at least 90 days in advance of the date. Applications received less than 90 days in advance for an event that size will be rejected. C. Permit fee. An applicant for a Temporary Cannabis Event permit must pay a nonrefundable permit fee in the amount established by the City's fee schedule. D. One week (7 days) prior to the date of the event, the Temporary Cannabis Event Organizer must submit proof of state licensure. Failure to do so will result in automatic event cancellation. Section 23-2755. PERMIT APPLICATION REVIEW. A. Special Services. The City shall determine whether Special Services may be necessary, and the cost for such Special Services. This includes Support Services as defined in Section 23- 23601(k). B. Review. When a Temporary Cannabis Event will not require any Special Services, the City Manager, or their designee, may review and approve the permit application administratively. Temporary Cannabis Events may be presented to the City Council for review at the discretion of the City Manager or designee. In cases where a Temporary Cannabis Event requires Special Services, the application will be presented to the City Council for review. C. Imposition of Conditions. The City Manager, or their designee, may impose reasonable restrictions on the issuance of a Temporary Cannabis Event permit. D. Permit Denial. The City may deny an application for a Temporary Cannabis Event permit if it determines from a consideration of the application or other pertinent information, that: 1. The information contained in the application or supplemental information requested from the applicant is false or nonexistent in any material detail; 2. The applicant fails to supplement the application after having been notified by the City of additional information or documents needed; 3. The applicant fails to agree to abide or comply with all the conditions and terms of the Temporary Cannabis Event permit, including payment of all costs and expenses; 4. The applicant fails to provide a comprehensive security plan to the city. Commented [KE5]: We might want to reference special events 23-2602 that requires 90 days if the event is more than 1000 people Commented [ST6]: Flagging for follow-up. Questions to OCM. Page 104 of 116 6 5. The Temporary Cannabis Event would substantially or unnecessarily interfere with traffic in the City, would interfere with access to the fire station or fire hydrants, or would interfere with access to businesses or residences in the immediate vicinity of the event and there are not sufficient city resources available at the time of the event to mitigate the disruption; 6. The Temporary Cannabis Event is of the size or nature that requires the diversion of so many law enforcement officers to properly police the event, site and contiguous areas that allowing the Temporary Cannabis Event would unreasonably deny law enforcement protection to the remainder of the City and its residents; 7. The proposed date and time of the Temporary Cannabis Event conflicts with a previously scheduled event and there are not available at the time of the proposed Temporary Cannabis Event sufficient city resources to provide services for both events without substantially or unnecessarily interfering with police, fire, water, public works, or other services to the City as a whole; 8. The location of the Temporary Cannabis Event will substantially interfere with any construction or maintenance work scheduled to take place upon or along public property or right-of-way; 9. The Temporary Cannabis Event would likely endanger the public safety or health; 10. The Temporary Cannabis Event would substantially or unnecessarily interfere with police, fire, water, public works, or other services to the City as a whole and there are not available at the time of the proposed event sufficient city resources to mitigate the disruption; 11. The applicant fails to comply with the liability insurance requirements or the applicant's insurance lapses or is canceled; and 12. The applicant has on prior occasions made material misrepresentations regarding the nature and extent of Special Services required for a Temporary Cannabis Event in the City or has violated the terms of a prior Temporary Cannabis Event permit. 13. Right of Appeal. If the Temporary Cannabis Event permit application has been denied, the applicant may appeal the decision to the City Council. The applicant must provide the City Manager with a written notice of appeal and hearing request within ten (10) business days of the date of denial. An Applicant waives its right to a hearing if it fails to submit a written request for hearing to the City withing ten (10) days of the written notice of denial. If a timely request for appeal and hearing is received, the City Council shall conduct a hearing at the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting and provide the Applicant an opportunity to be heard. Page 105 of 116 7 Section 23-2756. FEES FOR SPECIAL SERVICES. A. Special Services Fee. The applicant must pay the costs of all Special Services (Support Services) used during the Temporary Cannabis Event. Such costs will be established in the City's Fee Schedule. At the discretion of the City Manager, the applicant may be required to pay a Special Service fee deposit based on estimated costs of the Special Services to be provided at the Temporary Cannabis Event. Fees are due at the time of application. The event organizer may cancel an event by giving at least 10 days written notice to the City. If less than 24 hours' notice is given to cancel an event that required special services, staff will be compensated for a 2- hour minimum charge. Section 23-2757. INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE. B. If the Temporary Cannabis Event requires Special Services, prior to the issuance of a Temporary Cannabis Event permit, the permit applicant and authorizing officer of the sponsoring organization, if any, must sign an agreement to indemnify, defend and hold the City, its officials, employees, and agents harmless from any claim that arises in whole or in part out of the Temporary Cannabis Event, except any claims arising solely out of the negligent acts or omissions of the City, its officials, employees and agents. C. Liability Insurance Required. The applicant must possess or obtain liability insurance to protect against loss from liability imposed by law for damages on account of bodily injury or property damage arising from the Temporary Cannabis Event. A certificate of insurance must be filed with the City prior to issuance of the Temporary Cannabis Event permit. The certificate of insurance must name the City, its officials, employees and agents as additional insurers. Insurance coverage must be maintained for the duration of the Temporary Cannabis Event. Any company hired or working on behalf of the applicant or sponsor must also present the City with a certificate of insurance naming the City, its officials, its employees, and agents as additional insurers. D. Minimum Limits. The required insurance coverage includes a commercial general liability policy and an Automobile Liability Policy if automobiles will be used during the event. The insurance limits are as follows: 1. Commercial Liability. Commercial general liability insurance or equivalent special event coverage protecting it from claims for damages for bodily injury and property damage which may arise from or in connection with the Temporary Cannabis Event and the use of any City property. The policy shall be written on an occurrence basis and provide not less than $2,000,000 per occurrence, combined single limits, and $4,000,000 aggregate, unless waived by the City. The insurance policy shall be written on an occurrence basis and shall be written for a period not less than 24 hours prior to the event and extending for a period not less than 24 hours following the completion of the event. If on-site consumption is permitted at the Temporary Cannabis Event, the policy must also include an endorsement for such consumption. The City may require additional Commented [ST7]: FOR GINNY & CANNABIS TEAM: The special events ordinance has an entire scheme for different types of events containing support services. I will leave it up to the city to decide if it simply wants to incorporate 23-2612 as a section in this chapter. Licensing will have to determine what type of event it is before issuing the support services breakdown. Commented [KE8R7]: I think incorporating 23-2612 is a great way to go. Commented [ST9R7]: In fee schedule, city should implement a TCE Special Services fee. Commented [ST10]: Review special events ordinance for insurance language. Page 106 of 116 8 endorsements depending upon the type of Temporary Cannabis Event and the proposed activities. The liability policy must include the City as an additional insured. 2. Automobile Insurance. If automobiles will be used during the event, automobile liability insurance with a minimum combined single limit of $1,000,000 per occurrence. Coverage shall include liability for owned, non-owned, and hired automobiles. E. Waiver or Reduction of Required Limits. The City may waive or reduce insurance requirements of this section under the following circumstances: 1. The applicant or officer of the sponsoring organization signs a verified statement that the insurance coverage required by this section is impossible to obtain; or 2. The City determines that the insurance requirements are more than the reasonable risk presented by the proposed Temporary Cannabis Event. Section 23-2758. TEMPORARY CANNABIS EVENT REGULATIONS. A. Location Restrictions. 1. May not be held on City-owned property or school property; 2. If held outdoors, it may not be held on property within 500 feet of a residential property or a residential treatment facility. The measurement must be made from the entrance of each building or tenancy and not from the property line; and 3. May not be held at any single location more than four (4) times in a calendar year. B. Temporary Cannabis Event may not be held for longer than three (3) consecutive days; C. Hours Restrictions: Temporary cannabis events shall only be held between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. D. On-site consumption of edible cannabinoid products and lower-potency hemp products is permitted. E. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. Sec. 342.40 Subdivision 8(d), on-site consumption of alcohol or tobacco is not permitted. F. No person holding a permit for a Temporary Cannabis Event shall allow and no participant in a Temporary Cannabis Event shall camp overnight at the location of a Temporary Cannabis Event, except for a reasonable number of persons required to maintain security. Commented [ST11]: FOR CANNABIS TEAM: How are we measuring distance? We didn’t resolve this in the 5/19 meeting Commented [SP12R11]: My thought is property line. Commented [ST13R11]: Ask Ginny. Commented [ST14]: FOR CANNABIS TEAM: How are you ensuring this? Signage? Checks? The City will need to decide on that process and possibly list it here. Commented [SP15R14]: I added a sentence, but it may be too vague… thoughts? Page 107 of 116 9 G. No person shall make or cause to be made any distinctly and loudly audible noise that unreasonably annoys, disturbs, injures or endangers the comfort, repose, health, peace, safety or welfare of any person, or precludes their enjoyment of property or affects their property's value. This general prohibition is not limited by the specific restrictions contained in the City Code, Section 19-1200. If amplified music and/or speaking is utilized, the following requirements must be met: 1. The applicant must have designated a person affiliated with the Temporary Cannabis Event that is responsible for monitoring sound levels and has authority to ensure that sound does not exceed 80 decibels as measured 50 feet from the property line, or 50 feet from the source, whichever is more restrictive. 2. The amplified music and/or speaking can only be for a period of four hours or less between the hours of 7:00 a.m. - 9:00 p.m. Monday-Friday, and 9:00 a.m. - 9:00 p.m. on weekends and legal holidays. Amplified speakers are required to be positioned in a way to limit noise to the surrounding residential areas. 3. The applicant must have provided at least two contact names and valid, and current contact information for at least two people on-site of the event that will be able to respond to noise complaints and ensure that noise generated at the site complies with this chapter. H. Smoking and vaping are prohibited. No person shall smoke or vape any product, including cannabis flower, cannabis products, and lower-potency hemp products, or use any cannabis or lower-potency hemp related or electric delivery devices at a temporary cannabis event. The event will be immediately shut down if smoking or vaping is detected onsite. I. Cleanup: Applicant shall, at no cost to the City, immediately clean up, remove, and dispose of all litter or materials of any kind that is placed or left on the premise because of the event, or be charged the hourly rate of the employee for cleanup. J. Notice to Residents: Applicant must provide a 10-day notice to residents within 500 feet of the event. For events that occur over a course or a route, the applicant shall attempt to notify the public. The City will provide the applicant with the mailing list. If amplified music and/or speaking are utilized, such notification must include the name and contact information of the person on-site during the event that will be able to respond to noise complaints. K. All Temporary Cannabis Events must follow all requirements of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 342, et seq., and all city policies related to special events. The listed authorities shall be read together. Where there is conflict between this chapter and the special events ordinance, this Temporary Cannabis Events will control. Section 23-2759. ENFORCEMENT. Commented [ST16]: FOR LICENSING & CANNABIS TEAM: How will you enforce this provision? Commented [SP17R16]: In the current Special Event Ordinance, it doesn’t reference non-compliance or enforcement other than “The city’s Police Chief or designee has the ability to direct the event organizer to control the level of noise and/or terminate the event at any time” Page 108 of 116 10 A. Cancellation: City staff has the authority to cancel or stop an event, or place additional restrictions on the event, in order to protect public health, safety, or welfare. The City will notify the event organizer as soon as is practically possible if it cancels the event or if it modifies the conditions imposed on the event. The City may also immediately terminate an event for a violation of this chapter, or in an emergency if needed to protect public safety. Any such cancellation or termination of an event by the City constitutes a revocation of the permit. It is a violation of this chapter to conduct, or continue to conduct, the event once it is cancelled or terminated by the City. B. Misdemeanor: Any person who violates this chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, is subject to a fine and imprisonment as prescribed by state law. Each day each violation continues or exists, constitutes a separate offense. C. Administrative fine: any person who violates this chapter is subject to administrative fines in an amount set in the City fee schedule. Each day each violation continues or exists, constitutes a separate offense. D. Violation of any provision of this Chapter shall also be grounds for revocation of the Temporary Cannabis Event Permit, denial of any future application for a Temporary Cannabis Event permit, and action against any City-issued business license held by the Temporary Cannabis Event Organizer. First reading this 11th day of August, 2025. __________________________________ April Graves, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________ Shannon Pettit, City Clerk (Strikeout indicates matter to be deleted, double-underline indicates new matter.) Commented [ST18]: FOR CANNABIS TEAM: What is considered a violation under this chapter? How will you administer the fines? It may make sense to double check if this section/sanction can feasibly apply to this ordinance. Commented [SP19R18]: Would it make sense to add ‘violation’ as a definition? If so, what should that read? Page 109 of 116 Council Regular Meeting DATE: 8/11/2025 TO: City Council FROM: Cordell Wiseman, Director of Parks & Recreation THROUGH: Reggie Edwards, City Manager BY: Cordell Wiseman, Director of Parks & Recreation SUBJECT: Centerbrook Golf Course 2025 Mid-Year Update and Budget Revision Requested Council Action: Motion to Approve 2025 Budget Revision with $60K analysis or Motion to Approve 2025 Budget Revision without $60K analysis. Background: Budget Issues: Inclusive Community Engagement: Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect: Strategic Priorities and Values: ATTACHMENTS: 1. 2025 Golf Course Budget Revision 2. 8-11-2025 Centerbrook Presentation Page 110 of 116 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO._______________ RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A REVISION TO THE CENTERBROOK GOLF COURSE 2025 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center owns and operates Centerbrook Golf Course, a public golf course; and WHEREAS, the City Council passed the 2025 annual operating budget for Centerbrook Golf Course on December 2, 2024; and WHEREAS, City staff have requested the proposed budget revision in the amount of $32,809 which includes the addition of a feasibility study as well as other operating activity corrections; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the proposed budget revision supports the continued operation of the golf course and aligns with the strategic initiative of achieving financial sustainability. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that the proposed budget revision to the 2025 operating budget of the City’s public golf course, Centerbrook Golf Course, is approved. August 11, 2025 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 111 of 116 8/7/2025 1 City Council Meeting Centerbrook Golf Course Cordell Wiseman, Recreation Director Angela Holm, Finance Director Why are we here today 2 •Where Centerbrook is today •Plan for Centerbrook moving forward •To seek consideration for 2025 Budget Revision 1 2 Page 112 of 116 8/7/2025 2 Financial Structure 3 •Centerbrook Golf Course has operated as a Special Revenue Fund since 2018 •Used to report the proceeds from restricted revenue sources. •In this case, the revenue sources are user fees and transfers from the General Fund •Reported on the Annual Financial Report as a Non-Major Fund, has been noted in recent years as having a negative fund balance •Transfer from General Fund increased in recent years •Financial objective is to return Centerbrook to a fully functioning Enterprise Fund Budget Revision 4 •Staff are requesting a budget revision to address the following items: •Reduction of simulator revenue ($80,000; simulators not purchased in 2024) •Addition of feasibility study expense (budgeted at $60,000, may be less) •Deferral of New FTE until 2026 ($116,077) •Minor corrections to other line items ($8,886 increased expense) 3 4 Page 113 of 116 8/7/2025 3 Budget Revision Impact 5 2025 Proposed Revision 2025 Approved Budget 2024 Actual 481,500.00561,500.00476,653.00Total Revenue 547,214.00594,405.00454,421.00Total Expenses (65,714.00)(32,905.00)22,232.00Net Income/(Loss) 6 Pathway to Profitability Potential Partnership and Future Opportunities •Operational Tweaking •Simulators – Operate Simulators @ Centerbrook Golf Course (3 rd Party) •First Tee Partnership - Establish a National First Tee Training Center and State Headquarters @ Centerbrook Golf Course •JDL Group Catering/Vendor Partnership – Manage the Food and Beverage concession •Driving Range (City operated or First Tee Partnership) •Year-round Operation – winter weddings and events 5 6 Page 114 of 116 8/7/2025 4 7 Feasibility Analysis Council Feedback: •Feasibility Analysis – comprehensive analysis that evaluates practicality, potential success of a project, business idea examining various factors – technical, financial, market, operational, helps determine if a project is worth pursuing. •All information front and center. Feasibility Analysis •Approximately $60k •3-5-month process once the contract is signed •Potential to make changes in 2026 and will be complete in time for 2027 budget process Requested Council Action 8 •Motion to approve 2025 budget revision 7 8 Page 115 of 116 8/7/2025 5 QUESTIONS 9 9 Page 116 of 116