HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025.08.25 CCP REGULARCITY COUNCIL
MEETING
City Hall Council Chambers
August 25, 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 - Lawrence-Anderson
6. Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda
These items are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted
by one motion. There isn't a separate discussion for these items unless a
Councilmember so requests, then it is moved to the end of the Council
Consideration Items.
a. Approval of Minutes
b. Approval of Licenses
c. Resolution 2025-72 Accepting Grant Funding from MN BCA Auto Theft
Prevention Program
d. Commission Appointments
e. Resolution 2025-73 Acknowledging Awarded Funds for the Hennepin County
Healthy Tree Canopy Grant and Authorizing Acceptance of Grant Funds
f. Resolution 2025-74 Acknowledging Awarded Funds for the Metropolitan
Council Community Tree Planting Grant Program and Authorizing Acceptance
Page 1 of 137
of Grant Funds
g. Resolution 2025-75 Accepting Work Performed and Authorizing Final
Payment, Improvement Project No. 2024-05, 65th Avenue Storm Sewer
Rehabilitation
h. Resolution 2025-76 Adopting the City Commission Code of Respect and
Ethics
i. Resolution 2025-77 Adopting the City Council Code of Respect and Ethics
7. Presentations/Proclamations/Recognitions/Donations
a. Parks and Recreation Department Update
b. Ordinance 2025-09 - An Ordinance Amending Chapter 19-4000 Prohibiting
Use of Cannabis And Hemp Products In Public Places (First Reading)
8. Public Hearings
a. Ordinance 2025-07 Establishing Chapter 23-2750 in the Brooklyn Center City Code of
Ordinances to Regulate Temporary Cannabis Events (Second Reading)
b. 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
9. Planning Commission Items
a. Planning Commission Application No. 2025-006, Submitted by Kimley-Horn on
Behalf of Shingle Creek LLC for Preliminary and Final Plat Approval of the
Shingle Creek Crossing 7th Addition (1000, 1020, 1050, 1100, and 1150
Shingle Creek Crossing)
10. Council Consideration Items
11. Council Report
12. Adjournment
Page 2 of 137
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 137
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 8/25/2025
TO: City Council
FROM: Shannon Pettit, City Clerk
THROUGH: Daren Nyquist, Deputy City Manager
BY: Shannon Pettit, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Approval of Minutes
Requested Council Action:
Motion to approve the following minutes:
• August 11, 2025, Study Session
• August 11, 2025, Regular Session
• August 11, 2025, Work Session
Background:
Budget Issues:
Inclusive Community Engagement:
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
Strategic Priorities and Values:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. 2025.08.11 SS - Draft
2. 2025.08.11 CC - Draft
3. 2025.08.11 WS - Draft
Page 4 of 137
8/11/25 -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
AUGUST 11, 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
6:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Mayor April Graves and Councilmembers Dan Jerzak, Teneshia Kragness, and Laurie Ann Moore.
Also present were City Manager Reggie Edwards, Interim City Clerk Shannon Pettit, and City
Attorney Siobhan Tolar.
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson was absent and excused.
CITY COUNCIL MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION ITEMS
Mayo Graves discussed the Joint Finance and Council meeting on Monday, August 18, and stated
she would have to leave by 7:30 p.m. She said she would also have a schedule conflict for Thursday,
August 14, but would try to get a different employee to cover for her. She explained that August
14 is a scheduled training she is hosting for her full-time job. The training is at the North Regional
Library, and she is hosting it but not participating.
Councilmember Moore asked about the handouts in front of her. She said some handouts pertain
to the Work Session items about the Community Center, and a document addressing the ordinance
discussion. She asked if these documents were in addition to the previous packets the Council had
received.
Dr. Edwards explained that a Work Session item would be discussed, and a PowerPoint in the
Council's packets contains the same information. He continued that a cover sheet for each item is
missing in the packet, which might be confusing.
Councilmember Moore stated that she had a work conflict for the August 14 meeting, but would
be there. She asked to confirm what time the meeting started. Dr. Edwards responded that the
meeting had been shifted to 5:30 p.m. to accommodate her.
Councilmember Moore asked if the Council would be opposed to shifting the multiple joint
meetings that are scheduled at 5:00 p.m. to 5:30 p.m., as it is very difficult for her to get those
Page 5 of 137
8/11/25 -2- DRAFT
meetings that start at 5:00 p.m. Mayor Graves asked if she meant beginning September 22, and
potentially for the last five joint meetings if they could begin at 5:30 p.m.
Councilmember Moore said the scheduled August 25 meeting with Dr. Edwards was already
scheduled to start at 5:30 p.m., so from the September 22 meeting on she wondered if the Council
would be open to joint meetings starting at 5:30 p.m. Mayor Graves said she was fine with that,
and asked if other Councilmembers had any issue with starting at 5:30 p.m. No one on the Council
objected to starting the joint meetings at 5:30 p.m. instead of 5:00 p.m.
Dr. Edwards asked City Attorney Siobhan Tolar for confirmation, but he thought there had to be
72 hours' notice to change meeting times. Ms. Tolar asked for clarification on what they were
discussing.
Dr. Edwards explained that there is a special meeting on Thursday, August 14, for the Finance
Commission and the Council scheduled for 5:30. He asked if, in the event there needed to be
changes, there had to be a 72-hour notice. Mayor Graves asked if the rest of the meetings are
already scheduled for 5:30 p.m. Dr. Edwards said they are scheduled for 5:00 p.m., and he will
make the change to 5:30 p.m. for all of them.
CITY MANAGER MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION ITEMS
COMMUNITY CENTER: NEXT STEPS FOR CAPITAL INVESTMENT
Dr. Edwards explained that this is an issue that has taken an extensive amount of time over the last
few years. He explained that this project is the largest investment by the state in Brooklyn Center.
The state awarded Brooklyn Center over $5,000,000 for this project because the City did not have
the funding for it. This has not been done before in Brooklyn Center, and he wanted the Council
and residents to recognize this significant investment by the state. Dr. Edwards introduced Public
Works Director Liz Heyman to present this item and noted that Director Cordell Wiseman and
Deputy Director Carissa Goebel from Parks and Recreation also worked extensively on this project.
Ms. Heyman stated that she is looking for feedback from the Council on how to invest the
$5,100,000 funded by the state. She noted that the current status of the project is that the building
was built in the 1960s, and has many structural challenges and mechanical issues. These
challenges limit the way members can use the facility; for example, an AC unit failure in
September 2024 and $3,500,000 in high-priority deferred maintenance items, with $1,500,000 of
that allotted for a new pool liner and deck surface. The costs mentioned also do not include fitness
equipment which are beyond its useful life.
Ms. Heyman explained that the state funds must be spent to "design and construct the renovation
of a recreation center" and that funds must be spent by December 31, 2028. She explained that
there does not need to be a one-to-one City match to access the state funds. The City does need to
pay for non-eligible tasks like permits, legal services, and engagement work that were done for the
Page 6 of 137
8/11/25 -3- DRAFT
project. To date, approximately $446,000 has been spent on design and engineering, and $377,000
of that is for eligible tasks and $69,000 for non-eligible tasks.
Ms. Heyman explained investment scenarios, with one option being deferred maintenance plus a
small upgrade of existing space that would use all of the state funding, plus any non-eligible costs
associated with the project. There would be no bonding with this scenario and no levy impact.
She explained that there was a second scenario that included two basketball courts and would have
involved matching the state funding. The second scenario came in at $17,000,000 with
$12,000,000 worth of bonding for the City.
Ms. Heyman continued that in scenario one, deferred maintenance and upgrade to an existing space,
that maintenance would include pool area fixes, partial roof fixes, chiller or A/C unit repair, and
upgrades to the sauna. This would leave $400,000 to $500,000 left for a small upgrade to an
existing space, like locker rooms. The total investment for the deferred maintenance and upgrade
would be $5,300,000, which would include hard costs of $4,000,000, which pertains to items like
the air conditioning unit, the roof, and the pool liner. Soft costs consist of design, engineering,
and project management costs, which come in at $863,000. This still leaves the City with a
contingency budget of $437,000 with roughly $100,000 in non-eligible costs.
Ms. Heyman explained scenario two, which involved two basketball courts plus deferred
maintenance. This is the most expensive option, with a total investment of $17,000,000, with
$12,000,000 in bonding. Ms. Heyman explained that there would be impacts on operating costs
with this scenario, as well as impacts to the levy if the City were going to go with this type of
spending.
Ms. Heyman discussed community feedback that was received back in 2021 about the scenarios,
with the majority of feedback preferring scenario two to meet more of the community's goals. She
highlighted that there is an option between scenario one and scenario two. This option would
utilize a multi-use bond and add on to the bonding used for the water utility projects in 2025. The
Council would determine the amount added onto the bond, and Ms. Heyman noted that adding
$1,000,000 to the bond would have a 0.5 percent impact on the levy, which translates to a $9.00
increase on the median home value. Ms. Heyman continued that adding $5,000,000 to the bonding
amount would result in a 2.3 percent levy impact and $42.00 to the median home value. This
bonding could be used for potential renovation areas like the locker rooms and bathrooms, as well
as updates to existing spaces to create new spaces.
Ms. Heyman highlighted next steps for this project and noted that Public Works would look to the
Council for direction on the investment scenario and needs a final decision by the fall of 2025 to
make sure that the Department can hit the 2028 deadline for project delivery. Public Works will
be working with its project management team to finalize the project scope and create a plan to
cover the costs that are not eligible for reimbursement. Depending on the project scope, additional
design work may need to be done, and the final project delivery method must be decided. She
explained that the City might be working with one overall contractor or directly with vendors to
try to save funding. Public Works would have to finalize the grant agreement with the state and
Page 7 of 137
8/11/25 -4- DRAFT
finalize the project schedule. The project schedule would determine when the best time of year
would be to shut down the pool for work, as well as the pool deck and sauna, and begin construction
at the least impact time for residents.
Ms. Heyman stated that her Department is looking for Council feedback on the direction that
Public Works should go, so they can move forward and meet this deadline. Mayor Graves thanked
Ms. Heyman for her presentation and asked for questions or comments from Councilmembers.
Councilmember Moore said she did not get this presentation until today, so she did not have much
time to review everything and apologized for that. She asked about the money allotted for non-
eligible costs, what those are considered, and where that money would come from. Ms. Heyman
said Public Works would work with the Finance Director and other City Staff to figure out where
those funds would come from, but one option would be to take funds from the Capital
Improvement fund.
Councilmember Kragness asked for clarification on the non-eligible costs being either $100,000
or $69,000. Councilmember Moore said one page in the packet shows $69,000, and another page
highlights an additional $100,000 for non-eligible costs.
Councilmember Jerzak stated he knew the pool needed to be repaired and would be in favor of
utilizing scenario one, where deferred maintenance is the primary focus. He noted that if funds
are taken from the Capital Improvement fund, then maintenance somewhere else must be deferred
as a result. He stated that over time, the City has deferred a lot of maintenance, and the longer
maintenance is put off, the more expensive it becomes. He understands there are priorities, and he
is grateful for the grant money that the City received with no strings attached. Mayor Graves noted
that a lot of City officials went to bat to get that money. Councilmember Jerzak acknowledged
that Mayor Graves and Director Anderson both worked very hard to get those funds for the City.
He stated he supports scenario number one because improvements are within the City's means. He
noted there are a lot of other issues the City has to deal with, such as the Golf Course.
Mayor Graves stated that she anticipated what the overall consensus of the Council would be, and
she does not want to increase any of the taxes on City residents, which is why she thought the local
area sales tax was a good option, but it did not pass legislation. She stated she might consider the
multi-use bond, but she does not think there would be enough agreement on the Council to do that.
She wondered if there was a possibility of going after the local area sales tax again, despite the
fact that it got defeated by a thousand votes in the last election; she thought there were not enough
people who knew about it ahead of time. Mayor Graves said she knew some officials were actively
campaigning against the idea of the local area sales tax, which may have also contributed to it not
passing legislation. She acknowledged that the Council would need a full consensus to even go
after a local area sales tax option, and she has accepted that the idea will have to wait until attitudes
on the Council shift. She said that, as a result, Public Works has its answer; the Council would
agree to defer maintenance only, also known as scenario one.
Page 8 of 137
8/11/25 -5- DRAFT
Councilmember Moore said that she was not actively campaigning against the local area sales tax
idea and wanted to clarify if anyone thought that she was. She noted that this is not the time to
add more fees to the residents. She noted that she has been very vocal in budget meetings about
the fact that there are areas within the City that have duplication, services with no outcomes, no
data, and no results. She stated that even looking at the $1,000,000 in multi-use bonding is not
something that the Council should pass on to the residents.
Mayor Graves told Ms. Heyman that those comments further clarified where the Council stands
on their decision, but asked Councilmember Kragness if she had anything else to add.
Councilmember Kragness said she has always supported the Community Center, and she
recognizes the position that the City is in, and thinks the youth and community that prioritize health
and wellness deserve the Community Center, and it is unfortunate that the City is unable to provide
that resource to the community.
Dr. Edwards asked for clarity on whether the Council's consensus is to move forward with scenario
one. Mayor Graves confirmed that Dr. Edwards was correct.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Graves adjourned the Study Session at 7:00 p.m.
Page 9 of 137
8/11/25 -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
AUGUST 11, 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 7:00 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Mayor April Graves and Councilmembers Dan Jerzak, Teneshia Kragness, and Laurie Ann Moore.
Also present were City Manager Reggie Edwards, City Clerk Shannon Pettit, and City Attorney
Siobhan Tolar.
Councilmember Kris Lawrence-Anderson was absent and excused.
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.
Julie B. stated she wanted to give the Council a brief history about herself. She stated she is a
block captain and has been one for almost 10 years. She ended up in that position after a 10-year-
old girl in her neighborhood died from a rare strep infection the year that her neighborhood started
the Night To Unite national night out celebration. She stated that this year her neighborhood
postponed their night out celebration because the family who lost their child would be out of town
during the scheduled celebration. Julie B. had contacted Police Chief Garrett Flesland to ask if
their neighborhood party could be shifted to accommodate the family’s schedule. Chief Flesland
accommodated her request, and she wanted to thank him for doing that and invite the Council to
attend the event if they had not already received her invitation. Julie B. continued that her
neighborhood finally adopted Happy Hollow Park in honor of the girl who passed away, with a
sign that reads Persephone's Pals. She wanted to share the sign's meaning with the Council in case
anyone asked who Persephone was.
Julie B. highlighted the importance of crisis response and has been working with multiple
neighboring counties in the area, and is thankful that Brooklyn Center has been able to initiate the
Page 10 of 137
8/11/25 -2- DRAFT
same service. She noted that the Police Department does not have the time to spend on crisis
response, and that time is crucial to families. Her hope is that even though the outcomes of crisis
response are hard to measure, it is getting the recognition it deserves. Julie B. thanked the Council
for its time.
Councilmember Kragness asked for the time and date of Julie B.'s neighborhood event. Julie B.
responded that it was August 12 from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m.
Mayor Graves moved and Councilmember Jerzak second to close the Informal Open Forum at
7:04 pm.
Motion passed unanimously.
5. INVOCATION
Councilmember Jerzak quoted Dr. Lawrence Balter, a professor from New York University, “To
make life more bearable and pleasant for everybody, choose the issues that are significant enough
to fight over and ignore or use distraction for those you can let slide that day. Picking your battles
will eliminate a number of conflicts and yet will still leave you feeling in control.”
6. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA
Councilmember Moore moved and Councilmember Jerzak seconded to approve the Agenda and
Consent Agenda, as amended, with amendments to the minutes as stated during the Study Session
and the following consent items were approved:
6a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. July 28, 2025 – Study Session
2. July 28, 2025 – Regular Session
6b. LICENSES
MECHANICAL
Damyans Heating and Cooling LLC 2240 Chippewa Road,
Medina 55340
Innovative Mechanical LLC 5664 172nd Lane NW,
Anoka 55303
Mike’s Custom Mechanical, Inc. PO Box 171,
Champlin 55316
O’Boys Heating & Air 1550 91st Avenue NE,
Blaine 55449
Page 11 of 137
8/11/25 -3- DRAFT
Riccar Heating & A/C 2387 Station Parkway NW,
Andover 55304
RENTAL
INITIAL (TYPE I – three-year license)
6101 Colfax Avenue N Kaitlyn Padlock
RENEWAL (TYPE IV – six-month license)
1619 73rd Avenue N SFR ACQUISITIONS 2 LLC
3712 53rd Place N SFR BORROWER 2022-A LLC
5712 Logan Avenue N Penrod Llc
RENEWAL (TYPE III – one-year license)
7200 Camden Avenue N Namaka Evergreen, LLC
5542 Irving Avenue N Rifive Investments LLC
RENEWAL (TYPE II – two-year license)
5400 Russell Avenue N Tai Pham
3715 58th Avenue N Saldi Home Improvement
7212 Emerson Avenue N SFR ACQUISITIONS 3 LLC
7217 Unity Avenue N Ghulam Abbas Pyarali
RENEWAL (TYPE I – three-year license)
6712 Beard Avenue N Mlmjr Properties & Invst Llc
3301 Mumford Road Christina Duong & Danny Vo
6c. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL SUPPORT RESOLUTION 2025-069 FOR
APPLICATION TO MINNESOTA DNR CONSERVATION PARTNERS
LEGACY GRANT PROGRAM FOR WILDLIFE HABITAT
ENHANCEMENT AT PALMER LAKE PARKS
6d. ORDINANCE 2025-08 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)
Page 12 of 137
8/11/25 -4- DRAFT
6e. RESOLUTION 2025-070 ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED AND
AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYMENT, PROJECT NO. 2024-06, 2024 POND
48-001 MAINTENANCE
6f. RESOLUTION 2025-071 CANCELING CERTIFIED DELINQUENT
UTILITY ASSESSMENT FOR 6900 UNITY AVENUE NORTH
6g. 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
10a. CENTERBROOK GOLF COURSE 2025 MID-YEAR UPDATE AND BUDGET
REVISION
Dr. Edwards explained that this item is a presentation on the financing of the Golf Course and how
to move to a point of profitability. He introduced Parks and Recreation Director Cordell Wiseman,
Deputy Director Carissa Goebel, and Finance Director Angela Holm to present this item.
Mr. Wiseman stated that the presentation tonight would cover the financial status of Centerbrook
Golf Course, the plan for profitability, and the Council's consideration of a budget amendment.
Mr. Wiseman turned it over to Ms. Holm to continue the discussion on the budget.
Ms. Holm explained that she would be discussing the financial structure of Centerbrook Golf
Course and seeking a consideration of a budget revision that would allow her Department to review
and plan work that will be addressed by Mr. Wiseman during the second part of the presentation.
Ms. Holm continued that Centerbrook Golf Course has operated as a Special Revenue fund since
2018; before that, it was an Enterprise fund. Special Revenue funds are used to report the proceeds
from restricted revenue sources, which is the sole purpose of a Special Revenue fund. In this case,
the revenue sources are user feeds and transfers from the General Fund. This is reported on the
annual financial reports as a non-major fund and has been noted in recent years as having a
negative fund balance. Transfers from the General Fund have also increased in recent years. The
financial objective for today is to return Centerbrook to a fully functioning Enterprise fund. The
budget revision is to address the following items: a reduction of simulator revenue, approximately
$80,000, was put into the 2025 budget with the understanding that the simulators would be
purchased in 2024. The purchase of simulators did not happen, and they have still not been
Page 13 of 137
8/11/25 -5- DRAFT
purchased to date. She asked that the budget revision take out the revenue for the simulators as a
result. She stated that her Department is asking for a budget revision to cover a feasibility study
expense of $60,000, although the study may incur a cost loss, which is the current estimate. Ms.
Holm continued that her Department is also asking to defer the new FTE that was approved for
2025 until 2026. She noted that it is near the end of the golf season and that position has not been
filled, so it is a reasonable assumption that it could be deferred until 2026. Deferring that position
would save $116,000. She also noted some minor line item corrections for items that were either
under- or over-budgeted, which she reviewed and found approximately $8,886 in increased
expenses.
Ms. Holm noted that the budget revision impact in 2024, as learned during the audit, was a net
income at the golf course of $22,0000. The 2025 approved budget showed a net loss of $32,900,
and the proposed 2025 revision that she is seeking today would increase that net loss to $65,714.
Ms. Holm stated that with that information, she would turn the presentation back to Mr. Wiseman
to discuss the topics that would be pursued in the feasibility study.
Mr. Wiseman discussed the pathways to profitability with potential partnerships and future
opportunities, including tweaking operations at the golf course and offering third-party-maintained
simulators so the City does not have the expense of purchasing its own, but can generate revenue.
A First Tee Partnership to establish a national First Tee training center and state headquarters at
Centerbrook Golf Course. First Tee has come out and looked over the Centerbrook Golf Course
facilities and is very interested in establishing a partnership, so those conversations will continue.
If First Tee signs on to a partnership, Centerbrook Golf Course would be able to renovate the food
and storage area in order to sell concessions, and Centerbrook Golf Course would work with JDL
Group Catering and a vendor partnership to manage the food and beverages for additional revenue.
Mr. Wiseman also discussed operating a driving range that would be City-operated or First Tee
partnership-operated, which was discussed during the feasibility study. Year-round operations for
winter weddings and events are being discussed as another source of revenue with little impact on
City finances. First-Tee would generate funds through fundraising on Centerbrook Golf Course's
behalf to help fund and add on to the current facilities, if possible.
Dr. Edwards asked Mr. Wiseman to give a short explanation of First Tee. Mr. Wiseman said that
First Tee is a PGA program that offers training and lessons to youth, and they had their own 3M
PGA tournament a month ago, where the National Sports Center was. A First Tee partnership
would be a highlight for Brooklyn Center, with pro golfers coming to the facility to golf. He said
he is very hopeful after having conversations with First Tee and will keep the Council updated.
Mayor Graves thanked Mr. Wiseman for that additional information and met with one of the
coaches who was participating in the championship a few weeks back. She stated she liked the
idea of leveraging state partnerships. Mr. Wiseman explained that even with a First Tee
partnership, the City would still be running Centerbrook Golf Course, but would allow First Tee
to have a training center and headquarters there. He noted that First Tee is speaking to one other
community about using that facility as well, but approached Brooklyn Center about using
Centerbrook Golf Course because they were impressed with the course. Mr. Wiseman said he
could bring in examples for the Council to look at of other places that First Tee has had partnerships
Page 14 of 137
8/11/25 -6- DRAFT
with to see what First Tee has built and invested in. He noted that bringing in the First Tee would
bring in a lot of positive exposure for Brooklyn Center.
Mr. Wiseman discussed the feasibility analysis and that it is a comprehensive analysis that
evaluates practicality, potential success of a project, and business idea, examining various factors
such as technical, financial, market, operational, and helps determine if the project is worth
pursuing. All information about the project would be front and center for the Council to make a
decision. The feasibility analysis costs approximately $60,000 and takes three to five months to
process once the contract is signed. There is potential to make changes in 2026, and they will be
completed in time for the 2027 budget process. Mr. Wiseman noted that the Council had requested
a feasibility analysis be done for the golf course and the Heritage Center, and that is what the
Council would see in the budget requests. He requested Council’s action to approve the 2025
revised budget and asked if the Council had any questions.
Mayor Graves thanked Ms. Holm and Mr. Wiseman for their presentation, and asked about the
feasibility study cost and if that was just for the golf course. Mr. Wiseman said the $60,000 study
was only for the golf course. Mayor Graves asked if the feasibility study for the Heritage Center
and golf course could be done under the same contract to get a better deal. Mr. Wiseman said the
two feasibility studies would have to be separate to focus on each business individually.
Councilmember Moore noted that Ms. Holm said the golf course has had a negative fund balance
in recent years, and only had any profitability once it was turned into a Special Revenue fund. She
asked Ms. Holm if the golf course has had any profitability in the last 10 years, apart from the
$22,000 in revenue shown to the Council in tonight's presentation. Ms. Holm said the golf course
has only been a Special Revenue fund since 2018, so she could not give a 10-year history, but
since 2018, it has had low profitability each year. Councilmember Moore asked about the
increased transfers from the General Fund since 2018 and what those amounts were. Ms. Holm
said that initially, the transfer was needed to break even, and then it was set at a flat amount of
$80,000 in transfers for a few years. She noted that the audit team advised her that the transfers
needed to increase because the negative fund balance continued to grow. Ms. Holm continued that
in the last few years, her Department has budgeted $155,000 to be transferred from the General
Fund to the golf course.
Councilmember Moore asked when the golf course would return to an Enterprise Fund. Ms. Holm
said that the results of the feasibility study would speak to when that could happen. She noted that
if there are profitable opportunities, it could happen quickly, but if it is a slow and steady pace on
profitability, it would depend on when the golf course is no longer reliant on transfers from the
General Fund.
Councilmember Moore asked if the deferred full-time position at $116,000 included salary and
benefits or just salary. Ms. Holm said the $116,000 would include both salary and benefits.
Councilmember Moore asked about the additional increased expenses in the revised budget and
what those accounted for. Ms. Holm said that there were some corrections to the budget on items
such as credit card fees that were budgeted lower than they would be in reality. Ms. Holm
Page 15 of 137
8/11/25 -7- DRAFT
explained that her Department would not do a budget revision for those increased expenses alone,
but because she is in front of the Council already asking for the other items that would require a
budget revision, she wanted to bring those additional expenses to the Council’s attention.
Councilmember Moore asked if the proposed revision would include the fact that the golf course
is at an even greater deficit of $-65,000. Ms. Holm stated that it is correct, with the additional
expenses and adjustments, the golf course is at a net loss.
Councilmember Moore said she got a good idea from Mr. Wiseman of all the plans to increase
revenue, but she is not in favor of spending $60,000 on a feasibility analysis, and this discussion
reminds her of the Heritage Center discussion on ideas of trying to get increased revenue there as
well. She asked if the Council does not support the budget revision for the golf course.
Ms. Holm stated that if there is no support from the Council on the budget revision, there would
be a few options. Centerbrook Golf Course would go over budget without approval, and still do
the feasibility study as requested by another Councilmember. She noted that if the Council
approves the budget revision, the golf course will move forward with authorization.
Councilmember Moore asked if the feasibility study was approved by the Council prior to this
presentation. Ms. Holm shook her head no. Councilmember Moore said she does not understand
Ms. Holm’s comment that the feasibility study would happen without the Council’s approval of
the budget revision and asked if Dr. Edwards or someone else could clarify that.
Dr. Edwards explained that the feasibility study was a request from the Council at large, and the
entire Council wanted a feasibility study done on the Heritage Center and the golf course to
determine profitability or if it should stay in business at all. The feasibility study is a way to do
research and get answers on projects for all the Enterprise and Special Revenue funds.
Councilmember Jerzak thanked Dr. Edwards for that clarification and noted these conversations
are never easy but are necessary. He noted that, according to the Met Council, over 30 golf courses
have been fully or partially closed or redeveloped. In the last few years, Centerbrook Golf Course
has had to rely on contributions from the General Fund to stay afloat, and in 2018, it was put into
the Special Revenue fund. He recognized that golf courses have become more expensive to
maintain. He noted that TopGolf is in the backyard of Centerbrook Golf Course, and there is
competition there, even though TopGolf claims there is not. He continued that he did not find any
money in the Capital Improvement fund to improve things like the bridges at the golf course that
players can no longer drive across. He said that in the last budget meeting, it was mentioned that
some of the equipment at the golf course is beginning to wear and would have to be replaced.
Councilmember Jerzak said he is the one who had suggested the feasibility study, but after looking
at the golf course's total budget, he does not need a $60,000 feasibility study to see the obvious
trend that has occurred there.
Councilmember Jerzak continued that if he was going to criticize, he wanted to offer some possible
solutions too. One of the possible solutions could be to sell the property to a private owner. He
noted that in his research of other golf courses that had closed, most of them had additional land
Page 16 of 137
8/11/25 -8- DRAFT
that could be rezoned and turned into residential housing. He said that is not the case for
Centerbrook Golf Course because it is in a flood plain, and is not a desirable piece of property to
develop for residential housing. He recognized that someone could build there and would face
challenges with the water table being so high, but it would be very expensive and cost-prohibitive
to ensure the property. Councilmember Jerzak asked if there had been requests for a proposal for
private management of the golf course. He also asked if anyone had explored the possibility of
approaching the Three Rivers Park District for a regional park in a destination that could
potentially serve more people, with the golf course being in a flood plain.
Councilmember Jerzak said he would not be supporting the budget revision, and it was nothing
personal, but it is financially responsible. He asked about the Council manual on page 243, under
section two, general policies under Enterprise funds, it still lists Centerbrook Golf Course, and
states that in some cases the funds are expected to generate enough revenue to support Capital
Projects and other funds, which would be in violation of the City's own policy. He noted that if
that is not the case, then the Council's manual needs to be updated. He noted that with those
comments, he would yield to the other Councilmembers and reiterated that he would not be voting
for a budget revision.
Dr. Edwards said the Council’s manual needs to be updated because the Council did approve the
Centerbrook Golf Course as a Special Revenue fund.
Councilmember Kragness asked about the simulators because the last time she had recalled the
plan was to purchase the new simulators for $80,000 with the purpose that they were going to
generate revenue, but they were never purchased in 2024. She asked if the simulators were not
purchased because there was not enough council support.
Mr. Wiseman explained that the plan was to purchase simulators for around $50,000, and the
revenue generated was expected to be around $80,000. Ultimately, the simulators were not
purchased due to feedback from the Council. Councilmember Kragness said it looked like that
expense was taken out of the budget, as well as the revenue that it was expected to generate. Mr.
Wiseman confirmed that she was correct on that. Ms. Holm corrected that and said there was no
expense for the simulators in 2025, but had thought about incurring the expense for the simulators
in 2024 and were in the budget process at the time, so included the potential revenue from the
simulators in the 2025 budget. In the revision her Department is asking for today, revenue will be
removed from the golf course budget. Ms. Holm explained that part of the budget revision is not
only to increase expenses to ask for new items, but also to adjust the numbers so that when the
audit team comes in, the budget does not show a large variance that her Department then has to
speak to. She continued that since the golf course would not anticipate the revenue from the
simulators, it needs to be removed from the budget by a Council action rather than dealt with
during the year-end process.
Councilmember Kragness asked Ms. Holm if she could go back to the slide in the presentation
regarding the revised budget and asked if the revised budget had not been approved by the Council,
and if the actual loss for the golf course was less. Ms. Holm went back to slide five in the
presentation. Councilmember Kragness confirmed that with the 2025 approved budget, the loss is
Page 17 of 137
8/11/25 -9- DRAFT
$-32,905.00, and with the revised budget, the loss is $-65,714.00. Ms. Holm explained that the
loss of $80,000 in revenue is not reflected in that $-32,000 loss, so that loss would potentially be
higher from lost revenue. She explained that right now they are looking at a budget, and that
includes a revenue amount that she knows will not be realized.
Mayor Graves asked if the top line on the slide that has the 2025 approved budget total revenue at
$561,500 and the 2025 proposed revised budget total revenue at $481,500 reflects that loss of
$80,000. Ms. Holm confirmed that Mayor Graves is correct.
Councilmember Kragness asked about the feasibility study and did not support spending $60,000,
especially when City Staff has done feasibility study reports themselves and come up with plans
to turn funds from red to black. She stated that the suggestion to have City Staff do the feasibility
study has continued to be ignored. She asked how it would be any different to pay an outside party
$60,000 to come up with a plan when City Staff can essentially do the work to figure out how to
become profitable, and she has seen City Staff’s plans that work, but it is ignored anyway.
Councilmember Kragness asked what the difference is in having City Staff do the work versus
hiring an outside party to do the same work and paying an additional $60,000.
Mayor Graves said the Council had previously asked and wanted to do a feasibility study.
Ms. Holm stated she believes that an outside vendor would have a better understanding of the
market for a golf course, which is more specific knowledge than what City Staff would have. She
continued that an outside vendor would be able to apply their knowledge in finding profitability in
this type of environment, including food and concessions, buildings, training, and extra services.
Ms. Holm continued that resources and staffing would also be the bigger issue. City Staff is
already very busy, and finding an individual who could do a feasibility study in an efficient manner
would be difficult, which is another reason why the City would want to pay an outside party to do
the study.
Councilmember Kragness stated that, with that information, she wanted to give recognition to the
Liquor Store manager who came up with a plan to generate revenue for that store, and the audit
reflected that the plan worked. She said she wanted to ensure that the Council is recognizing
employees who come up with plans that work.
Mayor Graves said it sounds like there is a consensus not to spend the $60,000 on a feasibility
analysis. She noted that she would have been in favor of getting the simulators to try and get some
of that revenue, but she only has one vote on the Council. She continued that she suspected a
feasibility study would most likely tell the Council to get simulators, install a driving range, have
year-round operations, and host weddings and other events, meaning the ideas that City Staff has
already come up with would probably also be reflected in the feasibility study. She noted that if
there is already no desire to spend $80,000 on simulators, then there most likely would not be a
desire on the Council to spend $60,000 on a feasibility study either. She asked from a financial
perspective if there could be an adjustment on the revenue side and not on the additional cost for
the feasibility study. Ms. Holm explained that it would make a great deal of sense, and putting it
Page 18 of 137
8/11/25 -10- DRAFT
on the record would save the budget from having a large budget variance in the financial statements
at the end of 2025.
Mayor Graves asked Ms. Holm's opinion on expenses and if those would be more in line with the
actual expenses of 2024. Ms. Holm said she does not have any projections on that right now, but
the deferred full-time position, as mentioned before, would be a significant reduction in expenses
for 2025 and would be a valuable revision to make.
Mayor Graves suggested that the revisions to the revenue and expenses be made to the budget and
that the budget revision should not be specific to the $60,000 feasibility study, since there is no
Council consensus to do so.
Councilmember Kragness agreed with Mayor Graves but asked for clarity on whether the projected
revenue was on the information presented to the Council, but not the projected expenses. Ms.
Holm stated that the projected revenue was included as revenue in the 2025 budget, but had
anticipated the purchase of the simulators would have already happened in 2024, so would not be
part of the 2025 budget at all. Councilmember Kragness asked if the 2024 budget had been revised
to exclude that simulator expense. Ms. Holm explained that revision was not done because that
expense was anticipated at the end of 2024, and the 2025 budget was already completed, so that
adjustment was not made.
Councilmember Kragness asked why there was no footnote made to the auditors to explain a
source of revenue with no expense tied to it. She noted that, at the very least, there would have to
be some kind of revision to the budget at some point anyway to account for a source of revenue
with no expense tied to it. Ms. Holm explained that the budget variance would have to be
addressed in some way.
Councilmember Jerzak asked for clarity on whether the bridge repair on the golf course would
come out of the golf course budget or out of the Capital Improvement fund. Ms. Holm stated the
bridge repair would require some Staff discussion as to where that money would come from. She
explained that the golf course does not have a Capital Improvements budget or pool of money, so
funding would need to be from another source.
Councilmember Jerzak asked if there have been preliminary estimates on the cost of the bridge
repair, or an inventory of other Capital Improvement projects that need to be done. Ms. Heyman
stated that her Department is still in the process of scoping out options and prices for the bridge
repair, and would have to defer to Mr. Wiseman regarding any other Capital Improvement projects
besides the bridge. Councilmember Jerzak asked again if there were any preliminary numbers on
the bridge repair. Ms. Heyman said that at this point, her Department is still in discussions with a
consultant to figure out the best options to spend the least amount of money and still make the
facility safe for people using the golf course.
Councilmember Moore stated she saw two motions, one with the $60,000 fees of the feasibility
study and one without. She said she is not sure if the resolution is really there. Councilmember
Moore started to ask about the deferred full-time position and what that would mean. Mayor
Page 19 of 137
8/11/25 -11- DRAFT
Graves asked if Councilmember Moore was asking if the full-time position, if deferred at tonight's
meeting, would automatically be in the budget for next year. Councilmember Moore said her
question was whether the Council would approve the motion this evening and whether the Council
would receive a proposal regarding the golf course that still has the full-time position of salary and
benefits of $116,000 on it.
Dr. Edwards responded that the position in question is an approved position, so the Council should
anticipate that position back in the budget for 2026 and will be approved. He stated there are
reasons that the position was requested and previously approved. Councilmember Moore said that
the position would still be a topic of discussion in budget meetings. Dr. Edwards explained that it
is an approved position, so it would not be brought up for discussion, as it is a position that exists.
Councilmember Moore asked if positions that were budgeted for last year were filled this year
because those positions were in the budget, and if Dr. Edwards is saying that because this golf
course position was already approved, the Council could do nothing. Dr. Edwards explained that
this position is no different than any other position, and when the Council is presented with the
budget, it includes FTE's, and this position would be one of those. He continued that if the Council
decided to adjust the budget or a levy, it would be up to Department Staff to determine where to
make adjustments, but there is no position that the Council would single out and determine if the
Council wanted one position over another. Councilmember Moore thanked Dr. Edwards for that
clarification.
Mayor Graves moved and Councilmember Kragness seconded to approve the 2025 Budget
Revision with a reduction of the simulator revenue of $80,000 and the deferral of a new FTE until
2026, in the amount of $116,077.
Councilmember Moore asked if Mayor Graves would include the feasibility study, too. Mayor
Graves said she motioned for the items that she wanted to include, and she did not say anything
about including the feasibility study. Mayor Graves said she is not trying to sneak anything into
the budget. Councilmember Moore said she was just trying to understand what the motion was
and asked Mayor Graves to repeat it.
Mayor Graves moved and Councilmember Kragness seconded to approve the 2025 Budget
Revision with the reduction of the simulator revenue of $80,000 and a deferral of the new FTE
until 2026, in the amount of $116,077.
Councilmember Jerzak and Councilmember Moore voted against the same. Motion failed.
Mayor Graves said she was very confused as to why other Councilmembers voted against having
the budget better reflected in the audit.
Mayor Graves called for a six-minute recess.
Page 20 of 137
8/11/25 -12- DRAFT
11. COUNCIL REPORT
Councilmember Kragness reported on her attendance at the following events and provided
information on the following upcoming events:
• Attended the Prevention Academy Zoom call.
• Attended the Mayoral Retreat as a guest speaker, where the discussion was on preventing
and responding to the violence targeting local elected leaders.
• This weekend is the Community Health Fair at the Brooklyn Center High School from
12:00 to 4:00 p.m.
Councilmember Jerzak reported on his attendance at the following events and provided
information on the upcoming events:
• Attended the Nite to Unite, went to several different block parties, and met with several
constituents.
12. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Graves moved and Coucnilmember Kragness seconded adjournment of the City Council
meeting at 8:03 pm.
Motion passed unanimously.
Page 21 of 137
8/11/25 -1- DRAFT
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL/ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND
THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
WORK SESSION
AUGUST 11, 2025
CITY HALL – COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center City Council/Economic Development Authority (EDA) met in Work Session
called to order by Mayor/President April Graves at 8:03 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Mayor/President April Graves and Councilmembers/Commissioners Dan Jerzak, Teneshia
Kragness, and Laurie Ann Moore. Also present were City Manager Reggie Edwards, Finance
Director Angela Holm, City Attorney Siobhan Tolar, and City Clerk Shannon Pettit.
Councilmember/Commissioner Kris Lawrence-Anderson was absent and excused.
ACTIVE DISCUSSION ITEMS
COMMERCIAL ADDRESSING ORDINANCE DISCUSSION
Dr. Edwards explained that this is an ordinance that the Council had passed a year ago, and the
Council has since addressed some concerns and questions about how to redo addresses on business
and apartment complexes. Dr. Edwards introduced Community Development Director Jesse
Anderson to update the Council on the status of this ordinance.
Mr. Anderson stated that the Council adopted this ordinance change in November 2024, which
required larger addresses based on the height of the structure. The original intent was to improve
building identification for emergency response and code enforcement activity and uniformity
among building types. City Staff did not start enforcement action until January 2025. Compliance
notices were sent to commercial properties that were not in compliance, and properties were given
30 days to comply. Properties that contacted City Staff were able to work out acceptable timelines
with the property owner/manager. City Staff informed multi-family properties during the rental
license inspection and collaborated with property managers to create a plan of action.
Mr. Anderson stated that City Staff opened 74 code enforcement cases, with 44 properties in
compliance, and 30 properties have been sent notices. City Staff has paused enforcement after the
last Council discussion. City Staff received reports of different options in meeting compliance,
such as using Amazon, Etsy, or other online retailers to make new address signs, or making them
themselves out of wood, vinyl, or other materials, or using sign companies, which is usually more
Page 22 of 137
8/11/25 -2- DRAFT
costly for the property owner. Cost reports are a couple of hundred dollars to several thousand
dollars for the cost of purchasing new signs and hiring someone to install them.
Mr. Anderson stated that the City has three buildings that have 12-inch numbers, which, under the
current ordinance, would not be sufficient due to the building height. Those three buildings include
Public Works, the Police Department, and West Fire. Other buildings are under review until
further action is taken by the Council. Mr. Anderson said there have been conversations with both
the Police and Fire Chiefs, and their preference is still to have visible numbers on the properties.
Mr. Anderson showed the Council pictures of buildings with 24, 18, and 12-inch address numbers.
A building that is one story has 12-inch numbers, a two-story building has 18-inch numbers, and
higher buildings have 24-inch numbers within the current ordinance.
Mr. Anderson highlighted the potential options for the Council. Option one would be to remove
the new requirements for address numbers; there are no standards in the building code, and the fire
code requires four-inch numbers, which is the same as a single-family home requirement. Option
number two requires six-inch numbers, which are slightly larger than what is required for single-
family homes and are a common size available at most hardware stores. Option three is to
standardize all commercial building address numbers to 12 inches. This option would eliminate
the larger size (18 to 24 inches) requirements for multi-story buildings, and note that 12-inch
numbers are also readily available online and in stores. Option four would require no changes to
the current ordinance, and City Staff would start code enforcement again. Mr. Anderson asked the
Council if they had any preferred option or alternative.
Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak said he voted for this ordinance originally and realizes now
that his vote was a mistake. He was unaware of the unintended consequences that had occurred,
such as considerable expenses to the property owners and difficulty in achieving compliance. He
noticed in the updated compliance list that 22 of the properties that are not in compliance are rental
properties, and anytime there are expenses incurred on rental properties, those expenses are passed
on to the tenants, and he recognized that some tenants can barely afford to pay their rent as it is.
He recognized that this was an unnecessary expense in his mind as he looked back on it, and
received several complaints as he began to look into it. He noted that the ordinance was well-
intended to begin with, to make the commercial building addresses more visible, but as he looked
at several older buildings in Brooklyn Center, including churches with address numbers already
carved into stone, he realized it would be problematic to meet ordinance compliance, as well as
the expenses associated with that would be high.
Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak continued that there is no practical way without some type
of expense to accomplish meeting this ordinance, and there is no state building code other than the
residential code. He noted that from a public safety perspective, everyone uses GPS now, so they
are unaware of any specific examples of serious consequences of the old ordinance. He said he
should have known better, as he worked in code enforcement for 15 years, and other than being a
minor inconvenience, he had never had an issue identifying a property that he could not overcome.
He said he is a firm believer in correcting policies that have caused unintended outcomes or do not
justify the costs, and this is one of those examples. He stated this issue needs to be corrected as it
Page 23 of 137
8/11/25 -3- DRAFT
caused unnecessary harm, and would like to hear from other Councilmembers/Commissioners,
and depending on their input, he would like to make a motion to accept option one, which returns
to the old ordinance and served the City for many years.
Councilmember/Commissioner Kragness said Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak’s statement
highlights the importance of making informed decisions before voting on them. She noted that it
is unfair for the Council to change the ordinance when a lot of the citizens have already made the
changes to follow the ordinance. She noted that if the Council is trying to be consistent, the
ordinance cannot change halfway through the process. She said the Council should acknowledge
if something is not working and be mindful of that, but it is important for the Council to make
informed decisions for this exact reason. She noted that GPS is not a reliable source when it comes
to identifying buildings for emergency purposes and favors the larger signs. She said that the
Council needs to figure out what to do, stick with that decision, and determine what is going to be
best for the City.
Councilmember/Commissioner Moore said she is the only sitting Councilmember/Commissioner
who did not vote for this ordinance change. She stated she has a picture of a property at Bryant
and 55th, which she could not send to the rest of the Council, but the address was done in brick,
and it is atrocious. This building is only a four-plex, and she has gotten emails and phone calls
complaining about this sign and how gaudy it is. She noted that the Council made this decision
based on Staff recommendations, and it sounded great for fire and rescue purposes. The Council
went with the Staff's recommendations and did not know the unintended consequences it would
have. She stated that she thinks the requirement should be removed, and it is unfortunate that the
City was so diligent in getting this code enforced that some of these buildings incurred a property
violation, or already got their address numbers in compliance. She asked Mr. Anderson if he could
confirm that properties received a violation if the address numbers were not in compliance. She
continued that it was startling to hear that some residents have spent thousands to put new address
numbers on their buildings to meet this ordinance. She said she would vote for option one to
remove the requirements for address numbers.
Mr. Anderson said there were maybe two or three properties that received a citation of $75, but
for the most part, most places just received letters and phone calls from the City.
Councilmember/Commissioner Moore thanked him for that information.
Councilmember/Commissioner Kragness asked Mr. Anderson for clarity on how much citizens
had to pay in fines. Mr. Anderson said two properties received a level one violation that incurred
a $75 citation for the ordinance. Councilmember/Commissioner Kragness asked to date if those
fines have been corrected. Mr. Anderson said no, because those fines were cited shortly before
the Council told City Staff to pause enforcement. Councilmember/Commissioner Kragness asked
if the Council chose to reverse this ordinance and if those fines could be reimbursed to the residents.
Mr. Anderson confirmed that it would be an option. Councilmember/Commissioner Kragness said
that it would only be fair to reimburse those residents.
Page 24 of 137
8/11/25 -4- DRAFT
Mayor/President Graves asked what would happen if residents asked for the money back that was
incurred to meet this ordinance, now that the Council was going to change the ordinance back to
its original state.
Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak said he understands Mayor/President Graves' thought
process, and if the two properties request to be reimbursed for their citations, that is one thing, and
it makes sense. He continued that laws are repealed all the time, so reimbursement for the changes
to the addresses is unlikely, and it is unfortunate, but he owns his part in this. He stated that GPS
is important, and he has never heard of an incident where he was not able to find a property. He
mentioned that years ago, citizens had to take their vehicles in for CO2 testing and spend a lot of
money to bring all vehicles into compliance, and then Governor Ventura repealed that law. He
understood the concern, and after receiving so many complaints about it, he wanted to pause
enforcement until this could be addressed. He noted that with 22 rental properties that would still
need to comply with this ordinance, the cost would have to go somewhere, and the landlords would
pass that cost on to the tenants.
Mayor/President Graves asked Councilmember/Commissioner Kragness what option she would
prefer to go with. Councilmember/Commissioner Kragness said she would just go with the
majority because it was the least costly. Mayor/President Graves said her preference would have
been option three.
Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak asked if this ordinance would be repealed if the Council
had to bring back the old ordinance and vote on it, or put it in the Consent Agenda.
Dr. Edwards said the old ordinance would have to be brought back.
Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak asked if there would be entries made into IMS because
property violations follow the property. He asked that the record be corrected so that it would not
show that there were property violations for any of the properties. Mr. Anderson confirmed that
those changes would be made, and it would be clear that those cases would be closed.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor/President Graves moved and Councilmember/Commissioner Kragness seconded
adjournment of the City Council/Economic Development Authority Work Session at 8:19 p.m.
Motion passed unanimously.
Page 25 of 137
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 8/25/2025
TO: City Council
FROM: Kat Ellgren, Deputy City Clerk
THROUGH: Daren Nyquist, Deputy City Manager
BY: Shannon Pettit, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Approval of Licenses
Requested Council Action:
- Motion to approve the licenses as presented.
Background:
The following businesses/persons have applied for City licenses as noted. Each
business/person has fulfilled the requirements of the City Ordinance governing respective
licenses, submitted appropriate applications, and paid proper fees. Applicants for rental dwelling
licenses are in compliance with Chapter 12 of the City Code of Ordinances unless comments
are noted below the property address on the attached rental report.
Mechanical
BRH Products & Services LLC
17409 Duck Lake Trail, Eden Prairie 55346
Breeze Heating and Cooling
2009 W Broadway Ave., Ste 400, PMB 152, Forest Lake 55025
Carlson Plumbing, Inc.
16440 7th Street Lane S., Lakeland 55043
Hedlund Plumbing Heating & Air LLC
7700 Edmonson Ave NE, Monticello 55362
McQuillan Home Services LLC
1727 Highway 36 E, St. Paul 55109
Sensible Heating and Air Conditioning
3533 Roosevelt St NE, St. Anthony 55418
Wencl Services
8148 Pillsbury Ave So, Bloomington 55420
Budget Issues:
Inclusive Community Engagement:
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
Page 26 of 137
Strategic Priorities and Values:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Rental Criteria
2. For Council Approval 8.25.25 FOR COUNCIL 7.29 to 8.12
Page 27 of 137
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 28 of 137
Location Address License Subtype Renewal/Initial Owner
Property
Code
Violations License Type Police CFS*
Final License
Type**
Previous
License
Type***
Consecutive
Type IV's
1506 71st Ave N Single Initial Omo Llc 8 Type III N/A Type III N/A N/A
3506 Woodbine La Single Initial
B G FERNANDEZ/L S
CARDENAS
0 Type I N/A Type II N/A N/A
6900 Toledo Ave N Single Initial M BOSIRE & BB NYANGENA 25 Type IV N/A Type IV N/A N/A
4201 Lakeside Ave N, #205 Condo Renewal Corbet Cheung
2 Type I 0 Type I Type II N/A
818 Woodbine La Single Renewal
QZ Funding LLC
Met Requirements 5 Type II 0 Type II Type IV N/A
904 53rd Ave N Single Renewal Moshe Vorotinov 1 Type I 0 Type I Type II N/A
3125 65th Ave N Single Renewal SFR BORROWER 2021-2 LLC 17 Type IV 0 Type IV Type II 0
3912 61st Ave N Single Renewal Nazneen H Khatoon
2 Type I 0 Type I Type II N/A
5323 Brooklyn Blvd Single Renewal
Moshe Vorotinov
Met Requirements 2 Type I 0 Type I Type IV N/A
5532 Logan Ave N Single Renewal Irina & Igor Kovalsky
21 Type IV 0 Type IV Type I 0
5906 Dupont Ave N Single Renewal
Bruce & Rebecca Goldberg
Met Requirements
1 Type I 0 Type I Type III N/A
6325 Kyle Ave N Single Renewal
Cuong Pham
Did not meet requirements
4 Type II 0 Type III Type III N/A
6706 Drew Ave N Single Renewal 6706 Drew Ave LLC 1 Type I 0 Type I Type I N/A
6912 Logan Ave N Single Renewal
Hpa Borrower 2017 1 Llc
Did not meet requirements 12 Type IV 0 Type IV Type IV 2
*CFS = Calls for service for renewal licenses only (Initial licenses are not applicable to CFS and will be listed as N/A)
***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 utilities and taxes
Rental Licenses for Council Approval 8.25.25
**License type being issued
Page 29 of 137
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 8/25/2025
TO: City Council
FROM: Garett Flesland, Chief of Police
THROUGH:
BY: Garett Flesland, Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Resolution 2025-72 Accepting Grant Funding from MN BCA Auto Theft
Prevention Program
Requested Council Action:
Resolution accepting grant funding from the Minnesota Department of Public Safety –
Bureau of Criminal Apprenension Auto Theft Prevention Program and authorizing
execution of the grant agreement
Background:
This is the latest grant cycle for a state Auto Theft Prevention grant that the city has
regularly received, in one form or another, for approximately two decades.
Budget Issues:
Grant funding for $103,200 with no matching requirement for the city.
Inclusive Community Engagement:
N/A
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
N/A
Strategic Priorities and Values:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. DRAFT Resolution for auto theft grant cycle beginning 20250701
2. 1276075_5025320-Contract-BrooklynCenter-COMPLETE
Page 30 of 137
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-72
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING GRANT FUNDING FROM THE MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY – BUREAU OF CRIMINAL
APPREHENSION AUTO THEFT PREVENTION PROGRAM AND
AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF GRANT AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Public Safety Bureau of Criminal Apprehension
administers the Auto Theft Prevention Program to reduce automobile thefts, increase recovery of
stolen vehicles, and improve enforcement efforts across the state; and
WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center Police Department applied for and has been
awarded grant funding in the amount of $103,200 for the grant term beginning July 1, 2025, and
ending June 30, 2027; and
WHEREAS, the awarded funds will be used to support overtime enforcement focused on
auto theft prevention and investigation, and to fund Automatic License Plate Reader (ALPR)
subscription renewals, thereby enhancing the department’s ability to identify and recover stolen
vehicles and deter criminal activity; and
WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center acknowledges that there is no matching
requirement for this grant, and that the City will comply with all applicable laws, regulations, and
reporting requirements as outlined in the grant agreement; and
WHEREAS, the City recognizes the importance of these resources in improving public
safety, protecting property, and reducing the impact of auto theft on residents, businesses, and
visitors.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn
Center, Minnesota, that:
1. The City Council formally accepts the $103,200 grant awarded by the Minnesota
Department of Public Safety Bureau of Criminal Apprehension Auto Theft Prevention
Program.
2. The City Manager and Chief of Police are hereby authorized to execute the grant agreement,
along with any amendments or other documents necessary to implement the project as
described in the grant application.
3. The City expresses its appreciation to the Minnesota Department of Public Safety Bureau of
Criminal Apprehension for its continued support in advancing auto theft prevention and
vehicle recovery efforts.
Date Mayor
Page 31 of 137
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 32 of 137
Grant Contract Agreement Page 1 of 5
DPS Grant Contract Agreement Non-State (rev. March 2024)
Minnesota Department of Public Safety (“State”)
Bureau of Criminal Apprehension
1430 Maryland Avenue East
St. Paul, MN 55106
Grant Program:
Auto Theft Prevention Program
Grant Contract Agreement No.: A-ATPP-2026/27-
BRKCTRCI-007
Grantee:
City of Brooklyn Center
6645 Humboldt Avenue North
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
Grant Contract Agreement Term:
Effective Date: 07/01/25
Expiration Date: 06/30/27
Grantee’s Authorized Representative:
Garett Flesland, Chief of Police
6645 Humboldt Avenue North
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
Grant Contract Agreement Amount:
Original Agreement $ 103,200.00
Matching Requirement $ 0.00
State’s Authorized Representative:
Chris Huhn, Assistant Special Agent in Charge
1430 Maryland Avenue East
St. Paul, MN 55106
651-262-3164
chris.huhn@state.mn.us
Federal Funding: CFDA/ALN:
FAIN: N/A
State Funding: Minnesota Statute 65B.84
Special Conditions See Exhibit B
Under Minn. Stat. § 299A.01, Subd 2 (4) the State is empowered to enter into this grant contract agreement.
Term: Per Minn. Stat.§16B.98, Subd. 5, the Grantee must not begin work until this grant contract agreement is
fully executed and the State's Authorized Representative has notified the Grantee that work may commence. Per
Minn.Stat.§16B.98 Subd. 7, no payments will be made to the Grantee until this grant contract agreement is fully
executed. Once this grant contract agreement is fully executed, the Grantee may claim reimbursement for
expenditures incurred pursuant to the Payment clause of this grant contract agreement. Reimbursements will only
be made for those expenditures made according to the terms of this grant contract agreement. Expiration date is
the date shown above or until all obligations have been satisfactorily fulfilled, whichever occurs first.
The Grantee, who is not a state employee, will:
Perform and accomplish such purposes and activities as specified herein and in the Grantee’s approved Auto
Theft Prevention Program Application [“Application”] which is incorporated by reference into this grant contract
agreement and on file with the State at 1430 Maryland Avenue East, St. Paul, MN 55106. The Grantee shall also
comply with all requirements referenced in the Auto Theft Prevention Program Guidelines and Application which
includes the Terms and Conditions and Grant Program Guidelines (https://app.dps.mn.gov/EGrants), which are
incorporated by reference into this grant contract agreement.
Budget Revisions: The breakdown of costs of the Grantee’s Budget is contained in Exhibit A, which is attached
and incorporated into this grant contract agreement. As stated in the Grantee’s Application and Grant Program
Guidelines, the Grantee will submit a written change request for any substitution of budget items or any deviation
and in accordance with the Grant Program Guidelines. Requests must be approved prior to any expenditure by
the Grantee.
Matching Requirements: (If applicable.) As stated in the Grantee’s Application, the Grantee certifies that the
matching requirement will be met by the Grantee.
Page 33 of 137
Grant Contract Agreement Page 2 of 5
DPS Grant Contract Agreement Non-State (rev. March 2024)
Payment: As stated in the Grantee’s Application and Grant Program Guidance, the State will promptly pay the
Grantee after the Grantee presents an invoice for the services actually performed and the State's Authorized
Representative accepts the invoiced services and in accordance with the Grant Program Guidelines. Payment will
not be made if the Grantee has not satisfied reporting requirements.
Certification Regarding Lobbying: (If applicable.) Grantees receiving federal funds over $100,000.00 must
complete and return the Certification Regarding Lobbying form provided by the State to the Grantee.
1. ENCUMBRANCE VERIFICATION 3. STATE AGENCY
Individual certifies that funds have been encumbered as
required by Minn. Stat. § 16A.15. Signed: _____________________________________________
(with delegated authority)
Signed: _____________________________________________ Title: ______________________________________________
Date: _______________________________________________ Date: ______________________________________________
Grant Contract Agreement No./ P.O. No. A-ATPP-2026/27-BRKCTRCI-007 / 3000104440
Project No.(indicate N/A if not applicable): ________________
2. GRANTEE
The Grantee certifies that the appropriate person(s)
have executed the grant contract agreement on behalf of the Grantee
as required by applicable articles, bylaws, resolutions, or ordinances.
Signed: _____________________________________________
Print Name: __________________________________________
Title: _______________________________________________
Date: _______________________________________________
Signed: ______________________________________________
Print Name: __________________________________________
Title: ________________________________________________
Date: ________________________________________________
Signed: ______________________________________________
Print Name: __________________________________________
Distribution: DPS/FAS
Title: ________________________________________________ Grantee
State’s Authorized Representative
Date: ________________________________________________
Page 34 of 137
Grant Contract Agreement Page 3 of 5
DPS Grant Contract Agreement Non-State (rev. March 2024)
Exhibit A
Grantee’s Budget
(Brooklyn Center)
Budget: The Grantee’s eligible costs include actual costs incurred invoiced as reimbursement per State
requirements. These costs include labor/fringe, subcontractors, equipment, marketing, printing,
materials, supplies, and travel (subject to the guidelines of the “Commissioner’s Plan”). These costs
are reflected in the following categories which align with the Tasks in Exhibit B.
Category FY 2026 FY 2027 Total Amount
1. Personnel $ 21,600.00 $ 21,600.00 $ 43,200.00
a. 10 overtime personnel – Details
were for the full amount asked
for.
$21,600.00 $21,600.00
2. Payroll Tax & Fringe $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00
3. Contract Services $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00
4. Travel $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00
5. Training $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00
6. Office Expense $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00
7. Program Expenses $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00
8. Equipment Over $5,000 Per Unit $ 30,000.00 $ 30,000.00 $ 60,000.00
a. ALPR Subscription Renewal $30,000.00 $30,000.00
9. Other $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00
Total Grant Award: $ 51,600.00 $ 51,600.00 $ 103,200.00
Page 35 of 137
Grant Contract Agreement Page 4 of 5
DPS Grant Contract Agreement Non-State (rev. March 2024)
Exhibit B
Grantee’s Duties and Expectations
The Grantee shall do all the things necessary to complete the following tasks according to the
following schedule:
Task Description
Completion
Date
Task 1. Consideration and Payment
1.1 Consideration. The State will pay for all services performed by the Grantee under this grant
contract as follows:
1.1.1 Compensation. The Grantee will be paid, upon reimbursement, an amount not to exceed:
1.1.1.1 $51,600.00 available for fiscal year 2026
1.1.1.2 $51,600.00 available for fiscal year 2027
of actual eligible costs incurred in the performance of the Grantee’s duties according to the
breakdown of costs contained in the grant budget (Exhibit A), which is attached and
incorporated into this grant contract.
1.1.2 Total Obligation. The total obligation of the State for all compensation and
reimbursements to the Grantee under this grant contract will not exceed $103,200.00.
1.2 Line-Item Changes. Expenditures specified in Exhibit A may not be moved from one line-item to
another unless in accordance with the requirements listed below:
1.2.1 Any changes to the line-item budget must advance the purpose of the Automobile Theft
Prevention Grant Program and must remain within the total dollar amount available for
each fiscal year.
1.2.2 Any fund transfers must be approved in advance in writing by the State’s Authorized
Representative and will not be effective until an amendment to this Agreement has been
executed.
1.3 Invoices. The state will reimburse the Grantee after the Grantee presents an itemized invoice for
the services actually performed and the State’s Authorized Representative accepts the invoiced
services. Amounts submitted on each invoice must reflect goods ordered and services rendered
during the specific invoice period for each invoice. The final invoice pertaining to each state fiscal
year of this grant contract must be received by the close of business on July 25th following the end
of the fiscal year.
Ongoing
Task 2. Equipment
2.1. Purchase orders for equipment authorized to be purchased with grant funds will be made within 30
days of the start of the State’s Fiscal Year, unless approved by the Auto Theft Prevention Program
Grant Manager.
2.2. Equipment purchased will be installed and operational by the end of the calendar year, unless
approved by the Auto Theft Prevention Program Grant Manager.
2.3. The use of equipment will be documented on the grantee’s quarterly narrative report.
2.4. An evaluation of the equipment will be completed in quarterly reports and the final report.
2.5. An inventory of equipment purchased with grant funds shall be submitted and updated if/when
7/30/2025 &
7/30/2026
12/31/2025 &
12/31/2026
Page 36 of 137
Grant Contract Agreement Page 5 of 5
DPS Grant Contract Agreement Non-State (rev. March 2024)
Task Description
Completion
Date
equipment inventory changes.
2.6. Approval is required for equipment not specified in Exhibit A.
2.7. Approval is required for the disposal of capital equipment at any time during the term of the grant,
and for 5 years from the date of purchase of the equipment or before the equipment has a value of
less than $5,000.00, whichever comes first.
Ongoing
Task 3. Meetings
3.1. The agency will send a representative to intelligence meetings/trainings organized by the State.
Periodically
Task 4. Overtime
4.1. Employee receiving overtime under the grant will complete a report indicating: name, date, hours
worked, case number or detailed description, general description of work, number of arrests,
vehicles recovered, search warrants executed (if any), and overtime rate.
Ongoing
Task 5. Training
5.1. Staff attending training with grant funds shall be approved by the Auto Theft Prevention Program
Grant Manager.
5.2. Staff shall submit an evaluation of the training with the next quarterly report.
Ongoing
Task 6. Reporting/Invoicing
6.1. Conduct conferences as needed with the Auto Theft Prevention Program Grant Manager to apprise
him/her on progress accomplishments and issues encountered.
6.2. Schedule project update meetings as necessary to inform the Auto Theft Prevention Program Grant
Manager of deviations to the project schedule, the need to modify the scope of the project or at
the request of the Auto Theft Prevention Program Grant Manager to discuss any item related to the
project’s progress.
6.3. If the Grantee’s Authorized Representative changes at any time during this grant contract, the
Grantee must immediately notify the Auto Theft Prevention Grant Manager, along with any other
changes to personnel assigned to work on the grant.
6.4. On a monthly basis submit (by the 5th of the month):
6.4.1 Grantee shall provide a list of the vehicles reported stolen to the grantee agency. The list
shall include, but not limited to, case number, date, time, address of incident, all vehicle
information, manner taken, and arrest numbers (adult/juv). (Template provided by the State)
6.4.2 Grantee shall provide a list of the vehicles recovered by the grantee agency. The list shall
include, but not limited to, case number, date, time, address of incident, all vehicle
information, recovery indicators, and arrest numbers (adult/juv). (Template provided by the
State)
6.4.3 The state may modify or change all reporting forms at its discretion during the grant period.
Ongoing
6.5. On a quarterly basis submit (within 30 days following the end of the quarter):
6.5.1 Invoices and supporting documentation to the State for the preceding quarter’s work
completed within the project scope; and
6.5.2 A narrative report (template provided by the State) documenting grantee’s progress,
challenges and suggestions.
6.5.3 The state may modify or change all reporting forms at its discretion during the grant period.
Page 37 of 137
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 8/25/2025
TO: City Council
FROM: Shannon Pettit, City Clerk
THROUGH: Daren Nyquist, Deputy City Manager
BY: Kat Ellgren, Deputy City Clerk
SUBJECT: Commission Appointments
Requested Council Action:
- Motion to approve Sandra Kenyon for the Cultural & Public Arts Commission, Seretha
Latrice to the Housing Commission, Tolanda Mays to the Sister Cities Commission, and
Matthew Kraft to the Parks & Recreation Commission.
Background:
Budget Issues:
Inclusive Community Engagement:
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
Strategic Priorities and Values:
ATTACHMENTS:
None
Page 38 of 137
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 8/25/2025
TO: City Council
FROM: Elizabeth Heyman, Director of Public Works
THROUGH: Lydia Ener, City Engineer
BY: Lydia Ener, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Resolution 2025-73 Acknowledging Awarded Funds for the Hennepin
County Healthy Tree Canopy Grant and Authorizing Acceptance of Grant
Funds
Requested Council Action:
Motion to approve a resolution acknowledging the awarded funds for the Minnesota
Department of Natural Resources ReLeaf Community Forestry Grant and authorizing
acceptance of grant funds
Background:
With the Healthy Tree Canopy Grant from Hennepin County, City staff plan to remove
12 diseased green ash trees at Brooklyn Center City Hall and Community Center. Then
replace them with 22 new trees of varying species. Then plant 18 new trees of varying
species at Freeway Park to replace the 7 diseased green ash trees removed in the
winter of 2024/25. The project addresses public safety concerns posed by aging and
diseased trees, benefiting residents and maintaining a healthy natural canopy.
Immediate tree replacement is crucial, aligning with Brooklyn Center's 32-year
commitment to Tree City USA, showcasing dedication to the community's natural
landscape.
Additional Information:
Healthy Tree Canopy Grant aims to enhance community tree cover and involve
residents in tree protection. Goals include:
• Boosting city forestry capacity.
• Diversifying the urban canopy for climate resilience.
• Sequestering carbon dioxide.
• Promoting energy conservation.
• Supporting local tree care businesses.
The initiative aligns with the Hennepin County Forestry’s efforts to address disparities
by improving community forest ecosystem health, contributing to air quality, stormwater
management, and overall sustainability.
Budget Issues:
The total proposed project cost for removals and plantings at City Hall, Community
Center, and Freeway Park is $35,375.00. Hennepin County awarded the City
$25,912.50. The City will meet its obligation to the grant by matching $9,462.50,
Page 39 of 137
watering, and maintaining tree care for the new plantings for the next five years.
Replacement trees outside of the one-year warranty, should they die, will be funded
through the City’s Hazardous Tree Management and Reforestation program in the
Capital Improvement Plan (CIP).
Inclusive Community Engagement:
NA
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
NA
Strategic Priorities and Values:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. 250806-Resolution Accepting Hennepin County Healthy Tree Canopy Grant
Page 40 of 137
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-73
RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING AWARDED FUNDS FOR THE
HENNEPIN COUNTY HEALTHY TREE CANOPY GRANT AND
AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT FUNDS
WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Healthy Tree Canopy Grant provides funds to
encourage and promote the inventory, planting, assessment, maintenance, improvement,
protection, and restoration of trees and forest resources to enhance community forest ecosystem
health and sustainability as well as to reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide levels and promote
energy conservation, and;
WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center desires to remove 12 diseased green ash
trees at Brooklyn Center City Hall and Community Center.
WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center desires to plant 22 new trees of varying
species at Brooklyn Center City Hall and Community Center, as well as plant 18 new trees of
varying species at Freeway Park, to reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide levels and enhance
community forest ecosystems health.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that:
1. Authorizes its City Manager to accept awarded funds on behalf of the City for the
Hennepin County Healthy Tree Canopy Grant and to execute such agreements as may
be necessary to implement the project on behalf of the City.
August 25, 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 41 of 137
Page 42 of 137
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 8/25/2025
TO: City Council
FROM: Elizabeth Heyman, Director of Public Works
THROUGH: Lydia Ener, City Engineer
BY: Lydia Ener, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Resolution 2025-74 Acknowledging Awarded Funds for the Metropolitan
Council Community Tree Planting Grant Program and Authorizing
Acceptance of Grant Funds
Requested Council Action:
Motion to approve a resolution acknowledging the awarded funds for the Metropolitan
Council Community Tree Planting Grant Program and authorizing acceptance of grant
funds
Background:
With the Community Tree Planting Grant Program from the Metropolitan Council, City
staff plan to remove 54 diseased green ash trees along Brooklyn Center rights-of-way
and replace them with 54 new trees. Then grind 19 green ash stumps at the Brooklyn
Center Heritage Center and replace them with 19 new trees. The project addresses
public safety concerns posed by aging and diseased trees, benefiting residents and
maintaining a healthy natural canopy. Immediate tree replacement is crucial, aligning
with Brooklyn Center's 32-year commitment to Tree City USA, showcasing dedication to
the community's natural landscape.
The trees species to be planted were approved by the Metropolitan Council using the
intended tree species list and recommended 20-10-5 guideline. Those species include
Allegheny Serviceberry, American Basswood, American Elm, Downy Serviceberry,
Hackberry, Honeylocust, Ironwood, Kentucky Coffeetree, Swamp White Oak, and White
Oak.
Additional Information:
Metropolitan Council Community Tree Planting Grant Program aims to enhance
community tree cover and involve residents in tree protection. Goals include:
• Boosting city forestry capacity.
• Diversifying the urban canopy for climate resilience.
• Sequestering carbon dioxide.
• Promoting energy conservation.
• Supporting local tree care businesses.
Budget Issues:
Page 43 of 137
The total proposed project cost for removals and plantings throughout the Brooklyn
Center Heritage Center and city rights-of-way is $142,350.00. The Metropolitan Council
awarded the City $142,350.00. The City will meet its obligation to the grant by watering
and maintaining tree care for the new plantings for the next five years. Replacement
trees outside of the one-year warranty, should they die, will be funded through the City’s
Hazardous Tree Management and Reforestation program in the Capital Improvement
Plan (CIP).
Inclusive Community Engagement:
NA
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
NA
Strategic Priorities and Values:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. 250721-Resolution Accepting_Community Tree Planting Grant Program
Page 44 of 137
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.2025-74
RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING AWARDED FUNDS FOR THE
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL COMMUNITY TREE PLANTING GRANT
PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT FUNDS
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council Community Tree Planting Grant Program
provides funds to address disparities in census blocks with supplemental index scores 70th
percentile or greater to improve community forest ecosystem health, contribute to air quality,
stormwater management, and overall sustainability, and;
WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center desires to remove 54 diseased green ash
trees throughout City rights-of-way and 19 green ash stumps at the Brooklyn Center Heritage
Center.
WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center desires to plant 73 new trees of varying
species, to address census blocks with high environmental supplemental index scores, reduce
atmospheric carbon dioxide levels and enhance community forest ecosystems health.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that:
1. Authorizes its City Manager to accept awarded funds on behalf of the City for the
Metropolitan Council Community Tree Planting Grant Program and to execute such
agreements as may be necessary to implement the project on behalf of the City.
August 25, 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 45 of 137
Page 46 of 137
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 8/25/2025
TO: City Council
FROM: Elizabeth Heyman, Director of Public Works
THROUGH: Lydia Ener, City Engineer
BY: Lydia Ener, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Resolution 2025-75 Accepting Work Performed and Authorizing Final
Payment, Improvement Project No. 2024-05, 65th Avenue Storm Sewer
Rehabilitation
Requested Council Action:
Motion to approve a resolution Accepting Work Performed and Authorizing Final
Payment, Improvement Project No. 2024-05, 65th Avenue Storm Sewer Rehabilitation
Background:
On March 25, 2024, the City Council awarded Project No. 2024-05 to SAK Construction,
LLC of O’Fallon, Missouri, for the improvements to the storm sewer on 65th Avenue.
SAK Construction, LLC has successfully completed the construction work and is
requesting final payment for the project.
Budget Issues:
The original contract amount with SAK Construction, LLC for the project was
$897,209.00. The total value of work certified for final payment is $862,178.83. The total
project cost including contingencies/administration/engineering/legal was budgeted to
be $1,184,316.00 and was completed 21% percent under budget in the amount of
$930,320.35. 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. 65th Storm Final Payment Resolution
Page 47 of 137
Member the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-75
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED AND AUTHORIZING FINAL
PAYMENT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2024-05, 65TH AVENUE STORM SEWER
REHABILITATION
WHEREAS, pursuant to a written contract signed with the City of Brooklyn
Center, Minnesota, SAK Construction, LLC of O’Fallon, Missouri has completed Improvement
Project No. 2024-05.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that
1. Final payment shall be made on Improvement Project No. 2024-05, 65th
Avenue Storm Sewer Rehabilitation, taking the contractor’s receipt in full.
The total amount to be paid for said improvements under said contract
shall be $862,178.83.
2. The final project costs and revenues are hereby amended as follows:
Amended Amended
COSTS per Low Bid per Closeout
Contract $ 897,209.00 $ 862,178.83
Contingency $ 89,721.00 $ -0-
Admin/Legal/Engr. $ 197,386.00 $ 68,141.52
Total Project Cost $1,184,316.00 $ 930,320.35
Amended Amended
REVENUES per Low Bid per Low Bid
Capital Project Funds $1,184,316.00 $ 930,320.35
Total Estimated Revenue $1,184,316.00 $ 930,320.35
August 25, 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 48 of 137
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 8/25/2025
TO: City Council
FROM:
THROUGH:
BY: Shannon Pettit, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Resolution 2025-76 Adopting the City Commission Code of Respect and
Ethics
Requested Council Action:
- Motion to approve the Resolution Adopting the City Commission Code of Respect and
Ethics
Background:
At the May 27, 2025, City Council Study Session meeting, the City Council discussed
the City Council Code of Respect. At the July 28, 2025, City Council Study Session
meeting, the City Council discussed the Commission Code of Respect.
After a robust discussion, as well as a few edits, the City Council reached consensus on
enacting the document and asked staff to bring the Council Code of Respect and the
Commission Code of Respect to be presented together on a future agenda.
On July 30, 2025, staff distributed the Commission Code of Respect to Staff Liaisons to
gather feedback from Commission members. Feedback was received by one individual
prior to the deadline. The essence of the feedback pertained to grammatical
corrections, which have been corrected. In addition, there were a few minor
suggestions, including formatting and writing style, which were considered. There were
no formatting or writing style changes made to the original document agreed upon by
the Council.
Attached is the final edited version as requested by Council, for approval.
Budget Issues:
Inclusive Community Engagement:
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
Strategic Priorities and Values:
Page 49 of 137
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution 2025- City Commission Code of Respect
2. DOCSOPEN-#1038794-v7-
Brooklyn_Center_City_Commission_Code_of_Respect_and_Ethics
Page 50 of 137
Member introduced the following resolution and moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-___
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE CITY COMMISSION CODE OF RESPECT AND
ETHICS
WHEREAS, the City Council discussed at its study sessions throughout 2024 and 2025 the
issue of adopting a City Commission Code of Respect and Ethics to better address Commissioner
interactions and behavior between Commissioners, the Public, and City Staff; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission Code of Respect and Ethics will be incorporated into
the City Code of Policies as Section IX (numerical assignment subject to future revision) and will
include in-depth guidance for all City Commissions regarding behavior in and outside of
Commission Meetings, Ethics, and provides accountability measures for Commissioners; and
WHEREAS, the City Council determines it is in the City’s best interests to amend the City
Code of Policies to include the City Commission Code of Respect and Ethics to provide additional
context and guidance on how City Commissioners can best exemplify the values of the City and
model respectful interactions in the face of disagreement and discord; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission Code of Respect and Ethics will serve as a positive tool
to maintain camaraderie, collaboration, and to assist the Commissions and the City Council in
executing the business of the City;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn
Center as follows:
1. The City Commission Code of Respect and Ethics is hereby adopted in its substantial
form, subject to future amendments as directed by Council, and non-substantive
updates by City Staff.
2. The City Code of Policies is hereby amended by adding the City Commission Code of
Respect and Ethics, attached hereto as Exhibit A, which is incorporated in and made
part of this Resolution.
3. The City Manager and staff are authorized and directed to insert the new Section IX
into the City Code of Policies, and said updated document shall constitute the official
Code of Policies.
Page 51 of 137
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 52 of 137
Exhibit A
Page 53 of 137
1
BR291-4-1038794.v7
Brooklyn Center City Commission Code of Respect and Ethics
Table of Contents
Brooklyn Center City Commission Code of Respect and Ethics ..........................................................2
A. Commissioner Conduct with One Another .............................................................................2
1. In Public Meetings .............................................................................................................2
2. In Private Encounters ........................................................................................................3
B. Commissioner Conduct with City Staff ...................................................................................4
C. Commissioner Conduct with the Public .................................................................................4
1. In Public Meetings (For Commissions with Public Hearings) ...............................................4
2. In Unofficial Settings .........................................................................................................5
D. Commissioner Conduct with Other Public Agencies ...............................................................6
E. Poor Conduct and Accountability Measures ..........................................................................6
1. Conduct .............................................................................................................................6
2. Types of Accountability Measures .....................................................................................6
3. Process ..............................................................................................................................7
4. Conduct During Meetings ..................................................................................................8
F. Ethics ....................................................................................................................................8
1. Open Meeting Law ............................................................................................................8
2. Gift Law .............................................................................................................................9
3. Conflict of interest .............................................................................................................9
Page 54 of 137
2
Brooklyn Center City Commission Code of Respect and Ethics
A. Commissioner Conduct with One Another
City Commissions are composed of individuals with a wide variety of backgrounds, personalities, values,
opinions, and goals. Despite this diversity, all have chosen to serve the community. In all cases, this common
goal should be acknowledged even as Commissioners may "agree to disagree" on contentious issues.
1. In Public Meetings
(a) Commissioner Interaction. Commissioners agree to practice civility, professionalism and decorum in
discussions and debate. Difficult questions, tough challenges to a particular point of view, and criticism
of ideas and information are legitimate elements of a free democracy in action. Commissioners can
promote camaraderie and collaboration by refraining from making belligerent, personal, impertinent,
slanderous, threatening, abusive, or disparaging comments. Shouting or physical actions that could be
construed as threatening will not be tolerated. Commissioners should make every effort to conduct
themselves in a professional manner at all times, including listening actively during Commission
meetings.
(b) Deference to Order. Commissioners agree to honor the roles of Commission leadership including the
Chair and Co-Chair in maintaining order by deferring to their direction and guidance. It is the
responsibility of the Chair and/or Co-Chair to keep the Commission meetings on track during meetings.
Commissioners agree to honor efforts by the Chair or Co-Chair to focus discussion on current agenda
items. If there is disagreement about the agenda or Chair or Co-Chair’s actions, those objections should
be voiced politely and with reason, following procedures outlined in parliamentary procedure.
(c) Setting a Positive Example. One prominent goal of every commission meeting should be to demonstrate
a positive example of decorum and respect for constituents. To accomplish that goal, Commissioners
agree to avoid comments that personally attack other Commissioners. If a Commissioner is personally
attacked 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. The Chair or Co-Chair will maintain control of this discussion.
(d) Collaborative Problem Solving. Another goal of the commission meeting is to demonstrate effective
problem-solving approaches. Commissioners have a responsibility to show how individuals with
disparate points of view can find common ground and seek a compromise that benefits the community
as a whole.
(e) Timeliness. To ensure smooth and timely execution of each commission meeting, Commissioners agree
make best efforts to be punctual and keep comments relative to topics discussed. Every Commissioner
has made a commitment to attend meetings and participate in discussions. Therefore, it is important
Page 55 of 137
3
that Commissioners be punctual and that meetings start on time. It is equally important that discussions
on issues be relative to the topic at hand to allow adequate time to fully discuss scheduled issues.
(f) Endorsement of Candidates. It is inappropriate to mention endorsements during commission meetings
or other official City meetings or functions.
(g) Professional Courtesy. Commissioners endeavor to avoid putting colleagues in awkward or
disadvantageous positions in an effort to capitalize on another colleagues’ vulnerability or to embarrass
them publicly. Commissioners agree to make every attempt to submit questions or concerns to the Staff
Liaison prior to formal meetings to avoid surprising Commissioners, Council Liaisons, or Staff at said
meetings.
(h) Personal Attacks. Commissioners shall not personally attack, under any circumstance, another member
of a Commission. Commissioners acknowledge that cultural differences, body language, tone of voice,
as well as the words they use, could be experienced as intimidating, off-putting, or aggressive to the
message recipient.
2. In Private Encounters
(a) Respectful Workplace Values. Commissioners agree to continue to model respectful behavior in private.
The same level of respect and consideration of differing points of view that are deemed appropriate for
public discussions should be maintained in private conversations.
(b) Data Practices. Commissioners recognize that written notes, voicemail messages, social media and email
may be public information. Technology allows words written or said without much forethought to be
distributed wide and far. Commissioners agree to consider the following: (1) how they, their family
and/or friends would feel if this voicemail message was played on a speaker phone in a full office? Or
broadcast on the nightly news; (2) What could the consequences be if this email message was forwarded
to others? Commissioners agree that written notes, social media postings, voicemail messages and email
should be treated as potentially “public” communication.
(c) Public-Private Considerations. 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 that
they may not know. Lunch table conversations could be overheard, parking lot debates may be watched,
and casual comments between individuals before and after public meetings noted.
(d) Personal Comments. Commissioners agree to refrain from making personal comments about other
Commissioners. It is acceptable to publicly disagree about an issue, but it is unacceptable to make
derogatory comments about other Commissioners, their opinions and actions.
Page 56 of 137
4
B. Commissioner Conduct with City Staff
Governance of the City is a cooperative effort, including elected officials, appointed officials, and staff.
Therefore, every effort should be made to be cooperative and show mutual respect for the contributions
made by each individual for the good of the community.
1. Respectful Workplace Values. Commissioners agree to treat all staff as professionals. Commissioners
agree to engage in clear, honest communication that respects the abilities, experience, expertise, and
dignity of each individual. Berating, personal, impertinent, slanderous, threatening, abusive, or
disparaging comments toward staff are not acceptable and are automatic grounds for a Code of Resect
violation.
2. Limited City Staff Contact. Questions for City staff and/or requests for additional background
information should be directed to the City Manager or City Attorney. Commissioners agree to copy the
City Manager on or keep the City Manager informed of any request. Except in extraordinary
circumstances, Commissioners agree to avoid disrupting City staff while they are in meetings, on the
phone, or engaged in performing their job functions.
3. Staff Criticism. Commissioners should not publicly criticize an individual employee. Commissioners
agree to express concerns about the performance of a City employee directly to the City Manager
through private correspondence or conversation. Commissioners will refrain from expressing concerns
in public, to the employee directly, or to the employee’s manager.
4. Political Solicitation. Commissioners will not solicit any type of political support (financial
contributions, display of posters or lawn signs, name on support list, etc.) from City staff.
5. Personal Comments about other Commissioners. Commissioners agree to refrain from speaking ill
of other Commissioners to staff. This puts staff in an uncomfortable and compromising position because
staff have the responsibility to treat all Commissioners equally and with respect.
6. Personal Attacks. Commissioners shall not personally attack, under any circumstance, a member of
city staff. Commissioners acknowledge that cultural differences, body language, tone of voice, as well as
the words they use, could be experienced as intimidating, off-putting, or aggressive to the message
recipient.
C. Commissioner Conduct with the Public
1. In Public Meetings (For Commissions with Public Hearings)
(a) Create a Welcoming Environment. Making the public feel welcome is an important part of the
democratic process. No signs of partiality, prejudice or disrespect should be evident on the part of
individual Commissioners toward an individual participating in a public forum. Every effort should be
made to be fair and impartial in listening to public testimony.
Page 57 of 137
5
(b) Speaking Time. The Commission as a body agrees to be fair and equitable in allocating public hearing
time to individual speakers. The Commission Chair or Co-Chair will determine and announce limits on
speakers at the start of the public hearing process and ensuring those with Brooklyn Center addresses
have an opportunity to speak. Generally, each speaker will be allocated two minutes to speak.
Applicants or their designated representatives may be allowed more time. If many speakers are
anticipated, the Chair or Co-Chair may shorten the time limit and/or ask speakers to limit themselves to
new information and points of view not already covered by previous speakers.
(c) Public Hearing Speakers. No speaker will be turned away unless the speaker exhibits inappropriate
behavior. Each speaker may only speak once during the public hearing unless the Commission requests
additional clarification later in the process. After the close of the public hearing, no more public
testimony will be accepted unless agreed upon by the Commission.
(d) Avoid Public Debate. Commissioners agree to avoid debate and argument with the public. Only the
Chair or Co-Chair – not individual Commissioners – can interrupt a speaker during a presentation.
However, a Commissioner can ask the Chair or Co-Chair for a point of order if the speaker is off the topic
or exhibiting behavior or language the Commissioner finds disturbing. Commissioners may request that
the Chair or Co-Chair seek clarification from the speaker.
(e) Commission Chair to Focus Discussion. If speakers become flustered or defensive by Commissioner
questions, it is the responsibility of the Chair or Co-Chair to calm and focus the speaker and to maintain
the order and decorum of the meeting. Questions by Commissioners to members of the public testifying
should seek to clarify or expand information. It is never appropriate to belligerently challenge or belittle
the speaker. Commissioners agree to refrain from providing personal opinions or revealing inclinations
about upcoming votes until after the public hearing is closed.
(f) Personal Attacks. Commissioners shall not personally attack, under any circumstance, a
member/members of the public. Commissioners acknowledge that cultural differences, body language,
tone of voice, as well as the words they use, could be experienced as intimidating, off-putting, or
aggressive to the message recipient.
2. In Unofficial Settings
(a) No Promises. Commissioners may not make promises on behalf of the Commission. Commissioners
may be asked to explain a Commission policy or recommendation or to give their opinion about an issue
as they meet and talk with constituents 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 specific (fix a pothole,
plow a specific street, plant new flowers in the median, etc.).
Page 58 of 137
6
(b) Personal Comments. Commissioners agree to refrain from making personal comments about other
Commissioners to constituents. It is acceptable to publicly disagree about an issue, but it is unacceptable
to make derogatory comments about other Commissioners, their opinions and actions.
(c) Public-Private Considerations. Commissioners may observed by the community as the serve the city in
their capacity as commissioners. Commissioner behaviors and comments serve as models for proper
conduct in the City of Brooklyn Center. Commissioners agree to reflect honesty and respect for the
dignity of each individual in every word, communication, (whether in social media or otherwise), and
action taken by Commissioners, 24 hours a day, seven days a week. It is a serious and continuous
responsibility.
D. Commissioner Conduct with Other Public Agencies
Commissioners will be as clear as possible when representing City or personal interests. If a Commissioner
appears before another governmental agency or organization to give a statement on an issue, the
Commissioner must clearly state:
1. If his or her statement reflects personal opinion or is the official stance of the City;
2. Whether this is the majority or minority opinion of the Commission. Even if the Commissioner represents
her/his/their own personal opinions, the Commissioner must remember that the comments may reflect
upon the City as an organization.
If the Commissioner is representing the City, the Commissioner must support and advocate the official City
position on an issue, not a personal viewpoint.
E. Poor Conduct and Accountability Measures
1. Conduct
(a) Violations. Commissioners who violate the Code of Respect will be subject to accountability measures.
Any violations that potentially constitute criminal conduct shall be handled by the criminal justice
system.
(b) Factors. Factors that will be considered in determining the appropriate restorative measure or sanction
include but are not limited to the following: seriousness of the violation and number of preceding
violations.
2. Types of Accountability Measures
(a) Restorative Measures
Commissioners agree to engage in restorative measures prior to initiating sanctions for violations of
the Code of Respect. Restorative measures include, but are not limited to:
(i) Private meeting Commissioner and City Manager
(ii) Informal Mediation between involved parties and Mediator
Page 59 of 137
7
(iii) Mediator issues recommendations (i.e. training, public apology, meeting suspension, etc.)
(iv) Commissioner and/or Involved Parties to follow recommendations
(v) If Commissioner refuses to follow recommendations, then the process moves to sanctions.
(b) Sanction
Commissioners may face commission removal for failing to engage in restorative measures or for continued
violations of the Code of Respect.
3. Process
(a) Filing a Complaint and/or Reporting a Code of Respect Violation
(i) A Commissioner may report a potential Code of Respect violation by another Commissioner by
bringing the matter to the attention of the official of their choice, Mayor, or the City Manager.
(ii) A Brooklyn Center staff member may report a potential Code of Respect violation by a City
Commissioner by bringing the matter to the attention of the City Manager or Human Resources
Manager.
(iii) If the potential violation involves the Mayor, it should be brought to the attention of the Mayor Pro
Tem, City Manager, or City Attorney.
(iv) A community member may report potential Code of Respect violations by a member of a City
Commission to the Mayor, City Manager or any member of the City Council.
(b) Investigation
(i) Triage. The Mayor and City Manager will gather initial information, consult with the City Attorney if
necessary and decide how to move forward.
(ii) Fact Finding. If necessary, the matter will be referred to the criminal justice system. The Mayor and
City Manager will determine whether to pursue independent fact-finding or internal fact-finding.
(iii) Possible Outcomes. After an investigation, the City Manager, in consultation with proper staff, will
determine if the complaint is substantiated or unsubstantiated. A restorative solution will be sought
prior to moving to a sanction.
(1) If Substantiated: The Commissioner will have a consultation with the City Manager, if that is
unsuccessful, then the parties move to a graduated resolution process:
• Informal mediation with harmed individuals and City designee (Mediator);
• Mediator issues recommendations
• Commissioner / Involved Parties to follow recommendations
• If Commissioner refuses to follow recommendations, then the process moves to
sanction.
Page 60 of 137
8
(2) Sanction: (Last Resort)
• City Manager compiles redacted report for Council review (names, commission, other
identifying information will be removed from the report)
• After review of the circumstances and recommendation, Council will use a standard
form provided by the Administration to communicate their vote
• Administration will provide Council forms to Mayor
• Mayor will state Council vote on the record
• If Commissioner is removed from service, Commissioner will receive a letter of
removal from the Council
• Commission Removal results in automatic bar from Commission Appointment for 2
years
(3) If Unsubstantiated: City Manager to work with City Attorney to determine resolution compliant
with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act
4. Conduct During Meetings
(a) Inappropriate Statements. For inappropriate statements or conduct by Commissioners occurring during
a Commission meeting, a verbal correction by the Commission Chair will normally be the first step to
address the matter, either during or after the meeting.
(b) Further Incidents. Further incidents at the same meeting may be addressed by subsequent verbal
corrections accompanied Repeated incidents can give rise to Chair not recognizing the offending
Commissioner to speak. A Commissioner can request that the Chair take any of these actions against an
offending Commissioner if the Chair has not done so on her/his/their own.
F. Ethics
1. Open Meeting Law
(a) With certain exceptions, meetings of Council Commissions must be open the public. A meeting is a
gathering of a majority of Commissioners at which City business is discussed. It is not necessary that
action be taken for a gathering to constitute a “meeting.”
(b) A meeting does not include chance social gatherings as long as public business is not
discussed.
(c) A majority of Commissioners should not communicate with each other by phone, email, in-person, or
otherwise, to discuss City business.
(d) Use of social media does not violate the open meeting law as long as social media use is accessible to all
Members of the public.
See Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13D, for further information regarding the Open Meeting Law.
Page 61 of 137
9
2. Gift Law
A City Commissioner cannot accept a gift from someone who has an interest in any matter involving the City.
A “gift” includes money, property, a service, a loan, forgiveness of a loan, or a promise of future employment.
A “gift” does not include:
• Campaign contributions;
• Items costing less than $5;
• Items given to members of a group; the majority of whose members are not local officials;
• Gifts given by family members; or
• Food or beverages given at a reception, meal or meeting at which a Council Member is making a
speech or answering questions as part of a program
See Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.895 City Charter, Section 14.04(A), and Section II, 2.95 of the Brooklyn
Center Code of Policies for further information regarding the Gift Law and procedure.
3. Conflict of interest
(a) Commissioners cannot have a personal financial interest in a sale, lease, or contract with the City.
(b) Commissioners cannot participate in matters in which the Commissioner’s own personal interest,
financial or otherwise, is so distinct from the public interest that the Commissioners cannot be expected
to fairly represent the public’s interest when voting on the matter.
See Minnesota Statutes Section 471.87, and Section II, 2.95 of the Brooklyn Center Code of Policies of further
information about Conflicts of Interest involving Public Officers.
Page 62 of 137
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 8/25/2025
TO: City Council
FROM:
THROUGH:
BY: Shannon Pettit, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Resolution 2025-77 Adopting the City Council Code of Respect and Ethics
Requested Council Action:
- Motion to approve the Resolution Adopting the City Council Code of Respect and
Ethics.
Background:
At the May 27, 2025, City Council Study Session meeting, the City Council discussed
the City Council Code of Respect. At the July 28, 2025, City Council Study Session
meeting, the City Council discussed the Commission Code of Respect.
After a robust discussion, as well as a few edits, the City Council reached consensus on
enacting the document and asked staff to bring the Council Code of Respect and the
Commission Code of Respect to be presented together on a future agenda.
Attached is the final edited document as requested by Council, for approval.
Budget Issues:
Inclusive Community Engagement:
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
Strategic Priorities and Values:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution 2025- City Council Code of Respect
2. DOCSOPEN-#982190-v9-
Brooklyn_Center_City_Council_Code_of_Respect_and_Ethics
Page 63 of 137
Member introduced the following
resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-___
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE CITY COUNCIL CODE OF RESPECT AND
ETHICS
WHEREAS, the City Council discussed at its study sessions throughout 2024 and 2025 the
issue of adopting a City Council Code of Respect and Ethics to better address Council interactions
and behavior between Council Members, the Public, and the Media; and
WHEREAS, the City Council previously adopted the City Council Code of Policies (“Code
of Policies”) to address various items related to how the City Council conducts its business; and
WHEREAS, the City Council Code of Respect and Ethics will be incorporated into the
City Code of Policies as Section VIII (numerical assignment subject to future revision) and will
include in-depth guidance for the City Council regarding behavior in and outside of Council
Meetings, Ethics, and provides accountability measures for Council Members; and
WHEREAS, the City Council determines it is in the City’s best interests to amend the City
Code of Policies to include the City Council Code of Respect and Ethics to provide additional
context and guidance on how the City Council can best exemplify the values of the City and model
respectful interactions in the face of disagreement and discord; and
WHEREAS, the City Council Code of Respect and Ethics will serve as a positive tool to
maintain camaraderie, collaboration, and to assist the City Council in executing the business of the
City;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn
Center as follows:
1. The City Council Code of Respect and Ethics is hereby adopted in its substantial form,
subject to future amendments as directed by Council and non-substantive updates by
City Staff.
2. The City Code of Policies is hereby amended by adding the City Council Code of
Respect and Ethics, attached as Exhibit A hereto, which is incorporated in and made
part of this Resolution.
3. The City Manager and staff are authorized and directed to insert the new Section VIII
into the City Code of Policies, and said updated document shall constitute the official
Code of Policies.
Page 64 of 137
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 65 of 137
EXHIBIT A
Page 66 of 137
1
BR291-4-982190.v9
Brooklyn Center City Council Code of Respect and Ethics
Table of Contents
Brooklyn Center City Council Code of Respect and Ethics .......................................................................2
A. Council Conduct with One Another ............................................................................................2
1. In Public Meetings ....................................................................................................................2
2. In Private Encounters ...............................................................................................................3
B. Council Conduct with City Staff ...................................................................................................4
C. Council Conduct with the Public .................................................................................................5
1. In Public Meetings ....................................................................................................................5
2. In Unofficial Settings ................................................................................................................6
D. Council Conduct with the Media .................................................................................................7
E. Council Conduct with Other Public Agencies ..............................................................................7
F. Council Conduct with Boards and Commissions .........................................................................8
G. Accountability Measures .........................................................................................................9
1. Types of Accountability Measures ...........................................................................................9
2. Conduct ....................................................................................................................................9
CODE OF RESPECT VIOLATION GRID .............................................................................................10
3. Conduct During Meetings ......................................................................................................12
4. Reporting a Potential Violation ..............................................................................................12
5. Alternative Reporting .............................................................................................................12
6. Investigation Procedure .........................................................................................................12
H. Ethics ......................................................................................................................................13
1. Open Meeting Law .................................................................................................................13
2. Gift Law ..................................................................................................................................13
3. Conflict of interest ..................................................................................................................14
Page 67 of 137
2
Brooklyn Center City Council Code of Respect and Ethics
A. Council Conduct with One Another
Councils are composed of individuals with a wide variety of backgrounds, personalities, values, opinions, and
goals. Despite this diversity, all have chosen to serve in public office in order to preserve and protect the
present and the future of the community. In all cases, this common goal should be acknowledged even as
Council may "agree to disagree" on contentious issues.
1. In Public Meetings
(a) Council Member Interaction. Council Members agree to practice civility, professionalism and decorum
in discussions and debate. Difficult questions, tough challenges to a particular point of view, and criticism
of ideas and information are legitimate elements of a free democracy in action. Council Members can
promote camaraderie and collaboration by refraining from making belligerent, personal, impertinent,
slanderous, threatening, abusive, or disparaging comments. Shouting or physical actions that could be
construed as threatening will not be tolerated. Council Members should make every effort to conduct
themselves in a professional manner at all times, including listening actively during Council meetings.
(b) Deference to Order. Council Members agree to honor the role of the Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, or Acting
Mayor Pro Tem in maintaining order by deferring to their direction and guidance. It is the responsibility
of the Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, or Acting Mayor Pro Tem to keep the comments of Council Members on
track during public meetings. Council Members agree to honor efforts by the Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, or
Acting Mayor Pro Tem to focus discussion on current agenda items. If there is disagreement about the
agenda or the Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, or Acting Mayor Pro Tem’s actions, those objections should be
voiced politely and with reason, following procedures outlined in parliamentary procedure.
(c) Setting a Positive Example. One prominent goal of every council meeting should be to demonstrate a
positive example of decorum and respect for constituents. To accomplish that goal, Council Members
agree to avoid comments that personally attack other Council Members. If a Council Member is
personally attacked by the comments of another Council Member, the offended Council Member will
make notes of the actual words used and may call for a "point of order" to challenge the other Council
Member to justify or apologize for the language used. The Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, or Acting Mayor Pro
Tem will maintain control of this discussion.
(d) Collaborative Problem Solving. Another goal of the council meeting is to demonstrate effective
problem-solving approaches. Council Members have a responsibility to show how individuals with
disparate points of view can find common ground and seek a compromise that benefits the community
as a whole.
Page 68 of 137
3
(e) Timeliness. To ensure smooth and timely execution of each council meeting, Council Members agree to
make best efforts to be punctual and keep comments relative to topics discussed. Every Council Member
has made a commitment to attend meetings and participate in discussions. Therefore, it is important
that Council Members be punctual and that meetings start on time. It is equally important that
discussions on issues be relative to the topic at hand to allow adequate time to fully discuss scheduled
issues.
(f) Endorsement of Candidates. Council Members have the right to endorse candidates for all Council seats
or other elected offices. It is inappropriate to mention endorsements during Council meetings or other
official City meetings or functions.
(g) Council Decisions. Once a majority decision of the governing body has been made, Council Members
should endeavor to “speak with one voice,” respect the official position of the Council, and defend it if
needed.
(h) Professional Courtesy. Council Members endeavor to avoid putting colleagues in awkward or
disadvantageous positions in an effort to capitalize on another colleagues’ vulnerability or to embarrass
them publicly. Council Members agree to make every attempt to submit questions or concerns prior to
formal meetings to surprising Council Members or staff at said meetings.
(i) Avoid Personal Attacks. Council Members shall not personally attack, under any circumstance, another
member of Council. Council Members acknowledge that cultural differences, body language, tone of
voice, as well as the words they use, could be experienced as intimidating, off-putting, or aggressive to
the message recipient.
2. In Private Encounters
(a) Respectful Workplace Values. Council Members agree to continue to model respectful behavior in
private. The same level of respect and consideration of differing points of view that are deemed
appropriate for public discussions should be maintained in private conversations.
(b) Data Practices. Council Members recognize that written notes, voicemail messages, social media and
email may be public information. Technology allows words written or said without much forethought to
be distributed wide and far. Council Members agree to consider the following examples: (1) how they,
their family and/or friends would feel if a voicemail message was played on a speaker phone in a full
office? Or broadcast on the nightly news; (2) What are the potential consequences if this email message
was forwarded to others? Council Members agree that written notes, social media postings, voicemail
messages and email should be treated as potentially “public” communication.
(c) Public-Private Considerations. Even private conversations can have a public presence. Elected officials
are always on display – their actions, mannerisms, and language are monitored by people around them
that they may not know. Lunch table conversations could be overheard, parking lot debates may be
watched, and casual comments between individuals before and after public meetings noted.
Page 69 of 137
4
(d) Personal Comments. Council Members agree to refrain from making personal comments about other
Council Members. It is acceptable to publicly disagree about an issue, but it is unacceptable to make
derogatory comments about other Council Members, their opinions and actions.
B. Council Conduct with City Staff
The relationship between Council Members and administrative personnel is dependent on the form of
government. Governance of the City is a cooperative effort, including elected officials, who set policy, and
City staff, who implement and administer the Council’s policies. Therefore, every effort should be made to
be cooperative and show mutual respect for the contributions made by each individual for the good of the
community. Council Members will be careful to restrict that relationship to the defined channels. Unofficial
Council interference in administrative affairs can disrupt business, weaken employee morale, and create
antagonistic relationships between administrators and Council Members.
Council Members should not attempt to exert any influence over the hiring and firing of administrative
personnel, except for those people whose appointment they are responsible, namely the City Manager, City
Attorney, and City Prosecutor.
Federal, State, and local laws have made personnel administration a very complex affair, with mishandlings
costing public employers hundreds of thousands of dollars in litigation, claims, and damages. The City of
Brooklyn Center has a very strong commitment to providing its employees with a fair, accountable, and
uniform system of personnel administration including procedures to address employee grievances.
1. Respectful Workplace Values. Council Members agree to treat all staff as professionals. Council
Members agree to engage in clear, honest communication that respects the abilities, experience,
expertise, and dignity of each individual. Berating, personal, impertinent, slanderous, threatening,
abusive, or disparaging comments toward staff are not acceptable and are automatic grounds for a code
of conduct violation.
2. Limited City Staff Contact. Pursuant to Brooklyn Center Charter Section 6.02, Council Members must
limit contact with City staff. Questions of City staff and/or requests for additional background
information should be directed to the City Manager or City Attorney. Council Members agree to copy
the City Manager on or informed of any request. Except in extraordinary circumstances, Council
Members agree to avoid disrupting City staff while they are in meetings, on the phone, or engrossed in
performing their job functions.
3. Council Direction to staff. In accordance with Charter Section 2.09, individual Council Members cannot
give direction to City staff either publicly or privately. The Council as a body may provide staff direction
on matters that come before the Council.
4. Follow-up Requests or Directives. Council Member acknowledge that requests for follow-up or
directions to staff should be made only through the City Manager or the City Attorney when appropriate.
When in doubt about what staff contact is appropriate, Council Members will consult with the City
Manager. Additionally, Council Members agree that requests for additional staff support – even in high
priority or emergency situations – will be made to the City Manager who will work to allocate city
Page 70 of 137
5
resources. Materials supplied to a Council Member in response to a request for information of interest
to all Council Members will be made available to the entire Council so that all have equal access to the
information. Limit requests for staff support. (see Brooklyn Center City Charter Section 2.09).
5. Staff Criticism. Council Members should not publicly criticize City Staff. Council Members agree to
express concerns about the performance of a City staff person directly to the City Manager through
private correspondence or conversation. Council Members will refrain from expressing concerns in
public, to City Staff directly, or to the City staff person’s manager.
6. City Administrative Functions. Pursuant to Section 6.02 of the City Charter, the administrative functions
of the City are the responsibility of the City Manager. To avoid the appearance of bias or to avoid
violating the ethics code, Council Members will not attempt to influence City staff on the making of
employment or personnel decisions, the awarding of contracts, the selecting of consultants, the
processing of development applications, or the granting of City licenses and permits.
7. City Staff Meetings. If City Council Members desire to attend a staff meeting, Council Members agree
to consult with the City Manager. Council Member attendance at meetings could imply support, show
partiality, intimidate staff, and could impede staff’s ability to do their job objectively/effectively.
8. Political Solicitation. Council Members will not solicit any type of political support (i.e., financial
contributions, display of posters or lawn signs, name on support list, etc.) from City staff.
9. Council, EDA and Commission agendas. Staff’s responsibility is to provide Council Members with the
information needed for informed decision making. Council Members agree to make every effort to ask
staff questions regarding Council, EDA and commission agendas before the meeting.
10. Personal Comments about other Council Members. Council Members agree to refrain from speaking ill
of other Council Members to staff. This puts staff in an uncomfortable and compromising position
because staff have the responsibility to treat all Council Members equally and with respect.
11. Avoid Personal Attacks. Council Members shall not personally attack, under any circumstance, a
member of city staff. Council Members acknowledge that cultural differences, body language, tone of
voice, as well as the words they use, could be experienced as intimidating, off-putting, or aggressive to
the message recipient.
C. Council Conduct with the Public
1. In Public Meetings
(a) Create a Welcoming Environment. Making the public feel welcome is an important part of the
democratic process. No signs of partiality, prejudice or disrespect should be evident on the part of
individual Council Members toward an individual participating in a public forum. Every effort should be
made to be fair and impartial in listening to public testimony.
Page 71 of 137
6
(b) Speaking Time. Council as a body agrees to be fair and equitable in allocating public hearing time to
individual speakers. Pursuant to Council Procedure, the Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, or Acting Mayor Pro
Tem will determine and announce limits on speakers at the start of the public hearing process and
ensuring those with Brooklyn Center addresses have an opportunity to speak. Generally, each speaker
will be allocated two minutes to speak. Applicants or their designated representatives may be allowed
more time. If many speakers are anticipated, the Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, or Acting Mayor Pro Tem may
shorten the time limit and/or ask speakers to limit themselves to new information and points of view
not already covered by previous speakers.
(c) Public Hearing Speakers. No speaker will be turned away unless the speaker exhibits inappropriate
behavior. Each speaker may only speak once during the public hearing unless the Council requests
additional clarification later in the process. After the close of the public hearing, no more public
testimony will be accepted unless agreed upon by the Council.
(d) Avoid Public Debate. Council Members agree to avoid debate and argument with the public. Only the
Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, or Acting Mayor Pro Tem – not individual Council Members – can interrupt a
speaker during a presentation. However, a Council Member can ask the Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, or
Acting Mayor Pro Tem for a point of order if the speaker is off the topic or exhibiting behavior or
language the Council Member finds disturbing. Council Members may request that the Mayor, Mayor
Pro Tem, or Acting Mayor seek clarification from the speaker.
(e) Mayor to Focus Discussion. If speakers become flustered or defensive by Council questions, it is the
responsibility of the Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, or Acting Mayor Pro Tem to calm and focus the speaker
and to maintain the order and decorum of the meeting. Questions by Council Members to members of
the public testifying should seek to clarify or expand information. It is never appropriate to belligerently
challenge or belittle the speaker. Council Members agree to refrain from providing personal opinions or
revealing inclinations about upcoming votes until after the public hearing is closed.
(f) Avoid Personal Attacks. Council Members shall not personally attack, under any circumstance, a
member or members of the public. Council Members acknowledge that cultural differences, body
language, tone of voice, as well as the words they use, could be experienced as intimidating, off-putting,
or aggressive to the message recipient.
(g) Parliamentary Procedure. Council Members agree to follow parliamentary procedure (outlined in the
Council Procedure) in conducting public meetings. The City Attorney serves as advisory parliamentarian
for the City and is available to answer questions or interpret situations according to parliamentary
procedures. Final rulings on parliamentary procedure are made by the Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, or Acting
Mayor Pro Tem subject to the appeal of the full Council.
2. In Unofficial Settings
(a) No Promises. Council Members may not make promises on behalf of the Council. Council Members may
be asked to explain a Council action or to give their opinion about an issue as they meet and talk with
constituents 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 Council action, or to
Page 72 of 137
7
promise City staff will do something specific (fix a pothole, plow a specific street, plant new flowers in
the median, etc.).
(b) Personal Comments. Council Members agree to refrain from making personal comments about other
Council Members to constituents. It is acceptable to publicly disagree about an issue, but it is
unacceptable to make derogatory comments about other Council Members, their opinions and actions.
(c) Public-Private Considerations. Council Members are constantly being observed by the community every
day that they serve in office. Their behaviors and comments serve as models for proper conduct in the
City of Brooklyn Center. Council Members agree to reflect honesty and respect for the dignity of each
individual in every word, communication, (whether in social media or otherwise), and action taken by
Council Members, 24 hours a day, seven days a week. It is a serious and continuous responsibility.
D. Council Conduct with the Media
Council Members may be contacted by the media for background and quotes.
1. Official Spokesperson. The Mayor is the official spokesperson for the representative on City position.
The Mayor is the designated representative of the Council to present and speak on the official City
position. If an individual Council Member (including the Mayor) is contacted by the media, the Council
Member should be clear about whether their comments represent the official City position or a personal
viewpoint.
2. When Speaking to the Media. Council Members agree to choose their words carefully and cautiously.
Comments taken out of context can cause problems. Council Members agree to be especially cautious
about humor, sardonic asides, sarcasm, or word play. It is never appropriate to use personal slurs or
swear words when talking with the media.
3. Best Advice. The best advice for dealing with the media is to never go "off the record."
E. Council Conduct with Other Public Agencies
Council Members will be as clear as possible when representing City or personal interests. If a Council
Member appears before another governmental agency or organization to give a statement on an issue, the
Council Member must clearly state:
1. If his or her statement reflects personal opinion or is the official stance of the City;
2. Whether this is the majority or minority opinion of the Council. Even if the Council Member represents
his or her own personal opinions, the Council Member must remember that the comments may reflect
upon the City as an organization.
If the Council Member is representing the City, the Council Member must support and advocate the official
City position on an issue, not a personal viewpoint.
Page 73 of 137
8
F. Council Conduct with Boards and Commissions
The City has established several Boards and Commissions as a means of gathering more community input.
The Council appoints members to all committees, boards, and commissions which serve in a purely advisory
role for the Council. These commissions/committees/boards are as follows:
• Cultural and Public Arts Commission,
• Financial Commission;
• Housing Commission;
• Park and Recreation Commission;
• Sister Cities Commission;
• Planning Commission; and
• Community Violence and Public Safety Commission
The Council also appoints representatives to Visit Minneapolis Northwest Tourism, Watershed Commissions,
and Northwest Suburbs Cable Communications Commission.
The Charter Commission is a statutory commission appointed by the Chief Judge of the District Court. See
Minnesota Statutes 410.05 regarding appointment, terms, and discharge, of Charter Commission Members.
Residents who serve on Boards and Commissions are a valuable resource to the City’s leadership and should
be treated with appreciation and respect.
1. Council Liaison. “Liaison” means non-voting member of a commission who shall speak on behalf of the
Council (or staff) as a whole, not as an individual, thus providing a communication link between the
commission and Council (or staff). If a Council Member attends a Board or Commission meeting in the
role of liaison, the Council Member agrees to execute the role as intended.
2. Limited Contact. Council Members agree to limit contact with Board and Commission Members. It is
inappropriate for a Council Member to contact a Board or Commission member to lobby on behalf of an
individual, business, or developer. Council Members may contact members of the Commission and staff
liaison in order to clarify a position taken by the Board or Commission.
3. Commission Service. Council Members acknowledge that Boards and Commissions serve the
community, not individual Council Members. The City Council appoints individuals to serve on Boards
and Commissions, and it is the responsibility of Boards and Commissions to follow the policy established
by the Council. However, Board and Commission members do not report to individual Council Members.
Council Members cannot individually remove Board and Commission members if the parties disagree
about an issue.
4. Respect Diverse Opinions. Council Members agree to be respectful of diverse opinions. The primary role
of Boards and Commissions is to represent many points of view in the community and to provide the
Council with advice based on a full spectrum of concerns and perspectives. Council Members agree to
be fair and respectful of all residents serving on Boards and Commissions.
Page 74 of 137
9
G. Accountability Measures
1. Types of Accountability Measures
(a) Restorative Measures.
Council Members agree to engage in restorative measures prior to initiating sanctions for violations of
the Code of Respect. Restorative measures include, but are not limited to:
(i) Private meeting between Council Members to discuss issues between Council Members
(ii) Informal Mediation between Council Members
(iii) Open discussion between Council Members at a Study or Work Session
(iv) Training regarding the issue of contention (i.e. media training, first amendment training, etc.)
(b) Sanctions.
Council Members may face sanctions for failing to engage in restorative measures or for continued
violations of the Code of Respect. Potential sanctions for the aforementioned violations may include,
but are not limited to:
(i) Warning. A warning shall be verbal and made by the Mayor as the Presiding Officer to the offending
Council Member.
(ii) Reprimand. A reprimand shall be administered to the Council Member by letter. The letter shall be
approved by the City Council and shall be signed by the Mayor, or by the Mayor Pro Tem or Acting
Mayor Pro Tem if the Mayor position is vacant, or if the matter involves the Mayor.
(iii) Censure. A censure shall be administered pursuant to a formal resolution adopted by the Council.
The resolution shall outline the offending behavior and the consensus of the Council to condemn
that behavior.
2. Conduct
(a) Violations. City Council Members who violate the Code of Respect are subject to warning, reprimand,
or censure. Any violations that potentially constitute criminal conduct shall be handled by the criminal
justice system.
(b) Factors. Factors that will be considered in determining the appropriate restorative measure or sanction
include but are not limited to the following: seriousness of the violation and number of preceding
violations.
See grid on following page for illustration of violations, corresponding restorative
measures or sanctions.
Page 75 of 137
10
CODE OF RESPECT VIOLATION GRID
ACTION EXAMPLE
(NON-INCLUSIVE ILLUSTRATION)
STEP 1:
RESTORATIVE MEASURE
STEP 2:
SANCTION
Tier 1
A Minor to Moderate Violation
First Violation Disrespectful or offensive comment to
Council Member, constituent, appointed
official, or staff;
• Private conversation amongst
the parties with or without a
mediator to try to resolve the
issue;
• Parties resolve the issue in
private
• If step 1 fails, move to step 2.
Public Verbal Warning from
Presiding Officer
Second Violation Continued disrespectful exchanges with
same or different Council Member,
constituent, appointed official or staff
• Public conversation at study
or work session regarding
behavior and potential causes
and solutions;
• Offending Party attempts to
resolve the issue by offering
solutions for corrective
behavior;
• Parties resolve the issue in
public
• If Offending Party cannot
agree to resolution, then
move to step 2.
• If step 1 fails, move to step 2
Reprimand via Written Letter
approved by Council, signed
by the Mayor or Pro Tem
Third Violation After first and second violations, continued
disrespectful comments/exchanges with
Council Member, constituent, appointed
official, or staff
N/A Public censure via Council
Resolution
Page 76 of 137
11
Tier 2
A Moderate to Severe Violation
First Violation Directing staff to investigate a constituent
matter unknown to Council or City Manager
• Public conversation regarding
behavior at study or work
session;
• Offending party issues a
verbal public apology to those
involved
• If step 1 fails, move to step 2
Reprimand via Written Letter
approved by Council, signed
by the Mayor or Pro Tem
Second Violation Publicly endorse political candidate at
Council Meeting
• Public conversation regarding
behavior at study or work
session;
• If step 1 fails, move to step 2
Immediate verbal public
reprimand by Presiding
Officer; Reprimand via written
letter from approved by
Council, signed by Mayor or
Pro Tem
Third Violation Misrepresent a City position / Speak on
behalf of the City with no Council
consensus on the matter at hand
Public censure via Council
resolution
Tier 3:
An Egregious Violation
Violation Use profane language toward Council
member(s), staff, constituent, appointed
official;
After investigation, found to have violated
Minnesota Government Data Practices Act
Censure / Possible Criminal
Consequences
Page 77 of 137
12
3. Conduct During Meetings
(a) Inappropriate Statements. For inappropriate statements or conduct by Council Members occurring
during a Council meeting, a verbal correction by the Mayor (or Mayor Pro Tem or acting Mayor Pro Tem)
will normally be the first step to address the matter, either during or after the Council meeting.
(b) Further Incidents. Further incidents at the same meeting may be addressed by subsequent verbal
corrections accompanied by use of the gavel. Repeated incidents can give rise to the Mayor not
recognizing the offending Council Member to speak. A Council Member can request that the Mayor take
any of these actions against an offending Council Member if the Mayor has not done so on her/his own.
4. Reporting a Potential Violation
(a) A member of the Brooklyn Center City Council may report a potential Code of Respect violation by a
member of the City Council by bringing the matter to the attention of the official of their choice, Mayor,
City Manager, or City Attorney.
(b) A Brooklyn Center staff member may report a potential Code of Respect violation by a member of the
City Council by bringing the matter to the attention of the City Manager or Human Resources Manager.
(c) If the potential violation involves the Mayor, it should be brought to the attention of the Mayor Pro Tem,
City Manager or City Attorney.
(d) A community member may report potential Code of Respect violations by a member of the City Council
to the Mayor, City Manager or any member of the City Council.
5. Alternative Reporting
If the Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, or Acting Mayor Pro Tem are unable to be involved in reviewing the Code of
Respect complaint for any reason, the matter will be reviewed by the next most senior member of the
Council that is not involved in the complaint.
6. Investigation Procedure
(a) Triage. The Mayor and City Manager will gather initial information, consult with the City Attorney if
necessary and decide how to move forward.
(b) Fact Finding. If necessary, the matter will be referred to the criminal justice system. The Mayor and City
Manager will determine whether to pursue independent fact-finding or internal fact-finding.
(c) Possible Outcomes. As is referenced above, A restorative solution will be sought prior to moving to a
sanction. (i) a verbal warning may be given to the Council Member by the Mayor, (ii) a reprimand may
Page 78 of 137
13
be administered to the Council Member by a letter approved by the Council, or (iii) a censure may be
administered pursuant to a formal resolution adopted by the Council.
(d) Notice and Hearing. After voting to issue a reprimand or censure, the City Council will provide written
notice to the Council Member at least fourteen (14) days prior to the Council’s formal action upon the
reprimand or censure. The notice may be served by mail and shall specify the grounds for the reprimand
or censure and state the date the Council will take action upon the reprimand or censure. At any time
prior to the Council’s formal action, the Council Member may, in writing, request a hearing before the
City Council, which shall be held at the next regular City Council meeting. After the hearing, the City
Council shall decide whether or not to proceed with the reprimand or censure.
H. Ethics
1. Open Meeting Law
(a) State law requires that, with certain exceptions, meetings of the City Council be open to
the public. A meeting is a gathering of a majority of City Council Members at which City
business is discussed. It is not necessary that action be taken for a gathering to constitute
a “meeting.”
(b) A meeting does not include chance, social gatherings as long as public business is not
discussed.
(c) A majority of Council Members should not communicate with each other by phone, email, in-person,
or otherwise, to discuss City business.
(d) Use of social media does not violate the open meeting law as long as social media use is accessible to all
Members of the public.
See Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13D, for further information regarding the Open Meeting Law.
2. Gift Law
A City Council Member cannot accept a gift from someone who has an interest in any matter
involving the City. A “gift” includes money, property, a service, a loan, forgiveness of a loan, or
a promise of future employment. A “gift” does not include:
• Campaign contributions;
• items costing less than $5;
• items given to members of a group; the majority of whose members are not local officials;
• gifts given by family members; or
• food or beverages given at a reception, meal or meeting at which a Council Member is making a
speech or answering questions as part of a program
See Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.895 City Charter, Section 14.04(A), and Section II, 2.95 of the Brooklyn
Center Code of Policies for further information regarding the Gift Law and procedure.
Page 79 of 137
14
3. Conflict of interest
(a) City Council Members cannot have a personal financial interest in a sale, lease, or contract with the City.
(b) City Council Members cannot participate in matters in which the Council Member’s own personal
interest, financial or otherwise, is so distinct from the public interest that the
(c) Council Member cannot be expected to fairly represent the public’s interest when voting on the matter.
See Minnesota Statutes Section 471.87, and Section II, 2.95 of the Brooklyn Center Code of Policies of further
information about Conflicts of Interest involving Public Officers.
Page 80 of 137
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 8/25/2025
TO: City Council
FROM: Carissa Goebel, Deputy Director of Parks & Recreation
THROUGH: Cordell Wiseman, Director of Parks & Recreation
BY: Carissa Goebel, Deputy Director of Parks & Recreation
SUBJECT: Parks and Recreation Department Update
Requested Council Action:
Motion to accept presentation.
Background:
Provide the annual update from the Parks and Recreation Department.
Budget Issues:
Inclusive Community Engagement:
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
Strategic Priorities and Values:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. 8_25_25 P&R Department Update
Page 81 of 137
8/21/2025
1
Parks and Recreation
Department Update
The mission of the Parks and Recreation Department is to enhance the quality of life for our
community by providing diverse, accessible and inclusive opportunities. Our goal is to create a
thriving, vibrant community where people of all ages and backgrounds can connect, grow and
enjoy enriching experiences.
Cordell Wiseman, Parks and Recreation Director
2
Parks and Recreation
Department Consists of 3 units
Recreation
Centerbrook Golf Course
•General Fund
•Special Revenue
•Enterprise
1
2
Page 82 of 137
8/21/2025
2
Centerbrook Golf Course
Staffing Levels 2024 2025 2026
Golf Course Superintendent 1 1 1
Golf Course Coordinator 0 1* 1
Part-Time Staff (10) seasonal 1.75 1.75 1.75
Totals 2.75 3.75 3.75
*Coordinator position not hired in 2025. Plan to hire in 2026.
Centerbrook Golf Course
Current Initiatives
•Continue to Deliver a High Quality of Service through golfing opportunities and programming.
•Additional Programming
•Local Schools - JV Golf programs
•Juneteenth Golf event
•Guest Days
•Lady’s Days
•Youth on course
3
4
Page 83 of 137
8/21/2025
3
5
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
Heritage Center of Brooklyn Center:
m
•2025 Mid-Year Update
•Financial Updates
•Highlights and Accomplishments
5
6
Page 84 of 137
8/21/2025
4
Staffing Levels
Positions 2023 2024 2025
General Manager 1 1 1
Secretary/Receptionist 1 1 1
Billing Clerk 1 1 1
Operations Director 1 1 1
Sales Director 1 1 0
Sales Manager 3 4 3
Catering Sales Managers 2 0 0
Banquet Manager 0 0 0
Maintenance Custodians 2 2 2
Crew Chiefs 2 2 2
Part-time Employees 9 9 9
TOTALS 23 22 20
Heritage Center Rental Data:
•
•What are a few things we currently doing to bring in more events?
•Re3Creative has been a positive adjustment in our marketing efforts.
•Starting the creation of our new website.
•Continuing to increase our numbers of Joint Power Agreements with the State of
Minnesota.
•How many new clients in 2025?
•30 new corporate clients in 2025 YTD / 31 total in 2024
•14 weddings in 2025 YTD / 13 in 2024
•2025 - $173,245.80 YTD
•2024 - $175,354.51 (full year)
•Audio Visual Pricing Increase:
•2025 - $325,561.55 (YTD)
•2024- $478,244.63 (full year)
•How many events are on the books for 2025-2027
•2024 – 215 events
•2025 –Currently at 177 (148 last update) this number will continue to grow until
the end of the year
•2026 –85 (71 last update) events, this number will continue to grow
•2027 –36 (34 last update) events, similar to the previous years
7
8
Page 85 of 137
8/21/2025
5
Mintahoe Impact:
•$300,000 In-kind donation from contract:
•$40,000 will go toward the creation of our new website. Together, we reviewed 3 proposals and selected the
one that best fit our vision for future profitability.
•We are developing our plans to upgrade some of our common spaces to give the venue a welcoming aesthetic.
•We are developing our plans to upgrade some of our smaller spaces for wedding getting ready room rentals. We
feel this will enhance the draw for more wedding couples and bring in more rental revenue.
•Menu Options and Pricing:
•New menus are in the process of being finalized. New offerings, pairings and packages will be included.
•Mintahoe has hired full time staff to specialize in the Heritage Center events.
•Heritage Center is now listed as a venue on the Mintahoe website and listed in other marketing materials.
•During larger events, Heritage Center has utilized additional staffing from the Mintahoeemployee pool.
•Ability to allow outside ethnic foods. This has helped solidify events that would like to offer their cultural dishes.
•Ability to be creative and offer “out of the box” thinking to execute client’s requests.
•Amazing reviews on the food and service staff has continued.
•Catering Net Income as of June 30th
•2025: $335,608.00
•2024: $198,382.00
Highlights and Accomplishments:
•The Heritage Center was featured in Lake and Company Magazine as a part of the Naturalization
Ceremonies held onsite.
•Mintahoe is an Honoree with Twin Cities Business: MN Family Business Awards ceremony in
September. They recognize outstanding family-owned businesses and celebrate the value these
businesses add to the Minnesota economy and overall quality of life.
•Mintahoe was nominated in Minnesota Bride – Best of Awards for Best Catering for Large
Weddings.
•Heritage Center hosted Minnesota’s first State of Hunger Summit with Governor Walz in
attendance.
9
10
Page 86 of 137
8/21/2025
6
Cordell Wiseman, Parks and Recreation Director
Carissa Goebel, Parks and Recreation Deputy Director
Recreation
•Community Center
•Membership, Fitness and Aquatics
•Programming
•Adult, Senior, Youth, Family and Events
•Outreach
•Parks, Teens, Pop-Up Events
Recreation Staffing
12
11
12
Page 87 of 137
8/21/2025
7
Community Center
13
•Swim lessons 2024
•1,052 participants, 43% return rate
•Reciprocal Learn to Swim with BCCS
•Membership
•revenue increase from 2024 (through July)
Outreach
14
•Open Gym
•Blue Barn
•Monday-Friday 6-8 pm
•Garden City Elementary
•Wednesday 5-6:30 pm
•Total 2,015 youth (Sept 2024-May 2025)
13
14
Page 88 of 137
8/21/2025
8
Summer
15
•Camps
•Camp in the Center
•Camp 2.0
•Rec on the Go
•Seniors
Questions?
16
15
16
Page 89 of 137
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 8/25/2025
TO: City Council
FROM: Shannon Pettit, City Clerk
THROUGH: Daren Nyquist, Deputy City Manager
BY: Kat Ellgren, Deputy City Clerk
SUBJECT: Ordinance 2025-09 - An Ordinance Amending Chapter 19-4000
Prohibiting Use of Cannabis And Hemp Products In Public Places (First
Reading)
Requested Council Action:
-Motion to approve setting the Public Hearing for September 8th, 2025, regarding
updates to Chapter 19-4000 in the Brooklyn Center City Code of Ordinances Prohibiting
Cannabis Use in Public Places.
Background:
Staff will give a presentation to City Council regarding the updates to 19-4000
Prohibiting Cannabis Use in Public.
Tonight will also set the public hearing for the reading to be held on September 8th,
2025.
Budget Issues:
Inclusive Community Engagement:
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
Strategic Priorities and Values:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. DOCSOPEN-#1042320-v1-Chapter_19-
4000_Prohibiting_Cannabis_Use_in_Public_Places
2. Comparision of original and new 19-4000 Prohibiting Cannabis
3. 19-4000 Prohibit Use of Cannabis in Public Places
Page 90 of 137
BR291-437-1042320.v1
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 8th day of September 2005, at 7:00
p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard at City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to
consider an ordinance repealing and replacing in its entirety Chapter 19-4000 Prohibiting Use of
Cannabis and Hemp Products in Public Places.
Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance.
Please contact the City Clerk at 763-569-3300 to make arrangements.
ORDINANCE NO. 2025-09
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 19-4000 PROHIBITING USE OF
CANNABIS AND HEMP PRODUCTS IN PUBLIC PLACES
The City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center does ordain as follows:
Article I. Brooklyn Center City Code, Chapter 19 is amended as follows:
Section 19-4000. PROHIBITING USE OF CANNABIS AND HEMP IN PUBLIC PLACES.
Section 19-4001. PURPOSE AND 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 Minnesota Statutes, Section 342,
related to the use cannabis and hemp products within the City.
B. Findings. The City finds and concludes that these regulations are appropriate and lawful,
and that the proposed amendments are in the public interest and for the public good.
Section 19-4002. DEFINITIONS
A. Cannabis Flower, Cannabis Products, Lower-Potency Hemp Edibles, Hemp-Derived
Consumer Products. For purposes of this article, the terms “cannabis flower,” “cannabis
products,” “lower-potency hemp edibles,” and “hemp-derived consumer products” shall
have the definitions given to them in Minnesota Statutes, section 342.01, as it may be
amended from time to time.
B. Public Place. For purposes of this article, “public place” is defined as any indoor or
outdoor area that is used or held out for use by the public whether owned or operated by
public or private interests. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 152.0263, subd. 5,
“public place” does not include the following: (i) a private residence, including the
person's curtilage or yard; (ii) private property not generally accessible by the public,
unless the individual is explicitly prohibited from consuming cannabis flower, cannabis
products, lower-potency hemp edibles, or hemp-derived consumer products on the
property by the owner of the property; and (iii) the premises of an establishment or event
Page 91 of 137
licensed to permit on-site consumption of cannabis flower, cannabis products, lower-
potency hemp edibles, or hemp-derived consumer products.
Section 19-4003. PROHBITION
No person shall use Cannabis Flower, Cannabis Products, Lower-Potency Hemp Edibles, or Hemp-
Derived Consumer Products in a Public Place. A violation of this section shall be considered a petty
misdemeanor notwithstanding any other penalty provision in the city code, and, upon conviction, the
violator shall be punished by a fine not to exceed $200.
Section 19-4004. PENALTIES
A violation of this section shall be considered a petty misdemeanor notwithstanding any other penalty
provision in the city code, and, upon conviction, the violator shall be punished by a fine not to exceed
$200.
Section 19-4005. SEVERABILITY.
If any part, term or provision of this ordinance is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be
invalid, preempted by state law, or unconstitutional, such portion shall be deemed severable and such
unconstitutionality or invalidity shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this article,
which remaining portions shall continue in full force and effect.
Section 19-4006. EFFECTIVE DATE
This ordinance shall take effect following its passage and publication in accordance with state law.
Passed and adopted this ___ day of ____, 2025, by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center
Date April Graves, Mayor
ATTEST:
Shannon Petit, City Clerk
First Reading: , 2025
Page 92 of 137
Second Reading: , 2025
Publication Date: , 2025
Effective Date: , 2025
Page 93 of 137
Comparison of the current Chapter 19-4000 to the proposed repeal and replace of same.
Additions are highlighted in yellow, deleted language is in red text and struck through.
Section 19-4000. PROHIBITING USE OF CANNABIS AND HEMP PRODUCTS IN PUBLIC
PLACES
Section 19-4001. PURPOSE AND 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 Minnesota Statutes, Section 342, related to
the use cannabis and hemp products within the City.
B. Findings. The City finds and concludes that these regulations are appropriate and lawful, and
that the proposed amendments are in the public interest and for the public good.
Section 19-40002. DEFINITIONS. For purposes of this section, the following definitions shall
apply in the interpretation and enforcement of Sections 19-4000 through 19-4002.
1. Cannabis Flower, Cannabis Products, Lower-Potency Hemp Edibles, Hemp-
Derived Consumer Products. For purposes of this article, the terms “Ccannabis
flower,” “cannabis products,” “lower-potency hemp edibles,” and “hemp-derived
consumer products” shall have the definitions given to them in Minnesota Statutes,
section 342.01, as it may be amended from time to time.
2. Public Place. For purposes of this article, “Ppublic place” is defined as any indoor
or outdoor area that is used or held out for use by the public whether owned or
operated by public or private interests. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section
152.0263, subd. 5, “public place” does not include the following: (i) a private
residence, including the person's curtilage or yard; (ii) private property not
generally accessible by the public, unless the individual is explicitly prohibited
from consuming cannabis flower, cannabis products, lower-potency hemp edibles,
or hemp-derived consumer products on the property by the owner of the property;
and (iii) the premises of an establishment or event licensed to permit on-site
consumption of cannabis flower, cannabis products, lower-potency hemp edibles,
or hemp-derived consumer products.
Section 19-4001. USE OF CANNABIS AND HEMP PROHIBITED IN PUBLIC
PLACES. No person shall use cannabis flower, cannabis products, lower-potency hemp edibles,
or hemp-derived consumer products in a public place.
Section 19-4003. PROHBITION No person shall use Cannabis Flower, Cannabis Products,
Lower-Potency Hemp Edibles, or Hemp-Derived Consumer Products in a Public Place. A
violation of this section shall be considered a petty misdemeanor notwithstanding any other penalty
provision in the city code, and, upon conviction, the violator shall be punished by a fine not to
exceed $200.
Page 94 of 137
Section 19-40024. PENALTIES. A violation of this section shall be considered a petty
misdemeanor notwithstanding any other penalty provision in the city code, and, upon conviction,
the violator shall be punished by a fine not to exceed $200.
Section 19-4005. SEVERABILITY.
If any part, term or provision of this ordinance is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be
invalid, preempted by state law, or unconstitutional, such portion shall be deemed severable and
such unconstitutionality or invalidity shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this
article, which remaining portions shall continue in full force and effect.
Section 19-4006. EFFECTIVE DATE
This ordinance shall take effect following its passage and publication in accordance with state law.
Page 95 of 137
8/21/2025
1
Ordinance Amending Chapter
19-4000 Prohibiting the Use of
Cannabis and Hemp Products in
Public Places
First Reading
City Council Meeting, August 25, 2025
Shannon Pettit, City Clerk
Updating Ordinance to Align with State
Statutes Chapter 342, Cannabis Regulations
2
•Purpose and Findings;
•Definitions;
•Prohibition; and
•Severability.
1
2
Page 96 of 137
8/21/2025
2
Section 19-4003
3
•Section 19-4003. PROHIBITION - No person shall use
Cannabis Flower, Cannabis Products, Lower-Potency Hemp
Edibles, or Hemp-Derived Consumer Products in a Public
Place. A violation of this section shall be considered a petty
misdemeanor notwithstanding any other penalty provision
in the city code, and, upon conviction, the violator shall be
punished by a fine not to exceed $200.
4
Questions?
3
4
Page 97 of 137
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 8/25/2025
TO: City Council
FROM: Shannon Pettit, City Clerk
THROUGH: Daren Nyquist, Deputy City Manager
BY: Shannon Pettit, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Ordinance 2025-07 Establishing Chapter 23-2750 in the Brooklyn Center City Code
of Ordinances to Regulate Temporary Cannabis Events (Second Reading)
Requested Council Action:
- Motion to open the public hearing
- Take public comment
- Motion to close the public hearing
- Motion to approve Ordinance No. 2025-07; Establishing Chapter 23-2750 in the
Brooklyn Center City Code of Ordinance to Regulate Temporary Cannabis Events; and
- Motion to approve a resolution for summary publication of the aforementioned
ordinance in the Brooklyn Center Sun Post.
Background:
Council received a presentation regarding the regulation of Temporary Cannabis Events
on June 23, 2025, and at the August 11, 2025, meeting, set the public hearing for
August 25, 2025.
Tonight is a public hearing. The City Council will need to open the public hearing, take
public comments, close the public hearing, and then, if there is consensus, make a
motion to approve Ordinance 2025-07.
Additionally, the City Council will need to make a motion to approve a resolution for a
summary publication of Ordinance 2025-07, Establishing Chapter 23-2750 in the Brooklyn
Center City Code of Ordinances to Regulate Temporary Cannabis Events.
Budget Issues:
n/a
Inclusive Community Engagement:
n/a
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
n/a
Strategic Priorities and Values:
Page 98 of 137
ATTACHMENTS:
1. 2025-07 Temp Cannabis Events
2. Resolution_Summary_Publication_Establish_Cannabis_Temp_Events_Regulations
3. Comparision of original and new 19-4000 Prohibiting Cannabis
Page 99 of 137
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 137
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.
Page 101 of 137
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 137
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.
Page 103 of 137
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.
Page 104 of 137
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 137
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
Page 106 of 137
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.
Page 107 of 137
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.
Page 108 of 137
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.)
Page 109 of 137
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
HENNEPIN COUNTY
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-07
RESOLUTION APPROVING SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF AN ORDINANCE
ESTABLISHING CHAPTER 23-2750 TO REGULATE TEMPORARY CANNABIS EVENTS
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center acted at its August 25, 2025,
meeting to adopt Ordinance No. 2025-07 “Ordinance Establishing Chapter 23-2750 to Regulate
Temporary Cannabis Events”; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Section 412.191, subdivision 4 allows publication of
adopted ordinances by title and summary in the case of lengthy ordinances or those containing
maps or charts; and
WHEREAS, the City Council determines publishing the entire text of the Ordinance is not
in the best interests of the City, as the Ordinance is readily available to the public on the City’s
website and by contacting City Hall; and
WHEREAS, the City Council determines the following summary clearly informs the
public of the intent of Ordinance and where to obtain a copy of the full text.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Brooklyn
Center hereby approves publication of the following summary language as publication of the
Ordinance:
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
SUMMARY PUBLICATION
ORDINANCE NO. 2025-07
AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING CHAPTER 23-2750 TO REGULATE TEMPORARY
CANNABIS EVENTS
The Brooklyn Center City Council adopted the above-referenced ordinance amending Section 23-
2750 to the City Code of Ordinances. The ordinance includes legislative findings, purpose, and
authority for temporary cannabis event regulations, including definitions, permit requirements,
application requirements and review, fees, insurance requirements, regulations, penalties for
individuals, and enforcement. The ordinance is in effect 30 days from this publication. The full
text of the ordinance is available on the City’s website and can be obtained by contacting City
Hall.
Page 110 of 137
August 25, 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 137
Comparison of the current Chapter 19-4000 to the proposed repeal and replace of same.
Additions are highlighted in yellow, deleted language is in red text and struck through.
Section 19-4000. PROHIBITING USE OF CANNABIS AND HEMP PRODUCTS IN PUBLIC
PLACES
Section 19-4001. PURPOSE AND 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 Minnesota Statutes, Section 342, related to
the use cannabis and hemp products within the City.
B. Findings. The City finds and concludes that these regulations are appropriate and lawful, and
that the proposed amendments are in the public interest and for the public good.
Section 19-40002. DEFINITIONS. For purposes of this section, the following definitions shall
apply in the interpretation and enforcement of Sections 19-4000 through 19-4002.
1. Cannabis Flower, Cannabis Products, Lower-Potency Hemp Edibles, Hemp-
Derived Consumer Products. For purposes of this article, the terms “Ccannabis
flower,” “cannabis products,” “lower-potency hemp edibles,” and “hemp-derived
consumer products” shall have the definitions given to them in Minnesota Statutes,
section 342.01, as it may be amended from time to time.
2. Public Place. For purposes of this article, “Ppublic place” is defined as any indoor
or outdoor area that is used or held out for use by the public whether owned or
operated by public or private interests. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section
152.0263, subd. 5, “public place” does not include the following: (i) a private
residence, including the person's curtilage or yard; (ii) private property not
generally accessible by the public, unless the individual is explicitly prohibited
from consuming cannabis flower, cannabis products, lower-potency hemp edibles,
or hemp-derived consumer products on the property by the owner of the property;
and (iii) the premises of an establishment or event licensed to permit on-site
consumption of cannabis flower, cannabis products, lower-potency hemp edibles,
or hemp-derived consumer products.
Section 19-4001. USE OF CANNABIS AND HEMP PROHIBITED IN PUBLIC
PLACES. No person shall use cannabis flower, cannabis products, lower-potency hemp edibles,
or hemp-derived consumer products in a public place.
Section 19-4003. PROHBITION No person shall use Cannabis Flower, Cannabis Products,
Lower-Potency Hemp Edibles, or Hemp-Derived Consumer Products in a Public Place. A
violation of this section shall be considered a petty misdemeanor notwithstanding any other penalty
provision in the city code, and, upon conviction, the violator shall be punished by a fine not to
exceed $200.
Page 112 of 137
Section 19-40024. PENALTIES. A violation of this section shall be considered a petty
misdemeanor notwithstanding any other penalty provision in the city code, and, upon conviction,
the violator shall be punished by a fine not to exceed $200.
Section 19-4005. SEVERABILITY.
If any part, term or provision of this ordinance is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be
invalid, preempted by state law, or unconstitutional, such portion shall be deemed severable and
such unconstitutionality or invalidity shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this
article, which remaining portions shall continue in full force and effect.
Section 19-4006. EFFECTIVE DATE
This ordinance shall take effect following its passage and publication in accordance with state law.
Page 113 of 137
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 8/25/2025
TO: City Council
FROM: Elizabeth Heyman, Director of Public Works
THROUGH: Touyia Lee
BY: Lydia Ener, 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
Requested Council Action:
Motion to open the Public Hearing, take public input, close the Public Hearing and
consider approval of a resolution vacating easements for the 7100 Brooklyn Boulevard
site redevelopment in connection with the proposed final plat of 7100 Corporate Plaza
2nd Addition.
Background:
A public hearing is scheduled on August 25, 2025. The public hearing is to consider a
portion of easements as referenced above that are associated with the 7100 Brooklyn
Boulevard redevelopment. 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.
The attached exhibits outline the release and termination of easements and show the
locations of said existing easements. The City Attorney has reviewed the release and
termination documents and concurs to the purpose and form of the documents.
Staff recommends that a presentation be provided to the City Council prior to holding
the Public Hearing. Following the presentation, a Public Hearing to consider vacating
the easements as referenced above should be conducted to receive public comments.
A resolution vacating a portion of a drainage and utility easement within Lots 1, Block 1,
7100 Corporate Plaza 2nd Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota is provided for City
Council consideration upon closing of the Public Hearing. It should be noted that this
resolution will only take effect upon the release and filing of the final plat of 7100
Corporate Plaza 2nd Addition, execution and filing of associated and separate
rededicated easements for said associated development.
Page 114 of 137
Budget Issues:
NA
Inclusive Community Engagement:
NA
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
NA
Strategic Priorities and Values:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. NHA Easement Vacation Ordinance
2. Notice for Publication - NHA Easement Vacation General
Page 115 of 137
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. 2025-08
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 116 of 137
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 117 of 137
BR291\10\1040935.v1
EXHIBIT A
Page 118 of 137
BR291\10\1040935.v1
EXHIBIT B
Page 119 of 137
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
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 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.
TYPE OF REQUEST: Easement Vacation
APPLICANT | PROPERTY OWNER: New Horizon Academy
PROPERTY ADDRESS | PID: 7100 Brooklyn Boulevard, Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 | 27-119-
21-33-0097
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.
(Public Hearing Notice was posted to Sun Post on July 24th 2025)
Page 120 of 137
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 8/25/2025
TO: City Council
FROM: Ginny McIntosh, Planning Manager
THROUGH: Jesse Anderson, Community Development Director
BY: Ginny McIntosh, Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Planning Commission Application No. 2025-006, Submitted by Kimley-
Horn on Behalf of Shingle Creek LLC for Preliminary and Final Plat
Approval of the Shingle Creek Crossing 7th Addition (1000, 1020, 1050,
1100, and 1150 Shingle Creek Crossing)
Requested Council Action:
Motion to adopt a resolution approving Planning Commission Application No. 2025-006
for preliminary and final plat approval of Shingle Creek Crossing 7th Addition, based on
the findings of fact and submitted plans, and as amended by the conditions of approval
in the resolution.
Background:
Kimley-Horn (“the Applicant”) is requesting approval of a preliminary and final plat for
SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING 7TH ADDITION on behalf of Shingle Creek LLC (“the
Property Owner”). The requested re-platting would allow for the existing property lines
for the identified parcels to be adjusted and straightened to better align with the layout
of the proposed buildings for Building Sites L, M, O, Q, S, and N within the Shingle
Creek Crossing Planned Unit Development (PUD).
Due to the nature of the requests, a public hearing notice was published in the Brooklyn
Center Sun Post on July 31, 2025. Mail notifications were sent to those property owners
and residents located in vicinity of the Subject Property, and a public hearing notice
uploaded to the City’s website.
On August 14, 2025, the Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding the
request for plat approval of SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING 7TH ADDITION. No public
comments were received in advance of or at the public hearing. Representation of the
Property Owner, Shingle Creek LLC, and the Applicant, Kimley-Horn, were present to
address questions of the Planning Commission.
The Commissioners inquired on the rationale for re-platting the lots and how the lots
would be maintained once developed (e.g. snow removal). Mr. Frank Gatlin of Shingle
Creek LLC indicated that the purpose of the re-plat was to clean up each of the
currently vacant lots to make them more attractive for sale. Discussion was held
regarding the current breakdown in ownership within Shingle Creek Crossing. The
Commissioners expressed appreciation to the Property Owner in continuing his efforts
to sell the remaining seven lots within the shopping center.
Page 121 of 137
Following the close of the public hearing, the Planning Commission elected to
unanimously (5-0) recommend City Council approval of the requested preliminary and
final plats for SHINGLE CREEK 7TH ADDITION, subject to the Applicant complying with
the conditions as outlined in the Planning Commission report dated August 14, 2025,
and associated resolution.
A copy of the Planning Commission Report for Planning Commission Application No.
2025-006, dated August 14, 2025, and the City Council resolution is included with this
memorandum.
Budget Issues:
None to consider at this time.
Inclusive Community Engagement:
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
Strategic Priorities and Values:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution - Approval of Planning Commission Application No. 2025-006
2. Staff Report - Planning Commission Application No. 2025-006 (August 14, 2025)
3. Exhibit A - Planning Commission Application No. 2025-006 - Plat and Survey
Documentation
4. Exhibit B - Planning Commission Application No. 2025-006 - Published Notice
(July 31, 2025)
Page 122 of 137
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION REGARDING PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION
NO. 2025-006 FOR APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT
FOR SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING 7TH ADDITION (1000, 1020, 1050, 1100,
and 1150 SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING)
WHEREAS, Planning Commission Application No. 2025-006 was submitted by
Applicant Kimley-Horn on behalf of Property Owner Shingle Creek LLC and encompassing
certain properties commonly addressed as 1000, 1020, 1050, 1100, and 1150 Shingle Creek
Crossing; and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned properties are located within the Shingle Creek
Crossing Planned Unit Development, and the original final plat was approved in 2011 and
contemplated the re-platting of the former Brookdale Mall properties into 19 lots and one outlot to
facilitate phased improvements and development within the shopping center; and
WHEREAS, since the original Planned Unit Development ad plat approvals in
2011, subsequent subdivision approvals and numerous amendments to the Planned Unit
Development have been approved to accommodate market conditions; and
WHEREAS, the requested re-plat would allow for the re-alignment and
straightening of five existing parcels located on approximately 7.94 acres and known as Building
Sites L, M, O, Q, S, and N within the Shingle Creek Crossing Planned Unit Development; and
WHEREAS, these lots, which are currently identified as Lots 14 and 15, Block 1 of
the SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING ADDITION, and Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 2 of the SHINGLE
CREEK CROSSING 2ND ADDITION, would be re-platted into Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, Block 1 of
the SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING 7TH ADDITION; and
WHEREAS, existing drainage and utility easements, as identified on the provided
SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING 7TH ADDITION preliminary and final plats, would remain; and
WHEREAS, on August 14, 2025, the Planning Commission of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, held a duly called public hearing, whereby this item was given due
consideration, a staff report was presented, and a public hearing was opened to allow for public
testimony regarding the plat requests for SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING 7TH ADDITION, which
were received and noted for the record; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined in its review of the plat and materials
submitted with Planning Commission Application No. 2025-006, that said plat is in general
conformance with the City of Brooklyn Center’s City Code of Ordinances, and specifically
Page 123 of 137
RESOLUTION NO.
Sections 35-8106 (Preliminary Plat) and 35-8107 (Final Plat).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that Planning Commission Application No. 2025-006, as submitted
by Kimley-Horn and requesting approval of the preliminary and final plat for SHINGLE CREEK
7TH ADDITION be approved based upon the findings of fact in the Planning Commission staff
report dated August 14, 2025, submitted documentation and plans, and as amended by the
following conditions of approval:
1. Approval of the preliminary plat, final plat, and mylar for SHINGLE CREEK
CROSSING 7TH ADDITION shall be subject to the provisions as outlined under Chapter
35 (Unified Development Ordinance), including, but not limited to Sections 35-8106
(Preliminary Plat) and 35-8107 (Final Plat).
a. All requested revisions as outlined in the Planning Commission report prepared
for Planning Commission Application No. 2025-006 and dated for the August 14,
2025, Planning Commission meeting shall be addressed.
b. Any comments and/or requirements from the City Attorney’s office. The Property
Owner shall submit an up-to-date certified abstract of title or registered property
report and such other evidence as the City Attorney may require showing title or
control.
2. Any comments and/or requirements as provided by Hennepin County.
3. The successful recording of said plat (mylar) with Hennepin County within one (1) year
following date of City Council approval; otherwise, the final plat shall be considered
void.
4. Any development on the Subject Properties shall be subject to separate City consideration
and approval of a site and building plan and amendments to the Shingle Creek Crossing
Planned Unit Development plans and documents, as contemplated within Sections 35-
2103.e (Existing Planned Unit Developments) and 35-8300 (Planned Unit
Developments), and to reflect the Subject Properties as identified within the SHINGLE
CREEK CROSSING 7TH ADDITION.
Page 124 of 137
RESOLUTION NO.
August 25, 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 125 of 137
App. No. 2025-006
PC 08/14/2025
Page 1
Planning Commission Report
Meeting Date: August 14, 2025
Application No. 2025-006
Applicant | Property Owner: Kimley-Horn | Shingle Creek LLC
Addresses | PIDs: 1000, 1020, 1050, 1100, and 1150 Shingle Creek Crossing, Brooklyn
Center, MN 55430 | 02-118-21-31-0065, 02-118-21-31-0063, 02-118-21-
32-0029, 02-118-21-32-0024, 02-118-21-32-0025, 02-118-21-31-0058, 02-
118-21-32-0030, 02-118-21-32-0031, and 02-118-21-31-0064
Requests: Preliminary and Final Plats — SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING 7TH ADDITION
Map 1. Subject Properties Proposed for Re-plat to SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING 7TH ADDITION.
REQUESTED ACTION
Kimley-Horn (“the Applicant”) is requesting approval of a preliminary and final plat for SHINGLE CREEK
CROSSING 7TH ADDITION on behalf of Shingle Creek LLC (“the Property Owner”)—refer to Exhibit A. The
requested re-platting would allow for the existing property lines for the identified parcels in Map 1
above to be adjusted and straightened to better align with the layout of the proposed buildings for
Building Sites L, M, O, Q, S, and N within the Shingle Creek Crossing Planned Unit Development (PUD).
• Application Filed: 07/15/2025
• Review Period (60-day) Deadline: 09/13/2025
• Extension Declared: No
• Extended Review Period Deadline:
Page 126 of 137
App. No. 2025-006
PC 08/14/2025
Page 2
Due to the nature of the requests, a public hearing notice was published in the Brooklyn Center Sun Post
on July 31, 2025 (Exhibit B). Mail notifications were sent to those property owners and residents located
in vicinity of the Subject Property, and a public hearing notice uploaded to the City’s website.
The majority of properties located in vicinity to the Subject Property are owned by the same Property
Owner who submitted the application request as outlined in this report (Planning Commission
Application No. 2025-006), and include the following addresses: 1000, 1020, 1050, 1100, and 1150
Shingle Creek Crossing (“the Subject Properties”). Other neighboring property owners include the City of
Brooklyn Center Economic Development Authority, KKMBA Brooklyn Center LLC (HOM Furniture), Carol
Blum Rev Trust (Bank of America), and MJ Pro Enterprise Inc (Pop! Car Wash).
Site Data
2040 Land Use Plan: Transit-Oriented Development (TOD)
Neighborhood: Centennial
Current Zoning: Planned Unit Development/Commerce District (PUD/C2)
Site Area: Approximately 7.94 acres
Surrounding Area
Direction 2040 Land Use Plan Zoning Existing Land Use
North Transit-Oriented
Development (TOD)
Planned Unit
Development/Commerce
District (PUD/C2)
Commercial (Domino’s, Aspen
Dental, Pop! Car Wash)
South ROW (Highway 100) (ROW/Highway 100) Major Highway (Highway 100)
East Transit-Oriented
Development (TOD)
Planned Unit
Development/Commerce
District (PUD/C2)
Commercial (Bank of America,
HOM Furniture)
West Transit-Oriented
Development (TOD)
Planned Unit
Development/Commerce
District (PUD/C2)
Commercial (Empire Foods)
PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT
The originally approved final plat for Shingle Creek Crossing was approved on May 23, 2011, and created
a series of lots for almost the entirety of the former Brookdale Mall area. The Subject Properties, as they
exist today, were approved through the creation of the overall Shingle Creek Crossing Planned Unit
Development (PUD). The original preliminary plat approval for Shingle Creek Crossing contemplated the
re-platting of the former Brookdale Mall properties, and excluding the former Sears parcel, into 19 lots
and one outlot to facilitate phased improvements and development within what is today known as
Shingle Creek Crossing shopping center. At that time, Building Site L was contemplated as an
approximately 10,920-square foot retail use, Building Site M as an approximately 7,475-square foot
restaurant use, Building Site Q as an approximately 35,680-square foot retail use, and Building Site N as
an approximately 21,515-square foot retail use.
Since the original PUD and plat approvals in 2011, the Applicant has received subsequent approvals for
numerous amendments to the Planned Unit Development, as well as subdivision re-plats.
The eastern portion of the Shingle Creek Crossing Planned Unit Development, which includes the
identified Subject Properties, was originally envisioned for retail uses and sit-down restaurants, with
Page 127 of 137
App. No. 2025-006
PC 08/14/2025
Page 3
outdoor patios overlooking a partially daylit Shingle Creek. In 2012, under City Council Resolution No.
2012-129, the Planned Unit Development was amended following a re-plat of certain lots, which
resulted in an amendment to Building Site Q from an approximately 35,660-square-foot junior box retail
store to two new mixed retail/restaurant pad sites and identified as new Building Sites O and Q. Despite
years of the Property Owner seeking potential users, Building Sites L, M, O, Q, S, and N remain vacant.
Parking standards within the Planned Unit Development for Shingle Creek Crossing were set to a
minimum 4.5 parking stalls per 1,000-square feet of gross floor area for retail uses and a minimum
parking ratio of 10 parking stalls per 1,000-square feet for restaurant pad sites. As proposed, all five (5)
lots would meet the minimum requirements for commercial or retail uses.
The 2009 Daylighting of Shingle Creek Framework Plan presented conceptual plans, cost estimates, and
a financial strategy through cooperative efforts of Hennepin County, the City of Brooklyn Center, and
developer Gatlin Development Company. At the time, a proposal had been to replace the designated
FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) floodplain on “Lot 16” (also known as old Building Site
Q, which are now Building Sites O and Q), through the identified flood storage area within the partial
daylighting of Shingle Creek. A full daylighting of Shingle Creek was explored back in 2011; however, the
costs associated within removal of two box culverts to maximize the Creek as an amenity for economic
development were not supported at that time.
Image 1. Aerial Image Showing Subject Properties with Proposed New Property Lines and Building Footprints.
Page 128 of 137
App. No. 2025-006
PC 08/14/2025
Page 4
Image 2. Existing Subject Property parcels for Building Sites L, M, O, Q, S, and N.
This past year, City staff, in coordination with the Applicant and the Shingle Creek and West Mississippi
Watershed Commission (Consultant Stantec) had a feasibility report prepared for the potential full
daylighting of Shingle Creek where the Subject Properties are located. Although an application for grant
funding was successfully submitted to the Minnesota DNR Environment and Natural Resources Trust,
the application request was ultimately not successful.
As proposed, no new lots would be created as part of the requested preliminary and final plat requests
for SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING 7TH ADDITION. The Applicant identifies a 57-foot-wide drainage and utility
easement and a 20-foot-wide drainage and utility easement on the plat. Both easements are in
existence today and there are no plans to alter or vacate them.
City staff reviewed the preliminary and final plat requests against Section 35-8100 (Subdivisions and
Planned Unit Developments) and specifically Sections 35-8106 (Preliminary Plat), 35-8107 (Final Plat),
and 35-8108 (Combined Preliminary and Final Plat Approval). Following staff review, requested revisions
were provided to the Applicant in a follow-up meeting and sent via email for incorporation into the
revised preliminary and final plats.
Requested revisions to the preliminary plat for SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING 7TH ADDITION include:
1. Provision of surveyor name on preliminary plat and to match final plat;
2. Spelling error for “Brooklyn Center” in right-hand corner of preliminary plat;
3. Clarify legend symbology and clearly identify property line with thicker line;
4. Spell out zoning classification information (i.e. “Planned Unit Development/Commerce
District”);
5. Rename building sites on preliminary plat and in identified Site Data Table to reflect the
approved building site names under the Shingle Creek Crossing Master PUD plans (i.e. L, M,
O, Q, S, and N as opposed to A, B, C, D, E, and F);
6. Clearly identify building setbacks per City approvals and any variances granted under the
Shingle Creek Crossing Planned Unit Development plans and documents;
7. Ensure building footprint sizes for each identified building site match the last approved
footprint sizes for the Shingle Creek Crossing Master PUD Plans and documents and any
footprints are located outside any identified building setbacks;
8. Identify any existing sewer, water, culvert, and other underground facility connections and
to a distance of 100 feet beyond tracts with grades, invert elevations, and locations of catch
basins, any manholes, and hydrants, unless otherwise waived by City Engineer; and
9. Label identified contours at vertical intervals of not more than two feet, except that contour
lines shall be no more than 100 feet apart.
Page 129 of 137
App. No. 2025-006
PC 08/14/2025
Page 5
Requested revisions to the final plat for SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING 7TH ADDITION include:
1. Revise the City of Brooklyn Center signature block to reflect signature lines for the City of
Brooklyn Center “Mayor” and “City Clerk” per Section 35-8107.b.2 (Final Plat).
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
City Staff recommend the following conditions be attached to any positive recommendation on the
approval of Planning Commission Application No. 2025-006 for SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING 7TH ADDITION:
1. Approval of the preliminary plat, final plat, and mylar for SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING 7TH
ADDITION shall be subject to the provisions as outlined under Chapter 35 (Unified Development
Ordinance), including, but not limited to Sections 35-8106 (Preliminary Plat) and 35-8107 (Final
Plat).
a. All requested revisions as outlined in the Planning Commission report prepared for
Planning Commission Application No. 2025-006 and dated for the August 14, 2025,
Planning Commission meeting shall be addressed.
b. Any comments and/or requirements from the City Attorney’s office. The Property
Owner shall submit an up-to-date certified abstract of title or registered property report
and such other evidence as the City Attorney may require showing title or control.
2. Any comments and/or requirements as provided by Hennepin County.
3. The successful recording of said plat (mylar) with Hennepin County within one (1) year following
date of City Council approval; otherwise, the final plat shall be considered void.
4. Any development on the Subject Properties shall be subject to separate City consideration and
approval of amendments to the Shingle Creek Crossing Planned Unit Development plans and
documents, and to reflect the Subject Properties as identified within the SHINGLE CREEK
CROSSING 7TH ADDITION, as contemplated within Sections 35-2103.e (Existing Planned Unit
Developments) and 35-8300 (Planned Unit Developments).
RECOMMENDATION
City staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of Planning
Commission Application No. 2025-006 for the SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING 7TH ADDITION preliminary and
final plats, based on the findings of fact and subject to the Applicant complying with the Conditions of
Approval as noted above.
Attachments
Exhibit A — Planning Commission Application No. 2025-006 documentation, prepared by Gatlin
Development Company, Kimley-Horn, and Sunde Land Surveying.
Exhibit B — Public Hearing Notice, as published in the Brooklyn Center Sun Post, and dated July 31,
2025.
Page 130 of 137
From: Jose A. Baella, Vice President of Architecture & Planning
Gatlin Development Co., Inc
To: Ginny McIntosh, Planning Manager
City of Brooklyn Center, MN
Summary/ Reasoning for Proposed Replat:
The purpose of the re-plat is to adjust and straighten the property lines, so they better
align with the layout of the proposed buildings. Each parcel will still provide adequate
parking to meet code requirements for its intended use.
Exhibit A
Page 131 of 137
A
B
C
D
EF
LOT 1,
BLOCK 1
LOT 2,
BLOCK 1
LOT 3,
BLOCK 1
LOT 5,
BLOCK 1
LOT 4,
BLOCK 1
Th
i
s
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
,
t
o
g
e
t
h
e
r
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
c
o
n
c
e
p
t
s
a
n
d
d
e
s
i
g
n
s
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
e
d
h
e
r
e
i
n
,
a
s
a
n
i
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
o
f
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
,
i
s
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
o
n
l
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
a
n
d
c
l
i
e
n
t
f
o
r
w
h
i
c
h
i
t
w
a
s
p
r
e
p
a
r
e
d
.
R
e
u
s
e
o
f
a
n
d
i
m
p
r
o
p
e
r
r
e
l
i
a
n
c
e
o
n
t
h
i
s
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
w
r
i
t
t
e
n
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
a
d
a
p
t
a
t
i
o
n
b
y
K
i
m
l
e
y
-
H
o
r
n
a
n
d
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
l
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
t
o
K
i
m
l
e
y
-
H
o
r
n
a
n
d
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
SHEET NUMBER
K:
\
T
W
C
_
L
D
E
V
\
G
A
T
L
I
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
\
S
h
i
n
g
l
e
C
r
e
e
k
\
3
D
e
s
i
g
n
\
C
A
D
\
P
l
a
n
S
h
e
e
t
s
\
C
1
.
0
-
P
R
E
L
I
M
P
L
A
T
.
d
w
g
J
u
l
y
2
9
,
2
0
2
5
-
1
2
:
4
6
p
m
BY
RE
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
No
.
DA
T
E
2
0
2
5
K
I
M
L
E
Y
-
H
O
R
N
A
N
D
A
S
S
O
C
I
A
T
E
S
,
I
N
C
.
11
9
9
5
S
I
N
G
L
E
T
R
E
E
L
N
,
S
U
I
T
E
2
2
5
,
E
D
E
N
P
R
A
I
R
I
E
,
M
N
5
5
3
4
4
PH
O
N
E
:
6
1
2
-
3
1
5
-
1
2
7
2
WW
W
.
K
I
M
L
E
Y
-
H
O
R
N
.
C
O
M
PR
E
P
A
R
E
D
F
O
R
PR
E
L
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
P
L
A
T
SH
I
N
G
L
E
C
R
E
E
K
CR
O
S
S
I
N
G
7
T
H
AD
D
I
T
I
O
N
EX 1
SH
I
N
G
L
E
C
R
E
E
K
CR
O
S
S
I
N
G
GA
T
L
I
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
BR
O
O
K
L
I
N
C
E
N
T
E
R
MI
N
N
E
S
O
T
A
DA
T
E
CH
E
C
K
E
D
B
Y
SC
A
L
E
DE
S
I
G
N
E
D
B
Y
DR
A
W
N
B
Y
KH
A
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
16
0
6
3
3
0
0
5
07
/
2
9
/
2
0
2
5
AS
S
H
O
W
N
SJ
S
SJ
S
BM
W
NORTH
SITE DATA TABLE
BUILDING
DESIGNATION PLAT LOT AREA BUILDING
PARKING
PROVIDED RATIO
A LOT 1, BLOCK 1 1.438 AC 9,800 SQ. FT.85 SPACES 8.67
B LOT 2, BLOCK 1 1.003 AC 7,700 SQ. FT.60 SPACES 7.79
C LOT 3, BLOCK 1 0.776 AC 7,000 SQ. FT.45 SPACES 6.43
D LOT 4, BLOCK 1 1.476 AC 10,500 SQ. FT.68 SPACES 6.48
E LOT 4, BLOCK 1
3.238 AC
11,400 SQ. FT.
161 SPACES 6.91
F LOT 5, BLOCK 1 11,900 SQ. FT.
TOTAL 7.94 AC 58,300 SQ. FT.
BENCHMARKS
TOP OF NUT OF FIRE HYDRANT 85 FEET +/- NORTH OF NORTHEAST BUILDING CORNER OF OLD WALMART IN EMPTY LOT.
ELEVATION: 853.22 FT
TOP OF NUT OF FIRE HYDRANT 85 FEET +/- NORTH OF NORTHWEST BUILDING CORNER OF OLD WALMART IN EMPTY LOT.
ELEVATION: 853.32 FT
TOP OF TOP NUT OF FIRE HYDRANT ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PRIVATE DRIVE, SOUTH OF VERIZON AND DOMINO'S BUILDING
ELEVATION: 852.11 FT
TOP OF TOP NUT OF FIRE HYDRANT ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PRIVATE DRIVE, SOUTH OF POP CAR WASH.
ELEVATION: 849.82 FT
VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
EXISTING PLAT DESCRIPTION
(PER FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE COMMITMENT NO. NCS-1249505-MPLS, COMMITMENT DATE
FEBRUARY 02, 2025)
REAL PROPERTY IN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, STATE OF MINNESOTA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
PARCEL 1:
LOTS 14 AND 15, BLOCK 1, SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA.
(TORRENS PROPERTY - CERTIFICATE OF TITLE NO. 1459103)
PARCEL 2:
LOTS 1, 2, 3, BLOCK 2, SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING 2ND ADDITION, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA.
(TORRENS PROPERTY - CERTIFICATE OF TITLE NOS. 1419929, 1419930 AND 1419931)
PARCEL 3:
NONEXCLUSIVE APPURTENANT EASEMENTS IN FAVOR OF PARCELS 1 AND 2 CREATED IN DOCUMENT ENTITLED
"EASEMENTS WITH COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS AFFECTING LAND" DATED JUNE 28, 2011, RECORDED JUNE 30, 2011, AS DOCUMENT NO. 4868197,
AS AMENDED BY FIRST AMENDMENT TO EASEMENTS WITH COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS AFFECTING LAND, DATED AUGUST 22, 2014, RECORDED
SEPTEMBER 9, 2014, AS DOCUMENT NO. 5198198, AS AMENDED BY THIRD AMENDMENT TO EASEMENTS WITH COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS
AFFECTING LAND, DATED NOVEMBER 2, 2020, RECORDED DECEMBER 2, 2020, AS DOCUMENT NO. 5775962.
DEVELOPER/ OWNER
GATLIN DEVELPMENT CO., INC.
1301 RIVERPLACE BLVD SUITE 1900
JACKSONVILLE, FL 32207
(904) 379-4774
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
GINNY MCINTOSH
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
6301 SHINGLE CREEK PKWY
BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55430
(763) 569-3330
ENGINEER & PREPARER
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
11995 SINGLETREE LANE SUITE 225
EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344
(612) 315-1272
CURRENT ZONING
PUD/C2
FINAL PLAT DESCRIPTION
SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING 7TH ADDITION
SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING 7TH ADDITION
PRELIMINARY PLAT
SECTION 2-T118N-R21W
BROOKLYN CENTER, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PROPERTY LINE
EXISTING OVERHEAD POWER LINE
EXISTING CHAINLINK FENCE
EXISTING J-BARRIER
EXISTING RETAINING WALL
EXISTING SANITARY SEWER
EXISTING STORM SEWER
EXISTING WATERMAIN
EXISTING GAS MAIN
EXISTING UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE
EXISTING UNDERGROUND CABLE
EXISTING CONTOUR
EXISTING SIGN
EXISTING FLARED END SECTION
EXISTING STORM MANHOLE
EXISTING STORM CATCHBASIN
EXISTING GAS METER
EXISTING POST INDICATOR VALVE
EXISTING WELL
EXISTING AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER
EXISTING ROOF DRAIN
EXISTING GATE VALVE
EXISTING HYDRANT
EXISTING METAL COVER
EXISTING ELECTRICAL METER
EXISTING AIR CONDITIONER
EXISTING TELEPHONE MANHOLE
EXISTING CABLE BOX
EXISTING GUY WIRE
EXISTING POWER POLE
EXISTING LIGHT POLE
EXISTING TREE
EXISTING TREE LINE
EXISTING CURB & GUTTER
LEGEND
Page 132 of 137
Page 133 of 137
Page 134 of 137
850.83 850.83
846.43
846.50
845.57
850.06
8
5
0
846
847
84
8
84
9
8
4
5
850
8
4
6
846 8
4
6
8
4
7
8
4
8
84
9
8
4
5
8
4
3
8
4
4
84
6
847
84
8
84
9
84
5
85
0
84
3
84
4
8
4
6
84
7
8
4
8
8
4
9
84
7
84
8
COUNTY RD NO 10
BASS LAKE RD
SH
I
N
G
L
E
C
R
K
P
K
W
Y
STA
T
E
H
I
G
H
W
A
Y
N
O
.
1
0
0
X
E
R
X
E
S
A
V
E
N
U
E
N
O
R
T
H
55TH
AVE N
56T
H
AVE
N
SHINGLE CREEK |
Brooklyn Center, MN
May 13, 2025
2025 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
NORTH
PRELIMINARY SITE AND GRADING
EXISTING PROPERTY LINE
EXISTING LOT LINE
LEGEND
EXISTING EASEMENT
PROPOSED LOT LINE
PROPOSED BUILDINGS
PRELIMINARY PROPOSED FINISHED FLOOR100.00
Page 135 of 137
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER NOTICE OF PUBLIC
HEARING
Details for CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER NOTICE OF PUBLIC
HEARING
Jul 31, 2025
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO WHOM IT MAY
CONCERN: Please take notice that the Planning Commission of the City of
Brooklyn Center will hold an in-person public hearing on Thursday, August 14,
2025 at approximately 7:00 p.m. Meeting materials can be accessed by visiting
the City of Brooklyn Center's website at: https://www.brooklyncentermn.gov/. A
definite time for this application to be considered cannot be given as it will
depend on the progression of the agenda items. TYPE OF REQUEST:
Preliminary and Final Plat APPLICANT -- PROPERTY OWNER: Kimley-Horn --
Shingle Creek LLC ADDRESSES -- PIDS: 1000, 1020, 1050, 1100, and 1150 Shingle
Creek Crossing, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -- 02-118-21-31-0065, 02-118-21-31-
0063, 02-118-21-32-0029, 02-118-21-32-0024, 02-118-21-32-0025, 02-118-21-31-0058,
02-118-21-32-0030, 02-118-21-32-0031, and 02-118-21-31-0064 BRIEF STATEMENT
OF CONTENTS OF PETITION: The Applicant requests review and consideration
of a request to re-plat certain vacant lands located within the Shingle Creek
Crossing shopping center and currently located within SHINGLE CREEK
CROSSING ADDITION and SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING 2ND ADDITION,
Hennepin County, Minnesota. Comments and questions may be forwarded to
gmcintosh@brooklyncentermn.gov up until 4:30 pm on the day of the
meeting, or by contacting Ginny McIntosh at (763) 569-3319. Your comments
will be included in the record and addressed as part of the meeting.
Save Share
8/10/25, 10:02 PM CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING | Notice Of Public Hearing | hometownsource.com
https://www.hometownsource.com/classifieds/sun_post/community/announcements/legal/notice_of_public_hearing/city-of-brooklyn-center-notice-of-pu…1/2
Exhibit B
Page 136 of 137
Alternatively, you may participate in the Planning Commission meeting via
Webex at: logis.webex.com Meeting Number (Access Code): 2862 602 8156
Password: BCPC08142025 By Phone: 1 (312) 535-8110 (Enter Access Code)
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. Ginny McIntosh Planning Manager Published in the Sun Post
July 31, 2025 1483472
8/10/25, 10:02 PM CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING | Notice Of Public Hearing | hometownsource.com
https://www.hometownsource.com/classifieds/sun_post/community/announcements/legal/notice_of_public_hearing/city-of-brooklyn-center-notice-of-pu…2/2Page 137 of 137