HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026_04-13_CCP_REGULARCITY COUNCIL
MEETING
City Hall Council Chambers
April 13, 2026
AGENDA
1. Call to Order - 7:00 p.m.
Attendees please turn off cell phones and pagers during the meeting. A copy of the
full meeting packet is available in the binder at the entrance to the Council
Chambers.
2. Roll Call
3. Pledge of Allegiance
4. Informal Open Forum
This is an opportunity for the public to address the City Council on items that are
not on the agenda. It is limited to 15 minutes. It may not be used to make personal
attacks, air personal grievances, make political endorsements, or for political
campaign purposes. Council Members will not enter into a dialogue with the
presenter. Questions from the Council will be for clarification purposes only. It will
not be used as a time for problem-solving or reacting to the comments made but
for hearing the presenter for informational purposes only. The first call will be for
those that have notified the Clerk that they would like to speak during the open
forum and then ask if anyone connected to this meeting would like to speak. When
called upon, please indicate your name and then proceed. Please be sure to state
your name before speaking.
a. Meeting Decorum
5. Invocation - Jerzak
6. Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda
These items are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted
by one motion. There isn't a separate discussion for these items unless a
Councilmember so requests, then it is moved to the end of the Council
Consideration Items.
a. Approval of Minutes
- Motion to approve meeting minutes:
• March 23, 2026, Regular Meeting
• March 23, 2026, Work Session
b. Approval of Licenses
-Motion to accept licenses as presented.
c. Forestry and Related Services Agreement Between the City of Brooklyn
Center and the City of Crystal
- Motion to approve the attached Forestry Services Agreement with the City of
Page 1 of 299
Crystal.
d. Resolution Accepting Bid and Awarding a Contract, Improvement Project No.
2026-01, 02, 03, & 04, Humboldt Avenue Reconstruction
- Motion to approve the resolution accepting the lowest responsible bid and
award a contract to Ryan Contracting Company for Improvement Project No.
2026-01, 02, 03, & 04, Humboldt Avenue Reconstruction.
7. Presentations/Proclamations/Recognitions/Donations
a. Resolution Declaring April 22, 2026, as Earth Day in Brooklyn Center
- Motion to approve a resolution declaring April 22, 2026, as Earth Day in
Brooklyn Center.
8. Public Hearings
9. Planning Commission Items
10. Council Consideration Items
a. Traffic Calming Update and 2026 Implementation Recommendations
- Motion to accept the traffic calming update and authorize staff to proceed
with 2026 traffic calming planning and implementation consistent with the
City’s draft traffic calming policies and practices.
b. Rental License Program Ordinance Amendment — First Reading
(1) Motion to approve a first reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 12,
Sections 12-901, 12-902, 12-906, 12-908,12-910, 12-911 through -916, and
Section 12-1504(4)(b) of the Brooklyn Center City Code of Ordinances
regarding Rental Licensing and Vacant Property Exceptions within the City of
Brooklyn Center.
(2) Motion to schedule a second reading of the requested ordinance
amendment and public hearing for May 11, 2026.
11. Council Report
12. Adjournment
Page 2 of 299
COUNCIL MEETING DECORUM FOR THE PUBLIC
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 City Council has
established 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.
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 299
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 4/13/2026
TO: City Council
FROM: Shannon Pettit, City Clerk
THROUGH: Daren Nyquist, Interim City Manager
BY: Bridget Doyle, Administrative Assistant
SUBJECT: Approval of Minutes
Requested Council Action:
- Motion to approve meeting minutes:
• March 23, 2026, Regular Meeting
• March 23, 2026, Work Session
Background:
In accordance with Minnesota State Statute 15.17, the official records of all meetings
must be documented and approved by the governing body.
Budget Issues:
Inclusive Community Engagement:
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
Strategic Priorities and Values:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. 2026.03.23 CC
2. 2026.03.23 WS
Page 4 of 299
03/23/26 -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
MARCH 23, 2026
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, Councilmembers Dan Jerzak, Teneshia Kragness, Kris Lawrence-Anderson,
and Laurie Ann Moore. Also present were Interim City Manager Daren Nyquist, Interim Deputy
City Manager and Public Works Director Liz Heyman, City Engineer Lydia Ener, Fire Chief Todd
Berg, City Clerk Shannon Pettit, and City Attorney Siobhan Tolar.
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
4. INFORMAL OPEN FORUM
Mayor April Graves opened the meeting for the purpose of Informal Open Forum and reviewed
the Rules of Decorum.
Lori B. said she was glad to see Police Chief Flesland present at this meeting. She said she is a
resident of Brooklyn Center and works with the Dante and Kobe Implementation Committee. She
stated she also volunteers with a reinvestigation work group that reviews Police Officer involved
deaths so families and communities receive answers and accountability. She said it has been four
weeks since a man lost his life in an officer-involved shooting; four weeks, and the community is
still waiting for answers. She said she is not there to cast blame or rush judgment, but to ask
respectfully and firmly for transparency. She said questions remain if this man was shot in the
back while running away, and if there was a co-response with a mental health professional. She
asked if officers fired toward or into the IHOP, putting civilians at risk. She asked for the release
of body-worn cameras and squad footage, along with the 911 dispatch and CAD data, and a clear
understanding of what officers knew and how decisions were made. She said she submitted a data
request, and it was denied, which makes it difficult to move forward with trust. She added that
officer safety matters, and no one wants anyone to get hurt. She stated that if it is confirmed that
this individual was, in fact, shooting at officers, that is a serious and dangerous situation, but that
is exactly why transparency is important. She added that the purpose of these questions is not to
accuse, but to ensure proper procedures were followed and that every possible effort was made to
Page 5 of 299
03/23/26 -2- DRAFT
preserve life because preserving the sanctity of life is not optional. She said this on page one of
the BCPD policy manual, and it should guide every decision, no matter the circumstances; law
enforcement does not replace due process. She continued that Brooklyn Center is still healing
from past officer-involved shootings, including Daunte Wright and Kobe Heisler, and the
egregious harm caused by Operation Metro Surge.
Mayor Graves informed Lori B. that her time was up. She thanked Lori B. for speaking and asked
her to send her full comments to the Council via email.
Councilmember Moore moved and Councilmember Jerzak seconded to close the Informal Open
Forum.
Motion passed unanimously.
5. INVOCATION
Councilmember Kragness said in honor of National Women's History Month, she recited a poem
called "A True Leader" by Mindsets. "A True Leader doesn't shy away from responsibility.
When things go wrong, she steps up. When everyone panics, she remains calm. When others are
in doubt, she leads with Confidence. When things hit the fan, she doesn’t point fingers or make
excuses. When everyone around her is panicking, you need to be the eye of the storm. Calm,
cool, and collected. When doubt creeps in, and others start to waver, lead with Confidence. As a
true leader, you carry the weight of those around you on your shoulders, and you do it with pride.
You're not just a leader when things are going well; you're a leader when the world is falling
apart. That's what makes you stand out. That's what makes you unstoppable.”
6. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA
Councilmember Moore moved and Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson seconded to approve the
Agenda and Consent Agenda, as amended, with amendments to the minutes as stated during the
Study Session, to remove item 7b. Police Department Annual Report, and move it to a future
Council meeting, and the following consent items were approved:
6a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. March 9, 2026 – Study Session
2. March 9, 2026 – Regular Session
3. March 9, 2026 – Work Session
6b. LICENSES
RENTAL
INITIAL (TYPE III– one-year license)
5524 Aldrich Drive North DREDRICK COX
INITIAL (TYPE II– two-year license)
Page 6 of 299
03/23/26 -3- DRAFT
1409 63rd Lane North Shelly Evans
INITIAL (TYPE I– three-year license)
407 70th Avenue North River Glen TKRE LLC
3012-18 51st Avenue North Sri Lakshmi Valiveti
6415 James Circle North SIYA LLC
6900 Toledo Avenue North M BOSIRE & B B NYANGENA
RENEWAL (TYPE IV – six-month license)
3700 55th Avenue North James Ayotunde Olatunbosun
RENEWAL (TYPE III – one-year license)
2804 67th Lane North Bryan D Aitkens
RENEWAL (TYPE II – two-year license)
4207 Lakeside Avenue North, #234 Cynthia Patrick
3519 53rd Place North Jewel Johnson
4416 69th Avenue North Dmow Llc
RENEWAL (TYPE I – two-year license)
4700 Lakeview Avenue North PETER NGUYEN & LILY PHAM
2006 Brookview Drive Mnsf Ii W1 LLC
2107 70th Avenue North Infinite Property, LLC
5250 Lakeside Place TMJ PROPERTIES LLC
5316 Colfax Avenue North CAG Minnesota Fund II LLC
5808 Fremont Avenue North Cosco Property 5 Llc
6c. RESOLUTION IDENTIFYING THE NEED FOR AN LCDA
APPLICATION FOR NEW GENERATIONS MIXED USE
DEVELOPMENT ON 1500 69TH AVENUE NORTH
6d. RESOLUTION IDENTIFYING THE NEED FOR AN APPLICATION TO
THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL LIVABLE COMMUNITIES
ENVIRONMENTAL SITE INVESTIGATION & CLEANUP GRANT FUND
Page 7 of 299
03/23/26 -4- DRAFT
FOR DUR DUR BAKERY & GROCERY INC (5951 EARLE BROWN
DRIVE)
6e. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING QUOTE AND AWARDING A CONTRACT
FOR THE TREE CLEARING PORTION OF IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
NO. 2026-01, 02, 03, & 04, HUMBOLDT AVENUE RECONSTRUCTION
7. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS/RECOGNITIONS/DONATIONS
7a. HIGHWAY 252/I-94 PROJECT UPDATE: PRESENTATION BY THE
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Mr. Nyquist introduced Amber Blanchard, the Project Manager from the Minnesota Department
of Transportation (MnDOT), to present this item to the Council.
Ms. Blanchard stated she is the Metro District Major Projects Manager as well as the Project
Manager for the Highway 252, I-94 environmental study. She stated she would go through the
project overview first, discuss the study location, the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
process funding, and the purpose and the need. She stated she would also be discussing some
outstanding topics that she would like to have for future conversations, as well as a story map and
next steps.
Ms. Blanchard said the purpose of the presentation today is to discuss how MnDOT has been and
will continue to be in the community at coffee and community chats through pop-up events, which
have helped build relationships and get more in-depth on the issues. She noted that MnDOT does
acknowledge that Brooklyn Center City Council and the community have concerns about some of
the recommendations, which is one of the reasons she is here today to begin a conversation that
provides information and assesses the data that the Council needs to see and make decisions. She
noted that MnDOT will not have a perfect plan, as there are trade-offs with the recommendations
of phase 1A and 1B, and there will likely be trade-offs with phase two. She added that MnDOT
and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) will need to assess all the comments and
evaluate results, impacts, and benefits to strike a balance in decision-making for the project. She
stated that the draft EIS may identify a preferred alternative and some medication. The final EIS
may also select a preferred alternative, and additional mitigation of impacts may also be present
in that document. She stated she forces tonight's meeting and future meetings with MnDOT,
presenting information and the Council asking questions to understand, and if she cannot answer,
she will bring back that information at a future meeting, and the cycle continues until the Council
feels they have what they need to understand key topics of importance. She noted that MnDOT
used this process with the city of Richfield to gain municipal consent for their involvement with a
project on I-494 phase two, which will be undergoing construction next year.
Ms. Blanchard noted that Brooklyn Center is a participating agency in the environmental study for
this project, which means Brooklyn Center gets to comment on the draft EIS as a local agency,
and this ongoing conversation with the Council will help prepare the Council for what will be seen
in the draft EIS. Ms. Blanchard gave a quick project overview with Highway 252 being studied
Page 8 of 299
03/23/26 -5- DRAFT
from Highway 610 down to the I-694/I-94 system interchange, as well as the interchange down to
North 4th and 3rd Street in North Minneapolis.
Ms. Blanchard stated that MnDOT is in the EIS process, with solutions being funneled down to
solve problems based on purpose and need, and is pared down until there is an alternative, as this
helps MnDOT identify what the impacts are. Steps one through three of this process have already
been completed, and are in step four, which has had a number of different subphases, but first, the
needs of the project include walkability, bikeability, vehicle safety, vehicle mobility, and that
mobility includes transit. The purpose of this project is to provide safe and reliable movement of
people and goods across multiple modes on and across Highway 252 and I-94. She stated that in
phase four, subphase 1A, the over or under solution for Highway 252 was evaluated with the local
roadways, with a recommended solution based on property impacts, including relocation and
reduced community facility impacts, as well as fewer storm water impacts and pack objectives that
were set forth way before this project. Subphase 1B will focus on the Highway 252 access
combinations, with access combination one recommended, including interchanges at 85th Avenue,
Brookdale Drive, and 66th Avenue. This access combination was recommended as it performed
the best with transit user accessibility, emergency response time, and was consistent with future
land uses and the function of local roads and impacts to businesses and properties.
Ms. Blanchard explained that there is currently $150 million available for the construction of this
project, with a number of funding sources, but there will need to be more funding in the future,
which is yet to be determined.
Ms. Blanchard noted some outstanding topics for future consideration include air quality, freight,
parkway concept, the distance between 66th Avenue, Highway 252, I-94, and I-694 interchange,
which have been frequently mentioned through public engagement. She noted that these are things
that she can come back and discuss with the Council, as well as any others that the Council may
want to hear about. She noted that there are safety and mobility preliminary results in the Council's
packet that can be discussed now or at a future meeting.
Ms. Blanchard said the next steps include a website coming out, with interactive tools that are
being updated, so the public can look at the access combinations studied for this project during
phase two. The alternatives are also in the Council's packet with all the information. The relaunch
of the website will take place on April 20.
Ms. Blanchard explained that the anticipated schedule of the draft EIS (DEIS) coming out this year
is planned for October 2026 publication, followed by a formal 60-day public comment period,
which is the maximum days allowed by the NEPA process. She noted there will be a Public
Hearing during that comment period, and there will be noise wall voting happening during that
same public comment period timeline. She noted that noise could be a future topic with the
Council if they were interested. Other items coming in the future are near-road carbon monoxide
analysis done for air quality at certain intersections in Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Park, which
is coming next year. She added that there has been some cost-sharing information talk with City
Staff, and she will be coming out to Thursday's meeting with policy revisions that were made
public about a month ago, which MnDOT had included in the cost participation policy that they
Page 9 of 299
03/23/26 -6- DRAFT
have. She stated that there is a journey to community wellness recommended solution coming
soon to address the community needs, which are all important. She said MnDOT has reached out
to the Equity and Health Neighborhood Advisors to try to meet with them in April. She noted that
an in-depth noise wall analysis for the noise wall voting that is coming this fall, during the public
comment period, needs to take place in the next few months. She added that the benefits and
impacts on Brooklyn Center will also be forthcoming. She noted that at this time, that is all the
information she has, and will stand for questions from the Council.
Councilmember Jerzak thanked Ms. Blanchard for the presentation. He noted that he met with
MnDOT staff and Ms. Blanchard last Friday and brought a lot of his concerns to them. He said it
is his intention to have an open and honest conversation that should in no way be taken personally,
and Ms. Blanchard has been very helpful, and he believes she has done her best. He continued
that the amount of both City Staff time, Council time, the Highway 252 Task Force, and countless
fellow residents is not only considerable, but it also contributes to the overall frustration and a
mistrust of MnDOT. He stated there is some Highway 252 fatigue here. He stated for the record
that in May 2023, 1,050 days ago, the City submitted to MnDOT, with the honorable
Commissioner Dunberger, the City's concerns, of which few have been answered. He continued
that in October 2024, 511 days ago, City Staff resubmitted additional concerns to MnDOT along
with the cost share policy, which he acknowledged is still vague. The October 2024 letter to
MnDOT also discussed the loss of tax revenue into perpetuity. He noted that he and Ms. Blanchard
had this discussion, and MnDOT said they were working on it, but it is one of those things that is
easy to forget, because the City keeps bringing it up and gets new charts, meetings, and more
information. He said from day one, he asked what the benefits of this project are to the residents
of Brooklyn Center, and that should not be that hard to answer, because Brooklyn Center is taking
the brunt of this between Minneapolis and Brooklyn Park. He said he was going to recap questions
from the Highway 252 Task Force that have not been answered by MnDOT. He said for the record,
one of the questions was how it is possible, when comparing the five access options on the table
provided by MnDOT, that the preferred AC1 option is still predicted to have more than twice as
many serious injury crashes. He said he does not need an answer today, but he wanted it submitted
to ensure that MnDOT answers the question. He noted that he does not continually hear the no
build option, and if MnDOT is not increasing safety and accomplishing things, the challenges of
Highway 610 backing up onto I-694 may be out of MnDOT’s control, but it affects the people of
Brooklyn Center, and those things need to be addressed. He said he appreciates the update, but
feels it is premature until there is concrete factual data, and any further discussion will add to the
frustration.
Mayor Graves said she could not have said it better herself.
Councilmember Moore stated she also participated in the Zoom meeting on Friday, and expressed
appreciation for Ms. Blanchard’s honesty and transparency. She stated there are still outstanding
questions and final decisions that need to be made, and the no-build option seems like the best
option. In preparation for this meeting, Councilmember Moore had asked what the benefits to
Brooklyn Center are, because it is the most impacted. While Ms. Blanchard has had meetings with
Brooklyn Park and Minneapolis, they are the least affected by the proposal. The Highway 252
Task Force has also said that when this interchange was built, it was poorly built and poorly
Page 10 of 299
03/23/26 -7- DRAFT
planned, and it has had its challenges from the get-go. Yet, somehow, Brooklyn Center has done
fine. The fact of the matter is, the crashes, impact, and the cost of this project are concerning. Ms.
Blanchard just admitted MnDOT does not even know where all the money will come from to build
this project. Nonetheless, the no-build option is not rising to the top. There has been a lot of time
invested by the City Staff, the Highway 252 Task Force, and Brooklyn Center residents.
Community members are concerned about what is going to happen and are asking how they will
benefit. The community does care about each other, especially those in the neighborhood affected
by this project.
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson said one of the concerns that was not addressed is the impact
of the Mississippi River. She said she has been on the Council for a very long time, has heard
many presentations about Highway 252, and is concerned about the environmental impact on the
Mississippi.
Councilmember Jerzak said he would be remiss if he did not ask one other question that the
Highway 252 Task Force provided, which is why MnDOT is promoting less safe alternatives that
do not follow MnDOT safety rules. He said he does not need an answer right now, but he expects
an answer, and so will the Highway 252 Task Force, and he will convey to them whatever answer
MnDOT gives.
Mayor Graves said she does not have much to add, but wanted to mention some of the
environmental rollbacks that have happened at the federal level, not at the discretion of MnDOT,
but that move this process through on a new playing field. She said she was skeptical about some
of the environmental impacts this project was going to have prior to those rollbacks and changes,
and does not feel confident about this process under fewer restrictions and parameters. She said
that while the environmental impacts continue to be a concern for her, she is also thinking about
the funding environment and wasting resources on something that is not actually wanted by
Brooklyn Center, especially when it is uncertain that the City will even get the funding. She added
that the City has been expending funding on this process and has been for several years, and her
concern is that there are other things the City could be spending funds on that would be creating
more safety, instead of studying an alternative that is not wanted, for a project that may never be
funded anyway. She added that she appreciates the work that Ms. Blanchard has done and how
responsive Ms. Blanchard has been in her role, and thanked her for the update.
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson moved and Councilmember Moore seconded to accept the
presentation from the Minnesota Department of Transportation.
Motion passed unanimously.
7b. POLICE DEPARTMENT ANNUAL REPORT
This item was removed from the Agenda.
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Page 11 of 299
03/23/26 -8- DRAFT
9. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS
10. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS
11. COUNCIL REPORT
Councilmember Kragness reported on her attendance at the following events and provided
information on the following upcoming events:
• Attended the Congressional City Conference called Hill Day at the Capitol, where there
was a delegation breakfast with Senator Kobershire, Senator Smith, House Democrats, and
Republican members.
• Attended a meeting with Representative Omar to advocate for the City. She noted that
during this meeting, Representative Omar stated that the City had not submitted any
projects, but the Police Department did, which Representative Omar does support.
12. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Graves moved and Councilmember Kragness seconded adjournment of the City Council
meeting at 7:33 p.m.
Motion passed unanimously.
Page 12 of 299
03/23/26 -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
MARCH 23, 2026
CITY HALL – COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Work Session called to order by Mayor/President April
Graves at 6:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Mayor/President April Graves, Councilmember/Commissioners Teneshia Kragness, Dan Jerzak,
Kris Lawrence-Anderson, and Laurie Ann Moore. Also present were Interim City Manager Daren
Nyquist, Interim Deputy Manager and Public Works Director Liz Heyman, Interim Deputy
Community Development Director and Planning Manager Ginny McIntosh, Assistant Engineer
Lydia Ener, City Clerk Shannon Pettit, and City Attorney Siobhan Tolar.
ACTIVE DISCUSSION ITEMS
Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak said he had one simple correction to the minutes from
February 23, on page four of 48, with a misspelling of building permit as billing permit. He asked
about the presentation at tonight's meeting by the Police Department, and noted that the Council
did not receive that presentation until earlier today, and with the full agenda, he asked if the
Council would be interested in putting that presentation off until another meeting.
Mayor/President Graves said she was ok with moving that presentation to the meeting following
the next meeting. Councilmember/Commissioner Kragness said she was fine with that, since
tonight’s agenda is so full. Mayor/President Graves said Regular Agenda item 7b. The Police
Department Annual Report will be moved to an upcoming meeting at the Staff's discretion.
Mayor/President Graves asked if there were any other questions on agenda items.
Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak asked when the presentation with Mr. McNeil is on the
agenda. Mayor/President Graves said it was on the EDA agenda.
Councilmember/Commissioner Kragness said her understanding was that the EDA session was
first. Mayor/President Graves said she was going to do the EDA meeting first, and move on to the
Work Session regarding Gravel Driveways discussion later.
Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak said he would agree to that.
Page 13 of 299
03/23/26 -2- DRAFT
Mayor/President Graves asked Interim City Manager Daren Nyquist if that was the plan. Mr.
Nyquist confirmed that the agenda was a little different since it is packed with EDA items. The
plan is to do the EDA meeting first and get through as many items as possible, adjourn for the
regular Council meeting, and then do another Work Session with additional EDA items.
Mayor/President Graves asked how she should proceed with the meeting then. City Attorney
Siobhan Tolar said that because the Council normally has a Study Session to begin with, but is
having an EDA and Work Session meeting instead, Mayor/President Graves should temporarily
adjourn this Work Session meeting and move on to the EDA meeting.
ADJOURNMENT TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING
Mayor/President Graves moved and Councilmember/Commissioner Kragness seconded a
temporary adjournment of the City Council/Economic Development Authority Work Session at
6:03 p.m.
Motion passed unanimously.
RECONVENE WORK SESSION
Mayor/President Graves moved to reopen the City Council/Economic Development Authority
Work Session at 8:18 p.m.
GRAVEL DRIVEWAYS
Mr. Nyquist introduced Interim Deputy Community Development Director and Planning Manager
Ginny McIntosh to present this item and discuss the possibility of changing the City’s ordinance
to allow gravel driveways.
Ms. McIntosh said this conversation is about gravel driveways, but there might be some other
discussion points to be had about gravel driveways in general, along with maintenance of
properties in the City. She said she would start with providing some background and said prior to
January 2023, the zoning code, or what is now the City's UDO, did not specify the types of
surfacing that were permitted for single-family, duplex, and triplex properties or what are zoned
as R1, R2, and R3. She noted that properties other than the R1 and R2 districts, or what would be
considered commercial, industrial, and multi-family properties, were specified to provide asphalt
or concrete curb and gutter. She stated that after the adoption of the City's UDO in January of
2023, the R1 and R2 district properties, which include single-family and single-family duplex
properties, were specified to be paved with either concrete, asphalt, brick, stone, concrete pavers,
or equivalent material. She added that all other district properties kept the same language regarding
concrete, and for the most part, in the City's UDO, there is language that allows a resident to
maintain and keep gravel as a non-conformity. This basically means the resident would be able to
continue use of that driveway as long as it is maintained, but there is a big asterisk on the
Page 14 of 299
03/23/26 -3- DRAFT
maintained part because there is a lot of interpretation around that. She noted that abandonment
or failure to maintain it would require the resident to meet the City's current standards, and it does
not allow the resident to expand, extend, or intensify that non-conformity. She added that she does
not have an inventory of how many gravel driveways there are in the City. She said she spoke to
the code enforcement inspectors who called out the Riverwood, Belleveue, and Northport
neighborhoods for having gravel driveways, but she could not come to a consensus on how many
there are in the City.
Ms. McIntosh continued that Chapter 19, which references public nuisances and petty offenses,
has historically allowed for vehicles, trailers, and watercraft to be parked or stored on an authorized
parking or driveway area, or a paved or graveled extension of an authorized parking or driveway
area. She explained the reasons for removal of the gravel and class five provisions as an allowable
option for R1 and R2 district properties included Staff time which is a huge one, between code
enforcement with Planning, Engineering and Public Works and the wide range and quality of
gravel driveways, requests for use of pea gravel, lack of driveway boundary, and the residents'
interpretation of maintenance. She added that in just about every permit that she sees in her
Department, there is a lot of DIY that happens, which takes a lot of Staff time because Staff become
de facto project managers. She said she has had people want to do their own driveway and just
hire a truck to come and dump gravel to make the driveway, and Staff get questions about how to
make it straight and what kind of quality the City needs to do, even if it is a cheaper product. She
noted that all of that has to take into consideration Public Works equipment and City infrastructure,
along with storm water and runoff considerations. She added that she talked to Public Works and
Engineering regarding gravel driveways, and the feedback provided was that sediment produced
by gravel would fall into the gutter and flow line, and if there are opportunities to reduce or prevent
more gravel and sediment from getting into street sweepers, that would be ideal. She added that
the concern for storm water erosion and sediment control, particularly with fine sediments such as
sand, is going into the City drains. She continued that while this probably would not cause a
problem immediately, eventually there would be sediment buildup in the manholes that could
potentially lead to more frequent maintenance.
Ms. McIntosh said consideration of Public Works equipment, including snow plans, sidewalk
plows, street sweepers, and mowing equipment, would need to be taken into consideration with
potential liability and damage considerations for mowing near gravel drives and potential
projectiles if gravel is swept up, such as damaged vinyl siding and windows. She added that
frequent maintenance to re-gravel driveways could be a code enforcement issue, and gravel
driveways can leech into the street, causing visible gravel tracking paths and impacting the overall
aesthetics of the neighborhood and maintenance of those roadways.
Ms. McIntosh noted that of all the cities surrounding them, including Brooklyn Park, Columbia
Heights, Coon Rapids, Crystal, Fridley, Golden Valley, Maple Grove, New Hope, Plymouth,
Robbinsdale, St. Anthony, and St. Louis Park, the only community that allows gravel driveways
is Plymouth. She said she did contact the Plymouth city planners and asked them about it, and she
was told that while the city does allow it, there are not very many, and they are typically for
additional parking spaces along the garage or on larger non-subdivided lots, which Brooklyn
Page 15 of 299
03/23/26 -4- DRAFT
Center does not really have. She noted that the Plymouth city planners also said stormwater and
runoff or erosion are not a big issue because they do not have that many gravel driveways, and the
HOAs in subdivisions help mitigate gravel driveways because they are not allowed there, even if
the zoning might. She added that for those non-conforming gravel driveways in Plymouth, in
industrially zoned lots, they have had run off and erosion control issues, particularly at certain
times of the year and with higher truck traffic.
Ms. McIntosh said she reached out to staff in Golden Valley about gravel driveways because they
have a lot of environmentally friendly language in their city code, and have restrictions on the use
of sealants for blacktops, and they do not allow gravel driveways either.
Ms. McIntosh asked if the City Council/ Economic Development Authority wishes to entertain
potential amendments to the City code to allow gravel driveways as an approved surface, or if
Staff should review certain provisions for amendments in the future. She added that other things
to consider are general affordability when it comes to trying to maintain a home in the City, and
perhaps they can look at different ways to address some of those issues, particularly for higher
code enforcement issues, such as parking on unapproved surfaces like parking in the grass. She
said there are certain things in the City that do generate more code enforcement letters, and maybe
that is something they could look at to create a program to try to address some of those issues.
Mayor/President Graves said one of the first things that came to mind when discussing this topic
was the fact that the City has many multi-generational families in the City, and not everybody has
a big enough driveway, and the City does not have a particularly friendly parking ordinance. She
said having the option of being able to expand a driveway to residents who can park legally and
not get ticketed or have to wake up in the middle of the night to switch cars around makes sense.
She added that while she does have environmental concerns, she is less worried about the aesthetic
things. She continued that if Staff put in some good parameters and are careful about how the
driveways would be implemented and for what reasons, she would be open to it. She said that
does not mean she wants to see residents putting in full gravel circular driveways, but if residents
need additional parking or there is a specific reason for it to make it easier to comply with City
code, or it could reduce the cost to people who have no way to comply with parking, she would be
open to it.
Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak said this topic is near and dear to his heart. He said, besides
the affordability issue, the Mayor/President is absolutely right, the City has multi-generational
families, and most of the houses are built in the 1940s and 1950s, and there is a single-car garage.
He added that each of the kids has a car, and the City does not allow them to park overnight from
2:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. When he was in code enforcement, what would happen is the kids would
park in the grass, and then code enforcement would get a call about a vehicle parked on the grass.
He said he wanted to acknowledge the inconsistency between code enforcement inspectors and
code enforcement, and he does not want to dump dirt and pea gravel down as a driveway. He
stated that the City would want class five gravel, which is one part fine, and fines have to be mixed
in with binder and other things. He added that the City used to have a brochure that said the
resident would have to dig down and remove the humus material and then put down gravel for a
Page 16 of 299
03/23/26 -5- DRAFT
driveway. He said he found it fascinating in the City’s own ordinance on page four of 10, a
minimum of two inches of concrete is required for a truck to drive over. He said a truck driving
over two inches of concrete will crack the concrete into about 40 pieces. He stated he had to give
Public Works a shout-out about the fear of gravel being on the streets, since Public Works used to
put sand in the streets, and now they want to use chemicals instead. He said this policy deserves
a robust discussion, but people have contacted him and said they cannot afford to put in an $18,000
concrete driveway when concrete costs $265 per yard plus the labor, and the City does not have
any grant money to do repairs on concrete. He added that if a neighbor does not like someone and
there are a lot of cars parked there, then you get adversarial neighbor-on-neighbor complaints.
Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak continued that the City does not have a lot of new
construction for residential, and there are a number of class five driveways in the City already, and
the way this is set up is a solution looking for a problem, because it is not that prevalent. He said
the Council needs to be aware of the economic challenges of the City's residents, and there are
programs to help residents get into homes, but the last thing a resident is going to want to do, since
no housing is affordable right now, is spend money to upgrade a driveway because it is
unaffordable. He said if he thought this was a problem, he would be the first one to say it is. He
added that it is about to be spring, and Ms. McIntosh will be getting permits, and he thinks the
Council should consider stopping any enforcement until coming up with a comprehensive policy,
which could not possibly be done tonight. He said he wants to be respectful of the aesthetics,
reasoning, and improvement while acknowledging the resident's challenges. He added that if
residents are having economic challenges, nobody is going to improve their property; if they
cannot afford it, they cannot afford it. That is the reality. He continued that parking on the grass
is a problem, and is one of the most common things he used to get calls about as an inspector. He
said he notices more people parking on the grass in the spring, and bringing mud into the streets
than broken up bituminous driveways. He said he would like this Council's input to find some
amendments to allow reasonable maintenance and define what maintenance is, and if that includes
grass growing up, and potholes, because those are the types of things he had trouble with in code
enforcement.
Councilmember/Commissioner Moore thanked Ms. McIntosh for her presentation. She said Ms.
McIntosh mentioned she does not know the number of properties, but it sounds like Riverwood,
Bellevue, and Northport, which would all be on the south end of the City, and the number of gravel
extensions that have been approved is unknown, too. She asked if the question today is whether
or not the City will allow people to put gravel down for any reason, because these residents already
have either gravel, asphalt, or concrete now. She asked when Ms. McIntosh is referring to the
future, and what the question is exactly. She continued that Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak
brought up code enforcement, which is a whole different thing. She asked if Ms. McIntosh is
questioning whether or not the City should amend and allow gravel driveways. Ms. McIntosh said
this started as a conversation about allowing for gravel driveways as an approved surface, which
moves into other questions that might not necessarily be questions of allowing gravel driveways,
but the City does have issues and needs to address them. Ms. McIntosh said for the question
regarding multi-generational families, there are a lot of code enforcement issues with people
parking on the grass, which is not permitted because of zoning, and Chapter 35 does not allow it.
Page 17 of 299
03/23/26 -6- DRAFT
Ms. McIntosh continued that this conversation spurs other questions, such as the missing middle
zoning legislation that keeps coming back year after year, and there have been multiple attempts
to abolish the parking minimum, and with that, if they do push through legislation that would allow
for multiple different types of housing and R1 single-family districts. She added that one of the
big topics this session has been that for cities like Brooklyn Center, it would have to allow for four
different housing options in single-family neighborhoods, and it would not just be single-family
homes, but duplexes and different types of housing units to address the housing crisis. She said
that with all the housing options, parking will come up, and the City may allow on-street parking
at that point because it would be the cheapest option for homeowners. She noted that when she
lived in St. Louis Park, she lived in an apartment complex in a residential neighborhood without
enough parking, and there were language exemptions that allowed residents to park on sections of
that street, and during snow emergencies, they were allowed to park on one side of the street. She
said that maybe something that the City should start exploring, especially some of these streets
like Dupont, which are big streets that could accommodate parking on one side.
Ms. McIntosh said street parking is the question, as it is the cheapest option, and she has had people
come in and ask if they can pave their entire front yard, and she has had to tell them no, residents
cannot pave more than 50 percent of their front yard. She added that they removed the provision
to allow for multiple curb cuts because people were basically putting in airport landing strips on
their properties. She said driveway extensions are fine, but they had to add language that garages
in the backyards are allowed, with driveways for access, and residents cannot use their neighbors'
properties to get to their own garages because that was an issue, too. She said her Department has
tried to address things and manage it the best they can, but there does come a point as a first-string
suburb when they have to ask the question if street parking will be explored, or is off the table, or
not allowed unless forced.
Mayor/President Graves said she was in favor of street parking more than five years ago, when it
was up for discussion, and what ended up happening is that things were added to the ordinance
regarding snow removal instead, so it did not turn out the way she had hoped. She said she is open
to the conversation regarding street parking.
Councilmember/Commissioner Moore said she is open to the conversation too, with a
collaboration across Departments and how that could work and help the situation. She said she
wanted to talk about the large-scale street reconstruction that happened on Orchard Lane, then east,
and now the City will do the west, but there are also street resurfacing projects that happened 10
years ago on 55th. She said the City does not talk to the homeowners with gravel driveways when
there is street reconstruction or resurfacing happening, and opportunities that may give the
homeowner, which is sad that it only comes up under code enforcement.
Lydia Ener said the City does address that, not within the private property section, but depending
on the project type, it does get addressed within the City's right-of-way, which could include the
replacement of concrete aprons and ensuring that anything within the City's right-of-way is
handled. She said things that needed to be fixed for non-compliance, like driveways and curb cuts,
would also be fixed at that time and adjusted with the street project.
Page 18 of 299
03/23/26 -7- DRAFT
Councilmember/Commissioner Moore asked if, for projects like Orchard Lane, where resurfacing
was being done, City Staff is talking to homeowners in that area regarding their driveways and
concrete aprons. Ms. Ener said it depends on the type of project, so if the City is doing a simple
mill and overlay that does not involve concrete, then Staff would not talk to the homeowners. She
said any projects that involve concrete work, with driveways, sidewalks, trails, or larger-scale full-
depth reclamation and reconstruction projects, then the City would address that with the
homeowner.
Councilmember/Commissioner Moore asked if mill and overlay would fit the definition of asphalt
and if it could be a discussion for folks who were looking at extending or doing something with
an asphalt driveway. Ms. Ener said the City cannot mandate that any contractor work behind the
right-of-way, but the contractor can do things inside the City's right-of-way. Ms. Ener continued
that if the contractor is willing to work with property owners, then the City would send that
information out to residents, but it would never be included within the City's contract because Staff
does not want to have work outside of the City's right-of-way involved in the City's contract. Ms.
Ener added that a contractor could do a private contractor with a homeowner, but in the 12 years
that she has been doing this, she has only seen that happen a couple of times because typically the
large-scale road construction companies are not the same companies that do residential driveways.
She added that it would take too much time away from the street project, and they do not typically
schedule homeowner work. She said the City fixes anything inside the right-of-way, but does not
touch behind that right-of-way.
Councilmember/Commissioner Moore asked if putting in an impervious surface, versus the class
five gravel, could qualify for assistance from the repair fund from the City. Ms. McIntosh said
Councilmember/Commissioner Moore does not want to see that waitlist for that repair fund.
Councilmember/Commissioner Moore said there is a waitlist for that, and there are funds there, so
this is just a cycle of a waitlist, and people who cannot afford it will never have the opportunity to
really get any funds to help with anything, so the Council needs to make decisions in the best
interest of the entire community. Councilmember/Commissioner Moore asked if Ms. McIntosh is
saying that the only thing that is currently allowed for gravel driveways is those that are
grandfathered in, or residents who want to extend their current asphalt or concrete driveway.
Ms. McIntosh said the language is conflicting in Chapter 19, and the nuisance code needs an
overhaul, but there is language in there about having gravel extensions for boat parking and vehicle
parking. She added that Chapter 35 has language in it, and the zoning code UDO has a plethora
of options like brick pavers, concrete pavers, asphalt, or equivalent material, but gravel is not one
of them. She added that the equivalent material could be used to propose another option, and the
Staff would have to run through it, but they have not had any residents do that. She noted that last
year her Department got 50 driveway permits, but they were all for concrete or asphalt despite
having other options out there. She said in talks with Mr. Aarsvold, they have gone back and forth
on the language in the LAHA provisions and could potentially consider a separate loan program
catered towards code enforcement with driveway replacement that could be funded through LAHA
or EDA funding, and tailor it to specific AMI levels due to LAHA requirements. She said it would
Page 19 of 299
03/23/26 -8- DRAFT
be capped at 115 percent AMI, which is not really where this would be focused for driveway
replacement, and would have to look at below 50 percent AMI that would filter out the waiting list
for a program like that, and that is something that Staff could look into.
Councilmember/Commissioner Moore apologized to her colleagues because this conversation
kind of took a trip around the sun back to the beginning. She thanked Ms. McIntosh and said she
appreciated the detail provided.
Mayor/President Graves said for the sake of this discussion, it would be good for the Staff to bring
back a couple of different options for them to discuss further. She said this might include tweaking
the ordinance, or maybe lifting up a program or specific contextual situations. She added that
having all of those options would help them come to a consensus on how to move forward.
Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak said another thing to remember is that the City has had
extraordinary snowplowing services, and residents have come to expect that and do not like people
parked on the street. He said there is also code enforcement and police CSO issues with overnight
ticketing. He said if parking is allowed on one side of the street, then the City has to put up signs
everywhere. He added that on garbage day, the other side of the street has to put their garbage
cans out onto the street. He continued that everyone should go on a ride along with a snowplow
driver, and see how challenging it is to go around a car, so there are a lot of things to consider here,
but he said he is open to the discussion. He noted that he is not opposed to street parking, but it
could cause issues with fire trucks and ambulances getting through, and it is not as simple as
allowing street parking. He added that until the Staff goes through Chapter 19, anything that the
City Council/Economic Development Authority does would just be a band-aid, and there would
be conflicts. He said he would guess out the 50 driveways that pulled permits last year, except for
two of them, because they called Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak, they felt forced to spend
$18,000 for a new driveway, and had to get a second mortgage to pay for it because of an
interpretation of the City's code, and that is not right either. He asked how anyone would feel to
be forced into spending that kind of money on a driveway or being fined, and that is when fines
were getting doubled, which was another problem. He said a grand majority of those who elected
to put in a driveway last year probably had it in their budget, and there needs to be inspections for
all of that, but he is talking about existing driveways. He said that forcing a driveway on someone
who might be on a fixed income and already has a gravel driveway, or forcing a resident to tear
out a gravel driveway, is problematic, too. He encouraged Ms. McIntosh to bring options, as this
topic deserves a longer discussion, and said he would be very careful about forcing people to
upgrade things because they simply cannot afford it.
Ms. McIntosh said the City does not force people to do anything. She said she has been at
properties where she has had to argue with people who had a driveway that was dirt, gravel, and
grass, and the homeowner stated it was a gravel driveway. She said in Prior Lake, there were
discussions about forcing residents to convert their gravel driveways to an approved surface, and
Brooklyn Center does not take that stance. She added that right now, there is a provision that if a
resident has a gravel driveway, the requirement, just like any other driveway, if it is busted up and
getting into the roadway, the City is going to have a problem with that, and it needs to be
Page 20 of 299
03/23/26 -9- DRAFT
maintained. She said to clarify that the City does not force residents to convert from gravel to
concrete, asphalt, or brick.
Mayor/President Graves said, when Ms. McIntosh brings back the different driveway options,
please include the parking part as well, because she had a fairly in-depth conversation about this
seven years ago when Councilmember Butler was on the Council, and Mayor Wilson was the
Mayor. She added that when she bought her house in 2011, one of the very first things she spent
money on was her driveway, and the reason she did that was that it was cracked concrete and it
was draining towards her house. She said it was a recipe for disaster, so she invested in it, and it
was extremely expensive and took her four years to pay for it, but not everybody has as good credit
as she does. She said now her driveway seems too small because she has five drivers in her house,
but only three cars, and that could change.
Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak said he knows this is a sensitive subject, but patios out front
that are currently approved are so small that you have to step off the patio to change your mind.
He said this is discouraging people from being out front, talking to their neighbors. He said that
needs to be looked at, too, because the current patios that are allowed are very small. Ms. McIntosh
said that the amendment was made in 2014, and she was not there when that happened. She said
at that time, there were deck provisions adopted and unenclosed and enclosed porch provisions,
but it is only allowed to encroach within the minimum setbacks by so much, and has to provide
main access to the door. If that is something that the Councilmember/Commissioners would like
to discuss, they could. Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak said he would like to see why the
City does not have anybody facing the street.
Mayor/President Graves said she grew up in St. Paul, and front porches were a thing.
Ms. McIntosh said the majority of the City's housing stock was built within the same 20-year
period, and all of the R1 properties were built at the 35-foot setback, so that is going to be a
heartburn check for residents on how close is too close for porches. She said at 35 feet that is not
what St. Paul feels, and even if you put a porch on the front, it would still be 20 and some feet
away from the street.
Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak said he would like to look at the ordinance regarding patios.
Mayor/President Graves said Ms. McIntosh had suggested looking at Chapter 19, and asked who
should look at that, because Staff has a lot going on, and asked if there is somebody else that could
be delegated to do that, or a Commission that could look at that. Ms. McIntosh said that the chapter
is regarding nuisances, and the Police Department would have to look at it.
Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak said no, it belongs in Community Development, Code
Enforcement, and Housing, and the chapter is not as big as Staff might think it is. He added that
at the point that chapter was scheduled to be revisited, and it never got there, and like anything
else, it needs to be updated.
Page 21 of 299
03/23/26 -10- DRAFT
Mayor/President Graves said maybe Staff could identify which parts of the chapter need the most
attention and take it piece by piece and help with it, rather than saying the entire chapter is just a
mess. She suggested City Staff identify two other topics from that chapter that could be addressed
throughout the rest of the year and take baby steps.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor/President Graves moved and Councilmember/Commissioner Moore seconded the
adjournment of the City Council/Economic Development Authority Work Session at 8:57 p.m.
Page 22 of 299
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 4/13/2026
TO: City Council
FROM:
THROUGH:
BY: Bridget Doyle, Administrative Assistant
SUBJECT: Approval of Licenses
Requested Council Action:
-Motion to accept 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.
Amusement Devices
Metro Coin of MN, LLC, 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy
Entertainment Licenses
Oga Madam, 6000 Shingle Creek Pkwy
Mechanical
Heidelberger Enterprises Inc., 30132 105th St. NW, Princeton 55371
Home Express Delivery Service LLC, 804 Valley Park Dr., Shakopee 55325
Precision Point Plumbing, 12315 61st Ave N, Plymouth 55442
SPI Mechanical LLC, 1116 Lincoln Street NE, Minneapolis 55413
Total Home Solutions, 1008 Prospect Pointe Rd, Jordan 55352
Sign Hanger’s
Install this Awning & Sign, 4835 Lyndale Ave N, Minneapolis 55430
Budget Issues:
Inclusive Community Engagement:
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
Strategic Priorities and Values:
Page 23 of 299
ATTACHMENTS:
1. For Council Approval 4.13.26 FOR COUNCIL 3.10 to 3.31
2. Rental Criteria
Page 24 of 299
Location Address License Subtype Renewal/Initial Owner
Property
Code
Violations License Type Police CFS*
Final License
Type**
Previous
License
Type***
Consecutive
Type IV's
1531 Humboldt Pl N Single Initial R2 GROUP LLC 11 Type IV N/A Type IV N/A N/A
1543 Humboldt Pl N Single Initial R2 GROUP LLC 13 Type IV N/A Type IV N/A N/A
3206 67th Ave N Single Initial K J Arnevik/renae K Arnevik 3 Type II N/A Type II N/A N/A
1300 67th Ave N
Multiple Family
5 Bldgs 90 Units Renewal
R & E Anda Family Prop Llc
Met Requirements
161 = 1.79 per
unit Type III 0 Type III Type III N/A
4811 Lakeview Ave
Multiple Family
1 Bldg 4 Units Renewal
Eileen Booker
Met Requirements
2 Type I 0 Type I Type IV N/A
6907 Dupont Ave N
Multiple Family
1 Bldg 4 Units Renewal Evang Luth Ch Of The Master 3 Type II 0 Type II Type II N/A
5412 Fremont Ave N Two Family Renewal
Lenin Cardenas Duenas
Did not meet requirements 4 Type II 0 Type IV Type IV 2
3000 64th Ave N Single Renewal Infinite Property Llc
1 Type I 0 Type I Type I N/A
3807 61st Ave N Single Renewal Ih2 Property Illinois Lp
5 Type II 0 Type II Type II N/A
4019 Joyce La Single Renewal
Ih2 Property Illinois Lp
Met Requirements
5 Type II 0 Type II Type III N/A
5419 Humboldt Ave N Single Renewal Cecilia Pineda
1 Type I 0 Type I Type II N/A
5546 Emerson Ave N Single Renewal Raymond & Cindy Scherbing 15 Type IV 0 Type IV Type II 0
6014 Girard Ave N Single Renewal Rifive Investments Llc
2 Type I 0 Type I Type II N/A
6018 Kyle Ave N Single Renewal Christina Duong & Danny Vo
2 Type I 0 Type I Type II N/A
6116 Aldrich Ave N Single Renewal
BRIDGE SFR IV SEED BWR LLC
Met Requirements 13 Type IV 0 Type IV Type III 0
6628 Camden Dr Single Renewal
Wells Bovard
Did not meet requirements 10 Type IV 0 Type IV Type IV 4
6765 Humboldt Ave N Single Renewal
Loan Nguyen
Met Requirements 4 Type II 0 Type II Type IV N/A
6809 Fremont Pl N Single Renewal 786 Homes-f09 Llc
9 Type III 0 Type III Type II N/A
Rental Licenses for Council Approval 4.13.26
Page 25 of 299
6912 Logan Ave N Single Renewal
Hpa Borrower 2017 1 Llc
Did not meet requirements
0 Type I 0 Type IV Type IV 4
7141 Newton Ave N Single Renewal
Ih2 Property Illinois Lp
Did not meet requirements 3 Type II 0 Type IV Type IV 7
7217 Camden Ave N Single Renewal Ih3 Property Minnesota Lp
2 Type I 0 Type I Type III N/A
7225 Major Ave N Single Renewal Iasis Lii LLC 9 Type III 0 Type III Type II N/A
7236 Noble Ave N Single Renewal Caleb J Moses/nicole A Moses 14 Type IV 0 Type IV Type II 0
*CFS = Calls for service for renewal licenses only (Initial licenses are not applicable to CFS and will be listed as N/A)
**License type being issued
***Initial licenses will not show a previous Type I = 3 year, Type II = 2 year, Type III = 1 year, Type IV = 6 months
All properties are current on city utilities and property taxes
Page 26 of 299
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 27 of 299
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 4/13/2026
TO: City Council
FROM: Elizabeth Heyman, Director of Public Works
THROUGH:
BY: Elizabeth Heyman, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: Forestry and Related Services Agreement Between the City of Brooklyn
Center and the City of Crystal
Requested Council Action:
- Motion to approve the attached Forestry Services Agreement with the City of Crystal.
Background:
The City Council adopted funding in the 2026 Stormwater Utility Fund to create a
shared City Forester position with the City of Crystal. This joint powers agreement (JPA)
defines how the two cities will collaborate on this work and outlines how the costs of the
position will be shared.
For many years Brooklyn Center has assigned Forester duties to a Public Works
Maintenance employee. While the City has had Foresters with highly specialized
forestry knowledge, the assigned role is geared toward someone with a Public Works
maintenance background. The assigned position has served the City well in the past;
however, in the face of climate change and a growing list of invasive species, the scope
and types of skills needed to maintain Brooklyn Center’s urban forests have changed.
Creating a shared Forester position will allow Brooklyn Center to hire an individual with
specialized forestry knowledge while sharing the financial burden of the new position
with the City of Crystal.
Budget Issues:
Inclusive Community Engagement:
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
Strategic Priorities and Values:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. 260407 Crystal-Brooklyn_Center_City_Forester_JPA
Page 28 of 299
Page 29 of 299
- 1 -
FORESTRY AND RELATED SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER AND THE CITY OF CRYSTAL
This Forestry Services Agreement (the “Agreement”) is made this _____ day of ____________,
2026, by and between the City of Brooklyn Center (hereinafter referred to as “Brooklyn Center”) and the
City of Crystal (hereinafter referred to as “Crystal”) for the utilization of Crystal employees to provide
services to Brooklyn Center within the boundaries of Brooklyn Center; (collectively Brooklyn Center and
Crystal are referred to herein as the “Parties”).
WHEREAS, Brooklyn Center is authorized and empowered to provide for the care and
management of its urban forest, including the management of shade tree diseases and pests; and
WHEREAS, Brooklyn Center is authorized and empowered to undertake a program of noxious
weed abatement; and
WHEREAS, Crystal is authorized and empowered to provide for the care and management of its
urban forest, including the management of shade tree diseases and pests; and
WHEREAS, Crystal is authorized and empowered to undertake a program of noxious weed
abatement; and
WHEREAS, Crystal intends to hire a full-time City Forester for the provision of these same urban
forestry services within its own municipal boundaries, but is only in need of a part-time staff person; and
WHEREAS, Brooklyn Center is in need of a part-time City Forester; and
WHEREAS, by this Agreement, the Parties can provide forestry services to their citizens while
achieving cost savings; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59, it is the desire of the Parties and the
purpose of this Agreement that the aforesaid urban forestry services required by Brooklyn Center be
performed by qualified City Forester personnel of Crystal on behalf of Brooklyn Center within the
jurisdictional limits of Brooklyn Center in accordance with the terms and conditions contained herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth below, the
Parties agree as follows:
1. Term. The term of this Agreement (the “term”) shall commence effective the date of the latest
signature hereto and annually renew under the same terms and conditions, unless terminated as
provided herein. The term of this Agreement shall automatically renew for subsequent annual
terms (beginning on January 1, 2027), unless either party provides written notice of termination to
the other party in which case the Agreement shall end at the end of the then current term.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Agreement may be terminated as provided in Sections 6 and
7 below.
2. Scope of Services. For the term of this Agreement, Crystal, through use of its City Forester
personnel, shall provide Brooklyn Center with the following services (the “Services”), in and on
Page 30 of 299
- 2 -
behalf of Brooklyn Center and at the direction of Brooklyn Center’s City Manager or their
designee:
a. Urban Forest Management. Brooklyn Center intends to conduct a program of urban forest
management, including tree pest control pursuant to the authority granted by Minn. Stat.
§§89.51-64. It is the intent of the Parties that Crystal performs all of the duties normally
performed by a city forester and a certified tree inspector in the state of Minnesota within
the corporate limits of Brooklyn Center and is appointed Brooklyn Center’s contracted City
Forester. As Brooklyn Center’s contracted City Forester, Crystal shall implement and
enforce the urban forest management program and shall provide the following services,
among others:
i. Monitor and inspect trees, shrubs, and landscaping located on Brooklyn Center-
owned public lands (rights-of-way, parks, grounds, etc.) for damages, hazards,
disease, invasive plants and species, and other unsafe or undesirable conditions.
Determine and recommend appropriate treatment or remedial activities and assist
with carrying out approved actions.
ii. Act as a certified tree inspector under Minn. Stat. §89.63 for Brooklyn Center.
Coordinate all activities of Brooklyn Center relating to the control and prevention
of shade tree disease and pests under Minn. Stat. §89.62 and Brooklyn Center Code
Ch. § 20, including detection, inspection, and diagnosis. Coordinate and oversee
diseased tree removal and treatments on both City-owned public land and private
property.
iii. Coordinate with Brooklyn Center personnel on various tree and landscaping issues
for Brooklyn Center-owned public lands and occasionally private properties.
iv. Assist with planning, bidding, and administering contracts between Brooklyn
Center and other independent contractors for removing, maintaining, and planting
of trees, shrubs, plants, and landscaping on Brooklyn Center-owned public lands.
v. Perform removals, trimming, maintenance, and planting of trees, shrubs, plants, and
landscaping on Brooklyn Center-owned public lands using industry-accepted best
practices.
vi. Review construction plans and provide recommendations for tree and landscaping
issues associated with Brooklyn Center projects and private developments or
improvements.
vii. Prepare, administer and coordinate of the annual budget for the Brooklyn Center’s
Forestry Division
viii. Assist with preparation of Brooklyn Center’s Capital Improvement & Capital
Equipment plans, as they pertain to forestry needs within Brooklyn Center.
Page 31 of 299
- 3 -
ix. Performs administrative duties, such as, but not limited to, preparing reports,
developing plans and specifications for contracted work, work order generation,
and general divisional correspondence.
b. Noxious Weed Management. Brooklyn Center intends to conduct a program of noxious
weed management. It is the intent of the Parties that Crystal performs all of the duties
normally performed by an assistant weed inspector in the state of Minnesota and Crystal is
appointed as Brooklyn Center’s contracted assistant weed inspector. As Brooklyn Center’s
assistant weed inspector, Crystal shall implement and enforce Minn. Stat. §§18.76-18.91
(hereafter Minnesota Noxious Weed Law) and Brooklyn Center City Code §§19-601 - 04,
on behalf of Brooklyn Center and shall provide the following services, among others:
i. Act as an assistant weed inspector under Minn. Stat. §18.80 and perform all
required duties under §18.81, subd. 2.
ii. Issue individual notices for the control or eradication of noxious weeds on private
property and, where necessary under Minn. Stat. §18.83, actually control or
eradicate such noxious weeds.
iii. Enter into and manage noxious weed management plans under Minn. Stat. §18.78,
subd. 3.
iv. Maintain a log and comment sheet for all inspections, notices, noxious weed
management plans, and noxious weed control or eradication. The log will contain
at a minimum the time, place, and type of service.
c. Other Services. Crystal shall additionally provide the following other services:
i. Assist with developing, administering, and implementing Brooklyn Center’s urban
forestry activities and programs, including, but not limited to ordinances,
procedures and policies, Tree City USA, Arbor Day, tree sales, relevant grants,
budgeting, educational articles/newsletters, meetings, reports, storm clean up and
recovery, and other urban forestry programming.
ii. Provide an annual proposal for recommended tree species to plant in boulevards to
the Brooklyn Center City Council so that the City Council may meet its obligations
under Brooklyn Center City Code §20-402.
iii. Provide copies of all inspections, notices, nuisance abatement reports, and noxious
weed management plans made on a monthly basis.
iv. Perform other urban forestry related duties and assignments as assigned.
v. Crystal and Brooklyn Center will establish a regular communication process
between the City Forester, Brooklyn Center’s Streets and Parks Supervisor, and
Crystal’s Parks and the Superintendent of Parks and Facilities in order to
communicate on issues and discuss timing for Crystal to provide and complete
Services.
Page 32 of 299
- 4 -
3. Brooklyn Center Responsibilities in Providing Services. Brooklyn Center shall be responsible for
the following:
a. Brooklyn Center shall work with Crystal to create an annual work plan that outlines the
tasks the City Forester will provide for Brooklyn Center. The annual work plan will also
outline a list of materials and equipment that are necessary to complete the tasks set in the
work plan. The cost of these materials and equipment will be shared pursuant to Section 5
of this agreement.
b. Brooklyn Center shall provide Crystal feedback for the City Forester’s annual performance
review.
c. Brooklyn Center shall participate in the interview process for the City Forester,
d. Brooklyn Center shall notify property owners of required abatements, provide official
notice of a city-managed abatement under Brooklyn Center City Code §20-304 or the
Minnesota Noxious Weed Law, and assess unpaid charges for abatements.
4. Brooklyn Center City Code Compliance. Crystal shall consult with Brooklyn Center staff
regarding the manner in which the inspections, notices, abatement, and other urban forestry
activities are conducted and for the determination of what enforcement action is appropriate and
consistent with Brooklyn Center City Code, Chapter 20 (Trees) and Chapter 19 Article 16
(Providing for the Control of Noxious Weeds) and other policies and ordinances as established by
Brooklyn Center. Crystal shall confer with Brooklyn Center staff regarding interpretation of the
City Code. Brooklyn Center shall have a duty to inform Crystal of any and all updates or changes
to the Brooklyn Center City Code.
5. Compensation for Services and Expenses. Subject to the limitations set forth in this Agreement,
Brooklyn Center will compensate Crystal as described below for the Services under this
Agreement. There shall be no compensation for the Services other than as specified in this
Agreement.
a. Brooklyn Center shall pay to Crystal 50% of the City Forester’s total compensation
including salary and employer provided benefit costs, payroll taxes, etc.
b. Brooklyn Center shall pay to Crystal 50% of the City Forester’s total materials and
equipment costs including but not limited to: equipment purchases; equipment
maintenance; and tree, shrub, plant, landscaping purchases and disposal; computer, phone,
and/or other needed technology, inclusive of software licenses. These materials and
equipment will be listed in the City Forester’s annual work plan pursuant to Section 3 of
this agreement.
c. Each party shall have the right to collect any fees, fines, or other revenue generated
according to Minnesota Statutes or that party’s City Code by the City Forester for Services
which occur within that party’s municipal boundaries.
Page 33 of 299
- 5 -
d. The amounts in paragraphs (a) and (b) will be determined on an annual basis which will be
converted to a quarterly that will be paid by Brooklyn Center to Crystal. Crystal will
provide an invoice to Brooklyn Center for any amounts owed under paragraph (c), which
will be due to Crystal with the monthly payment following receipt of the invoice. Payment
by Brooklyn Center may be withheld for Services found by the Brooklyn Center City
Manager or designee to be unsatisfactory or in violation of federal, state, and local laws,
ordinances, rules or regulations. If Brooklyn Center fails to make any payment due Crystal
for Services performed to the satisfaction of the Brooklyn Center City Manager and
expenses within thirty - five (35) days after the date of Crystal’s invoice, Crystal may,
after giving thirty (30) days written notice to Brooklyn Center, and without waiving any
claim or right against Brooklyn Center and without incurring liability whatsoever to
Brooklyn Center, suspend Services under this Agreement until Crystal has been paid in full
all amounts due for Services, expenses and charges.
e. All Crystal’s expenses incurred in providing the Services are included in the above-
described compensation. Brooklyn Center shall not be liable to Crystal for any additional
expenses paid or incurred by Crystal, unless otherwise agreed to in writing by Brooklyn
Center.
6. Termination. Notwithstanding any of the foregoing, this Agreement may be terminated by either
party, without or without cause, as follows:
a. If by one party, at the end of the calendar year upon written notice of termination provided
to the other party no later than September 1st of that year; or
b. At any time, upon mutual agreement of the Parties.
7. Default. Notwithstanding any provision hereof, if Crystal fails to satisfy any of the provisions of
this Agreement, or so fails to perform and/or administer the services detailed herein in such a
manner as to endanger the performance of this Agreement or the services provided hereunder, this
shall constitute default. Unless Crystal’s default is excused in writing by Brooklyn Center or
otherwise cured by Crystal within 10 days or, where an immediate cure is not reasonably possible
due to industry-accepted seasonal planting or trimming limitations within 10 days when such
limitation is no longer applicable, of such written notice of default from Brooklyn Center,
Brooklyn Center may, upon subsequent written notice, immediately cancel/terminate this
Agreement or exercise any other rights or remedies available to Brooklyn Center under this
Agreement or law. In the event of Crystal’s default, Crystal shall be liable to Brooklyn Center for
any and all costs, disbursements, attorneys and consultant fees reasonably incurred by Brooklyn
Center in enforcing this Agreement.
Page 34 of 299
- 6 -
8. Dispute Resolution. In the event of a dispute between the Parties regarding the terms of this
agreement, including any attachments or exhibits hereto, the Party with the grievance must report
it to the offending party in writing within 10 business days of discovery. At the time the offending
party is made aware of an issue, the parties must attempt to resolve the issue immediately. If the
issue cannot be resolved within 30 business days, the issue will be elevated and reported to the
leadership of the parties unable to resolve the dispute for further mediation and resolution. The
relevant leaders will convene a meeting to hear and discuss the dispute. No later than 10 business
days after the mediation, the decision makers will issue a decision on how the parties will resolve
the dispute.
9. Indemnification.
a. Crystal agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless Brooklyn Center, and its officials,
agents, and employees, from and against all claims, actions, damages, losses, and expenses
arising out of or resulting from Crystal’s performance of the Services required under this
Agreement, provided that any such claim, action, damage, loss, or expense is attributable
to bodily injury, sickness, disease, or death or to the injury to or destruction of property
including the loss of use resulting therefrom and is caused in whole or in part by any
negligent act or omission or willful misconduct of Crystal. This provision shall not be
construed as a waiver by either party of any defenses, immunities, or limits on liability with
respect to claims made by third parties.
b. Brooklyn Center agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless Crystal, and its officials,
agents, and employees from and against all claims, actions, damages, losses, and expenses
arising out of or resulting from Brooklyn Center’s performance of the duties required under
this Agreement, provided that any such claim, action, damage, loss, or expense is
attributable to bodily injury, sickness, disease, or death or to the injury to or destruction of
property including the loss of use resulting therefrom and is caused in whole or in part by
any negligent act or omission or willful misconduct of Brooklyn Center. This provision
shall not be construed as a waiver by either party of any defenses, immunities, or limits on
liability with respect to claims made by third parties.
c. All indemnification obligations shall survive termination, expiration or cancellation of this
Agreement.
d. The Parties shall be considered a single governmental unit for purposes of calculating any
liability hereunder and the total maximum liability shall not exceed the limits on
governmental liability for a single governmental unit pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
section 471.59, subd. 1a(b) and Minnesota Statutes, section 466.04.
10. Insurance. During the full term of this Agreement, the Crystal shall procure and maintain, the
following insurance coverage: Workers Compensation insurance in accordance with Minnesota
law; General Liability Coverage against claims for bodily injury, death, or property damage arising
out of Crystal’s performance of duties under this Agreement; automobile insurance for owned,
hired and non-owned vehicles. The Coverage shall be sufficiently broad to cover to all duties and
obligations undertaken by Contractor in this Agreement including duties related to
indemnification. Insurance must be on an “occurrence” basis, and, other than Workers
Page 35 of 299
- 7 -
Compensation, the limits of such policies must be no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence and
$1,500,000 aggregate. Crystal further agrees to provide a certificate of said insurance to Brooklyn
Center.
Crystal is responsible for payment of Agreement related insurance premiums and deductibles.
Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement, Brooklyn Center reserves the right to
immediately terminate this Agreement if Crystal is not in compliance with the insurance
requirements contained herein.
11. Crystal Personnel. Any employee assigned by Crystal to perform its obligations hereunder shall
remain the exclusive employee of Crystal for all purposes including, but not limited to, wages,
salary, and employee benefits.
12. General Terms.
a. Independent Contractor. It is agreed that nothing herein contained is intended or should be
construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of co-partners or
similar legal relationship between the Parties hereto or as constituting the persons
employed by Crystal as the agent, representative, or employee of Brooklyn Center for any
purpose or in any manner whatsoever except as expressly otherwise provided herein.
Crystal is to be and shall remain an independent contractor with respect to all Services
performed under this Agreement.
b. Records: Availability and Retention. The books, records, documents, and accounting
procedures of Crystal relevant to this Agreement, are subject to examination by Brooklyn
Center and either the legislative or state auditor as appropriate, pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes, Section 16C.05, Subd. 5. Crystal agrees to maintain these records for a period of
six years from the date of termination of this Agreement.
c. Entire Contract. This Agreement represents the entire Agreement between Crystal and
Brooklyn Center and supersedes and cancels any and all prior agreements or proposals,
written or oral, between the Parties relating to the subject matter hereof.
d. Modifications/Amendment. Any amendments, addenda, alterations, or modifications to the
terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be in writing and signed by both Parties.
e. Non-Discrimination. The provisions of any applicable law or ordinance relating to civil
rights and discrimination shall be considered part of this Agreement as if fully set forth
herein. Crystal and Brooklyn Center agree to comply with the American with Disabilities
Act and not to discriminate on the basis of disability in the admission or access to, or
treatment of employment in its services, programs, or activities. Upon request,
accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in all
services, programs, and activities. Crystal has designated coordinators to facilitate
compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), as required by
Section 35.107 of the U.S. Department of Justice regulations, and to coordinate compliance
with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as mandated by Section 8.53 of the
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development regulations. For information contact
Page 36 of 299
- 8 -
_____________, City of Crystal, 4141 Douglas Drive N, Crystal, Minnesota 55422;
telephone 763-531-1000.
f. Notices. All notices and other communications required or permitted under this Agreement
shall be in writing, and hand delivered or sent by registered or certified mail, return-receipt
requested, postage prepaid, or by overnight delivery service and shall be effective upon
receipt at the following addresses or as either party shall have notified the other party. The
Parties’ representatives for notification for all purposes are:
Crystal: City of Crystal
4141 Douglas Drive N
Crystal, MN 55422
Attention:
Or emailed:
Brooklyn Center: City of Brooklyn Center
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
Attention:
Or emailed:
g. Subcontracting. Crystal shall not enter into any subcontract for performance of any
Services contemplated under this Agreement without the prior written approval of
Brooklyn Center.
h. Assignment. This Agreement may not be assigned by either party without the written
consent of the other party.
i. Force Majeure. The Parties shall each be excused from performance under this Agreement
while and to the extent that either of them are unable to perform, for any cause beyond its
reasonable control. Such causes shall include, but not be restricted to fire, storm, flood,
earthquake, explosion, war, total or partial failure of transportation or delivery facilities,
raw materials or supplies, interruption of utilities or power, pandemic, and any act of
government or military authority. In the event either party is rendered unable wholly or in
part by force majeure to carry out its obligations under this Agreement then the party
affected by force majeure shall give written notice with explanation to the other party
immediately.
j. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be deemed to have been made and accepted in
Hennepin County, Minnesota, and the laws of the State of Minnesota shall govern any
interpretations or constructions of the Agreement without regard to its choice of law or
conflict of laws principles.
k. Data Practices. The Parties acknowledge that this Agreement is subject to the requirements
of Minnesota’s Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section 13.01 et seq.
Page 37 of 299
- 9 -
l. Execution. This Agreement may be executed simultaneously in two or more counterparts
that, when taken together, shall be deemed an original and constitute one and the same
document. The signature of any party to the counterpart shall be deemed a signature to the
Agreement, and may be appended to, any other counterpart. Facsimile and email
transmissions of executed signature pages shall be deemed as originals and sufficient to
bind the executing party.
[REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK]
Page 38 of 299
- 10 -
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Agreement to be executed by their
respective duly authorized officers as of the day and year first above written.
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
By: Date: ____________________
April Graves, Its Mayor
By: Date: ____________________
, Its City Manager
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
By: Date: ____________________
April Graves, Its Mayor
By: Date: ____________________
Daren Nyquist, Its Interim City Manager
Page 39 of 299
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 4/13/2026
TO: City Council
FROM: Lydia Ener, City Engineer
THROUGH: Elizabeth Heyman, Director of Public Works
BY: Lydia Ener, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Resolution Accepting Bid and Awarding a Contract, Improvement Project
No. 2026-01, 02, 03, & 04, Humboldt Avenue Reconstruction
Requested Council Action:
- Motion to approve the resolution accepting the lowest responsible bid and award a
contract to Ryan Contracting Company for Improvement Project No. 2026-01, 02, 03, &
04, Humboldt Avenue Reconstruction.
Background:
Bids for the Improvement Project 2026-01, 02, 03, & 04, Humboldt Avenue
Reconstruction, were received and opened on March 19, 2026. The bidding results are
tabulated below:
Bidder Total Base Bid
Ryan Contracting Co. $3,446,683.99
Kuechle Underground, Inc. $3,463,432,77
New Look Contracting, Inc. $3,669,644.75
Veit & Company, Inc. $3,716,738.59
S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. $3,763,000.00
Park Construction Co. $3,852,637,94
Northwest Asphalt, Inc. $4,260,770.58
Of the seven (7) bids received, the lowest bid of $3,446,683.99 was submitted by Ryan
Contracting Co. of Elko New Market, Minnesota. Ryan Contracting Co. has the
experience, equipment, and capacity to qualify as the lowest responsible bidder for the
project.
Budget Issues:
The bid amount of $3,446,683.99 for the Base Bid is within the 2026 budgeted amount.
The total estimated budget including construction, contingencies, administration,
engineering, and legal was $4,956,611.00 and is amended to $4,155,852.99, an
approximate 16.2% decrease from the originally budgeted amount. (see attached
Resolution – Costs and Revenues tables).
Inclusive Community Engagement:
NA
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
Page 40 of 299
NA
Strategic Priorities and Values:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Humboldt Reconstruction - Bid Award - Res
Page 41 of 299
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. _______________
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING A CONTRACT,
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2026-01, 02, 03, & 04, HUMBOLDT AVENUE
RECONSTRUCTION
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for Improvement Project No.
2026-01, 02, 03, & 04, bids were received, opened and tabulated on the 19th day of March, 2026.
Said bids were as follows:
Bidder Total Base Bid
Ryan Contracting Co. $3,446,683.99
Kuechle Underground, Inc. $3,463,432,77
New Look Contracting, Inc. $3,669,644.75
Veit & Company, Inc. $3,716,738.59
S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. $3,763,000.00
Park Construction Co. $3,852,637,94
Northwest Asphalt, Inc. $4,260,770.58
WHEREAS, it appears that Ryan Contracting Co. of Elko New Market, Minnesota.
is the lowest responsible bidder.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that
1. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter
into a contract with Ryan Contracting Co. of Elko New Market, Minnesota.
in the name of the City of Brooklyn Center, for Improvement Project No.
2026-01, 02, 03, & 04, according to the plans and specifications therefore
approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Engineer.
2. The estimated project costs and revenues are as follows:
Amended Amended
COSTS Estimate (1/26/26) per Low Bid
Contract $ 4,291,438.00 $ 3,466,683.99
Tree Clearing Portion of Contract $ 23,996.00
Contingency $ 214,572,00 $ 214,572.00
Subtotal Construction Cost $ 4,506,010.00 $ 3,705,251.99
Admin/Legal/Engr. $ 450,601.00 $ 450,601.00
Total Estimated Project Cost $ 4,956,611.00 $ 4,155,852.99
Page 42 of 299
RESOLUTION NO. _______________
Amended Amended
REVENUES Estimate (1/26/26) per Low Bid
Special Assessments $ 225,435.50 $ 225,435.50
Municipal State Aid Funds (County) $ 2,634,425.00 $ 1,894,744.00
Municipal State Aid Funds (City) $ 409,082.50 $ 419,102.49
County Fiber (County) $ 80,846.00 $ 95,264.00
Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund $ 690,386.00 $ 755,431.00
Water Utility Fund $ 896,436.00 $ 745,876.00
Street Light Utility Fund $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00
Total Estimated Revenue $ 4,956,611.00 $ 4,155,852.99
April 13, 2026
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 43 of 299
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 4/13/2026
TO: City Council
FROM: Lydia Ener, City Engineer
THROUGH: Elizabeth Heyman, Director of Public Works
BY: Lydia Ener, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Resolution Declaring April 22, 2026, as Earth Day in Brooklyn Center
Requested Council Action:
- Motion to approve a resolution declaring April 22, 2026, as Earth Day in Brooklyn
Center.
Background:
The name and concept of Earth Day was pioneered in 1970 in the United States. It is an
annual day on which events are held worldwide to demonstrate support for
environmental protection. This day of nature's balance was later sanctioned in a
Proclamation at the United Nations, eventually going international in 1990.
Today, more than 192 countries coordinate and celebrate Earth Day every year.
Brooklyn Center recognizes Earth Day on Tuesday, April 22, 2026, by taking part in
celebratory events.
In honor of Earth Day, the City will host the Public Works Open House on Saturday,
May 16, 2026, from 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m., this event will include “Big Wheels and Big
Works” at the Public Works Garage as well as materials for the annual park clean up
event.
Budget Issues:
NA
Inclusive Community Engagement:
NA
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
NA
Strategic Priorities and Values:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Earth Day 2026 Resolution
Page 44 of 299
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. _______________
RESOLUTION DECLARING APRIL 22, 2026, TO BE EARTH DAY IN
BROOKLYN CENTER
WHEREAS, a sound natural environment is the foundation of a healthy society
and a robust economy; and
WHEREAS, local communities can do much to reverse environmental
degradation and contribute to building a healthy society by addressing such issues
as energy conservation, waste prevention and sustainable practices; and
WHEREAS, Earth Day 2026 offers an unprecedented opportunity to commit to
building a healthy planet and flourishing communities.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that:
1. April 22, 2026, to be Earth Day in the City of Brooklyn Center.
2. The City of Brooklyn Center commits itself to undertaking programs and
projects that enhance the community’s natural environment.
3. The City Council hereby reaffirms its commitment and encourages
residents, businesses and institutions to use Earth Day 2026 to celebrate the Earth
and to commit to building a sustainable society by initiating or expanding existing
programs which improve energy efficiency, reduce or prevent waste and promote
recycling.
April 13, 2026
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 299
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 4/13/2026
TO: City Council
FROM: Kory Andersen Wagner, Public Works Planner
THROUGH: Kory Andersen Wagner, Public Works Planner
BY: Kory Andersen Wagner, Public Works Planner
SUBJECT: Traffic Calming Update and 2026 Implementation Recommendations
Requested Council Action:
- Motion to accept the traffic calming update and authorize staff to proceed with 2026
traffic calming planning and implementation consistent with the City’s draft traffic
calming policies and practices.
Background:
Traffic calming includes low-cost roadway strategies intended to reduce speeding,
improve neighborhood safety, and support livability (e.g., speed tables, traffic circles,
curb extensions, and delineated posts).
In 2025, staff expanded traffic calming work by testing locations citywide, using
improved speed data collection methods, implementing permanent speed tables on
Newton Ave, piloting traffic circles in Grandview, tracking requests and results in
ArcGIS, and advancing broader safety planning work.
In 2026, staff will prioritize candidate locations that meet draft policy criteria and
demonstrate consistent speeding, safety concerns, and neighborhood support, and will
implement measures where they can be delivered effectively and maintained over time.
Budget Issues:
Inclusive Community Engagement:
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
Strategic Priorities and Values:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. 2026 Traffic Calming and Speed Table Policy Presentation
Page 46 of 299
1
Brooklyn Center Traffic Calming
Update
Presented by Kory Andersen Wagner
Brooklyn Center Public Works Planner
Outline
•What is Traffic Calming?
•2025 Brooklyn Center Traffic Calming Successes
•East Palmer Lake – Newton Ave Speed Tables
•Grandview Neighborhood Pilot – Staff Recommendation
•Establish a draft neighborhood traffic circle policy –Staff
Recommendation
•Lilac Dr North Project – Staff Recommendation
•Draft Speed Table Policy Review
•Next Steps
2
Page 47 of 299
What Is Traffic Calming?
•Reduces speeds and
improves safety for
pedestrians, cyclists, and
drivers
•Enhance neighborhood
livability and reduce cut-
through traffic
•Common measures include
speed bumps, speed tables,
curb extensions, and
roundabouts
3
Delineated Posts
2025 Brooklyn Center Traffic
Calming Successes
•Transitioned data collection from tubes to radars
•Making data collection more reliable
•Reducing staff time (At least 5 hrs. a week saved)
•No license plates or faces collected
•Tested 20 distinct locations
•Installed permanent speed tables on Newton Ave
•Piloted traffic circles in Grandview
•Utilized the draft Speed Table Policy
•Begun tracking locations via ArcGIS to identify patterns and track
frequency
•Brooklyn Center Staff are supporting Brooklyn Center Community
Schools in developing a Safe Routes to School Plan
4
Page 48 of 299
5
East Palmer Lake – Newton Ave
•Newton Ave 85% ≤ 44 MPH (target:
30 MPH)
•~1,400 vehicles/day
•Permanent speed tables installed
June–July 2025
•Newton ~700 vehicles/day 85th
percentile: 27 MPH
•Adjacent Streets 85th percentile: 30–34
MPH
•450–500 vehicles/day
•Neighborhood (three streets):
•~2,099 vehicles/day (pre)
•~1,650 vehicles/day (post)
---------------------------Brooklyn Park-----------------------
------------------
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
MN
2
5
2
-
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
6
Grandview Neighborhood Pilot
Page 49 of 299
7
Grandview Neighborhood Pilot
Baseline:
Fremont & 58th
•47 MPH 85th percentile
•2 crashes annually
•277 AADT
Emerson & 58th
•37 MPH 85th percentile
•School bus recently hit at
this intersection
•136 AADT
---------------------------Interstate 694----------------------
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
In
t
e
r
s
t
a
t
e
9
4
-
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
8
Grandview Neighborhood Pilot
Results:
Fremont & 58th
•27 MPH 85th percentile
•324 AADT
Emerson & 58th
•29 MPH 85th percentile
•155 AADT
Both streets experienced an
increase in vehicles, but
speeds decreased
Page 50 of 299
9
Grandview Neighborhood Pilot
What did we hear from residents?
•61% of residents felt they made traffic slower and
made the street safer
•“I think this is a brilliant solution to the speed problems in
the neighborhood…No notes!”
•“Traffic calming efforts at 58th & Emerson Av N has made
a significant positive difference… I hope it becomes
permanent…You helped calm not only traffic, but also this
Grandma's nerves! Thanks for making this city safer.”
•Opposition wasn’t against traffic calming, rather
wanted stop signs instead
Grandview Neighborhood Pilot
•Impacts to EMS and Plowing
•We conducted tests with our
largest fire engine and 1-ton
plows
•They can turn right and go
through but cannot take the 3rd
exit
•To accommodate, EMS will turn
left at the circle if that movement
is needed
•Plows will turn right and go
around the block to complete the
plow
•Recommend the installation of
permanent neighborhood traffic
circles at 58th and Emerson and 58th
10
111sttst ExitExitExit
222ndndnd ExitExitExit
333rdrdrd ExitExitExit
Page 51 of 299
Draft Traffic Circle Policy
•We anticipate traffic circles
becoming popular based on
public feedback
•Must set consistent standards
for future traffic circles in
Brooklyn Center
•Fortunately, we are not the
first City to build traffic circles
to improve safety, and there
are precedent policies
11
12
Policing versus Traffic Calming
Policing
•14 days of targeted
enforcement cost
•$1k to $5k
•Staff limits
•Inconsistent
Infrastructure
•$10k -$17k per traffic circle
•Inconsistent
Page 52 of 299
13
Lilac Dr North
Lilac Dr N from 57th to Centerbrook Golf
Course
•950 AADT
•52 MPH 85th percentile
•A perfect candidate for speed tables
per the City’s draft Speed Table Policy
Engagement postcard sent in September
sent to solicit feedback on installing
speed tables
•Residents validated the concerns
Recommend installing a permanent
speed table on Lilac Dr North in 2026
14
Draft Speed Table Strategy
Reminder
•As part of the 2024 Summer work, staff developed a speed
table strategy that aligns with peer cities
•Guidelines Require Speed Tables:
•Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) compliance
•Local residential street, posted speed limit ≤ 30 mph, AADT ≤ 4,000
vehicles
•85th percentile speed ≥ 10 mph over posted limit or Average of 3+
crashes per year
•Not on a public transit route, not a Municipal State Aid (MSA) road,
not on an emergency route (unless Fire/Police approve), other
measures deemed unfeasible, approved by Public Works Director,
and financially feasible
Page 53 of 299
15
Draft Speed Table Strategy
Reminder
•Exception to Speeding and Crash History Criteria
•Location is in a school zone or next to a park
•The Location must follow the same criteria of:
•Not on a public transit route, not a Municipal State Aid (MSA), not on an
emergency route (unless Fire/Police approve), other measures deemed
unfeasible, approved by Public Works Director, and financially feasible
•Additional requirements:
•51% of property owners within 500 ft must support accepting reduced
snowplowing quality in exchange for speed tables
•Petition must be approved by City Council
•In this scenario, we are going against best practice to install speed tables.
We ask that Council makes the final decision on whether we carry this out
16
A Year of the Speed Table Strategy
•The City installed their first permanent speed
tables under this policy
•There were no public petitions for speed tables
•Of the 20 locations evaluated in 2025, only Lilac
Dr N met the criteria to be eligible for speed
tables
•One location was close to being eligible but failed
because it is a Municipal State Aid (MSA) road.
•Dupont Ave between 72nd and 67th Ave adjacent to Evergreen
Park Elementary School
Page 54 of 299
17
Next Steps
Public Works will:
•Continue to evaluate
traffic calming requests
•Install permanent traffic
circles in the Grandview
Neighborhood
•Install a permanent
speed table on Lilac Dr
•Establish a draft traffic
circle policy
Questions?
18
Page 55 of 299
19
Speed Tables and Snow Plowing
-------------------------- One Day After Plow --------------------------
With Speed TableWithout Speed Table
Page 56 of 299
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 4/13/2026
TO: City Council
FROM: Xiong Thao, Housing and Community Standards Manager
THROUGH: Ginny McIntosh, Planning Manager
BY: Xiong Thao, Housing and Community Standards Manager
SUBJECT: Rental License Program Ordinance Amendment — First Reading
Requested Council Action:
(1) Motion to approve a first reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 12, Sections
12-901, 12-902, 12-906, 12-908,12-910, 12-911 through -916, and Section 12-
1504(4)(b) of the Brooklyn Center City Code of Ordinances regarding Rental Licensing
and Vacant Property Exceptions within the City of Brooklyn Center.
(2) Motion to schedule a second reading of the requested ordinance amendment and
public hearing for May 11, 2026.
Background:
City staff held several work session discussions with the City Council on an ordinance
amendment to Chapter 12-901 Licensing of Rental Units. At the March 9, 2026, work
session with City Council, a draft ordinance was presented to City Council for review.
During the work session, staff presented the changes to the rental license program and
feedback was received from Council on the proposed changes. It was requested by
Council to bring forward an ordinance amendment, as presented, to a future council
meeting for consideration.
The following items were proposed as amendments to the rental license program:
1. Eliminate the performance-based rental licenses program. Adopt a two-year rental
license program for all licenses, replacing the current 6-month, 1-year, 2-year, and 3-
year license types.
2. Rental licenses will be administratively issued by City staff and will no longer require
City Council approval.
3. The rental license will be issued prior to passing a rental license inspection.
4. The rental license inspection must pass within 90 days of issuing the rental license.
5. If the rental license inspection does not pass within 90 days, the rental license
application is considered incomplete and will be canceled. The applicant would then
need to reapply for a new license.
6. Rental licenses are transferable if the property was issued a rental license within the
last 6 months, paid a transfer fee, and has passed the rental license inspection.
7. Remove the following requirements:
-8-hour Crime Free Housing training requirement
-Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) inspection requirement
-Submission of an Action or Mitigation Plan for Type III (1-year) and Type IV (6-
Page 57 of 299
month) licenses
-Police calls for service to determine rental license types.
On March 17, 2026, staff presented the rental license program changes to the Housing
Commission. After the presentation, there was a discussion about the changes and
several questions were asked by the Commissioners about the rental program changes.
A few Commissioners inquired about who and how the request came about to change
the current rental license program and why the City is looking at changing the license
when a majority is already getting a two-year license or better. There were also
conversations around rewarding Type III (1-year) and Type IV (6-month) rental
properties with longer rental licenses when they do not meet the criteria for a longer
license and have more code violations.
It was explained that staff met with tenants, tenant advocates, and property owners and
managers back in September 2025 regarding the City's tenant protections and rental
license programs. Changes to the rental program came out of conversations held with
rental property owners. It was then brought to the City Council and, at the City Council's
direction, City staff worked with the City Attorney to propose amendments. Under the
new license program, all properties would be awarded a two-year license, and be
required to complete and pass an inspection within 90 days from license issuance. It
was explained that it is anticipated the Type III (1-year) and Type IV (6-month) licensed
properties would have more complaints and code violations under the new two-year
rental licensing program due to the prolonged time in the City's ability to inspect the
property.
There was also a discussion about how the licenses would impact those with a Type I
(3-year) license. It was explained that these license types would lose one (1) year from
their license and would be required to renew and pay more frequently. The
Commissioners did express that they were happy to see that the inspection process is
still in place, along with the City's ability to regulate tenant's activity through the calls for
service process. Staff explained that the inspection, as proposed under the new rental
license program, would occur after the license is issued; however, if the inspection does
not pass within 90 days, the entire rental application will be canceled and the property
owner/manager would be required to submit a new rental license application. Staff then
clarified that the calls for service would only be counted against a tenant if the call was
validated by the responding police officers.
Copies of previously held work sessions with City Council regarding the proposed
amendments to the rental licensing program, and a PowerPoint presentation are
included with this item for Council review.
It is requested that City Council adopt the proposed changes to amend Chapter 12,
Sections 12-901-902, 12-906, 12-908-12-910, 12-911-916, and Section 12-1504(4)(b)
of the Brooklyn Center Code of Ordinances regarding Rental Licensing and Vacant
Property Exceptions within the City of Brooklyn Center and hold a first reading of the
ordinance amendment and schedule the second reading and public hearing for the City
Page 58 of 299
Council meeting on May 11, 2026.
Budget Issues:
None to consider at this time.
Inclusive Community Engagement:
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
Strategic Priorities and Values:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft Ordinance Amendments — Chapter 12 (Clean Version)
2. Draft Ordinance Amendments — Chapter 12 (Strikethrough Version)
3. PowerPoint Presentation — Rental License Program — 1st Reading (April 13,
2026 Council Meeting)
4. Draft Housing Commission Meeting Minutes — March 17, 2026
5. PowerPoint Presentation —Rental License Program (March 9, 2026 Council
Meeting)
6. City Council Work Session — Rental Ordinance Changes (January 12, 2026
Council Meeting)
7. PowerPoint Presentation —Rental License Program (January 12, 2026 Council
Meeting)
8. City Council Work Session —Rental Ordinance Changes (November 24, 2025
Council Meeting)
Page 59 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-1 City Ordinance
BR291-16-1080393.v5
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the ____day of ____, 2026, 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 amending Chapter 12, Sections 12-901-902, 12-906, 12-908-12-910,
12-911-916, and Section 12-1504(4)(b) of the Brooklyn Center Code of Ordinances regarding
Rental Licensing and Vacant Property Exceptions within the City of Brooklyn Center.
Auxiliary aid 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. 2026-XX
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 12 OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
REGARDING RENTAL LICENSING
The City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center does ordain as follows:
Article 1. Brooklyn Center City Code, Chapter 12, Sections 12-901and 12-902 are amended as
follows:
Section 12-901. LICENSING OF RENTAL UNITS.
1. License Required.
a. No person shall operate a rental dwelling without first having obtained a
license to do so from the City of Brooklyn Center. A license will be granted
as a two-year license by the City Manager. Any rental license received under
this article shall commence upon the date of issuance and, unless revoked or
suspended, shall remain valid until the next applicable renewal date.
b. Operating without a License. A person who operates a rental dwelling after
the rental license has expired is operating an unlicensed rental dwelling.
Operating a rental dwelling without a rental license is a violation of this
ordinance and may be subject to administrative citations pursuant to Chapter
18-102 of the Brooklyn Center City Code.
c. License Transfer. Rental licenses may be transferred if the license is within 6
months of issuance and have passed the rental license inspection. The rental
license may be transferred upon completion of a license transfer application
and payment of the license transfer fee.
d. Exceptions. No license shall be required under the following circumstances:
Page 60 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-2 City Ordinance
1) Rented rooms within an owner-occupied dwelling unit (no more
than two sleeping rooms) who utilizes the unit as their primary
residence. An owner must provide proof of residency by submitting
a notarized affidavit to the City. (See Chapter 35, Section 35-4103.)
2) A residential property owned by a an individual or individuals
where the property is rented to or occupied by another person a
maximum period of 120 consecutive days while the owner is
residing out of the State of Minnesota. The owner must occupy the
property during the remainder of the year. This circumstance shall
be referred to as “Seasonal Leave.” “Seasonal Leave” is defined as:
Those persons who leave their residential buildings on a temporary
basis for vacation purposes or to reside elsewhere for a season and
have the intent to return to their primary residence.”
3) As defined in Chapter 35, Section 35-9200 of this code, Accessory
Dwelling Units (ADU) shall not require a rental license and shall
comply with Section 35-4403.
4) Unoccupied dwelling units that have been issued a Vacant Building
Registration.
2. New Licenses. Properties that have not been required to have a rental license due to
new construction may receive a two-year License. Properties that have changed from
owner occupied to rental may receive a two-year License. Properties found operating
without a valid rental license from the City or failing to meet City Code requirements
or that have been the subject of enforcement actions such as criminal prosecution or
civil penalties for violation of this Chapter, will only qualify for a one-year license.
3. License Renewals. All rental properties are subject to review and shall be required
to apply and comply with City Codes and applicable regulations.
4. License Process and Renewal.
a. Renewals. License renewals shall be filed at least 90 days prior to the
license expiration date. Within two weeks of receipt of a complete
application and of the license fee required by Section 12-902, the
Compliance Official shall schedule an inspection.
b. Inspection. After an application for an initial license has been submitted to
the City Manager for approval, the property shall pass an inspection within
90 days of the rental license issuance. Failure to pass the inspection may
result in license revocation, suspension, cancellation, issuance of an
Administrative Citation, or a formal complaint.
Page 61 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-3 City Ordinance
c. Transfer of Building Ownership. The new owner of a rental dwelling is
required to obtain a rental permit from the City in order to continue renting
the rental dwelling. When ownership of an affordable housing building is
transferred, the new owner is required to obtain a new rental license for the
property under this Section and comply with Section 12-912D. The new
owner shall include in its application for a new license the affidavit of
having provided notice to the tenants and, if required, having paid relocation
assistance in accordance with Section 12-912D. The new owner shall not
be eligible for a new rental license if it failed to provide the notice or failed
to pay, if required, relocation benefits in accordance with Section 12-912D.
d. Incomplete Applications or Process. If the license application is
incomplete, or the applicant does not meet the requirements of the
licensing process within 90 days of the license approval date, the
application will be canceled and the applicant must reapply and pay for a
new license.
Section 12-902. LICENSE FEES AND PENALTIES. License fees, as set forth by City
Council resolution, shall be due 90 days prior to the license expiration date; in the cases of new
unlicensed dwellings, license fees shall be due at the time of application.
1. Residential Rental Conversion Fee. When a residential single-family home or
single family attached property is converted to a rental property, the owner or
applicant shall pay a conversion fee as established by City Council resolution. The
rental conversion fee also applies to residential properties registered as vacant
properties.
2. License Fees, Delinquent Payment Penalties. Operating without a rental license is
subject to a delinquency penalty pursuant to the fee schedule adopted by the City
Council. Late payment of a rental license fee or rental license renewal is subject to
a delinquency penalty pursuant to the fee schedule adopted by the City Council.
Once issued, a license may be transferred pursuant to Section 12-901(1)(c) and the
licensee shall not be entitled to a refund of any license fee. Upon revocation,
suspension, application withdrawals, an incomplete application or application
process, or application cancellation, the fee is nonrefundable.
3. Reinspection Fees. All reinspection fees are set by City Council resolution. If the
reinspection is being performed as part of the licensing process, fees must be paid
prior to the time of license issuance or renewal for the property, in the case of rental
housing and at the time of recertification of occupancy for nonresidential
properties. If a reinspection fee or any portion is not paid within 60 days after
billing, or within 60 days after any appeal becomes final, the City Council may
certify the unpaid cost against the property in accordance with the process set forth
in Section 19-105 of this Code.
Page 62 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-4 City Ordinance
4. Transfer Fee. Rental License Transfer Fees are subject to the fee schedule adopted
by the City Council.
Article 2. Brooklyn Center City Code, Chapter 12, Section 12-906 is amended as follows:
Section 12-906. LICENSE INSPECTION REQUIRED. No operating license shall be
issued or renewed unless the owner of rental units agrees in his application to permit inspections
pursuant to Section 12-1001. Licensed rental dwellings are subject to the Compliance Official’s
right to inspect the rental dwelling and dwelling units to determine whether they are in compliance
with the code and state law. The Compliance Official will provide reasonable notice to the owner
or operator of the date and time of the inspection.
Article 3. Brooklyn Center City Code, Chapter 12, Sections 12-908-12-910 are amended as
follows:
Section 12-908. OCCUPANCY REGISTER REQUIRED.
1. Every owner of a licensed rental dwelling shall keep, or cause to be kept, a current
register of occupancy for each dwelling unit that provides the following
information:
a. Dwelling unit address.
b. Number of bedrooms in dwelling unit and the maximum number of
occupants.
c. Legal names and date of birth of adult occupants and number of adults and
children (under 18 years of age) currently occupying the dwelling units.
d. Dates renters occupied and vacated dwelling units.
e. A chronological list of complaints and requests for repair by dwelling unit
occupants, which complaints and requests are related to the provisions of
this Code of Ordinances.
f. A similar chronological list of all corrections made in response to such
requests and complaints.
Such register shall be made available for viewing or copying by the Compliance
Official at all reasonable times.
2. All nonresidential properties (commercial, industrial, and similar) shall keep, or
cause to be kept, a current register of occupancy for each building that provides the
Page 63 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-5 City Ordinance
following:
a. Building address.
b. List of all tenants occupying building.
c. Nature of business conducted by each tenant in building.
d. Contact person for each tenant.
e. Gross floor area leased by each tenant.
Such register shall be made available for viewing or copying by the Compliance
Official at all reasonable times.
Section 12-909. LICENSE SUSPENSION, REVOCATION, DENIAL AND NON-
RENEWAL.
1. Applicability. Every license issued under the provisions of this Chapter is subject
to suspension or revocation by the City Council.
2. Unoccupied or Vacated Rental Units. In the event that a license is suspended,
revoked, or not renewed by the City Council, it shall be unlawful for the owner or
the owner’s duly authorized agent to thereafter permit any new occupancies of
vacant or thereafter vacated rental units until such time as a valid license may be
restored by the City Council.
3. Grounds for License Action. The Council may revoke, suspend, or decline to renew
any license issued under this Chapter upon any of the following grounds:
a. false statements, misrepresentations, or fraudulent statements on any
application or other information or report required by this Chapter to be given
by the applicant or licensee.
b. failure to pay any application fee, fine or penalty, reinspection fees,
reinstatement fee, special assessments, real estate taxes, or other financial
claims due to the City as required by this Chapter and City Council
resolution.
c. failure to continuously comply with any property maintenance, zoning,
health, building, nuisance, or other City Codes; or failure to correct
deficiencies noted in Compliance Notices in the time specified in the notice.
d. excessive police calls for service in accordance with criteria determined by
the City Manager and approved by the City Council as City policy, based
Page 64 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-6 City Ordinance
on the number and nature of the calls when, after owner notification, the
owner has failed to supply an appropriate written action plan to reduce the
police calls for service
e. failure to actively pursue the eviction of tenants who have violated the
provision of this Chapter or Crime Free Lease Addendum or have otherwise
created a public nuisance in violation of City, state, or applicable laws.
f. the failure to eliminate imminent health and life safety hazards as
determined by the City, or its authorized representatives.
g. conviction of any crime related to the business or entity licensed and failure
to show by competent evidence the rehabilitation and ability to perform the
duties of the business.
h. the abandonment of the property by the property owner as determined by
the inability to make contact with the owner or his/her manager or local
agent due to inaccurate or invalid contact information.
i. failure to operate or maintain the licensed premises in conformity with all
applicable state and local laws and Ordinances.
4. License Action Sections. Revocation, suspension, and non-renewal may be
brought under either this Section or Section 12-911, or both. Each section
provides an independent basis on which to take a license action and only the
procedures required of the particular Section being relied upon must be followed
to pursue the action.
5. Notification, Hearing, and Decision Basis.
a. Written Notice, Hearing. A decision to revoke, suspend, deny, or not renew
a license shall be preceded by written notice to the applicant or licensee of
the alleged grounds therefor and the applicant or licensee will be given an
opportunity for a hearing before the City Council before final action to
revoke, suspend, deny, or not renew a license.
b. Decision Basis. The Council shall give due regard to the frequency and
seriousness of violations, the ease with which such violations could have
been cured or avoided and good faith efforts to comply and shall issue a
decision to deny, not renew, suspend or revoke a license only upon written
findings.
6. Affected Facility. The Council may suspend or revoke a license or not renew a
license for part or all of a facility.
7. License Actions, Reapplication.
Page 65 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-7 City Ordinance
a. Suspension. Licenses may be suspended for up to ninety (90) days and may,
after the period of suspension, be reinstated subject to compliance with this
Chapter and any conditions imposed by the City Council at the time of
suspension.
b. Revocation, Denial, Nonrenewal. Licenses that are revoked will not be
reinstated until the owner has applied for and secured a new license and
complied with all conditions imposed at the time of revocation. Upon a
decision to revoke, deny or not renew a license, no approval of any
application for a new license for the same facility will be effective until after
the period of time specified in the Council’s written decision, which shall
not exceed one year. The Council shall specify in its written decision the
date when an application for a new license will be accepted for processing.
A decision not to renew a license may take the form of a suspension or
revocation. A decision to deny an initial application for a new facility will
not take the form of a suspension or revocation unless false statements have
been made by the applicant in connection with the application. A decision
to deny an initial application shall state conditions of reapplication.
c. Reinstatement Fees. All new applications must be accompanied by a
reinstatement fee, as specified by Council resolution, in addition to all other
fees required by this Chapter.
8. Written Decision, Compliance. A written decision to revoke, suspend, deny, or not
renew a license or application shall specify the part or parts of the facility to which
it applies. Thereafter, and until a license is reissued or reinstated, no rental units
becoming vacant in such part or parts of the facility may be re-let or occupied.
Revocation, suspension or non-renewal of a license shall not excuse the owner from
compliance with all terms of state laws and Codes and this Code of Ordinances for
as long as any units in the facility are occupied. Failure to comply with all terms
of this Chapter during the term of revocation, suspension or non-renewal is a
misdemeanor and grounds for extension of the term of such revocation or
suspension or continuation of non-renewal, or for a decision not to reinstate the
license, notwithstanding any limitations on the period of suspension, revocation or
non-renewal specified in the City Council’s written decision or in paragraph 6 of
this Section.
9. New Licenses Prohibited. A person who has a rental license revoked may not
receive a rental license for another property within the City for a period of one year
from the date of revocation. The person may continue to operate other currently
licensed rental properties if the properties are maintained in compliance with City
Codes and other applicable regulations.
Page 66 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-8 City Ordinance
Article 4. Brooklyn Center City Code, Chapter 12, Sections 12-911-916 are renumbered as
follows:
Section 12-910. CONDUCT ON LICENSED PREMISES.
Section 12-911. NO RETALIATION.
Section 12-912A. FALSELY REPORTING VIOLATIONS.
Section 12-912B. TENANT RESPONSIBILITIES.
Section 12-912C. TENANT PROTECTIONS.
Section 12-912D. TYPE IV PROVISIONAL LICENSES.
Section 12-913. CRIME FREE HOUSING PROGRAM.
Section 12-914. CRIME FREE/DRUG FREE HOUSING LEASE ADDENDUM
REQUIREMENTS.
Section 12-915 TENANT BACKGROUND CHECKS.
Article 5. Brooklyn Center City Code, Chapter 12, Section 12-1504(4)(b) is amended as follows:
Section 12-1504. VACANT BUILDING REGISTRATION.
4. Exemptions.
a. Fire Damage. A building that has suffered fire damage is exempt from the
registration requirement for a period of ninety (90) days after the date of the fire if
the owner submits a request for exemption in writing to the Compliance Official.
A request for exemption must be approved by the Code official and include the
following information supplied by the owner:
i. A description of the premises;
ii. The name and address of owner or owners;
iii. A statement of intent to repair and reoccupy the building in an expeditious
manner and the time frame for completion;
iv. Actions the owner will take to ensure the property does not become a
nuisance for the neighborhood.
Page 67 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-9 City Ordinance
b. “Seasonal Leave.” Those persons who leave their residential buildings on a
temporary basis for vacation purposes or to reside elsewhere for a season and
have the intent to return to their primary residence.”
Article 6. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force after its passage and publication in
accordance with Section 3.09 of the City Charter and applicable State law.
Passed and adopted this ___ day of ____, 2026, by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center
Date April Graves, Mayor
ATTEST: ____________________
Shannon Petit, City Clerk
First Reading: , 2026
Second Reading: , 2026
Publication Date: , 2026
Effective Date: , 2026
Page 68 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-1 City Ordinance
BR291-16-1080393.v2
CHAPTER 12 – BUILDING MAINTENANCE AND OCCUPANCY ORDINANCE
Section 12-900. PURPOSE. It is the purpose of this Chapter to assure that rental housing
in the City is decent, safe and sanitary and is so operated and maintained as not to become a
nuisance to the neighborhood or to become an influence that fosters blight and deterioration or
creates a disincentive to reinvestment in the community. The operation of rental residential
properties is a business enterprise that entails certain responsibilities. Operators are responsible to
take such reasonable steps as are necessary to assure that the citizens of the City who occupy such
units may pursue the quiet enjoyment of the normal activities of life in surroundings that are: safe,
secure and sanitary; free from noise, nuisances or annoyances; free from unreasonable fears about
safety of persons and security of property; and suitable for raising children.
Section 12-901. LICENSING OF RENTAL UNITS.
1. License Required.
a. No person shall operate a rental dwelling without first having obtained a
license to do so from the City of Brooklyn Center. A license will be granted
as a two-year license Type I, Type II, Type III, or Type IV Provisional based
on criteria recommended by the City Manager. and approved by the City
Council.. Any rental license received under this article shall commence upon
the date of issuance and, unless revoked or suspended, shall remain valid until
the next applicable renewal date.
b. Operating without a License. A person who operates a rental dwelling after
the rental license has expired is operating an unlicensed rental dwelling.
Operating a rental dwelling without a rental license is a violation of this
ordinance, and may be subject to administrative citations pursuant to Chapter
18-102 of the Brooklyn Center City Code..
c. License Transfer. Rental licenses may be transferred if the license is within 6-
months of issuance and have passed the rental license inspection. The rental
license may be transferred upon completion of a license transfer application
and payment of the license transfer fee.
a.d. Exceptions. No license shall be required under the following circumstances:
1) A single family dwelling or a dwelling unit in a duplex occupied by
the building owner for a minimum of six months per calendar year.
2) Rented rooms within an owner-occupied dwelling unit who utilizes
the unit as their primary residence. An owner must provide proof of
residency by submitting a notarized affidavit to the City.
Formatted: Indent: Left: 1.5"
Page 69 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-2 City Ordinance
3) A residential property owned by a “snowbird” where the property is
rented to another person for aa maximum period of less than 120
consecutive days while the owner is residing out of the State of
Minnesota. The owner must occupy the property during the
remainder of the year. “Snowbird” is defined as: Those persons who
leave their residential buildings on a temporary basis for vacation
purposes or to reside elsewhere for a season and have the intent to
return to their primary residence.
4) Unoccupied dwelling units that have been issued a Vacant Building
Registration.
2. License Term. Licenses will be issued for a time period according to the license
type as indicated in Diagram I. All licenses may be reviewed at any time after the
beginning of the license term to determine whether the property continues to have
the appropriate Type license.
Diagram I
Licensing
Category
Licensing
Period
Min. Inspection
Frequency
Crime Free Housing Plans
Type I 3 year Min. 1 time in 3 years,
upon request, or as needed
as determined by City
Phase I
Recommended
Type II 2 year Min. 1 time in 2 years,
upon request, or as needed
as determined by City
Phase I Required
Type III 1 year Min. 1 time per year, upon
request, or as needed as
determined by City
Phase I, II Required Action Plan
Required
Type IV
Provisional
6 months Min. every 6 months,
upon request, or as needed
as determined by City, or
as otherwise specified by
Mitigation Plan
Phase I, II, and III
Required
Mitigation
Plan
Required
3. New Licenses. Properties that have legally not been required to have a rental license
due to new construction may qualify for a Type II, Type III, or Type IV receive a
two-year License. Properties that have changed from owner occupied to rental may
qualify for a receive a Type II, Type III, or Type IV two-year License. Properties
found operating without a valid rental license from the City or failing to meet City
Code requirements or that have been the subject of enforcement actions such as
criminal prosecution or civil penalties for violation of this Chapter, will only qualify
for a Type III or Type IV License.only qualify for a one-year license.
4. License Renewals. All rental properties are subject to review and may shall be
Page 70 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-3 City Ordinance
required to apply and qualify for a different license Type based on the level of
compliancecomply with City Codes and applicable regulations.
5. Failure to Meet License Category Requirements. At any time during a license
period, if a rental property does not meet or exceed the criteria established for the
current license Type, the license may be brought forth to the City Council for
consideration of license suspension, revocation, and/or license Type review.
6. Type IV Provisional Licenses. Rental properties under Type IV Provisional
Licensing must meet the requirements set forth in Section 12-913.
7. License Category Criteria. License type will be determined on the basis of
established criteria based on Police incidents and property Code and nuisance
violations as recommended by the City Manager and approved by the City Council
as City policy. A copy of the City policy shall be distributed to each licensee.
a. Police Incidents. Frequency of police calls will be based on the average
number of valid police calls per unit. 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).
b. Property Code and Nuisance Violations. Standards for property
maintenance will be based on compliance with City and other applicable
Codes as determined through inspections and investigations.
8. License Process and Renewal.
a. Renewals. License renewals shall be filed at least 90 days prior to the
license expiration date. Within two weeks of receipt of a complete
application and of the license fee required by Section 12-902, the
Compliance Official shall schedule an inspection.
b. Inspection. No After an application for an initial license shall be has been
submitted to the City CouncilCity Manager for approval, the property shall
pass an inspection within 90 days of the rental license issuance. until the
Compliance Official has determined that all life, health safety violations, or
discrepancies have been corrected. In cases where a weather deferral for
repairs has been granted by the Compliance Official, the license may be
Page 71 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-4 City Ordinance
brought forward for consideration of granting a license conditioned on
completing repairs. Failure to pass the inspection may result in license
revocation, suspension, cancellation, issuance of an Administrative
Citation, or a formal complaint.
c. Transfer of Building Ownership. The new owner of a rental dwelling is
required to obtain a rental permit from the City in order to continue renting
the rental dwelling. When ownership of an affordable housing building is
transferred, the new owner is required to obtain a new rental license for the
property under this Section and comply with Section 12-912D. The new
owner shall include in its application for a new license the affidavit of
having provided notice to the tenants and, if required, having paid relocation
assistance in accordance with Section 12-912D. The new owner shall not
be eligible for a new rental license if it failed to provide the notice or failed
to pay, if required, relocation benefits in accordance with Section 12-912D.
d. Incomplete Applications or Process. If the license application is
incomplete, or the applicant does not meet the requirements of the
licensing process within 120 90 days of the submittal license approval
date, the application will be canceled and the applicant must reapply and
pay for a new license..
9. Condition of License. Licensees with three or more units must be current on the
payment of all utility fees, taxes, assessments, fines, penalties, or other financial
claims due to the City on the licensed property and any other rental real property in
the City owned by the license holder at all times. Licensees with less than three
units must be current on the payment of all utility fees, taxes, assessments, fines,
penalties, or other financial claims due to the City on the licensed property and any
other rental real property in the City owned by the license holder prior to issuance
or renewal of a license. In the event a suit has been commenced under Minnesota
Statutes, Section 278.01-278.03, questioning the amount or validity of taxes, the
City Council may on application waive strict compliance with this provision; no
waiver may be granted, however, for taxes or any portion thereof that remain unpaid
for a period exceeding one (1) year after becoming due.
Section 12-902. LICENSE FEES. License fees, as set forth by City Council resolution,
shall be due 90 days prior to the license expiration date; in the cases of new unlicensed dwellings,
license fees shall be due at the time of application.
1. Residential Rental Conversion Fee. When a residential single-family home or
single family attached property is converted to a rental property, the owner or
applicant shall pay a conversion fee as established by City Council resolution. The
rental conversion fee also applies to residential properties registered as vacant
properties.
Page 72 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-5 City Ordinance
2. License Fees, Delinquent Payments. A one-time delinquency penalty of 2550% of
the license fee for each day of operatingon without a valid license shall be charged
operators of rental dwellings. A delinquency penalty of 50% of the license fee for
late rental license renewals shall be charged operators of rental dwellings. Once
issued, a license is nontransferable may be transferred pursuant to XXX and the
licensee shall not be entitled to a refund of any license fee. Upon revocation or
suspension or if the applicant withdraws an application, or in the case of an
incomplete application or process, or if an application is canceled, the fee is
nonrefundable.
3. Reinspection Fees. All reinspection fees are set by City Council resolution. If the
reinspection is being performed as part of the licensing process, fees must be paid
prior to the time of license issuance or renewal for the property, in the case of rental
housing and at the time of recertification of occupancy for nonresidential
properties. If a reinspection fee or any portion is not paid within 60 days after
billing, or within 60 days after any appeal becomes final, the City Council may
certify the unpaid cost against the property in accordance with the process set forth
in Section 19-105 of this Code.
4. Transfer Fee.
Section 12-903. OWNER OR AGENT TO APPLY. License application or renewal shall
be made by the owner of rental units or the owner’s legally constituted agent. Application forms
may be acquired from and subsequently filed with the Compliance Official. The applicant shall
supply:
1. First, middle (if any), and last name, address, date of birth, telephone number and
e-mail address of dwelling owner, owning partners if a partnership, corporate
officers if a corporation.
2. Name, address, telephone number, and e-mail address of designated local agent, if
any.
3. Name, address, and telephone number of vendee, if the dwelling is being sold
through a contract for deed.
4. Legal address of the dwelling.
5. Number of dwelling units within the dwelling.
6. Description of procedure through which tenant inquiries and complaints are to be
processed.
7. Status of utility fees, property taxes, and other assessments on the dwelling and
Formatted: No underline
Page 73 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-6 City Ordinance
other rental real property in the city owned by the applicant.
8. The number of tenants.
9. The legal name of the designated local agent.
10. At least one 24-hour property contact information for an available property owner,
local agent, or other designated responsible agent.
11. Any other information as requested by the City.
Every person holding an operating license shall give notice in writing to the Compliance
Official within ten business days after any change of this information. Depending on the
nature of changes, the City may require a new property inspection. Notice of transfer of
ownership shall be as described in Section 12-908.
Section 12-904. LOCAL AGENT REQUIRED.
1. Local Agent. No operating license shall be issued or renewed for a nonresident
owner of rental dwelling units (one who does not reside in any of the following
Minnesota counties: Hennepin, Ramsey, Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Scott, or
Washington) unless such owner designates in writing to the Compliance Official
the name of the owner’s local agent (one who does reside in any of the following
Minnesota counties: Hennepin, Ramsey, Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Scott, or
Washington) who is responsible for maintenance and upkeep and who is legally
constituted and empowered to receive service of notice of violation of the
provisions of the City Code of Ordinances, to receive orders and to institute
remedial action to effect such orders and to accept all service or process pursuant
to law. The Compliance Official shall be notified in writing of any change of
resident agent.
2. Responsibility for Acts of Manager, Operator, or Local Agent. Licensees are
responsible for the acts or omissions of their managers, operators, local agent, or
other authorized representative.
Section 12-905. CONFORMANCE TO LAWS. No operating license shall be issued or
renewed unless the rental dwelling and its premises conform to the Code of Ordinances of
Brooklyn Center and the laws of the State of Minnesota.
Section 12-906. LICENSE INSPECTION REQUIRED. No operating license shall be
issued or renewed unless the owner of rental units agrees in his application to permit inspections
pursuant to Section 12-1001. Licensed rental dwellings are subject to the Compliance Official’s
right to inspect the rental dwelling and dwelling units to determine whether they are in compliance
with the code and state law. The Compliance Official will provide reasonable notice to the owner
or operator of the date and time of the inspection.
Page 74 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-7 City Ordinance
Section 12-907. POSTING OF LICENSE. Every licensee of a rental dwelling with more
than four units shall conspicuously post the current license certificate in the main entryway or other
conspicuous location. For rental dwellings of four or fewer units, the licensee must provide a copy
of the license certificate to each tenant by attaching a copy to the tenant’s copy of the executed
lease agreement.
Section 12-908. Rental licenses may be transferred if the license is within 6-months of
issuance and have passed the rental license inspection. The rental license may be transferred upon
completion of a license transfer application and payment of the license transfer fee. LICENSE
NOT TRANSFERABLE. No operating license shall be transferable to another person or to
another rental dwelling. Every person holding an operating license shall give notice in writing to
the Compliance Official within ten (10) business days after having legally transferred or otherwise
disposed of the legal control of any licensed rental dwelling. Such notice shall include the name
and address of the person succeeding to the ownership or control of such rental dwelling or
dwellings.
Section 12-909. OCCUPANCY REGISTER REQUIRED.
1. Every owner of a licensed rental dwelling shall keep, or cause to be kept, a current
register of occupancy for each dwelling unit that provides the following
information:
a. Dwelling unit address.
b. Number of bedrooms in dwelling unit and the maximum number of
occupants.
c. Legal names and date of birth of adult occupants and number of adults and
children (under 18 years of age) currently occupying the dwelling units.
d. Dates renters occupied and vacated dwelling units.
e. A chronological list of complaints and requests for repair by dwelling unit
occupants, which complaints and requests are related to the provisions of
this Code of Ordinances.
f. A similar chronological list of all corrections made in response to such
requests and complaints.
Such register shall be made available for viewing or copying by the Compliance
Official at all reasonable times.
2. All nonresidential properties (commercial, industrial, and similar) shall keep, or
cause to be kept, a current register of occupancy for each building that provides the
Page 75 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-8 City Ordinance
following:
a. Building address.
b. List of all tenants occupying building.
c. Nature of business conducted by each tenant in building.
d. Contact person for each tenant.
e. Gross floor area leased by each tenant.
Such register shall be made available for viewing or copying by the Compliance
Official at all reasonable times.
Section 12-910. LICENSE SUSPENSION, REVOCATION, DENIAL AND NON-
RENEWAL.
1. Applicability. Every license issued under the provisions of this Chapter is subject
to suspension or revocation by the City Council.
2. Unoccupied or Vacated Rental Units. In the event that a license is suspended,
revoked, or not renewed by the City Council, it shall be unlawful for the owner or
the owner’s duly authorized agent to thereafter permit any new occupancies of
vacant or thereafter vacated rental units until such time as a valid license may be
restored by the City Council.
3. Grounds for License Action. The Council may revoke, suspend, or decline to renew
any license issued under this Chapter upon any of the following grounds:
a. false statements, misrepresentations, or fraudulent statements on any
application or other information or report required by this Chapter to be given
by the applicant or licensee.
b. failure to pay any application fee, fine or penalty, reinspection fees,
reinstatement fee, special assessments, real estate taxes, or other financial
claims due to the City as required by this Chapter and City Council
resolution.
c. failure to continuously comply with any property maintenance, zoning,
health, building, nuisance, or other City Codes; or failure to correct
deficiencies noted in Compliance Notices in the time specified in the notice.
d. failure to comply with the provisions of an approved mitigation plan or not
submitting an action plan as required.
Page 76 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-9 City Ordinance
e. failure to qualify for the type of license held or applied for.
f. excessive police calls for service in accordance with criteria determined by
the City Manager and approved by the City Council as City policy, based
on the number and nature of the calls when, after owner notification, the
owner has failed to supply an appropriate written action plan to reduce the
police calls for service
g. failure to actively pursue the eviction of tenants who have violated the
provision of this Chapter or Crime Free Lease Addendum or have otherwise
created a public nuisance in violation of City, state, or applicable laws.
h. the failure to eliminate imminent health and life safety hazards as
determined by the City, or its authorized representatives.
i. conviction of any crime related to the business or entity licensed and failure
to show by competent evidence the rehabilitation and ability to perform the
duties of the business.
j. the abandonment of the property by the property owner as determined by
the inability to make contact with the owner or his/her manager or local
agent due to inaccurate or invalid contact information.
k. failure to operate or maintain the licensed premises in conformity with all
applicable state and local laws and Ordinances.
4. License Action Sections. Revocation, suspension, and non-renewal may be
brought under either this Section or Section 12-911, or both. Each section
provides an independent basis on which to take a license action and only the
procedures required of the particular Section being relied upon must be followed
to pursue the action.
5. Notification, Hearing, and Decision Basis.
a. Written Notice, Hearing. A decision to revoke, suspend, deny, or not renew
a license shall be preceded by written notice to the applicant or licensee of
the alleged grounds therefor and the applicant or licensee will be given an
opportunity for a hearing before the City Council before final action to
revoke, suspend, deny, or not renew a license.
b. Decision Basis. The Council shall give due regard to the frequency and
seriousness of violations, the ease with which such violations could have
been cured or avoided and good faith efforts to comply and shall issue a
decision to deny, not renew, suspend or revoke a license only upon written
Page 77 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-10 City Ordinance
findings.
6. Affected Facility. The Council may suspend or revoke a license or not renew a
license for part or all of a facility.
7. License Actions, Reapplication.
a. Suspension. Licenses may be suspended for up to ninety (90) days and may,
after the period of suspension, be reinstated subject to compliance with this
Chapter and any conditions imposed by the City Council at the time of
suspension.
b. Revocation, Denial, Nonrenewal. Licenses that are revoked will not be
reinstated until the owner has applied for and secured a new license and
complied with all conditions imposed at the time of revocation. Upon a
decision to revoke, deny or not renew a license, no approval of any
application for a new license for the same facility will be effective until after
the period of time specified in the Council’s written decision, which shall
not exceed one year. The Council shall specify in its written decision the
date when an application for a new license will be accepted for processing.
A decision not to renew a license may take the form of a suspension or
revocation. A decision to deny an initial application for a new facility will
not take the form of a suspension or revocation unless false statements have
been made by the applicant in connection with the application. A decision
to deny an initial application shall state conditions of reapplication.
c. Reinstatement Fees. All new applications must be accompanied by a
reinstatement fee, as specified by Council resolution, in addition to all other
fees required by this Chapter.
8. Written Decision, Compliance. A written decision to revoke, suspend, deny, or not
renew a license or application shall specify the part or parts of the facility to which
it applies. Thereafter, and until a license is reissued or reinstated, no rental units
becoming vacant in such part or parts of the facility may be re-let or occupied.
Revocation, suspension or non-renewal of a license shall not excuse the owner from
compliance with all terms of state laws and Codes and this Code of Ordinances for
as long as any units in the facility are occupied. Failure to comply with all terms
of this Chapter during the term of revocation, suspension or non-renewal is a
misdemeanor and grounds for extension of the term of such revocation or
suspension or continuation of non-renewal, or for a decision not to reinstate the
license, notwithstanding any limitations on the period of suspension, revocation or
non-renewal specified in the City Council’s written decision or in paragraph 6 of
this Section.
9. New Licenses Prohibited. A person who has a rental license revoked may not
Page 78 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-11 City Ordinance
receive a rental license for another property within the City for a period of one year
from the date of revocation. The person may continue to operate other currently
licensed rental properties if the properties are maintained in compliance with City
Codes and other applicable regulations.
Section 12-911. CONDUCT ON LICENSED PREMISES.
1. Conduct, Disorderly Activities, Nuisances Defined. It shall be the responsibility of
the licensee to see that persons occupying the licensed premises conduct themselves
in such a manner as not to cause the premises to be disorderly. For purposes of this
Chapter, disorderly activities are considered nuisances and defined as follows:
a. Noise – cats/dogs City Code Section 1-110; horns/radios – City Code
Sections 19-1201, 1202, and 1203
b. Violation of City Code Section 19-1121 (Unlawful Possession, Delivery, or
Purchase) or violation of laws relating to the possession of controlled
substances as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 152.01, Subdivision 4,
and drug paraphernalia as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 152.092.
c. Public disturbance – City Code Section 19-202.
d. The unlawful sale of intoxicating liquor or 3.2 percent malt liquor.
e. Violation of laws relating to gambling.
f. Violation of laws relating to prostitution as defined in Minnesota Statutes,
Section 609.321, Subdivision 9, or acts relating to prostitution.
g. Unlawful use or possession of a weapon. Violation of Minnesota Statutes,
Sections 609.66, Subdivision 1a; 609.67; 609.02, Subdivision 6; or
624.713; and City Code Section 19-402.
h. Loud parties/persons – City Code Section 19-1201.
i. Fights – City Code Section 19-203.
j. Allowing curfew/status offenses/underage drinking – City Code Sections
19-301 and 19-304.
k. Disorderly conduct (Minnesota Statutes, Section 609.72).
l. Property damage – City Code Section 19-211.
Page 79 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-12 City Ordinance
m. Assaults 5th degree non-domestic – City Code Section 19-204.
n. Interference with a peace officer (Minnesota Statutes, Section 609.50).
o. Unlawful assembly (Minnesota Statutes, Section 609.705) – City Code
Section 19-1105.
p. Presence at unlawful assembly (Minnesota Statutes, Section 609.175).
q. Terrorist threats (Minnesota Statutes, Section 609.713).
r. Loitering – City Code Section 19-201.
2. Violations, Actions. Upon determination by the City Manager or the Manager’s
authorized designee that a licensed premises was used in a disorderly manner, as
described in paragraph 1, the City Manager shall take the following actions:
a. For a first instance of disorderly use of licensed premise a notice shall be
provided to the licensee of the violation directing the licensee to take steps
to prevent further violations.
b. If a second instance of disorderly use of the licensed premises occurs within
a twelve (12) month time period for the same tenancy, the City Manager or
the Manager’s authorized designee shall notify the licensee of the violation
and require the licensee to submit a written report of the actions taken, and
proposed actions to be taken by the licensee to prevent further disorderly
use of the premises. The licensee shall submit a written report to the City
Manager or the Manager’s authorized designee within five (5) days of
receipt of the notice of disorderly use of the premises and shall detail all
actions taken by the licensee in response to all notices of disorderly use of
the premises.
c. If a third instance of disorderly use of the licensed premises occurs within a
twelve (12) month time period from the first disorderly violation for the
same tenancy, the rental dwelling license for the premises may be denied,
revoked, suspended, or not renewed. An action to deny, revoke, suspend,
or not renew a license under this Section shall be initiated by the City
Manager or the Manager’s authorized designee who shall give the licensee
written notice of a hearing before the City Council to consider such denial,
revocation suspension, or nonrenewal. The written notice shall specify all
violations of this Section, and shall state the date, time, place, and purpose
of the hearing.
3. Hearing. The hearing shall be held no less than ten (10) days and no more than
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5", Hanging: 0.5"
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5"
Page 80 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-13 City Ordinance
forty-five (45) days after giving such notice.
Following the hearing, the Council may deny, revoke, suspend, or decline to renew
the license for all or any part or parts of the licensed premises, or may grant a license
upon such terms and conditions as it deems necessary to accomplish the purposes
of this Section.
4. Eviction Actions. No adverse license action shall be imposed where the instance
of disorderly use of the licensed premises occurred during the pendency of eviction
proceedings (unlawful detainer) or within thirty (30) days of notice given by the
licensee to a tenant to vacate the premises where the disorderly use was related to
conduct by that tenant or by other occupants or guests of the tenant's unit. Eviction
proceedings shall not be a bar to adverse license action, however, unless they are
diligently pursued by the licensee. Further, an action to deny, revoke, suspend, or
not renew a license based upon violations of this Section may be postponed or
discontinued at any time if it appears that the licensee has taken appropriate
measures which will prevent further instances of disorderly use.
5. Determining Disorderly Conduct. A determination that the licensed premises have
been used in a disorderly manner as described in paragraph 1 shall be made upon
substantial evidence to support such a determination. It shall not be necessary that
criminal charges be brought in order to support a determination of disorderly use,
nor shall the fact of dismissal or acquittal of such a criminal charge operate as a bar
to adverse license action under this Section.
6. Notices. All notices given by the City under this Section shall be personally served
on the licensee, sent by First Class mail to the licensee's last known address or, if
neither method of service effects notice, by posting on a conspicuous place on the
licensed premises.
7. Enforcement. Enforcement actions provided in this Section shall not be exclusive,
and the City Council may take any action with respect to a licensee, a tenant, guests,
or the licensed premises as is authorized by this Code or state law.
Section 12-912A. NO RETALIATION. No licensee shall evict, threaten to evict, or take
any other punitive action against any tenant by reason of good faith calls made by such tenant to
law enforcement agencies relating to criminal activity, suspected criminal activity, suspicious
occurrences, or public safety concerns. This Section shall not prohibit the eviction of tenants from
a dwelling unit for unlawful conduct of a tenant or invitee or violation of any rules, regulations, or
lease terms other than a prohibition against contacting law enforcement agencies.
[PROVISIONS REMOVED FOR EASE OF READING]
Section 12-913. TYPE IV PROVISIONAL LICENSES.
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5", Hanging: 0.5"
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5", Hanging: 0.5"
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5", Hanging: 0.5"
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5", Hanging: 0.5"
Page 81 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-14 City Ordinance
1. Eligibility. Rental properties that meet the provisional licensing criteria as described
in Section 12-901 are eligible only for provisional licenses.
2. Monthly Report. The City will provide by mail to each licensee a monthly report of
any police and fire calls and incidents and applicable property Code violations as
described in Section 12-901.
3. Mitigation Plan. The applicant for a provisional license must submit for
Compliance Official review and approval a mitigation plan for the license period.
The mitigation plan shall describe steps proposed by the applicant to reduce the
number of police and fire calls and/or the property Code issues described in Section
12-901 and 12-911 to a level that qualifies for a Type I, II, or III license. The
mitigation plan may include such steps as changes in tenant screening procedures,
changes in lease terms, security measures, rules and regulations for tenant conduct,
security personnel, and time frame to implement all phases of the Crime Free
Housing Program. The Compliance Official may require modifications to the
proposed mitigation plan to ensure if effectively addresses the issues that resulted
in the applicant not being eligible for a different type of license. An applicant may
appeal the Compliance Official’s decision regarding the mitigation plan by filing a
written appeal within 10 days of the date of the decision. The appeal must state the
reasons for the appeal, the alleged error, and the relief being sought from the appeal.
4. Council Consideration. The Council shall act on whether to approve the
application. Approval of the license shall be conditioned on compliance with the
mitigation plan as approved by the Compliance Official. If the applicant filed a
timely appeal of the Compliance Official’s decision regarding the mitigation plan,
the Council shall hear the appeal and may uphold, overturn, or amend the
Compliance Official’s decision.
5. Compliance with Mitigation Plan. The licensee shall comply with the mitigation
plan as approved or as modified by the Council as a result of an appeal. Failure to
implement and comply with the mitigation plan shall constitute sufficient grounds
for a license action under Section 12-910.
Section 12-914. CRIME FREE HOUSING PROGRAM. For the purpose of this Chapter,
the Crime Free Housing Program shall mean the nationally recognized program, unless otherwise
indicated. The phases of the program include, but are not limited to, the conditions set forth
below.
1. Phase I. For license categories other than Type I, an owner, manager, or local agent
responsible for the operation of the rental property must complete the Phase I
training of the Crime Free Housing Program or a similar course approved by the
City Manager. Certification as a rental property manager may also satisfy this
requirement. Phase I includes the following:
Page 82 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-15 City Ordinance
a. Attend an eight-hour crime-free housing course presented by police, fire,
public housing and others.
b. Use a written lease including the Minnesota Crime Free Housing Lease
Addendum.
c. Check the criminal background of all prospective tenants and, upon request,
provide a copy of Third Party Background Check procedures for Tenants.
d. Actively pursue the eviction of tenants who violate the terms of the lease
and/or the Crime Free Lease Addendum.
2. Phase II. Includes Phase I plus the following:
a. Complete a Security Assessment and complete the security improvements
recommended. This phase will certify that the rental property has met the
security requirements for the tenant’s safety.
3. Phase III. Includes Phases I and II plus the following:
a. For properties with more than four units, conduct resident training annually
for the residents where crime watch and crime prevention techniques are
discussed.
b. For properties with more than four units, hold regular resident meetings.
c. For a property that has received consecutive Type IV rental licenses, the
applicant, owner, or local agent is required to schedule and attend an
inspection consultation at the property.
Page 83 of 299
4/9/2026
1
Rental License Program –
Ordinance Amendment (First Reading)
City Council Meeting, April 13, 2026
Xiong Thao, Housing and Community Standards Manager
Background
•Staff met with Council during several work sessions to discuss changes to the
rental license program.
•Staff has received feedback and incorporated the feedback to develop a new
rental license ordinance.
•During the work session meeting on March 9, 2026, a draft ordinance was
presented to Council. Afte the presentation, it was requested that an
ordinance amendment be brought forward for consideration.
2
1
2
Page 84 of 299
4/9/2026
2
Proposed Ordinance
•Eliminates the performance based rental license program. Implement a
rental license that is valid for two (2) years.
•The rental license will be issued administratively by staff and will no longer go
to City Council for approval. Periodic reporting will be provided to Council on
the rental license program.
•The rental license will be issued prior to passing the rental license inspection.
•Rental license inspection must pass within 90 days of issuing the rental
license.
•The ordinance would allow for a rental license transfer if the transfer fee is
paid, and the rental inspection has passed and is within 6 months of issuing
the license.
3
Proposed Ordinance (Cont.)
•For rental licenses that do not pass the inspection within 90 days after the
license has been issued, the rental license application would be considered
incomplete, and the rental license would be cancelled. The property owner
would have to re-apply for a new license.
•Removes the 8-hour Crime Free Housing training requirement.
•Removes the requirement for a Crime Prevention through Environmental
Design (CPTED) inspection requirement.
•Removes the requirement for the submission of an Action or Mitigation Plan.
•Removes police calls for service in determining the license type.
4
3
4
Page 85 of 299
4/9/2026
3
Next Steps
•Staff met with the Housing Commission on March 17 and the Commissioners
provided input on the changes to the rental license program.
•Overall, the Commission likes that the rental license program retains the rental
license inspection and the City is still able to regulate tenant behavior on the
property.
•Concerns:
•Who is asking for the rental program changes;
•Why is the City rewarding Type III and Type IV licenses with longer licenses.
•Tonight is the first reading of the requested ordinance amendment. It will require a
2nd reading and a public hearing. Due to noticing requirements, the soonest the
public hearing can be scheduled is May 11
th City Council meeting.
•If the ordinance amendment is adopted on May 11
th, the change would go into effect
30 days following newspaper publication of the ordinance language.
5
Requested Council Action
(1) Motion to approve a first reading of an ordinance amending
Chapter 12, Section 12-901, 12-902, 12-906, 12-908, 12-910, 12-911
through 916, and Section 12-1504(4)(b) of the Brooklyn Center City
Code of Ordinances regarding Rental Licensing and Vacant Property
Exceptions within the City of Brooklyn Center
(2) Motion to schedule a second reading of the requested ordinance
amendment and public hearing for May 11, 2026.
6
5
6
Page 86 of 299
03/17/26 -1- DRAFT
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND STATE OF MINNESOTA
REGULAR SESSION
MARCH 17, 2026
1. CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission was called to order by Vice Chair Straub at 7:08 p.m.
2. Roll Call
Vice Chair Landon Straub
Commissioner Laura Freund
Commissioner Serentha Lee
Commissioner Jamal Said
Commissioners Aniya White, Alyssa Kuglin, and Chair Natalie O’Connor (absent and excused)
City Staff present: Associate Planner Krystin Eldridge and Housing and Community Standards
Manager Xiong Thao
Also present: None
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
a. Motion to Approve Regular Meeting Agenda for March 17, 2026
There was a motion by Commissioner Lee and seconded by Commissioner Said to approve the
agenda as submitted.
4. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES
a. Motion to Approve December 16, 2025, Meeting Minutes
b. Motion to Approve February 17, 2026, Meeting Minutes
There was a motion by Commissioner Said and seconded by Commissioner Freund to approve the
minutes of December 16, 2025, and February 17, 2026, as submitted.
Associate Planner Krystin Eldridge reminded the Commission that, when moving to approve the
minutes, the Commissioner has reviewed them and agrees with everything noted.
Vice Chair Straub asked how the minutes are transcribed. Ms. Eldridge shared that the meetings
are recorded and that software transcribes and summarizes the discussion. She noted that the
recording is sent to the transcription clerk, who types out everything that is discussed. The minutes
are then sent back to the Staff, who fill in missing items or add more context where needed.
5. RENTAL ORDINANCE UPDATE – XIONG THAO, HOUSING AND COMMUNITY
Page 87 of 299
03/17/26 -2- DRAFT
STANDARDS MANAGER
Housing and Community Standards Manager Xiong Thao shared that this information was a
follow-up to a November meeting on tenant protections and rental license ordinances. There was
a meeting on January 12 with the City Council, in which the Council decided not to move forward
with any tenant protection action at this time. However, the Council still wanted to move forward
with the rental license ordinance change, so a work session took place on March 9, and the
information he would share with the Commission was the same as that shared with the Council.
Mr. Thao presented that PowerPoint presentation to the Commission. First, the presentation
informed the Council that the work session would review a sample of the rental license program
ordinance to be drafted. After questions and input were received from the Council, a final
ordinance would be brought forward for consideration. He explained that there are 551 active
licenses, and in the City, there are four license types, ranging from three-year to six-month licenses.
The proposed ordinance is a two-year program that the Council requested during the three work
sessions. He added that this would essentially mean that anyone with a three-year license would
lose one year and have to renew more frequently, and those with one-year and six-month licenses
would be given additional time and renew less frequently. He shared that, in the first round of
changing the license to a two-year program, the City would conduct 210 additional inspections.
Commissioner Freund stated that types three and four get an extra year to a year and a half, and
there are only 52 of them. She asked if investment groups own any of the properties. Mr. Thao
shared that investment groups do. Commissioner Freund asked if investment groups were the ones
going to the Council and pushing the agenda. Mr. Thao explained that the issue was brought to
City staff by the Council a couple of years ago regarding the rental license program. Staff
presented information on rental license types, repeat type four licenses, and how the program
works. Based on those conversations, the Council wanted to look at how to change the license
program. He added that it was not until 2025, when one particular Councilmember requested City
staff pursue changes to the rental license program.
The City then met with the landlord group and tenants about tenant protections and rental licensing.
The group of landlords really pushed for changing the ordinance. He explained that the idea was
brought to the Councilmember, who, along with other Councilmembers, asked the Staff to review
various licensing programs and bring something to the Council. He shared that the program is
based on what Brooklyn Park has because the landlord group indicated a preference for it. The
Brooklyn Park program has a two-year program. Inspections are done every year, but only 50
percent of the units are inspected every year, so by the second year, 100 percent of the building
will be inspected. He explained that the proposed ordinance is modeled after Brooklyn Park, but
the City will do 100 percent of the inspections each year.
Commissioner Freund asked if it would be more work. Mr. Thao shared that, at the front end,
there is more work due to scaling back the three-year licenses. Commissioner Freund pointed out
that the program does not sound homeowner friendly or renter-friendly. Mr. Thao noted that this
is pointed out in the PowerPoint presentation. He shared that, regarding type three and type four
licenses, City staff anticipates an increase in the number of complaints received for those license
types. At the same time, knowing that when the City does the inspection every two years, the type
three and four licenses are going to have more property code violations just because of the
Page 88 of 299
03/17/26 -3- DRAFT
inspection delay. He added that, normally, in the six months, there are 20 to 30 code violations,
so over two years, there will be more than 10 or 20 code violations to deal with. Commissioner
Straub asked what the plan is for managing the issues that pop up and whether there is an
enforcement mechanism. Mr. Thao stated that there still is an enforcement mechanism. The City
can still go out to conduct complaint inspections and issue a correction or complaint order to the
landlord. The landlord will have an average of two weeks to make the corrections; if they don’t,
the City can assess reinspection fees or citations. He added that if it reaches the point where the
City needs to revoke a license or take other license-related action, it can be brought before the City
Council for consideration. He explained that no powers or authority to regulate licenses are being
taken away, just because inspections are not happening as regularly for type three and four licenses.
Commissioner Said asked how the program would affect the landlords. Mr. Thao stated that there
is no qualification for a two-year license. Commissioner Said clarified that the property has to be
quoted to the number one or two level, because if there is a violation and the property is inspected,
the City will not give the property owner a two- or three-year license, as the owner is not ready for
the jump to that level. Commission Straub asked what the standard is going forward. There is a
tiered standard for what was acceptable at each level, but now that it is across the board, no
standard is being met. Mr. Thao explained that there is no standard anymore, but he would
elaborate more in the presentation shortly.
He stated that the City would eliminate the performance-based rental program, so there would be
no more tiers, and implement a two-year license. Everyone who applies for a rental license will
automatically get a two-year license. He added that the City is no longer bringing a rental license
to the City Council for approval; City staff would issue the license to the applicant. He explained
that when someone applies, the license is issued, and the owner then has 90 days from the license's
issuance to pass the inspection. So, the owner is getting a license without having to pass the
inspection; however, the owner is still required to undergo an inspection and pass the inspection
within 90 days.
Commission Straub questioned that previously someone obtaining a license was contingent upon
only having a “insert number” amount of violations. Now that it's pass or fail, how many violations
will be allowed? Mr. Thao stated that, under the performance-based program, to obtain a three-,
two-, one-year, and six-month licenses, the owner must qualify based on the number of code
violations. For example, for single-family and duplex homes, 9 or more violations, and more than
three violations per unit in a multi-family property would result in a six-month rental license.
There is no maximum number of violations in either program.
Commissioner Said explained that right now, there is a big jump to go from type three or four to
type one or two. He asked what level type three or four must meet to qualify for the two-year
program. He noted that those owners already on type one or two do not have to do much to apply
for the license, because when the space is inspected, it will easily pass compared to the type three
or four license. Now, after 90 days, if the owner does not pass, then they will not get the license.
Mr. Thao stated that the owner already has the license. He added that with the new two-year
program, the owner does not have to qualify for anything.
Commissioner Lee clarified that everyone who applies is issued a two-year license, but after that,
Page 89 of 299
03/17/26 -4- DRAFT
there are 90 days to pass the inspection. Then the City goes out and sees everything that is wrong,
and then they would have 90 days. Mr. Thao further explained that they would receive a letter
stating that the owner has 30 days to correct the violations. If the inspection is not passed, then
another letter is sent, and a reinspection fee is charged. After that, there would be a follow-up every
two weeks until the 90-day period is up. There are a total of seven inspections to pass; if the owner
does not pass any of them, the rental license is considered incomplete and cancelled. He added
that the City can either require the applicant to reapply, pay the fee, and go through the inspection
process again, or bring it forward to the Council for consideration of license revocation, a formal
complaint with the City’s Attorney, prosecution of the office, or license suspension. The City is
still working that out with the attorney as the policy is being written. He shared that what is being
brought forward is the big picture, and the details will be worked out before the program is rolled
out.
Commissioner Straub asked if the applicant is allowed to rent during the first 90 days. Mr. Thao
shared that they are allowed to rent, but if the application is not completed, then the City will take
action.
Mr. Thao continued that the City Council expressed a desire to allow a rental license to be
transferred within six months of issuance. Under the current ordinance, the City does not allow
license transfers, so the new owner will have to pay the license fee and undergo the inspection
process. He shared that, with the proposed change, if the old owner has passed the inspection
within a six-month window, the new owner can pay a transfer fee and assume the license without
having to go through the inspection process again. Commissioner Straub asked if the license
continues with the original license type. Mr. Thao shared that, assuming the new owner takes over
at the six-month mark, the license would be valid for 18 months.
Mr. Thao stated that the Council desires to remove the eight-hour Crime Free Housing training
requirements, the CPTED (Crime Prevention through Environmental Design) inspection, and the
requirement to submit an actual mitigation plan. Commissioner Straub asked what the actual
mitigation plan is. Mr. Thao explained that for type three and four licenses, the owner must
demonstrate that they have completed the eight-hour housing class and the sub-type inspection,
agree to a list of checkboxes, and submit a capital improvement plan. The actionable mitigation
plan is also used for properties with issues related to police calls for service for which the City
lacks an enforceable ordinance. He gave an example: if the owner has met the lighting
requirements through zoning, but there are still dark spaces on the property. Still, there have been
police calls for service, and the actionable mitigation plan can require the owner to install lighting
or security cameras. He further stated that CPTED only looks at the property itself, and that
additional lighting and similar measures cannot be required outside the actual mitigation plan.
Mr. Thao explained that the police calls for service to determine the license type will be removed.
In the old system, the number of police calls for service could reduce the license type: if there were
only one code violation, the owner would be issued a three-year license, but if five validated calls
for service came in, the license could be reduced. He noted that, with the new program, police
calls for service will not affect license types. The ordinance includes a section addressing the
conduct of property. If there are police calls for service at a particular unit, the police can still ask
the landlord to take action against the tenant based on those calls. If the landlord takes no action
Page 90 of 299
03/17/26 -5- DRAFT
after three service calls, the police will notify the tenant that, if no action is taken, there will be
action against the landlord’s license. He continued by stating that the language would also be
changed to state that licenses not completed within the 90-day inspection period will be considered
incomplete applications and will require reapplication for a new license. The City would still send
license renewal reminders at 120, 90, 60, and 30 days before the license expires. This does not
prevent the owner from renewing outside of those dates; as long as they renew, the Staff will
schedule the inspection and get a new license before the license expires. He shared that there are
551 active licenses, but about 225 are not included because they are pending, expired, in process,
or not yet processed by the City. The City does not license assisted living facilities; there are about
300 in the City licensed by MDH or DHS.
Mr. Thao explained that the Council has been informed of the meeting with the Commission, and
that City staff has neither met nor presented the proposed amendments to rental property owners
or tenant advocates. The earliest that the amendments could be brought to the Council would be
April 13, given the notice requirements, and because it is an ordinance amendment, it requires a
first and second reading with a Public Hearing. He added that if the ordinance is adopted, it will
take effect 30 days after publication. He noted that policies and procedures would still need to be
put in place, so the timeline may look more like September before the program is rolled out. Ms.
Eldridge noted that she would keep the Commission informed of updates and would be available
to listen or attend meetings.
Mr. Thao shared that the Council wanted the proposed ordinance to come soon rather than later.
So, the Staff worked to get it onto the agenda as soon as possible, with April 13 being the earliest.
Commissioner Said asked about the hotel ordinance that was recently changed. Mr. Thao said he
would answer the question but asked if there were any questions about the rental program.
Commissioner Freund asked whether the Council is aware that the vast majority of rentals are
already type two, and what the motivation is. Mr. Thao shared that the Council is aware. He
explained that one of the councilmembers is a part of the landlord group, and they wanted the
rental program to change. The Councilmember requested City staff review the rental license
program and recommend any changes.
Commissioner Lee asked if the Councils feel the new program is better for landlords. Mr. Thao
shared that the Council does feel it is better. Commissioner Straub noted that it feels like the
program is only better for the landlords and a way to be cheaper for them. He shared that the
renters absolutely lose with this new program. Taxpayers will pay more for these inspections, at
least at first. He stated that it seems like many things that used to be the landlord's responsibility
are now being offloaded onto City Inspectors and City Law Enforcement. He stated that when the
proposal is read to the public, he does not expect many people to be happy about it. Mr. Thao
stated that, regarding the inspection process, the City is still in the process and will not change
that.
The IPMC is still enforced, and 100 percent of the units are being inspected. The only difference
is that the number of code violations does not impact landlords. He explained that under the
current program, the landlord had to prepare for the inspection; under the new program, the City
Page 91 of 299
03/17/26 -6- DRAFT
can inspect, and nothing needs to be done to prepare, so more code violations might be found.
Commissioner Lee stated that the inspections will not slacken regarding violations; the City will
still follow the same process. Mr. Thao noted that previously, the property owners had to be more
proactive, but now the inspection can take place, and the owners are given a list of items that need
to be fixed.
Commissioner Straub noted that, in reviewing all the requirements being removed, he understands
that many of them are obnoxious barriers because they are difficult to complete. However, with
the removal of the requirements, there is no longer an easily accessible alternative. He shared that
the requirements are not just small legal protections, but safety features in housing. He stated that,
especially because this entire change heavily favors types three and four licensed rental properties,
it will significantly impact low-income individuals. There is zero reason for the landlords to care.
He noted that there is no rental protection, and the proposal feels one-sided. Mr. Thao noted that
he understands the Commissioner’s concern. He shared that, regarding the eight-hour training,
many landlords have already completed it, and it does not expire. Fewer cities are offering the
training, and it is very hard to get into it. He stated that the same applies to the CPTEC.
Commissioner Straub asked whether there has been any positive reinforcement for these types of
programs, rather than penalizing license holders for not doing them. Mr. Thao stated that the idea
has been brought to the Council in the past, and there is currently no interest in a license-reduction
fee or any incentive to complete these items. Commissioner Straub stated that there must be data
surrounding these types of attributes, such as public spending on law enforcement and inspections.
Mr. Thao shared that the CPTEC inspections conducted are very basic, and most properties already
have them. If the properties do not have CPTEC inspections, items are being called out during
regular inspections. He shared that single-family homes will feel the impact of not having the
benefit of the security assessment. Mr. Thao shared that, despite there being no benefits to tenants,
tenant protections remain in place. Tenants can call about issues with a property, and if proper
channels are not being followed, then the City can come out to do an inspection.
Ms. Eldridge asked how much time a landlord is given to make repairs. Mr. Thao explained that
it depends: if it is an emergency, then 24 to 48 hours; if it is a normal code violation, then 10 days
is the standard. No utilities are an emergency, and need to be addressed quickly. Commissioner
Lee asked about how to handle a situation with no heat in a rental unit. Mr. Thao explained that
the tenant should call the landlord, if nothing is done, call the City, and the City will do an
inspection. If it is not 68 degrees three feet from the heat source, the landlord will be notified that
something needs to be done, temporary solutions can be put in place, and it needs to be fixed. If
things are going to take longer than a few days, something better than temporary heat needs to be
done. The City cannot force the landlord to place a tenant in a hotel; it is all on a case-by-case
basis. He reminded that the new ordinance still allows tenants to call in complaints or concerns.
He noted that the City is anticipating going out to the 51 units more frequently due to complaints.
Commissioner Straub asked whether the City keeps metrics and data to show how successful or
unsuccessful landlord-owned housing is. He added, would the City have information showing
where the inspections are taking place and which types of inspections those would have fallen
under in the old program? Mr. Thao stated that the City has access to all of that data and that it
has previously been reviewed. With the Council most concerned about type two licenses, the City
Page 92 of 299
03/17/26 -7- DRAFT
reviewed data across categories over 12 months. He shared that the Council wants to continue
receiving periodic reports on the new program, so the plan is to present to the Council twice a year.
Commissioner Straub noted that there are likely metrics on landlord satisfaction. He asked if there
was any way to gauge tenant satisfaction. Mr. Thao shared that tenant satisfaction is not tracked.
He noted that satisfaction is gauged anecdotally through inspections, as every single apartment is
inspected. He added that the City engages with tenants about their housing. He stated that the
City conducts a citywide residential survey every five years with questions about housing, safety,
and housing quality. Ms. Eldridge stated that there are tenant forums and a tenant advocate group
that the City speaks to.
Commissioner Lee asked if the City has co-ops. Mr. Thao stated that the City is not aware of any
co-ops or land trusts. He shared that a land trust company approached the City, but upon closer
review, the property values did not meet the land trust model. He explained that in a land trust
model, a nonprofit or third party buys the property; the owner would buy the house but lease the
land, and the land is leased for free. It maintains affordability to get into housing without having
to pay the full value of the property.
Commissioner Freund asked if applicants have to go through the Council to get a rental license.
Mr. Thao explained that, with the current program, the inspection would be conducted; once passed,
the Staff would prepare a report, bring it to the Council, and the Council would vote to issue the
license. The item is put on the consent agenda. When the program first started, the Council had to
vote individually on the rental license. He shared that the process will be phased out, and under
the new process, once someone pays the rental license fee, the administration can issue the license
without the Council’s approval.
Mr. Thao commented on the hospitality licensing. He explained that the overhaul of the hospitality
licensing was approved at the March 9 City Council meeting. The approval ended the current
program and adopted a new one. He shared that with this new program, rentals still need to be
licensed through the City. The City must license all hotels, and every hotel must be inspected by
the Department of Community Development. That is another approximately 1,000 units that will
be inspected every year. He added that every single room in the hotel will be inspected, and the
hotel will have to pass inspection before a new license is issued. The inspection will have to take
place far enough in advance of the license's expiration to allow issuance of a new license. He
noted that there are no more licensed tiers, there is strict language about police calls for service,
and training is required for sex trafficking and prostitution. The language has been clarified to
state that cash payments for hotel rooms are not accepted; all reservations must be made with a
credit card, and the card must match the ID. A photo ID is required for guest registration.
Commissioner Lee asked if there are penalties for not following the ordinance. Mr. Thao shared
that the penalties are very clear. It is an automatic suspension or revocation of the license. He
added that if police activity has been validated, it can be a reason to revoke a hotel license. He
noted that it will be effective by the end of April. All of the hotels have been notified. There is a
meeting to discuss the rules and how to roll them out. Commissioner Lee stated this is a good
thing. Mr. Thao shared that because of the overdose that resulted in a death, the Travelodge was
shut down after an inspection by Hennepin County. Both Hennepin County and the City gave
Page 93 of 299
03/17/26 -8- DRAFT
Travelodge a list of corrections to make before it could reopen. Travelodge was able to get all the
rooms to meet the Hennepin County requirements, and there were a few outstanding items for the
City, but they were in rooms that are not planned to be rented out and on the exterior because of
the weather. He noted that an inspection was also conducted at Super 8, but it was much better,
and the City plans to pass it.
Ms. Eldridge shared that she would send the information about the rental program and the hotel
ordinance.
6. NEXT MEETINGS
Ms. Eldridge shared that the next meeting is on April 21. She shared that someone may come to
talk about TIF. Even though there are no developments in the City right now, it is still good
information. She noted that the Commission can also discuss new legislation being proposed.
Things about HOAs, property tax relief, and the ban on private equity. She shared that the CEE
contract has not been signed yet, and once it is, the City can activate the programming. She asked
what the Commission wanted to talk about. Commissioner Straub noted that what is happening at
the legislature is very intriguing. Commissioner Said stated that TIF would be great, but legislation
would be even better.
7. ADJOURNMENT
There was a motion by Commissioner Said, seconded by Commissioner Freund, to adjourn the
meeting. The motion passed. The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission adjourned at 8:34 p.m.
__________________________________
Vice Chair Straub
Page 94 of 299
4/7/2026
1
Rental License Program – Ordinance
Amendment
City Council Meeting, March 9, 2026
Xiong Thao, Housing and Community Standards Manager
Historical Background / Purpose
•Staff met with Council at several work sessions to discuss changes to the
rental license program.
•During the work session meeting on January 12, 2026, staff received feedback
on specific changes to the rental program.
•The purpose of this work session is to go through the requested changes in
the form of a proposed ordinance amendment before bringing forward an
action to amend the rental license ordinance.
2
1
2
Page 95 of 299
4/7/2026
2
License Information
•Currently, there are 551 Active licenses:
•Type I (3-year) — 338
•Type II (2-year) — 162
•Type III (1- year) — 38
•Type IV (6-month) — 13
•Type I licenses would lose 1-year off their license and pay more frequently while Type III
and IV license gain additional time on their license and pay less frequently.
•Net Change:210 licenses would see an increase in the number of inspections.
•Type III and IV licenses would potentially see an increase in complaints and property
code violations during rental license inspections due to increased time between
inspections.
3
Proposed Ordinance
•Eliminates the performance based rental license program. Implements a
rental license that is valid for two (2) years.
•The rental license will be issued administratively by staff and will no longer go
to City Council for approval.
•Changes the language to issue the rental license prior to passing the rental
license inspection.
•Rental license inspection must pass within 90 days of issuing the rental
license.
•Changes the language in the ordinance to allow for a rental license transfer to
occur within 6 months of issuing the license to a new owner.
4
3
4
Page 96 of 299
4/7/2026
3
Proposed Ordinance (Cont.)
•Removes the 8-hour Crime Free Housing training requirement.
•Removes the requirement for a Crime Prevention through Environmental
Design (CPTED) inspection requirement.
•Removes the requirement for the submission of an Action or Mitigation Plan.
•Removes police calls for service in determining the license type.
•Proposed amendment would keep Section 12-911, which allows for the
City to enforce conduct on a property. The City would retain the ability to
ask a property owner to act against tenants who continue to violate
Section 12-911.
5
Proposed Ordinance (Cont.)
•Changes the incomplete rental license language to reflect the 90-day
inspection period.
•Rental license renewals will still be sent 120, 90, 60, and 30 days prior to
the license expiring.
•The owner can renew anytime before the license expires and staff will
schedule the inspection.
6
5
6
Page 97 of 299
4/7/2026
4
Next Steps
•Staff plans to meet with the Housing Commission on March 17 to provide an
overview of the changes to the rental license program.
•At this time, staff has not met or presented the proposed amendments to
rental property owners or tenant advocates.
•Staff will prepare the ordinance and bring it to Council for consideration at a
future City Council meeting. The April 13 City Council meeting is the earliest
an ordinance could be presented given noticing requirements.
•The ordinance amendment will require a 1
st and 2
nd reading with a public
hearing.
•If an ordinance amendment is adopted, the change would go into effect 30
days following newspaper publication of the ordinance language.
7
Questions?
Are there additional changes that Council would like
staff to update or bring forward for consideration?
8
7
8
Page 98 of 299
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 1/12/2026
TO: Council Study Session
FROM: Xiong Thao, Housing and Community Standards Manager
THROUGH: Jesse Anderson, Community Development Director
BY: Xiong Thao, Housing and Community Standards Manager
SUBJECT: Rental License Program Changes
Requested Council Action:
- It is requested that the council provide direction to staff on what changes they would
like staff to bring forward for a new rental license program.
Background:
The rental license program information was presented to council during the November
24, 2025 work session. Based on feedback from council, staff met with Brooklyn Park's
rental license program staff to understand and discuss the rental license program. The
information gathered from Brooklyn Park was used to develop a new rental license
program.
Based on the work session conversation and council's recommendation, staff is
proposing the following changes to the rental license program.
1. Eliminate the performance-based rental license program and develop a new program.
2. Eliminate the following rental license requirements:
• 8 hour Crime Free Housing Training.
• Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) inspection.
• Action and Mitigation Plan submission for Type III and Type IV licenses.
• Property owners must be current on property tax and utility payments.
• Police calls for service used for rental license determination.
3. Develop a new rental license program. The rental license program would be a two-
year rental license program. This includes single family and multifamily properties.
By changing the rental license program to a two-year license program, workload and
staffing levels would remain the same.
Metric Current Tiered System (Min. 2
Visits/Renewal)
Proposed 2-Year Cycle (Min. 2
Visits/Renewal)
Type I (3-year) ~239.4 inspections (359 / 3 * 2) 22 359.0 inspections (359 / 2 * 2) 33
Type II (2-year) 201.0 inspections (201 / 2 * 2) 4 201.0 inspections (201 / 2 * 2) 5
Type III (1-year) 124.0 inspections (62 / 1 * 2) 6 62.0 inspections (62 / 2 * 2) 7
Page 99 of 299
Type IV (6-
month)
124.0 inspections (31 * 2 cycles *
2) 8 31.0 inspections (31 / 2 * 2) 9
Total Annual
Volume ~688.4 Inspections ~653.0 Inspections
Net Change — ~35.4 fewer inspections
*This calculation does not factor in licenses that are currently expired or pending due to
them not having a set license type/length. This also doesn’t account for additional
inspection needed in order to pass.
There are a few questions for council to consider and provide staff with direction.
1. The rental license inspection process. There are two options to consider.
• The property owner applies for the rental license and pays the required fee, the
rental license can be issued. The inspection would then be scheduled after the
license is issued. The property would be required to pass inspection prior to
renewing the license. Would the council provide a recommendation on a
timeframe that a property must pass inspection before the city can take
enhanced enforcement action?
• The property owner applies for the rental license and pays the required fee. The
license will not be issued until the inspection passes. The inspection must then
pass within a specified amount of time, otherwise enhanced enforcement action
can be taken.
2. Would council consider allowing rental licenses to be transferred to a new owner?
Currently, the ordinance does not allow a rental license to transfer. The new owner
would need to apply for a new license regardless of when the license was issued.
3. Would council still like to approve all rental licenses on a consent agenda or should
the approval of licenses be done administratively by staff?
Budget Issues:
No budget issues to consider.
Inclusive Community Engagement:
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
Strategic Priorities and Values:
Page 100 of 299
ATTACHMENTS:
1. November 24, 2025 Council Work Session Packet
2. PowerPoint Presentation - Rental License Program Changes (WS)
Page 101 of 299
4/7/2026
1
Rental License Program
City Council Meeting, January 12, 2026
Jesse Anderson, Community Development Director
Historical Background
•It was brought to council for discussion during the November 24,
2025 city council meeting.
•The suggested changes are based on council feedback and
recommendations.
•Staff met with Brooklyn Park’s rental license program staff to
discuss the rental license program
2
1
2
Page 102 of 299
4/7/2026
2
Proposed Changes
•Eliminate the performance based rental license program and
additional requirements currently in chapter 12-900.
•8-hour crime free housing training
•Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) inspection
•Action and Mitigation plan requirement
•Property owners must be current on property tax and utilities before a
license is issued.
•Police calls for service in determining the license type.
3
Proposed Changes
•Create a new 2-year rental license program which includes single
family and multi-family properties.
•The 2-year rental program would not change workload or staffing
levels.
4
Proposed 2-Year Cycle (Min. 2 Visits/Renewal)Current Tiered System (Min. 2 Visits/Renewal)Metric
359.0 inspections (359 / 2 * 2) 33~239.4 inspections (359 / 3 * 2) 22Type I (3-year)
201.0 inspections (201 / 2 * 2) 5201.0 inspections (201 / 2 * 2) 4Type II (2-year)
62.0 inspections (62 / 2 * 2) 7124.0 inspections (62 / 1 * 2) 6Type III (1-year)
31.0 inspections (31 / 2 * 2) 9124.0 inspections (31 * 2 cycles * 2) 8Type IV (6-month)
~653.0 Inspections~688.4 InspectionsTotal Annual Volume
~35.4 fewer inspections—Net Change
3
4
Page 103 of 299
4/7/2026
3
Council considerations
•The rental license inspection process.
•Does the council want to issue the rental license and then conduct the
inspection or does council prefer to issue the license after the property
passes the rental license inspection?
•Currently rental license do not transfer to a new owner. Would
council consider allowing rental licenses to transfer to a the new
property owner?
•Currently all rental licenses are on the consent agenda for
approval. Does council still want to approve all rental licenses or
should license be issued administratively by staff?
5
Next Steps
•Staff would then prepare a new ordinance for council
consideration outlining a new rental license program.
•Since it is a change to the ordinance there would be a 1st and 2nd
reading with a public hearing.
•After the 2nd reading, if adopted, the change would be effective 30
days after the publication.
6
5
6
Page 104 of 299
4/7/2026
4
Questions?
Are there additional changes that
Council would like staff to update or
bring forward for consideration?
7
7
Page 105 of 299
COUNCIL/EDA WORK SESSION
MEETING
City Hall Council Chambers
November 24, 2025
AGENDA
1. Active Discussion Items
a. Rental License Application Process Discussion
b. Tenant Protections Discussion
Provide direction to City Staff on next steps, if any.
2. Adjournment
Page 1 of 194Page 106 of 299
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 11/24/2025
TO: Council/EDA Work Session
FROM: Xiong Thao, Housing and Community Standards Manager
THROUGH: Jesse Anderson, Community Development Director
BY: Xiong Thao, Housing and Community Standards Manager
SUBJECT: Rental License Application Process Discussion
Requested Council Action:
Background:
City Council requested staff to bring forward a discussion of the City’s Rental License
Program.
Staff met with property owners/managers and tenants and tenant advocate
organizations separately to discuss the rental license program. The recordings of the
meetings were shared with City Council members during a weekly update. Below are
the summaries from both meetings.
Staff met with tenants and tenant advocates on August 26, 2025. Staff posted the
notices in several multifamily properties and sent email invites. In total, there were 12
participants. During the meeting, staff presented an overview of the rental license
program, and a few questions were posed to the group. Ideas and topics that came up
during the conversation were:
• Many liked the rental license program and didn’t want to change the current
program.
• Collectively, the group wanted the City to be more proactive and cite more code
violations.
• Enforce mold and mildew as code violations during a complaint or rental
inspection.
• Penalize property owners who knowingly violate their own lease agreements.
• Pursue more rental license revocations for ongoing maintenance violations. Staff
explained that revocation may not be the best solution, although it is a tool that
can be effective in certain circumstances.
• Create rules around visitor parking and towing regulations because tenant
vehicles are being towed. This might be possible through a tenant protection
ordinance. Staff stated that there might be some challenges around developing
such policies due to legal issues to consider.
• Property management is changing general notifications to an online/email
notification system only and eliminating door postings and/or posting notices in
the building. Seniors are most impacted due to their lack of knowledge and
technical skills.
Page 2 of 194Page 107 of 299
• The City should notify tenants of the actions that are taken by a property
owner/manager. Staff explained that for each failed inspection, staff notified the
tenant that another inspection is needed and management was informed of the
failed inspection. Staff stated that they didn’t know who to notify, and it is
difficult to notify residents of common area code violations.
• The city should increase tenant engagement and education about their rights and
maintenance concerns. Continue to have dialogue with the tenants and advocacy
groups to develop policy that impacts tenants. Create and require a poster
similar to Minneapolis’s rental poster of city contact and services.
• Create a program where tenants can escrow rent money for repairs neglected by
property owners/managers and/or the city can contract maintenance repairs and
charge a fee to the property owner for those repairs. Staff stated that there are
already services similar to this at the state level, and it would require additional
staffing to administer such a program.
During the conversation, staff talked through some of the ideas and were able to explain
what the city is currently doing, took down ideas under advisement, and listened to
concerns that tenants have.
Staff had a meeting with property owners and managers on August 28, 2025. Email
invites were sent primarily to multifamily property owners and managers. However, staff
did invite several single-family property owners and managers to the meeting. In total,
there were 12 participants that attended the meeting and one council member.
Staff did a presentation on the rental license program and then opened up the
conversation with a set of questions presenting five options to consider.
1. Eliminate the Crime Free Housing Training due to limited class offerings.
2. Eliminate the Crime Prevention Through Environment Design (CPTED)
requirement. Many properties have already completed their requirements.
3. Eliminate the Action and Mitigation Plan requirements since this can sometimes
hold back a property from improving the new license type.
4. Adjusting the inspection point system by increasing the number of violations to
allow for improved license types.
5. Revert back to a 2-year rental license.
There were very little comments about the proposed changes and not much discussion
about those specific options..
Ideas and topics that came up during the meeting were:
• There was consensus that the rental license program or inspection does not
produce a better housing quality because it's similar to neighboring cities.
Property owners want to provide “solid” housing and to have low vacancy rates
Page 3 of 194Page 108 of 299
and attract better tenants.
• Property improvements often open up for more code violations. An example
provided was an over-the-range microwave with a vent.
• Some of the code violations are out of their control and were not created by the
property owner/manager and should not be penalized for it. Items such as a
blocked egress. Differentiate between landlord responsibility vs tenant
responsibility.
• Have an ability to cite the tenant directly if it is their correction?
• Code violations should only be life safety violations and not include non-life
safety violations. Most cities only call life safety violations. City inspectors are
not consistent in calling property code violations, where one inspector would call
a violation, but another one would not call it a violation.
• Allow property owners to do onsite repairs so it does not count against them in
the license determination.
• The city is conducting too many inspections, and it is an intrusion on tenant’s
privacy. The city should go to a 2-year rental license program. Decrease the
number of units inspected. Many made reference to Brooklyn Park’s rental
license program.
1. Inspect 50% of units every year
2. Renew rental license annually
• The cost of preparing for an inspection is too expensive, and the money could be
used to do other capital improvements. Eliminate re-inspection fees because it
adds to the cost of inspections.
1. Not every fee is being passed onto tenants; not a $1 to $1 ratio. For
example, blocked egress can be passed onto the tenant.
2. Investors need to increase the maintenance budget due to inspections.
3. Some of the costs are necessary but not all costs are necessary.
• Reinspection of property after a sale of a property. Licenses should transfer and
not require another inspection.
• Rental license revocation is a deterrent to investing in the City. Minneapolis has
the ability to and have revoked licenses, while Brooklyn Center has only revoked
1 license in the past several years. Staff explained that it is rare for the City to
revoked a license and not the best tool, often a last resort.
Staff met with the Housing Commission on September 16, 2025 during a Housing
Commission meeting Commissioners were informed that the city has had a rental
license program since the 1970s and all properties were issued a two-year license. The
current rental license program was adopted in 2010 as a performance-based rental
program. Staff presented information on the current rental license program, explaining
the four rental license types and how rental licenses are determined. Staff also
informed Commissioners of the Action or Mitigation Plan as an additional requirement if
a property is a Type III or Type IV rental license. The program is to incentivize property
owners to be proactive in their maintenance and not wait until the City calls out code
violations during the rental license inspection. Staff explained that at the time of
application, a brochure of the most common code violations is provided to property
Page 4 of 194Page 109 of 299
owners so they know what the city is looking for during the inspection.
Discussion points from the Housing Commission meeting:
• If a tenant requests an inspection, do the property owners have the opportunity to
do the repairs? Staff informed Commissioners that staff would enter the
correction order and send it in the compliance notice.
• If a tenant removed a smoke alarm, what would the city do? Staff stated it would
be written up as a code violation and a compliance notice would be sent. Staff
does not determine who removed the smoke alarm.
• Staff informed the Commission that the city council had asked that staff to bring
options to consider. Staff presented the 5 options that were presented during
the property owners meeting.
1. Eliminate the Crime Free Housing Training due to limited class offerings.
2. A question was asked about removing the 8-hour crime-free housing
training. Staff explained that due to a lack of classes available, that is why
it is being proposed. It was explained that the classes teaches a lot of
different things about crime prevention, such as locks, lighting, and
vegetation to deter crime.
3. Eliminate the CPTED requirement. Many properties have already
completed their requirements.
4. Eliminate the Action and Mitigation Plan requirements since this can
sometimes hold back a property from improving the new license type.
5. Adjusting the inspection point system by increasing the number of
violations to allow for improved license types.
6. Revert back to a 2-year rental license.
7. Staff explained the second option of removing the Crime Prevention
Through Environmental Design (CPTED) inspection.
• Staff shared the comments from the tenants and advocates meeting, citing that
they generally wanted more regulations, inspections, and accountability from
property owners. Staff shared that some of the ideas do present challenges, but
some ideas can be done. Points that were shared are:
1. Create rules around vehicle parking and towing.
2. Provide information about property owners operating without a license.
3. More tenant engagement from the city about inspections and tenant
protections.
4. More public postings in the buildings, more communication with tenants.
5. Create an escrow account for repairs.
• Staff then shared comments from the property owners meeting citing they
generally wanted less regulation, fewer inspections, citing that the city was doing
too many inspections. Ideas that were shared are:
1. They liked Brooklyn Park’s rental license program and asked if the city
could do something similar to their program. Brooklyn Park inspects 30%
of the units 1x per year and is a 1 year license.
2. Changed the property code violations and hold tenant accountable for
tenant-related code violations.
Page 5 of 194Page 110 of 299
3. Reduce costs for inspections, so the money could be used for other needs
on the property.
4. Wanted a more uniform inspection process.
• It was stated that if property owners maintained their property on an ongoing
basis, there would be less time spent on getting ready for inspections.
• There was a question about the types of violations that the city is citing. It was
explained that code violations are a combination of life, safety and general
property maintenance violations and all the violations are weighted the same.
• A question was asked about livability standards and whether they would pass an
inspection. Staff stated that it is difficult to have a program that just focused on
life, health, safety because it would be difficult to determine what those violations
would look like. Each code would then need to be written and articulated that it
would meet life, health, safety violations.
• Staff explained that the inspection only requires minimum standards and does
not look at the quality or craftsmanship of the work.
• Commissioner Said stated that having a program that does 30% of the units for
inspections, doing only health, life, safety inspections, and offering a 2-year
license would be a good way to go because it would allow property owners time
to work on other issues and is more friendly towards property owners.
Commissioner Said also stated that this may lead to more real estate companies
wanting to come to the City.
• Commissioner Straub had the opposite opinion and wanted more enforcement
and responsibility put on property owners. He stated that there are areas that
can be flexible, however, as a previous renter, he felt property owners do the
minimum because it is profit-driven. Commissioner Straub stated that conducting
inspections in 30% of units is possible, however, he was not sure how quickly a
unit can degrade in 3 years. Staff stated that family units tend to have more code
violations due to having children in the household.
• Reference was made to Brooklyn Park’s rental license program and it was cited
that only apartments were inspected at 33% of the total units and inspected
every year. Common areas are inspected every year. Single-family properties
are inspected every 2 years.
• Commissioner Straub stated that there are things that require very little effort
from property owners but have direct value to tenants, such as posting towing
notices and visitor parking and physical posting of notices and city’s actions
against property owners.
Staff stated that much of the information that the city has is public data and can
be requested, but complainant information is not public.
• Commissioner Freund stated that the tiered system is working and she liked the
current system.
There appeared to be a consensus that the Housing Commission members agreed that
the current program is working. However, there could be changes made to provide
tenants with a better housing experience.
Page 6 of 194Page 111 of 299
After meeting with the various different stakeholders and hearing the feedback, the
recommendation would be to keep the performance-based rental license program with
some changes.
• Increase the number of code violations for multifamily properties. By increasing
the average number of violations per unit, this allows for multifamily properties to
obtain an improved license type. Properties that are on the margin of an
improved license type will be able to obtain the improved license while allowing
staff to focus on lower performing properties. The exact increase has not been
determined yet and will be brought back at a future meeting. An increase in code
violations was made for single-family properties in 2019, making it easier to
achieve an improved rental license. However, staff can also consider increasing
the number of violations for single-family properties as well.
• Remove the Crime Free Housing certification requirement due to the lack of
available classes and most property owners and managers have already met this
requirement.
• Remove the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED)
inspection. Many properties have already been required to or volunteered to
complete this requirement.
• Remove the Action and Mitigation plan requirement for Type III and Type IV
licenses. Failure to meet this requirement has been a reason that licenses which
qualify for an improved license do not obtain the improved license and remain a
repeat license type. This will allow rental properties that qualify for an improved
license to obtain the improved license type at their rental license renewal.
• Do not hold back properties that are not current on utility and fees owed to the
city from obtaining a rental license after it passes the rental license inspection.
Only require properties to be current on property taxes to obtain a rental license.
Utility fees and other fees owed to the City do not have to be current since those
fees can be specially assessed to the Hennepin County property tax rolls.
• There will be no change to the inspection process. Inspections will be conducted
after the rental license fees are paid and must pass inspection before a license
can be issued. Health, life, safety and property maintenance violations would be
considered a violation used to determine the license type. There are too many
grey areas to determine what is considered health, life, safety code violations
and who caused the code violation. Property owners and managers are the
applicants for the rental license have a broad authority over what can be added
to and enforced in their lease agreements and the city should not continue to
hold the property owners responsible for code compliance matters.
There are a couple of questions for the Council to consider.
• Should staff move forward with the recommended change? If not, are there other
specific changes the City Council would like staff to research and bring forward?
• Are there other rental license programs that the Council would like staff to
research and bring forward for discussion?
Page 7 of 194Page 112 of 299
• What other options would Council like to consider and have staff bring back for
Council consideration?
Budget Issues:
There are no budget issues to consider.
Inclusive Community Engagement:
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
Strategic Priorities and Values:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. 2025.10.21 HC
2. Unapproved 2025.09.16 HC (002)
3. Rental Program Presentation - Housing Commission - 9.2025
4. Rental Program Presentation - Property owners-managers - 8.2025
5. Rental Program Presentation - Tenants - 8.2025
6. Properyt owners email to staff
Page 8 of 194Page 113 of 299
10/21/25 -1- DRAFT
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND STATE OF MINNESOTA
REGULAR SESSION
OCTOBER 21, 2025
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission was called to order by Associate Planner and Staff
Liaison Krystin Eldridge at 7:03 p.m.
MEETING ATTENDEES
Commissioner Laura Freund
Commissioner Landon Straub (arrived at 7:05 p.m.)
Commissioner Seretha Lee
Commissioner Aniya White
Commissioner Jamal Said
Commissioner Alyssa Kuglin is absent and excused.
Commissioner Natalie O’Connor is absent.
City Staff present: Associate Planner and Staff Liaison Krystin Eldridge, Community
Development Director Jesse Anderson, and Housing and Community Standards Supervisor Xiong
Thao.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
There was a motion by Commissioner White and seconded by Commissioner Said to approve the
agenda as submitted. The motion passed.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
There was a motion by Commissioner ____, seconded by Commissioner ____, to approve the
minutes of September 16, 2025, as submitted. The motion passed.
NEW COMMISSIONERS INTRODUCTIONS
Ms. Eldridge asked the new Commissioners to introduce themselves.
Commissioner Straub arrived at 7:05 p.m.
Commissioners White and Lee introduced themselves by sharing why they wanted to be on the
Commission, how long they have been in Brooklyn Center, and what their interests are.
Commissioners and Staff introduced themselves as well.
NEIGHBORHOOD PACKETS
Page 9 of 194Page 114 of 299
10/21/25 -2- DRAFT
Ms. Eldridge stated that there were more neighborhood packets, about 80, at the meeting if
Commissioners were interested in getting to the rest of the neighborhoods that were talked about
in the last meeting. She noted that she also brought the 2026 Housing Commission Meeting
Schedule, and if Commissioners had anything specific to talk about or bring to the City Council
in the upcoming year, to let her know, and it could get on the schedule. She explained that some
of the past people who have come to talk are Mike Vraa, who spoke on new legislation, and ULI,
who did a housing study and gave a list of goals.
Commissioner Lee asked about having Mike Vraa come and speak to them. Ms. Eldridge noted
that if the Commission is interested, then Mike would be able to come back. Commissioner Lee
noted that she was interested.
Community Development Director Jesse Anderson asked if Mike Vraa met with the Commission
after the Legislative session in late July or August. Ms. Eldridge stated that it was at the
beginning of the year.
Commissioner Lee asked if it was someone from HOME Line, was at the last Housing
Commission meeting. Mr. Anderson stated that it was not Mike Vraa but Sam who attended the
last meeting. Housing and Community Standards Supervisor Xiong Thao noted that Sam is one
of the authorities who provides legal advice, and Mike is the managing director. Commissioner
Said asked what Mike and Sam do with the company HOME Line. Commissioner White
explained that HOME Line works with people who are getting evicted and listens to their
personal stories. Mr. Thao added that HOME Line does a lot of advocacy work, such as helping
to write letters to landlords. He stated that HOME Line also works for tenants at the state level,
advocating for protections and rights, and helping tenants navigate getting the necessary repairs
done.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PRESENTATION
A. Wrap up comments for the Rental License Program
Mr. Anderson explained that the first half of the packet was information from the last meeting,
which discussed the rental licensing inspection process, the performance-based system that is
based on how many violations were observed during the initial inspection, which determines the
license category. He added that included in the packet was feedback from both the tenants, who
noted they wanted more accountability for things to be fixed, and the landlords on what they would
like to see done with the system, which was not a performance-based system, rather a two-year
licensing with not as many units inspected.
Commissioner Freund asked about the motivations for bringing the information to the Housing
Commission and whether there are concerns or dissatisfaction with the current system. Mr.
Anderson explained that the Council asked for both topics of tenant protections and the licensing
process to be looked at. He added that the Staff’s response has been to meet with landlords and
tenants, meet with the Housing Commission, and then provide feedback to the Council, from which
the Council can make a recommendation to make changes after that. He noted that the same
request was made two years ago, and at the time, the Housing Commission recommended that
there be no change to the tenant protection. He speculated that the Council requested it because
there were constituents who made requests.
Page 10 of 194Page 115 of 299
10/21/25 -3- DRAFT
Mr. Anderson asked if there were any thoughts or questions about the rental licensing process that
was talked about in the last meeting.
B. Tenant Protections
Mr. Thao explained that the City first adopted the tenant protections in 2018, and that was for
notice of sale. He added that it particularly applied to multifamily properties. He stated that if a
large multifamily property was going to be for sale or had been sold, the property would have to
notify tenants that the property’s being sold, which allows the tenants to either stay in their current
unit or find new housing and allows for relocation assistance. He added that if the landlord was
going to raise rent or change the lease agreement, tenants have the option for relocation assistance.
He noted that the tenant protections also protect tenants from non-renewals or terminations. He
stated that in 2021, the City adopted two new protections: the pre-eviction notice and Just Cause
Non-Renewals. He noted that before adopting the two protections, the City met with landlords,
tenants, housing advocates, HOME Line, and many others, and came to the consensus to only
move forward with the two protections, and additional protections could come at a later date. He
stated that the City was watching what St. Paul was going through with being sued, and the two
protections were the least controversial. He explained that the pre-eviction notice gives tenants 30
30-day notice if a landlord is going to evict a tenant for not paying rent. He added that if there is
a material breach of the lease, the landlord also has to give a 30-day notice, and would have to
disclose what the material breach was so the tenant has the opportunity to cure the violations. Ms.
Eldridge stated that an example would be someone living in the apartment, and they are not
supposed to. Mr. Thao added that anything that violates the lease agreement is prohibited.
Commissioner Lee asked if the landlord needed to give time to make the corrections. Mr.
Anderson explained that tenants do get 30 days before the filing of the eviction. He added that
there is time that comes along with the filing, but the argument was that it is very difficult to
overcome an eviction in future housing applications, so the 30 days give a chance to avoid getting
an eviction filed against the tenant’s record.
Mr. Thao stated that the Just Cause Non-Renewal requires a landlord to give a reason why they
are not renewing the tenant, and the City has stated there are eight reasons a landlord can remove
a tenant: there is a lease violation, the tenant refuses to renew the lease, if the landlord or family
member will occupy the unit, if the building is being demolished, if there will be a substantial
rehab or renovation, government order, or if employment requires the person lives on the property.
He added that the 2021 tenant protection also gave the implicit right for tenants to sue their
landlords if their tenant protections were being violated.
Mr. Anderson noted that the enforcement of both of the tenant protections does not require much,
if any, Staff involvement; it is mostly just an education piece. He added that for the most part, the
tenant is responsible for telling the landlord, but the City will reach out and let the landlord know
if they violate either of the protections.
Mr. Thao stated that the HOME Line website lists the 2023 and 2024 state legislative amendments
that were passed. He highlighted a few: the eviction notice must have a minimum of 14 days,
landlords must disclose all fees as part of the total rent, minimum heat requirement laws, expanded
Page 11 of 194Page 116 of 299
10/21/25 -4- DRAFT
the emergency repair list, and clarified how much time is required for a landlord to give notice to
get into a unit, 24 hours. He noted other additional protections: the right to move in and out of
inspections, landlords cannot require pets to be declawed or devocalization, landlords cannot force
early lease renewal no more than six months before the lease ends, tenants cannot be evicted for
crimes that were not committed on the property, service support animal fees are prohibited, if a
property is condemned landlords cannot collect rent payments, gave the tenant’s rights to organize,
and utility rights in a multifamily property.
Mr. Thao stated that the purpose of bringing the two protections to the Housing Commission was
to receive feedback on the protections and to determine if any changes or additions were needed.
He added that in meetings with the landlords, they wanted fewer tenant protections. Mr. Anderson
explained that the pre-eviction notice has a 30-day curing period, so if the tenant is not paid within
this time frame, the eviction will be filed. He noted that the Just Cause Non-Renewal does not
have a curing period; it just forces the landlord to have a just cause or reason. Mr. Thao noted that
when meeting with the tenants, there were some things the City could not do, but there was a desire
for more education about tenant protections. He added that there was a landlord who gave notices
to a bunch of seniors, and they all moved out because the seniors did not understand their rights.
He stated that tenants also wanted more communication about what actions were taken against
particular landlords; they wanted the City to penalize the property owners for violating the
ordinances. He stated that HOME Line is putting together a list of additional tenant protections,
which is not ready yet, but one thing that will be on there is protecting tenants from discrimination
based on sources of income.
Commissioner Said asked about tenants who run businesses out of their homes and if they would
be protected if the tenant is doing certain things for the business. Mr. Anderson noted that there
is nothing in the ordinance that protects them or gives them that right, but the tenant does at least
have some right to the property and what it can be used for. He added that he is not aware of any
kind of protection that grants them the right to necessarily operate a business. Commissioner Said
stated that in other states, there have been tenants who have been kicked out because of doing
transactions on their properties. Mr. Thao explained that if Commissioner Said is talking about a
home-based business that violates city code or becomes a nuisance, then that might be the basis
for non-renewing somebody, or it becomes a lease violation. Mr. Anderson explained that there
is no protection for the ability to run a home-based business; it is just if your landlord says that
you cannot, then the tenant is not allowed to, just like having a pet. Commissioner Said stated that
in some of the newer, luxury apartments are stating in the lease states that the tenant cannot run
any business. Mr. Anderson explained that there is no regulation on that, and that the landlord can
do what they want if it is in the lease. He noted that for the Council, they would like to know if
the Commission is supportive of the 30 days or an alternative, and if the Commission is supportive
of the non-renewal.
Commissioner Freund asked if the Just Cause Non-Renewal is similar to the example given, noting
that if a tenant has a pet, which is not allowed in the lease, but then removes the pet, the tenant
may be allowed to stay. Mr. Anderson stated that the Staff is asking if the City should keep the
Just Cause Non-Renewal, change it to something else, or completely get rid of it. He explained
that the Just Cause Non-Renewal is that the lease terms are coming to an end, the lease probably
states the landlord needs to give a notice of non-renewals, but in Brooklyn Center, the landlord
Page 12 of 194Page 117 of 299
10/21/25 -5- DRAFT
must also include the reason for non-renewals.
Commissioner Lee stated that, due to seeing that elders are vulnerable to different things from
landlords and don’t know their rights, she would like to see both the Just Cause for Non-Renewals
and the 30-day notice in place. Mr. Thao noted that there are many cities around Brooklyn Center
that are pushing for the 30-day notice as well.
Commissioner Said asked about the 30 days, and if that gives tenants an extra 30 days before the
30 days. Mr. Anderson gave an example of a lease that states rent is due on January 1, January 1
comes and goes, and the landlord can give a 30-day pre-eviction notice on January 2, then the
landlord has to wait until February 2 before they can file that with the courts. He added that the
tenant feels the 30 days helps find space, find somewhere else to go, and helps them try to get
emergency assistance. He noted that a landlord would say it strains the relationship with the tenant
because things are starting to the process faster.
Commissioner Lee asked if it would be possible to include in the ordinance that the tenant can
move in the 15 days if able, but 30 days is a cushion, if it does not work out. Mr. Anderson stated
that he cannot think of another checkpoint in the middle, but the tenant would be able to move out
no matter what, and would probably still be breaking the lease. Mr. Thao noted that it does not
prevent the tenant from negotiating an early termination with the landlord before eviction is filed
with the court. Mr. Anderson explained that if the tenant is given the 30-day notice, and they know
they will not be able to pay, the tenant could go to the landlord and negotiate to sign a termination
lease and move out. He added that both parties would have to sign, but the tenant would be able
to do that in the 30-day pre-eviction phase.
Ms. Eldridge asked if the Staff had seen an early release letter or termination. Mr. Thao stated that
they have not; most of the pre-eviction notices have been for the full 30 days, and mostly for rent.
Commissioner Straub noted that he is in support of the 30 days. He stated that part of the landlord's
hesitation with the 30-day notice is that if they want to evict a tenant for not paying rent, and 30
30-day pre-eviction notice is given, and then after that, a tenant can be evicted, the landlord is
losing a full month’s worth of rent. He asked if there is a mechanism in place to help remediate
issues on the landlord’s end for missing a month’s worth of rent, and if there was, maybe the
landlord would be more willing to give the 30-day pre-eviction notice. Mr. Anderson noted that
the landlord has the potential for the landlord to pay, or the potential for the tenant to file for
emergency assistance, and the tenant to receive the emergency assistance, so the landlord can get
paid. He added that the City does not have a program right now for the landlord. Commissioner
Said noted that in many cases, the landlord has the deposit as well. Commissioner Straub stated
that many times in renting, deposits were just a few hundred dollars, rather than the thousand owed,
but that may be how the landlords are adapting to this situation. Commissioner Said added that it
is an incentive to the tenant to talk to the landlord if they are facing problems, because the landlord
may work with the tenant. Commissioner Straub stated that the necessity of a large security deposit
could be a barrier for a lot of people to secure housing. He added that it is an opportunity to
increase visibility to landlords of the options for the tenants in these situations. He noted that
increased education requirements for written notifications or ensuring that tenants are educated on
their rights are always a great thing. He stated that the justifications needed for non-renewals are
Page 13 of 194Page 118 of 299
10/21/25 -6- DRAFT
great tools to fight biases that exist.
Mr. Anderson asked for thoughts on the 30-day or 14-day notices. Commissioner Straub stated
that he does not think 14 days is enough, and with such a fast turnaround, it can be a tough time to
do what is needed in that time period.
Commissioner Said asked about raising rent and if there is any control over how much rent can be
raised. Mr. Anderson noted that the City does not have any control over rent raising, but the
landlords mentioned that they would still have to follow fair housing practices. Commissioner
Lee added that there is a margin in certain areas that landlords can only go so high. Mr. Anderson
stated that certain properties are funded a certain way, so their funding source requires them to be
affordable at a certain rate. Mr. Thao added that, generally speaking, the state is silent on how
much rent can be increased. He noted that the only city that has anything is St. Paul, and there is
a lot of pushback, and landlords can apply for an exclusion, which many have done because the
three percent increase does not cover property taxes. Mr. Anderson added that 95 percent of the
housing is not locked into a certain rate, there is a lot of naturally occurring affordable housing,
but it is not legally bound affordable housing.
Commissioner Straub asked if the income restrictions are known to the tenants. Mr. Anderson
stated that it is a known thing for sure and that the dollar amount does change from year to year.
He added that for Area Median Income, AMI, there must be so many units at 60 percent, and so
many at 80 percent, and that changes every year, so then landlords can raise rent, but it has to stay
at 60 percent. He stated that many tenants came to the City from Sonders when rent was increased,
but the landlord was under the expectation, so the increase was legal. Mr. Thao noted that the
AMI is calculated on the Twin Cities metro, and it is very high, about $90,000. Mr. Anderson
added that a six percent AMI is common, and for a two-bedroom at 60 percent, the monthly rent
would be $1,788. Mr. Thao stated that the number is skewed because of the few people with very
high incomes, and that is where AMI comes into play, which is calculated by the federal
government. Mr. Anderson noted that the City does not have any regulations on rent increases.
Mr. Thao stated that the only maximum requirement that landlords have is for late fees; they cannot
go above eight percent of the rent.
Mr. Anderson stated that technically, a landlord could increase rent, and the tenant could refuse to
renew the lease because of the increase in rent, then the landlord could Just Cause Non-Renew the
tenant for refusing to renew the lease.
Mr. Thao noted that in the conversations with tenants, it was brought up whether or not landlords
could require rent payments without having a rental license. He added that neither the City nor
the State regulates it, so if the landlord is operating without a license, it is unknown if that would
hold up in courts, and HOME Line is silent on it as well.
Mr. Anderson asked if there were more people on the same side as the other Commissioners.
Commissioner White, Commissioner Freund, and Commissioner Said stated that they agree with
the others as well.
Mr. Thao asked if there were any tenant protections that the Commission would like to explore.
Page 14 of 194Page 119 of 299
10/21/25 -7- DRAFT
Commissioner Said asked when a landlord raises rent, how is it known that they are doing so fairly
to all of the tenants. Mr. Anderson stated that the City does not know anything about rent; it would
take the tenant to investigate and take that information to a Fair Housing Agency. Commissioner
Said noted that many of the developers are targeting the new families and making promises that
are not kept. Mr. Thao added that many developers, for example, have a move-in introductory rate
of $1,500 when it would originally be $1,700, and then rent goes up to $1,900 after the lease is up
to the landlord, which is only a $200 increase because of the free introductory move-in rate.
Mr. Anderson stated that there has been discussion among the Staff about requiring the phone
number to be posted in common areas so that complaints can be made. Commissioner Said noted
that it is hard to find information, so it would be good to have posters that read know your rights
and information about that on them. Commissioner Lee noted that it is very hard for the vulnerable
and elderly, and that is why it is important to have the 30 days versus the 14 days. Commissioner
Said asked if it was possible to add a clause for the elderly or vulnerable that may be different from
the rest of the population. Commissioner Straub noted that it would come down to who defines
the vulnerable, and many are going to give different answers. He added that universality in
ordinances is more effective, because deciding who gets the 30 days versus 14 days, it is easier to
enforce and not lead to lawsuits. Commissioner Said mentioned that what if a landlord buys the
building and comes in and tells all the tenants they have to leave, this would be very hard on the
elderly person. Mr. Thao noted that this would be in the Just Cause Non-Renewals and would
have protection. Commissioner Lee stated that she is a big advocate for Just Cause because many
do not know their rights, and more education needs to be done, like the posters in Minneapolis.
Commissioner Straub noted that there are many people who would say that authority is telling me
to do it, so it must be right. Commissioner Lee stated that the vulnerability of elderly people is
that they trust people. Mr. Anderson noted that Commissioner Said’s comment about the sale of
the building is a different protection that was adopted in 2018. He added that when a sale takes
place within 30 days of buying, the landlord has to give a 90-day notice if they are going to make
material changes to the leasing criteria. Mr. Thao noted that many multifamily properties have
been sold in the last three years, and all tenants have been given the 30-day notice.
Mr. Anderson explained the process from here and what the Staff would do with the information.
He then went on to explain how the changing of the ordinance takes place. He added that it will
be a process to get through all of the information. He stated that it is possible that it goes to the
Council and nothing is changed, but if something is to be changed, it will take a little while.
Ms. Eldridge asked if the Staff has a feeling of whether Council is leaning one way or the other.
Mr. Anderson stated that when it initially passed in 2021, it took multiple meetings and went back
and forth several times, so it made for a very long process.
FUTURE MEETINGS (2026 SCHEDULE)
Ms. Eldridge noted that she spoke on this earlier in the meeting and would keep the Commission
informed of the things to come on tenant protections.
Mr. Anderson gave a general update: the Staff is working to finalize the Economic Growth Plan
and will present to Council on November 24. There was a market retail node that came from the
plan, and it should be noted that Brooklyn Center is having a slightly positive absorption rate.
Page 15 of 194Page 120 of 299
10/21/25 -8- DRAFT
Commissioner Straub asked about the net plus or minus of business. Mr. Anderson stated that
with Walmart closing, that is a negative, and a business moving in is positive, so it is even. He
added that overall, the City is gaining more than it is losing.
Mr. Anderson shared that there is a lot of budget discussion, and the preliminary levy that has been
adopted is $4,970,000, which will result in the reduction of positions in City Hall and throughout
the City. He added that the City is still working towards the construction of the opportunity site.
He explained that the opportunity site is 80 acres, right in the middle of the city, which has a master
plan for the site, and the City owns 40 acres of it. He explained that the developers and investors
pulled up when the interest rates went up, so that is continuing to be worked through. He added
that the first thing to be built will be a road, and then apartments that the City is hoping to start on
in the next year. He noted some of the other construction happening in the City.
ADJOURNMENT
There was a motion by Commissioner White and seconded by Commissioner Lee to adjourn the
meeting. The motion passed. The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission adjourned at 8:32 p.m.
__________________________________
Commissioner Freund
Page 16 of 194Page 121 of 299
09/16/25 -1- DRAFT
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND STATE OF MINNESOTA
REGULAR SESSION
September 16, 2025
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission was called to order by Commissioner Freund (Acting
Chair) at 7:04 p.m.
MEETING ATTENDEES
Commissioner Laura Freund
Commissioner Aniya White
Commissioner Jamal Said
Commissioner Landon Straub
Commissioner Natalie O’Connor is absent and excused
Commissioner Alyssa Kuglin is absent
City Staff present: Associate Planner and Staff Liaison Krystin Eldridge, Community
Development Director Jesse Anderson, and Housing and Community Standards Supervisor Xiong
Thao.
Also present: Community Member Sam Golden
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
There was a motion by Commissioner Freund, seconded by Commissioner Said, to approve the
agenda as submitted. The motion passed.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
There was a motion by Commissioner Freund, seconded by Commissioner Straub, to approve the
minutes of June 17, 2025, as submitted. The motion passed.
NEW NEIGHBOR BAGS UPDATES FROM COMMISSIONERS
Staff Liaison Krystin Eldridge asked for feedback on how the New Neighbor Bags delivery went,
where the Commissioners delivered to, what things could be improved, and that they would mark
on the map where they went. She noted that only Commissioners Straub and Freund went out to
deliver the bags.
Commissioner Freund stated that the neighborhoods in which she delivered bags. She noted that
she could do more, but would need additional bags.
Ms. Eldridge asked how Commissioner Freund felt things went or if there was anything that needed
improvement. Commissioner Freund stated that people were friendly.
Page 17 of 194Page 122 of 299
09/16/25 -2- DRAFT
Commissioner Straub stated that the neighborhoods in which he delivered bags, and that he would
be willing to go to more neighborhoods with additional bags. He added that the people were
interested to see what was in the bags, and that the information which was contained in the bags
was a great resource to have. He noted that there was no negative feedback from the people with
whom he interacted.
Ms. Eldridge stated that they would try to deliver bags again before it gets cold. She asked if the
Commissioners had neighborhoods that they preferred. Commissioner Freund stated that she
could do some neighborhoods. Ms. Eldridge stated that she would not expect the whole
neighborhood to be complete, as they are spread out, but if they go again, they could go in pairs
or trios if more people are there.
Commissioner Said noted that he would be willing to go with others the next time they go out to
deliver bags.
Ms. Eldridge stated that at the last meeting, they discussed putting together a list of contractors
and handymen, but when talking to the City Attorney, they felt it was too much of a liability to
collect people’s information and keep it; however, if the Commissioners wanted to create a
Facebook group or something like that, they could. She noted that people might think the City is
showing preference to certain contractors, or do they have insurance, and how does that work with
the City, so it was just best to not include the list in the bags.
Community Development Director Jesse Anderson added that the City cannot determine which
contractors to recommend and which not to recommend, so it has asked to stay away from making
recommendations for anything, because it can make the City liable for those recommendations.
Ms. Eldridge noted that if there were any other recommendations to send them to her and she could
follow up on them.
Community Standards Supervisor Xiong Thao stated that having a handout to direct people to the
Department of Labor and Industry’s website, and information on how to use it to find a licensed
contractor, or even an unlicensed one, might be helpful to have.
Commissioner Said noted that the original idea was to get in touch with your neighbor's handy
person instead of looking for someone in a different city, but he understands that the City cannot
endorse that. He added that getting a list together that is just used personally and shared with those
who want it would still be a good idea to help form that sense of community. Ms. Eldridge stated
that she understood the thought behind it, but it would need to be done not as Commissioners, but
rather members of the community.
Mr. Thao added that by going to the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry website, a
person can look for contractors for specific zip codes or business names. Commissioner Said asked
what the website was. Mr. Thao stated that it is MNDOLI, and the website uses IMS, so an account
would need to be created, but then a search can be done for various types of contractors, etc.
Commissioner Straub asked when more bags would be put together. Ms. Eldridge stated that she
Page 18 of 194Page 123 of 299
09/16/25 -3- DRAFT
would have them by the next meeting.
Commissioner Said asked about putting more things in the bags that were discussed previously,
such as coupons or finding other things to add. Ms. Eldridge stated that she did get some things
from Dos Hermanos and had reached out to a few others, but had not heard back, so she could do
another outreach.
Mr. Anderson stated that there is an application that the businesses can fill out, and that the
Commissioners could have some as well to hand out if they would like to do that. He noted that
he would look for that form to share with everyone.
ALL COMMISSIONER APPRECIATION NIGHT
Commissioner Freund introduced the topic of All Commissioner Appreciation Night.
Ms. Eldridge stated that the event would be held on October 8, from 6:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m., and
all of the Commissions would be present. She added that there would be activities, a presentation
on what the Commissions have done for the year, and some awards.
TENANT PROTECTIONS UPDATE PRESENTATION
Commissioner Freund introduced the topic of the Tenant Protections Update Presentation.
Mr. Anderson stated that the Council directed Staff to review two different parts of the rental
ordinance: the rental licensing program and tenant protections. He noted that Council had sent
this before the Housing Commission previously, and the Commission made a recommendation not
to change the ordinance, and now the Council is making the request again to review it.
Mr. Thao explained that he had presented to the group before, and that Mr. Anderson had stated
the reason for the conversation, but the background is that the City of Brooklyn Center has always
had a license program since the 1970s. He added that historically, those licenses have been two-
year licenses, so you do an inspection and then you get a two-year license, but in 2010, the City
changed the rental license program to a performance-based program, and with that change, it
created four license types. He noted that the four license types are: a three-year, Type One; a two-
year, Type Two; a one-year, Type Three, which requires an action plan; and a six-month, Type
Four, which requires a mitigation plan. He explained that the purpose of an action and mitigation
plan is for the City to add additional things to their license that are not part of the inspection process,
such as lighting. He stated that the rental license program is based on the number of code violations
found during the initial license inspection. He noted that the fewer the code violations that are
found, the longer the license period a property qualifies for.
Mr. Anderson stated that the intent behind this is to motivate the landlords to keep the property
maintained in good condition, so that they do not have to have inspections as frequently. He added
that about five percent are Type Four properties, out of the 700 licenses in the City, and 15 percent
are Type One, which is the second most common category, and everyone else is in the other two.
He noted that 20 percent are in the lower performing category, while 80 percent are performing at
a high level and not requiring as frequent inspections.
Page 19 of 194Page 124 of 299
09/16/25 -4- DRAFT
Mr. Thao added that the City is really encouraging landlords to be more proactive and pay attention
to their housing in Brooklyn Center, rather than reacting to a list that would be given to them to
do repairs every six months or three years.
Mr. Thao continued to talk about the license time frame and how the renewal process works. He
noted that for a new license, you need to apply for a license, schedule the inspection within two
weeks, then, after the initial inspection takes place, there are 30 days for the property owner to do
anything that needs to be done, and then there is a follow-up inspection. He stated that after this
inspection, whether the property passes or fails is decided. If the property passes, then the City
Council needs to approve the license; if the property fails, then the process will continue to take
place until it passes. He added that the process can turn very tedious, because the property owner
needs to stay on top of it and renew when needed.
Mr. Thao noted that 100 percent of the units are inspected during the process; they do not miss
anything or pick and choose. He added that inspections are also done on complaint-based as well,
so if a tenant notes to the inspector that things were reported and not fixed, then it will be added to
the correction list as well.
Commissioner Said asked if the tenant requests an inspection or makes a report, the landlord is
given a chance to make corrections before it is added to the list. Mr. Thao stated that if they are
already in the unit, then they will add it to the list because they will be back anyway to check it
out, and it is better to have added it to the list so that it gets done. Mr. Anderson added that
complaints from tenants outside of the maintenance of licensing are also taken into consideration
and will need to be corrected, but no inspection fees need to be paid.
Commissioner White inquired about a tenant issue, specifically whether the tenant was removing
a smoke alarm that was present upon initial inspection what the response would be. Mr. Thao
noted that it would be written up as a missing smoke alarm and that the landlord would need to
address the situation, but the inspectors do not determine guilt.
Mr. Thao stated that there are weather deferrals as well, so if there is anything exterior that can’t
be done in the winter, the inspection is passed, so it can go to the City Council to be approved. He
added that paying the fee starts the fee of the process, but it does not mean that the license has been
given.
Mr. Thao stated that the Council asked them to bring options to the Housing Commission to
consider. He noted the first option is eliminating the Crime Free Housing Training, because very
few cities are offering it.
Commissioner Straub asked if it is a class that teaches landlords how to create lower crime
environments. Mr. Thao stated that it is a class that teaches a lot of different things about crime
prevention, such as locks, lighting, vegetation, and being alert to possible crime in the area. Mr.
Anderson noted that currently, it is only required if you are not a type one, but there are not really
any classes right now. Commissioner Straub asked who runs the classes. Mr. Thao stated that it
is through different cities, but not many are offering it anymore, and it is tough to get new landlords
into the class because it fills up quickly.
Page 20 of 194Page 125 of 299
09/16/25 -5- DRAFT
Mr. Thao stated that the second option would be to eliminate the Crime Prevention through
Environmental Design requirement, which is done by the City inspectors. He continued with the
third option, which is to eliminate the Rental Plan requirement; number four is to address the
inspection point system, and finally, number five is to change the inspection cycle, no longer
having the tiered system.
Commissioner Freund asked if the City is noticing that with the tiered system, there is an advantage
to encouraging people to take care of their properties. Mr. Anderson noted that, from his
perspective, it allows the City to focus more on the lower-performing properties.
Mr. Thao stated that the City gained feedback from tenants and landlords in regards to the
ordinance. He stated that they asked questions in an August 26th meeting of tenants, and found
that they wanted more regulations, rules about vehicle parking, and information on landlords who
do not have an active license. He noted that if the City takes about the license, then they also lose
their enforcement tool. Mr. Anderson stated that the best way to get compliance is the property
owner’s motivation to obtain the license, and that generally, revocation of a license is not the way
to go about getting compliance.
Commissioner White asked if, to rent out a property, it is mandatory to have a license. Mr. Thao
stated that if the property is not owner-occupied, then it requires a rental license.
Mr. Thao continued to share information about the feedback from the tenants, who wanted to see
more postings in the buildings in addition to email notices, more city engagement around tenant
rights and tenant protections, notification of the residents of the City’s actions against property
owners or managers, and to create a City escrow account that the City manages to do repairs. He
noted that internally, the idea of an escrow was discussed, but it would not work very effectively
because there is already a state statute process. Mr. Anderson stated that some of the suggestions
have some challenges, such as the more regulation suggestion, because with the codes,
craftsmanship cannot be regulated. He added that generally speaking, tenants would like more
information, more regulations, and more inspections.
Mr. Thao stated that they met with the landlords to receive feedback from them. They noted that
they wanted fewer regulations, fewer inspections, and the main concern was that the City was
doing too many inspections. He added that the landlords liked Brooklyn Park’s inspection rental
license program: Brooklyn Park only inspects 30 percent of the units one time per year, and the
license is for one year. He noted that the landlords wanted to change the property code violation
types because they did not want to get penalized for things that the renters were doing, but the City
noted that it would be hard to figure out who was at fault for the violation. He stated that the
landlords also asked for reduced costs for the inspections, so money could be used elsewhere, and
the landlords would like a more uniform inspection process. He noted that the inspectors are put
through training, and then once a year, there is a consistency training.
Mr. Thao asked if there were any comments or questions. Mr. Anderson noted that there is a work
session for Council coming up on this subject, and that the minutes from this meeting would be
brought to Council, so if there was anything the Commissioner would like noted, now would be
the time to do so.
Page 21 of 194Page 126 of 299
09/16/25 -6- DRAFT
Commissioner Freund asked if it was about keeping the tiered system. Mr. Anderson stated that
it is part of it, but it could be other things as well. He added that maybe it would be getting rid of
the performance-based system, which many landlords, even those with three-year licenses, would
agree with because of the time spent getting ready for the inspection.
Commissioner Straub noted that if landlords were keeping their properties in good shape all the
time, then they would not need to spend the time to get ready for the upcoming inspection, so it
seems like they would be taking less care of the property than is needed.
Commissioner White asked if the information would be going to the October meeting. Mr.
Anderson stated they are hoping to bring it to the October 13th meeting.
Commissioner Said asked if there is a way to know what the general inspection is. Mr. Thao stated
that there is a brochure with the common code violations that are found during an inspection for
both single-family and multi-family, and that contains most things. Mr. Anderson noted that the
list has the 200 most common codes that are violated, but the City uses the International Property
Maintenance Code. Mr. Thao noted that the code was adopted in 2018 to have a more standard
code, rather than just their own code.
Commissioner White asked about the codes and if they were life safety. Mr. Thao noted that the
codes are a combination of life safety and maintenance.
Commissioner Straub asked if all code violations are treated equally, or if there is a sliding scale
based on severity. Mr. Thao stated that at this point, all code violations are weighted the same,
but some cities have a weighted system, Minneapolis and St. Paul. Mr. Anderson noted that when
this version of the code was designed in 2009, and the City went from every two years to a
performance-based system, they looked through two years of records and kind of calculated based
on that.
Commissioner Said asked about the inspection being whether the property is liveable, but does not
meet a certain standard, and it would still be able to be passed. Mr. Anderson noted that it could
be challenging if the City went to an inspection program that was only life, health, and safety,
because drawing that line for the inspection would be hard to do.
Commissioner Said asked if the inspection is seen as an obstacle because there are too many of
them. Mr. Thao stated that the standards that are used are a minimum standard; they do not look
at the quality of the work or the cross-mission of the work. He added that they are minimum codes
that are being enforced, mixed with the health, life, and safety. Mr. Anderson noted that there are
some gray areas, such as what kind of wall a hole is located in, or what door needs to work, and
which door does not need to work, and that would require everything to be written into the code
on what exactly to enforce.
Mr. Anderson asked for thoughts on the performance-based system and if it should go away, and
if not, then should it be changed to make it easier on landlords, and should fewer units be inspected,
no longer inspecting 100 percent of the units.
Page 22 of 194Page 127 of 299
09/16/25 -7- DRAFT
Commissioner Said stated that personally he thinks that 30 percent would be a good way to do it
because then time can be dedicated elsewhere, and they would be back in two years anyway, and
it is more friendly to the landlord as well. He noted that it may lead to more companies wanting
to come into the City as well.
Mr. Thao asked when Commissioner Said noted being more friendly to the landlords, if he had
any recommendations or ideas as to what he would like to see or recommend. Commissioner Said
noted that when landlords do not have to spend as much on an inspection, then they can spend it
elsewhere, and that would make the property more landlord-friendly. He added that this was why
he suggested the health and safety-focused inspections.
Commissioner Straub stated that he has the opposite opinion on most of the thoughts about
landlords. He noted in some respects, some areas could be made more flexible for the landlords,
such as the training that could just be done through a well-thought-out PDF or document, without
needing to be an in-person class. He added that, as someone who has rented in the past, he feels
that many landlords do the bare minimum on inspections because it is not profitable for them to
go above and beyond, and many of the advocacy options are ways for landlords to make more
money and work around providing tenants with proper livable spaces. He stated that 30 percent
of units per year is something that theoretically could be reasonable, depending on how it is done.
He noted that he was not sure about how quickly the average rental degrades, but over the course
of three years, a lot of damage can be done. Mr. Thao noted that more code violations are seen in
family units because of the kids.
Commissioner Straub suggested that maybe the number of rooms inspected is a scale that changes
depending on how many rooms are on the property, or if there is a multi-family versus single-
family property. Mr. Anderson noted that Brooklyn Park has an annual license, and they have to
inspect 33 percent. Commissioner Straub asked if it was the rooms that were marked down as
inspected. Mr. Anderson noted that it was by floors. Commissioner White asked if that was true
of single-family as well. Mr. Anderson stated it was the whole house, but it is done every two
years, and apartments are done every year, but only 33 percent.
Commissioner Straub noted that there were easy wins for tenants that were being shown, that
require very little effort from the landlord, but provide direct value to the tenant, such as towing
and visitors, and that should be obvious information. He added that the physical posting of notices
should be required, and also the notification of residents of the City’s actions against the property
owner. Mr. Thao noted that the information of where the complaint comes from is not public
knowledge, but everything else is public data, and a citizen can request the information, and that
will be provided to them.
Mr. Anderson noted there was another topic, so he wanted to know if there were any more
comments. Commission Freund stated that the tiered system is working well and she likes it.
Community Member Sam Golden agreed with the appreciation of the tiered system, but maybe
have a two-year versus a three-year, and also not inspecting 100 percent of the units because of
the cost burden to the property owner.
Page 23 of 194Page 128 of 299
09/16/25 -8- DRAFT
Commissioner White asked if reinspection of the units is 100 percent of the units inspected. Mr.
Thao noted that only the units where code violations are, are reinspected.
Commissioner Said needed to leave the meeting. Mr. Anderson noted that the next topic could
not be able to be discussed because that would not leave enough time, and if Commissioner Said
left, then there would not be enough Commissioners for a quorum.
Mr. Thao explained that the handouts that he gave to the Commissioners were the state’s ten
protections passed in 2023 and 2024.
Commissioner Said asked if there was a way to do it via email. Mr. Anderson noted that it could
be done that way, but it may be best to discuss it as well. He added that they would talk internally
to see if the Council wants to still move forward in October without feedback or if they want to
delay until November.
ADJOURNMENT
There was a motion by Commissioner Freund, seconded by Commissioner Straub, to adjourn the
meeting. The motion passed. The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission adjourned at 8:26 p.m.
__________________________________
Chair O’Connor
Page 24 of 194Page 129 of 299
Rental License Program / Tenant
Protections Overview
September 16, 2025
Xiong Thao, Housing and Community Standards ManagerPage 25 of 194Page 130 of 299
Purpose
•City Council wants to review the Rental license program and
tenant protections ordinances.
•Staff has brought this matter to Housing Commission several times
in the past few years.
•Discussion about rental license program and Tenant Protections
ordinances.
2Page 26 of 194Page 131 of 299
Background
•Brooklyn Center has had a rental license program since the 1970s. Every property was issued a 2 year license.
•A performance based rental program was adopted in 2010 after the housing crisis which resulted in many vacant properties.
•The program aimed to encourage proactive property management
•Established 4 license types
•Type I – 3 year license
•Type II – 2 year license
•Type III – 1 year license (Requires an Action Plan)
•Type IV – 6 month provisional license (Requires a Mitigation plan)
3Page 27 of 194Page 132 of 299
Background
•License type is based on the number of property code violations
4
License Type Number of units Property code violations per inspected
unit
Type I – 3 year license 1-2 units
3+
0 - 2
0 - 0.75
Type II – 2 year license 1-2 units
3+
Greater than 2 but not more than 5
Greater than 0.75 but not more than 1.5
Type III – 1 year license 1-2 units
3+
Greater than 5 but not more than 9
Greater than 1.5 but not more than 3
Type IV – 6 month license 1-2 units
3+
Greater than 9
Greater than 3
Page 28 of 194Page 133 of 299
License Timeframe
5
Apply for
rental license
Schedule
inspection
(within 2
weeks)
Conduct
inspection
(30 day
follow up)
Follow up
inspection is
conducted If the inspection
fails, re-
inspection is
scheduled (2
weeks)
If the
inspection
passes, City
Council
Approval
City Council
approval,
send Rental
License
Page 29 of 194Page 134 of 299
Inspection
•100% of the units
•Kitchen, bathrooms, windows, bedrooms, egress, smoke and co alarms,
basements, hallways/stairwells, storage, mechanical systems, electrical,
plumbing, exterior, parking lots, and garages
•Complaint based property code violations may be added to the follow up
inspection
•Weather deferrals
•Exterior items that cannot be completed due to the weather
•Siding, painting, yard work, driveway, concrete, roofing, etc.
•Must pass inspection or pass with a weather deferral
6Page 30 of 194Page 135 of 299
License Approval
•Paying the rental license fee does not equal a license; the fee
payment starts the rental licensing process.
•Before a license can be considered for approval
•Pass rental inspection(s) and pay any reinspection fees
•Current on utilities (water)
•Current on property taxes
•All licenses must be approved by City Council
7Page 31 of 194Page 136 of 299
Options to Consider
1.Eliminate the Crime Free Housing Training: Limited class
offerings
2.Eliminate the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) requirement: Many properties have already completed this; new properties would be given the option to have it completed
3.Eliminate the Rental Plan Requirement: Action and Mitigation plan are often the reason properties remain a Type III or IV license
4.Adjust Inspection Point System: Increasing the number of violations a property can have for each license type.
5.Inspection Cycle: Revert to a 2 year license for every property
8Page 32 of 194Page 137 of 299
Discussion – Rental licensing
1.Do you think that the City’s rental program has been
effective in providing better quality housing or improved BC
housing stock?
2.What part of the rental license program would you like the City
to include or change?
3.What can the city can do to improve the rental license program?
4.Are there other rental license programs that the City should
considering mimicking?
9Page 33 of 194Page 138 of 299
Meetings – Tenant / Housing
Advocates
Tenant / Housing Advocate Meeting – August 26, 2025
•Wanted more regulation / inspections
•Create rules around towing vehicles
•Require visitor parking spaces and hours
•Not require rent payment without an active rental license
•Revocation of rental license due to lack of repairs
•Require posting of notices in the building in addition to email notices
•More city engagement around tenant rights and tenant protections
•Notify residents of city’s actions against a property owner/manager
•Create an escrow account that the city manages for repairs
10Page 34 of 194Page 139 of 299
Meetings – Proper Owners /
Managers
Property owners / Managers– August 28, 2025
•Wanted less regulation / inspections
•Too many inspections and causing hardship for tenants
•Brooklyn Park only inspects 30% of the units 1x per year
•Reduce / change property code violation types
•Tenant created vs owner neglect / Cite tenant for violation
•Only consider life/safety violations
•Reduce cost of inspections
•Use money saved for re-investment into the property
•More uniform rental license inspection process
11Page 35 of 194Page 140 of 299
QUESTIONS?
12Page 36 of 194Page 141 of 299
Tenant Protections
2018
•City adopted its first tenant protection
•Notice of Sale
•Must provide notice to tenants and the city within 30 days of purchase
•Allows for relocation assistance
•Raises rents
•Terminates or non-renews a lease
•Require tenants to re-qualify for the lease
•A material change of the lease
13Page 37 of 194Page 142 of 299
Tenant Protections
2021
•Adopted 2 new protections
•Pre-Eviction notice
•Requires a 30 day notice if the property owner/manager is going to file an eviction
•Rent Eviction Notice
•Who the rent can be paid to
•The total amount that is owed
•When the total amount must be paid by
•Material breach of lease Eviction Notice
•What is the lease violation
•What can be done to correct the violation
•When does the lease violation correction have to be completed by
14Page 38 of 194Page 143 of 299
Tenant Protections
•Just cause non-renewal
•Must be one of the following reasons for lease non-renewal
•Non-payment of rent
•Lease violation
•Tenant refused to renew
•Occupancy by owner or family member
•Building is to be demolished or conversion
•Substantial rehab or renovation
•Government order to vacate
•Required employment on the property
15Page 39 of 194Page 144 of 299
Tenant Protections
•Private enforcement of tenant protections
•Tenants can take action in district court against the property owner or
manager for violations of the 30 day pre-eviction notice or just cause non-
renewal.
•State tenant protections passed in 2023 and 2024
•Notice before non-payment of rent evictions – 14 day notice required
•Fee disclosure – Must disclose all mandatory fees for “total monthly rent”
•Heat requirement – minimum heat at 68 degrees from Oct 1-April 30.
•Expanded emergency repair
•Must give 24 hour notice before entering the unit
16Page 40 of 194Page 145 of 299
Tenant Protections
•State tenant protections
•Right to move-in and out inspections
•No pet declawing or devocalization allowed
•No force early lease renewals – no more than 6 months before lease ends
•Crime free ordinance lease – cannot be evicted for crimes that were not committed on the property
•Service support animal fee prohibited
•No rent payments for condemned properties
•Tenant right to organize
•Shared sub-metering – Property owners must explain how the costs are shared.
17Page 41 of 194Page 146 of 299
Discussion – Tenant Protections
1.Did you know the city had tenant protections? Did you know
that the State passed tenant protections?
2.How does tenant protections change the way you operate?
3.What additional tenant protections do you think the City should
consider?
4.What additions/changes would you like the city to consider?
18Page 42 of 194Page 147 of 299
Meeting – Tenant / Housing
Advocates
•Wanted the city to do more education about tenant protections
•Especially around just cause non-renewal
•Require written notification in addition to emails or electronic
notification
•City to penalize property owners / managers who knowingly
violate the ordinance
•Homeline
•Working on putting a list together
•Protect tenants from discrimination based on sources of income
19Page 43 of 194Page 148 of 299
Meeting – Property Owners /
Managers
•Reduce 30 day eviction notice to 14 day notice
•Mirror State requirement
•Ability to non-renew bad tenants without a curing period
20Page 44 of 194Page 149 of 299
QUESTIONS?
21Page 45 of 194Page 150 of 299
Rental License Program Overview
August 28,2025
Xiong Thao, Housing and Community Standards ManagerPage 46 of 194Page 151 of 299
Background
•Brooklyn Center has had a rental license program since the 1970s. Every property was issued a 2 year license.
•A performance based rental program was adopted in 2010 after the housing crisis which resulted in many vacant properties.
•The program aimed to encourage proactive property management
•Established 4 license types
•Type I – 3 year license
•Type II – 2 year license
•Type III – 1 year license (Requires an Action Plan)
•Type IV – 6 month provisional license (Requires a Mitigation plan)
2Page 47 of 194Page 152 of 299
Background
•License type is based on the number of property code violations
3
License Type Number of units Property code violations per inspected
unit
Type I – 3 year license 1-2 units
3+
0 - 2
0 - 0.75
Type II – 2 year license 1-2 units
3+
Greater than 2 but not more than 5
Greater than 0.75 but not more than 1.5
Type III – 1 year license 1-2 units
3+
Greater than 5 but not more than 9
Greater than 1.5 but not more than 3
Type IV – 6 month license 1-2 units
3+
Greater than 9
Greater than 3
Page 48 of 194Page 153 of 299
License Timeframe
4
Apply for
rental license
Schedule
inspection
(within 2
weeks)
Conduct
inspection
(30 day
follow up)
Follow up
inspection is
conducted If the inspection
fails, re-
inspection is
scheduled (2
weeks)
If the
inspection
passes, City
Council
Approval
City Council
approval,
send Rental
License
Page 49 of 194Page 154 of 299
Inspection
•100% of the units
•Kitchen, bathrooms, windows, bedrooms, egress, smoke and co alarms,
basements, hallways/stairwells, storage, mechanical systems, electrical,
plumbing, exterior, parking lots, and garages
•Complaint based property code violations may be added to the follow up
inspection
•Weather deferrals
•Exterior items that cannot be completed due to the weather
•Siding, painting, yard work, driveway, concrete, roofing, etc.
•Must pass inspection or pass with a weather deferral
5Page 50 of 194Page 155 of 299
License Approval
•Paying the rental license fee does not equal a license; the fee
payment starts the rental licensing process.
•Before a license can be considered for approval
•Pass rental inspection(s) and pay any reinspection fees
•Current on utilities (water)
•Current on property taxes
•All licenses must be approved by City Council
6Page 51 of 194Page 156 of 299
Options to Consider
1.Eliminate the Crime Free Housing Training: Limited class
offerings
2.Eliminate the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) requirement: Many properties have already completed this; new properties would be given the option to have it completed
3.Eliminate the Rental Plan Requirement: Action and Mitigation plan are often the reason properties remain a Type III or IV license
4.Adjust Inspection Point System: Increasing the number of violations a property can have for each license type.
5.Inspection Cycle: Revert to a 2 year license for every property
7Page 52 of 194Page 157 of 299
Discussion – Rental licensing
1.Do you think that the City’s rental program has been
effective in providing better quality housing or improved BC
housing stock?
2.What part of the rental license program would you like the City
to include or change?
3.What can the city can do to improve the rental license program?
4.Are there other rental license programs that the City should
considering mimicking?
8Page 53 of 194Page 158 of 299
Tenant Protections
2018
•City adopted its first tenant protection
•Notice of Sale
•Must provide notice to tenants and the city within 30 days of purchase
•Allows for relocation assistance
•Raises rents
•Terminates or non-renews a lease
•Require tenants to re-qualify for the lease
•A material change of the lease
9Page 54 of 194Page 159 of 299
Tenant Protections
2021
•Adopted 2 new protections
•Pre-Eviction notice
•Requires a 30 day notice if the property owner/manager is going to file an eviction
•Rent Eviction Notice
•Who the rent can be paid to
•The total amount that is owed
•When the total amount must be paid by
•Material breach of lease Eviction Notice
•What is the lease violation
•What can be done to correct the violation
•When does the lease violation correction have to be completed by
10Page 55 of 194Page 160 of 299
Tenant Protections
•Just cause non-renewal
•Must be one of the following reasons for lease non-renewal
•Non-payment of rent
•Lease violation
•Tenant refused to renew
•Occupancy by owner or family member
•Building is to be demolished or conversion
•Substantial rehab or renovation
•Government order to vacate
•Required employment on the property
11Page 56 of 194Page 161 of 299
Tenant Protections
•Private enforcement of tenant protections
•Tenants can take action in district court against the property owner or
manager for violations of the 30 day pre-eviction notice or just cause non-
renewal.
•State tenant protections passed in 2023 and 2024
•Notice before non-payment of rent evictions – 14 day notice required
•Fee disclosure – Must disclose all mandatory fees for “total monthly rent”
•Heat requirement – minimum heat at 68 degrees from Oct 1-April 30.
•Expanded emergency repair
•Must give 24 hour notice before entering the unit
12Page 57 of 194Page 162 of 299
Tenant Protections
•State tenant protections
•Right to move-in and out inspections
•No pet declawing or devocalization allowed
•No force early lease renewals – no more than 6 months before lease ends
•Crime free ordinance lease – cannot be evicted for crimes that were not committed on the property
•Service support animal fee prohibited
•No rent payments for condemned properties
•Tenant right to organize
•Shared sub-metering – Property owners must explain how the costs are shared.
13Page 58 of 194Page 163 of 299
Discussion – Tenant Protections
1.Did you know the city had tenant protections? Did you know
that the State passed tenant protections?
2.How does tenant protections change the way you operate?
3.What additional tenant protections do you think the City should
consider?
4.What additions/changes would you like the city to consider?
14Page 59 of 194Page 164 of 299
Rental License Program Overview
August 26,2025
Xiong Thao, Housing and Community Standards ManagerPage 60 of 194Page 165 of 299
Background
•Brooklyn Center has had a rental license program since the 1970s. Every property was issued a 2 year license.
•A performance based rental program was adopted in 2010 after the housing crisis which resulted in many vacant properties.
•The program aimed to encourage proactive property management
•Established 4 license types
•Type I – 3 year license
•Type II – 2 year license
•Type III – 1 year license (Requires an Action Plan)
•Type IV – 6 month provisional license (Requires a Mitigation plan)
2Page 61 of 194Page 166 of 299
Background
•License type is based on the number of property code violations
3
License Type Number of units Property code violations per inspected
unit
Type I – 3 year license 1-2 units
3+
0 - 2
0 - 0.75
Type II – 2 year license 1-2 units
3+
Greater than 2 but not more than 5
Greater than 0.75 but not more than 1.5
Type III – 1 year license 1-2 units
3+
Greater than 5 but not more than 9
Greater than 1.5 but not more than 3
Type IV – 6 month license 1-2 units
3+
Greater than 9
Greater than 3
Page 62 of 194Page 167 of 299
Licensing
•Paying the rental license fee does not equal a license; the fee
payment starts the rental licensing process.
•Before a license can be considered for approval
•Pass rental inspection(s) and pay any reinspection fees
•Current on utilities (water)
•Current on property taxes
•All licenses must be approved by City Council
4Page 63 of 194Page 168 of 299
Inspection
•100% of the units
•Kitchen, bathrooms, windows, bedrooms, egress, smoke and co alarms,
basements, hallways/stairwells, storage, mechanical systems, electrical,
plumbing, exterior, parking lots, and garages
•Complaint based property code violations may be added to the follow up
inspection
•Weather deferrals
•Exterior items that cannot be completed due to the weather
•Siding, painting, yard work, driveway, concrete, roofing, etc.
•Must pass inspection or pass with a weather deferral
5Page 64 of 194Page 169 of 299
License Timeframe
6
Apply for
rental
license
Schedule
inspection
(within 2
weeks)
Conduct
inspection
(30 day
follow up)
Follow up
inspection
is
conducted If the
ispection
fails, re-
ispection is
scheduled
(2 weeks)
If the
inspection
passes, City
Council
Approval
City Council
approval,
send Rental
License
Page 65 of 194Page 170 of 299
Discussion – Rental licensing
1.Do you think that the City’s rental program addresses
tenant concerns?
2.What part of the rental license program that you, as a tenant,
would like the City to include or change?
3.How effective is the rental license program in addressing
property maintenance, tenant concerns, and overall property
conditions?
7Page 66 of 194Page 171 of 299
Tenant Protections
2018
•City adopted its first tenant protection
•Notice of Sale
•Must provide notice to tenants and the city within 30 days of purchase
•Provides relocation assistance
•Raises rents
•Terminates or non-renews a lease
•Require tenants to re-qualify for the lease
•A material change of the lease
8Page 67 of 194Page 172 of 299
Tenant Protections
2021
•Adopted 2 new protections
•Pre-Eviction notice
•Requires a 30 day notice if the property owner/manager is going to file an eviction
•Rent Eviction Notice
•Who the rent can be paid to
•The total amount that is owed
•When the total amount must be paid by
•Material breach of lease Eviction Notice
•What is the lease violation
•What can be done to correct the violation
•When does the lease violation correction have to be completed by
9Page 68 of 194Page 173 of 299
Tenant Protections
•Just cause non-renewal
•Must be one of the following reasons for lease non-renewal
•Non-payment of rent
•Lease violation
•Tenant refused to renew
•Occupancy by owner or family member
•Building is to be demolished or conversion
•Substantial rehab or renovation
•Government order to vacate
•Required employment on the property
10Page 69 of 194Page 174 of 299
Tenant Protections
•Private enforcement of tenant protections
•Tenants can take action in district court against the property owner or
manager for violations of the 30 day pre-eviction notice or just cause non-
renewal.
•State tenant protections passed in 2023 and 2024
•Notice before non-payment of rent evictions – 14 day notice required
•Fee disclosure – Must disclose all fees for “total monthly rent”
•Heat requirement – minimum heat at 60 degrees from Oct 1-April 30.
•Expanded emergency repair
•Must give 24 hour notice before entering the unit
11Page 70 of 194Page 175 of 299
Tenant Protections
•State tenant protections
•Right to move-in and out inspections
•No pet declawing or devocalization allowed
•No force early lease renewals – no more than 6 months before lease ends
•Crime free ordinance lease – cannot be evicted for crimes that were not committed on the property
•Service support animal fee prohibited
•No rent payments for condemned properties
•Tenant right to organize
•Shared sub-metering – Property owners must explain how the costs are shared.
12Page 71 of 194Page 176 of 299
Discussion – Tenant Protections
1.Did you know the city had tenant protections? Have you or
do you know anyone who has benefited from the cities
tenant protections?
2.Did you know that the State passed tenant protections?
3.What additional tenant protections do you think the City should
consider?
13Page 72 of 194Page 177 of 299
Page 73 of 194Page 178 of 299
Page 74 of 194Page 179 of 299
Page 75 of 194Page 180 of 299
Page 76 of 194Page 181 of 299
Page 77 of 194Page 182 of 299
Page 78 of 194Page 183 of 299
Page 79 of 194Page 184 of 299
Page 80 of 194Page 185 of 299
Page 81 of 194Page 186 of 299
Page 82 of 194Page 187 of 299
1
Xiong Thao
From:Erik Falkman <erik@sasapartments.com>
Sent:Friday, October 3, 2025 11:01 AM
To:April Graves; Teneshia Kragness; Dan Jerzak; Kris Lawrence-Anderson; Laurie Moore;
Reggie Edwards; Xiong Thao; Xiong Thao; Jesse Anderson; Jesse Anderson
Subject:Brooklyn Center Inspections
Attachments:202510031006.pdf
Mayor, Councilmembers, and Staff,
As a group we would like to thank you for your engagement in revisiting the Inspection Process and
Tenant Protection Ordinances in Brooklyn Center.
We are grateful to be able to participate in this dialogue and look forward to working in partnership with
the city for the benefit of our communities, and our residents and their homes.
As requested, we have provided our thoughts and recommendations in the attached for revisions to the
current policies that we believe will benefit all stakeholders.
Please let us know when this will be on the agenda for the council.
Thank you again and all my best-
Erik Falkman
Erik Falkman
Chief Operating Officer, Soderberg Apartment Specialists
763-746-4020 | erik@sasapartments.com
www.sasapartments.com
6401 Camden Ave N. Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
Page 83 of 194Page 188 of 299
Council Regular Meeting
DATE: 11/24/2025
TO: Council/EDA Work Session
FROM: Xiong Thao, Housing and Community Standards Manager
THROUGH: Jesse Anderson, Community Development Director
BY: Xiong Thao, Housing and Community Standards Manager
SUBJECT: Tenant Protections Discussion
Requested Council Action:
Provide direction to City Staff on next steps, if any.
Background:
City Council requested staff to bring forward a discussion of the City’s Tenant
Protections.
Ordinance Summary
30 Day Pre-Eviction Notice: This section of the ordinance requires a 30 day notice to a
tenant prior to filing for an eviction for non-payment of rent or a material breach of lease.
Just Cause Non-Renewal:This ordinance prevents a property owner or manager from
non-renewing an existing tenant’s lease without just cause. Just Causes:
• Non-payment of rent
• Material non-compliance of the lease
• Refuse to renew a lease agreement
• Occupancy by the property owner or family member
• Building demolishing or conversion
• Rehabilitation or renovation
• Complying with a Government order to vacate
• Occupancy conditioned on employment
Recent Engagement on Tenant Protections Summary
Staff met with property owners/managers and tenants and tenant advocate
organizations separately to discuss the current tenant protections. The recording of the
meetings were shared with City Council members during a weekly update. Below are
the summaries from both meetings.
Staff met with tenants and tenant advocates on August 26, 2025. Staff posted the
notices in several multifamily properties and sent email invites. In total, there were 12
participants. During the meeting, staff presented an overview of the city’s tenant
protections and highlighted the state’s tenant protections passed in 2023 and 2024.
Staff passed out HomeLine’s handouts outlining each of the state’s tenant protections.
Page 84 of 194Page 189 of 299
Following the presentation, staff posed a few questions to the group. After the
presentation, staff also had a list of questions to start the conversation. Ideas and
topics that came up during the conversation were:
• Collectively, the group liked the city’s tenant protections and wanted the city to
pursue more protections.
1. Many liked the 30-day pre-eviction notice vs the State’s 14-day notice and
feel that it would continue to provide tenants with time to apply for rent
assistance and/or look for new housing.
2. Just cause non-renewal is important in preserving someone’s housing.
The city should continue to provide education about tenant protection, since tenants are
still not aware and many were impacted by the lack of knowledge.
1. An example was provided that a property manager gave non-renewal notice to
40 residents and many moved out because they were not aware of the
protection.
• Penalize property owners/managers who purposely neglect the city’s protections
even if they rescind the improper notices. Put specific penalties in place.
• HomeLine is working on proposing additional tenant protections that the state or
cities can consider, such as providing protections to tenants based on sources of
income. The full list has not been published yet.
Following the meeting with tenants and tenant advocates, staff had a meeting
with property owners and managers on August 28, 2025. Email invites were sent to
primarily multifamily property owners and managers. However, staff did invite several
single-family property owners and managers to the meeting. In total, there were 12
participants that attended the meeting and one council member.
Similar to the tenant meeting, staff did a presentation on the tenant protections that the
city currently have adopted and then opened up the conversation with a set of
questions. During the meeting, staff presented an overview of the city’s tenant
protections and highlighted the state’s tenant protections passed in 2023 and 2024.
Ideas and topics that came up during the meeting were:
• Tenant protections create an adversary relationship with tenants due to property
owners having to preserve their rights.
• Staff stated some of the challenges that were expressed during the tenant
discussion.
o Generally, they want more protection.
o Increase protections on towing vehicles
o Increase citing property code violations
o Take action on property owners who abuse tenant protections
Page 85 of 194Page 190 of 299
o Protecting tenants due to their source of income
o Increase inspections around mold/mildew
• There was consensus that the 30-day pre-eviction notice was too long and the
city should revert to the State’s 14-day notice. The eviction allows tenants to
seek rental assistance and most property owners would accept a guarantee of
payment from a housing provider. Many property owners do not want to evict
tenants due to difficulty and cost.
• There were some concerns about the just cause non-renewal and the
requirement for a curing period. Staff stated that there was not a curing period
for the just cause non-renewal period and the property owner would only need to
provide the reason for the non-renewal.
• It was stated that there are a few bad apples that caused the State to pass tenant
protections and not all property owners acted that way.
Staff met with the Housing Commission and presented the tenant protection
information on October 21, 2025, during the Housing Commission meeting. Staff
explained that the first tenant protection was adopted in 2018, which applied to
multifamily properties that sold to new property owners. It was a required notice that the
new owner had to give tenants of any changes to the lease, rent, or other conditions.
The next set of protection was adopted in 2021, which included a 30-day pre-eviction
notice, a just cause non-renewal notice, and giving tenants that authority to take legal
action if these rights were violated. It was explained to the Commissioners that there
was a robust discussion with property owners, tenants, and tenant advocates before
bringing the tenant protections to council for consideration.
Staff explained what the 30-day pre-eviction notice means and how it would work. Staff
explained that within the notice that is given to the tenant, the notice allows for the
tenant to cure the lease violation. Staff then explained the just-cause non-renewal,
stating that there are eight reasons why a property owner/manager can non-renew a
tenant. It was explained that these two tenant protections do not require much staff
involvement and when there are issues, staff will follow up with the property
owner/manager about the violation.
It was then explained that in 2023 and 2024 the State of Minnesota passed additional
tenant protections. Copies of the State’s tenant protections were handed out to the
Commissioners for review. Staff highlighted a few of the State’s tenant protections and
explained what some of the new protections mean.
Ideas and topics that came up during the meeting were:
• Commissioner Freund asked what the motivation to bring the rental license
program and tenant protection to the Housing Commission and whether it was
due to dissatisfaction with the current system. Staff stated that it was a council
directive and a possible constituent request. Staff also stated that it was a similar
request made two years ago by council. During the last discussion about tenant
Page 86 of 194Page 191 of 299
protection, the Housing Commission recommended that there be no change to
the tenant protection ordinance.
• Commissioner Said asked if a tenant would be protected if they operated a
business out of the home, since he has heard of individuals conducting
transactions out of their home. Staff stated that there are some rights that they
would have because they are a tenant, but it would depend on whether they can
use the property for business. Generally speaking, there are no protections that
would allow the business to operate, if the lease does not allow a business to
operate. If the property is in violation of the zoning code or a nuisance, then that
might be grounds for a lease violation or termination.
• Commissioner Freund asked a question to clarify just cause non-renewal. Staff
explained that when a lease is ending, the property owner must provide a reason
as to why they are not renewing the lease and the property owner cannot just
terminate the lease without a reason outlined in the ordinance.
• Commissioner Lee stated that due to the vulnerability of elderly people, she liked
both the 30-day pre-eviction notice and just cause non-renewal protections.
• Commissioner Said asked a question to clarify the 30-day pre-eviction notice.
Staff stated that before the property owner can file an eviction, they must give a
30-day notice stating the reason for the eviction and how to cure it. The example
that staff provided was a late rent payment stating that if rent is due on the 1st of
the month, the property owner can give notice that they will file an eviction for
non-payment of rent on January 2nd and then file the eviction on February 2nd for
non-payment of rent.
• Commissioner Lee asked a question about moving out during the 30-day pre-
eviction notice period. Staff stated that the tenant can move out during the notice
period and does not prevent the tenant from negotiating with the property owner.
• Commissioner Straub stated that he is in support of the 30-day notice and once
the 30-day notice is given, the property owner can potentially lose out on a month
of rent. Staff stated that within that 30 days, it would allow the tenant to seek
rental assistance so that the property owner can get paid. Commissioner Said
stated that the property owner has the deposit and that can be used to pay for
the rent.
• Commissioner Straub stated that ongoing education about tenant rights is a good
thing and justification for non-renewals is a great tool against biases. He also
thought that giving a tenant 14 days was not enough, and it is too fast of a
turnaround.
• Commissioner Said asked about raising rents and if there are any controls over
that issue. Staff stated that the city currently does not have any rules about rent
increases, but property owners are still required to follow fair housing rules. Staff
also stated that State laws are also silent on how much rent can be increased;
State laws only address late fees. Staff alluded to the City of St. Paul’s rules
around rent increases. The city allows property owners to apply for a waiver if
property owners go above the city maximum amount.
• A question was asked about income restrictions and staff explained how area
Page 87 of 194Page 192 of 299
median income (AMI) is calculated and used to determine rents. Staff stated that
there are some properties that are income restricted and legally obligated to
follow a rent increase schedule.
• A point was made that a tenant can refuse the rent increase and choose not to
renew the lease, which would be a reason that the property owner can cite for
not renewing the tenant's lease agreement.
• Commissioner Said asked if the city would know if the property owner is raising
rents fairly. Staff stated that the city would not know, and it would be a fair
housing issue and require an investigation. Commissioner stated that some
developers are targeting new families and making promises and then not keeping
those promises. Staff stated that there are many developers who hope to fill the
units fast, offer introductory rates and, after a while, increase rents after that
period ends. The rent increases may seem higher than normal due to the
introductory rent prices.
• Many of the Commissioners agreed that having a poster with various contacts
would be good for tenants, since finding information can be difficult.
Commissioner Lee stated that information is difficult to find. That is why 30 days
is needed versus the 14-day notice.
• Staff further explained the notice of sale and how that differs from the 30-day pre-
eviction notice. A sale of a building requires a different type of notice if there are
going to be changes to the lease or rent.
Summary of Feedback
After reviewing the discussion from all stakeholders, there appears to be general
support for the city’s tenant protections. Property owners want to reduce tenant
protections, while tenants, advocacy groups, and the Housing Commission support
what the city currently has and does not want any reductions. In addition to
tenant/property owner laws, the State has seen the need for increased tenant
protections and passed additional laws ensuring that tenants have increased rights to
prevent tenants from losing their housing.
There are a couple of questions for discussion with the Council.
1. Are there any additional protections that the Council would like staff to research
and bring back for discussion?
2. Are there any protections that the Council would like to remove or reduced to the
current tenant protections?
Budget Issues:
There are no budget issues to consider.
Inclusive Community Engagement:
Page 88 of 194Page 193 of 299
Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect:
Strategic Priorities and Values:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Past Minutes and Council Memos Relating to Tenant Protections
2. 2025.10.21 HC
3. Unapproved 2025.09.16 HC (002)
4. Tenant protection ordinance
Page 89 of 194Page 194 of 299
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND STATE OF MINNESOTA
REGULAR SESSION
July 18, 2023
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission was called to order by Chairperson Enger at 7:03 p.m.
MEETINGATTENDEES
Chair Gretchen Enger
Vice Chair Michael Donnelly
Commissioner Lori Best-Deyoe
Commissioner Laura Freund
Commissioner Jerry Gayflor
Commissioner Elizabeth Riel — not present
Commissioner Florence Williams — (joined via WebEx at 7:12 p.m.)
City Staff present: Community Development Director and Staff Liaison Jesse Anderson and City
Associate Planner Krystin Eldridge. City Clerk Barb Suciu joined the meeting via WebEx at 7:13
p.m.
Also present: Marty McDonough, Director of Government Affairs with Minnesota Multi Housing
Association (MHA), City Councilmember Dan Jerzak, and Eric Falkman, COO with Soderberg
Apartments.
WELCOME AND INTRODUCTION The
members of the Commission introduced themselves to one another. Commissioner
Best-Deyoe asked if Brooklyn Center is 20 percent rental properties. Staff Liaison Jesse
Anderson stated he doesn't know offhand. City Planner Krystin Eldridge noted it was about 40
percent rental properties when she last looked at the statistics. Commissioner
Best-Deyoe asked if group homes count in that percentage. Mr. Anderson explained
group homes or other rental properties are only counted as a rental if a rental license is needed.
If the homeowner also lives on site, there is not a need for a rental license. Commissioner
Best-Deyoe noted part of the reason she wanted to join the Housing Commission is
because of all of the rentals and group homes on her street. APPROVAL
OFAGENDA There
was a motion by Chair Enger and seconded by Vice Chair Donnelly to approve the agenda as
submitted. The motion passed. 7/
18/23 -1-
Page 90 of 194Page 195 of 299
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: APRIL 18, 2023 AND MAY 16, 2023
There was a motion by Chair Enger and seconded by Commissioner Gayflor
to approve the minutes for the April 18, 2023 and May 16, 2023 Housing Commission meetings
The motion passed.
NEWNEIGHBOR PROGRAM
HOUSING COMMISSIONER TO PROVIDE FEEDBACK ON PACKETS
Staff Liaison Jesse Anderson stated the packets are still being put together by Staff. He explained
the New Neighbor Program is a hand -delivered bag from a Housing Commissioner to any new
residents of Brooklyn Center. There is a hope to deliver in early August, and the deliveries are
most successful on weekday evenings.
41212023-21112023 (245 NEW NEIGHBORS)
None.
512112021-313112022 (120NEWNEIGHBORS)
None.
SELECT DELIVERYDATES
Chair Enger suggested folks discuss availability.
Commissioner Florence Williams joined the meeting through WebEx at 7:12 p.m.
Mr. Anderson noted the next Housing Commission meeting is August 15, 2023, so the delivery
date should be before then. Chair Enger stated she would be unavailable to attend the August 15
meeting. She offered to attend virtually. Mr. Anderson pointed out Commissioners cannot
participate virtually anymore.
City Clerk Barb Suciu joined the meeting through WebEx at 7:13 p.m.
The consensus of the Housing Commission was to deliver some packets on August 8, 2023. They
will meet in the parking lot to pick up packets and assign addresses for delivery. The hope is to
leave to start deliveries by 6:00 p.m.
Chair Enger asked who was available on August 10, 2023 for delivery. Vice Chair Donnelly
suggested only delivering once per week and offered the date of August 15, 2023.
Mr. Anderson pointed out August 15, 2023 is a Housing Commission meeting with a full agenda.
The consensus of the Housing Commission was to deliver more packets on August 16, 2023. They
will meet in the parking lot to pick up packets and assign addresses for delivery. The hope is to
leave to start deliveries by 6:00 p.m.
Chair Enger asked for availability for deliveries on August 22, 2023. Commissioner Best-Deyoe
stated people move out of Brooklyn Center so fast it is impossible to get to know neighbors.
7/18/23 -2-
Page 91 of 194Page 196 of 299
The consensus of the Housing Commission was to deliver more packets on August 22, 2023. They
will meet in the parking lot to pick up packets and assign addresses for delivery. The hope is to
leave to start deliveries by 6:00 p.m.
PRESENTATION ON NEW CONSTRUCTION MULTI FAMILY LICENSE AND REPEAT
TYPE 4 LICENSE
Staff Liaison Jesse Anderson gave an overview of the history of discussions on the topic. In
January 2023, City Council requested Housing Commission to review Licensing for New
Construction Rental Properties. In February 2023, the Housing Commission had an agenda item
for New License. There were only 2 Commissioners in attendance and no meeting was held. In
March 2023, the Housing Commission had an agenda item for New License. There were only 3
Commissioners in attendance and no meeting was held. In April 2023, the Housing Commission
had discussion regarding the Initial Rental License Type. There was direction to staff to have 3
scenarios reviewed by the City Attorney. Then in June 2023, the Housing Commission were
provided the feedback from the City Attorney on the 3 scenarios reviewed by the City Attorney.
The Commission continued the discussion for the next meeting.
Mr. Anderson stated there has been a rental licensing program since the 1970s. Mr. Anderson
explained system was last modified in 2010, and it is intended to promote quality assurance.
Additionally, it is meant to reward landlords for quality rental services and to provide extra
attention to lower -performing rentals.
Staff Liaison Jesse Anderson explained there is a four -tier structure of licensing in Brooklyn
Center. A license is required when a unit is not owner -occupied. After a license is granted, there
is a required inspection. The tiered structure is performance -based, and each tier has different
requirements. A license cannot move up to another tier unless they meet all of the current tier's
requirements, have no violations, and successfully complete an inspection in a particular timeline.
Mr. Anderson stated the ordinance covers length of license, application, revocation, definition of
a valid police call, and tenant protection ordinance.
Mr. Anderson stated after the inspection, Staff reviews police service calls. He showed a list of
valid calls. Different amounts of validated police calls count against license levels in different
ways. The validated police calls haven't impacted properties in a while, mostly because those with
several validated police calls are already at the 6-month license level.
Staff Liaison Jesse Anderson stated each license level correlates with a different level of crime -
free housing requirements. He showed a slide with information on the various licensure tiers. If
the property owner doesn't fulfill the requirements, then they are not eligible to move up to a higher
license tier. The license repeats as a six-month license if the crime -free housing requirements are
not met or if there are a high number of qualified police calls.
Mr. Anderson showed a slide with the distribution of the various license types. The lowest tier is
only eight percent of the units in Brooklyn Center. The tiers do not reflect the size of the residence.
7/18/23 -3-
Page 92 of 194Page 197 of 299
Staff Liaison Jesse Anderson showed some of the numbers Council used to make changes in 2018.
At that time, 44 percent of type four rentals were repeats. 38 percent of the repeats were due to
violations. In 2022, there were 76 repeats, 60 percent of which were only due to failing to meet
requirements.
Staff Liaison Jesse Anderson stated of the type four licenses issued in the 2015-2018 period, 86
percent of them improved from the previous inspection. Since 2018, that percentage has increased.
The percentage is lower for 2023, but it is early in the year and Staff has been stricter on rental
licensing lately.
Mr. Anderson noted the Commission has also been asked to consider new construction licensure.
The ordinance is written somewhat weirdly, and the current City Attorney agrees. As it stands,
new construction houses can't get higher than a tier one license.
Mr. Anderson stated Sonder House has gotten a lot of attention. There are 127 units, and their
license expired May 31, 2023. At that time, there were zero violations. They have recently paid
the renewal fee. A full inspection was conducted on April 26, 2023 and 168 property maintenance
code violations. A majority of the units had few or no violations, and the common areas were well -
maintained. Several units had multiple property code violations, which resulted in the large total
number. A follow-up inspection is scheduled.
Mr. Anderson explained Sonder Point, a senior living facility, recently had an inspection and
received zero violations. The Sanctuary is also a senior living facility. After two years of operating
the facility, there were 27 violations and six police calls for service, neither of which impacted the
license type. Maranatha is an older rental, and they have done well with inspections over the years.
Most recently, their inspection showed 16 violations and allowed them to maintain their license
type.
Mr. Anderson noted the City Attorney reviewed some licensure options. The first suggestion was
new developments can only qualify for a Type 3 license and require an action plan. This would
require the fewest number of changes to the existing City Code and the Rental License Category
Criteria Policy. As it stands, new licenses start at Type 2. Type 3 requires an action plan, so this
requirement would automatically be in place. The language of the City's form Rental License Plan
would have to be tweaked because it assumes that the property has been placed in the Type 3
category for known nuisances and calls.
Staff Liaison Jesse Anderson stated the City Attorney had a response to the second option, which
was that a new license could quality for a Type 2 license, but it will be reviewed at the one-year
mark; if their license changes based on code violations or validated nuisance police calls for
service, it would be change to that new license type. This would require a few more additions and
changes to the City Code. If the goal is a one-year review, rather than saying that a new license
qualifies for Type 2, the City Attorney recommends a one-year provisional/probationary license
that will be reviewed at one year, and at that time, placed in the proper category. It may be
confusing for a licensee if they think they have a two-year Type 2 license, with everything that
comes with that, but it's not really a two-year license. It seems like it would be cleaner to just say
it's a one-year license.
7/18/23 -4-
Page 93 of 194Page 198 of 299
City Clerk Barb Suciu noted the audio is going in and out.
Staff Liaison Jesse Anderson added the third option was offering a six-month licensure and
requiring a mitigation plan with police calls for service as part of the review. As discussed, six
months seems like a pretty short period of time for the initial license period and may not necessarily
be representative of a longer period of time. With the mitigation plan requirement, this would
effectively be a Type 4 provisional license from the outset and would be particularly restrictive for
potential landlords. Of the three options, this is the only one that pose some concerns with regard
to the legal impact and a potential claim that it is too restrictive.
Mr. Anderson noted a fourth option was added to keep current licensing ordinance that provides
for a 2-year license maximum for initial rental license at New Construction.
Chair Enger explained the goal is to determine which option the Housing Commission would like
to recommend to the Council. She asked for each Commissioner to share their opinion to find a
consensus.
Commissioner Florence Williams asked if she would be able to vote. Mr. Anderson asked Ms.
Suciu, but she did not respond. Mr. Anderson stated typically someone cannot vote remotely, but
this is just a recommendation to the Council.
Commissioner Gayflor stated his initial impression was in support of the first option. However,
one year is a little tight for inspection, and he now prefers option two.
Commissioner Freund noted she prefers option four. Vice Chair Donnelly agreed that he supports
option four.
Commissioner Best-Deyoe stated her preference is option two. Chair Enger agreed she prefers
option two. Commissioner Williams stated she also prefers option two.
There was a motion by Chair Enger and seconded by Commissioner Gayflor to recommend the
City Council consider that a new license can qualify for a Type 2 two-year license but will be
reviewed at the one-year marls and if their license changes based on code violations or validated
nuisance police calls for service, it would be change to that new license type.
Commissioner Williams stated the current system isn't working, so the fourth option is pointless.
Then the first option is too short of a timeline for a new construction.
Mr. Anderson stated it is hard to determine if the current process is working or not. There isn't an
evaluation at the one-year mark, which could be helpful to address issues with a poorly performing
property.
Vice Chair Donnelly asked if there is an example of that. Mr. Anderson stated there is not an
example.
7/18/23 -5-
Page 94 of 194Page 199 of 299
Chair Enger stated there has been minimal construction in Brooklyn Center since the 1970s. Part
of the reason the Commission is discussing the licensing process is because of the upcoming new
development planned in the City.
Vice Chair Donnelly asked if the recommendation would impact the first phase of the Opportunity
Site. Chair Enger stated Wangstad Commons would be the first building impacted by any licensing
changes.
Commissioner Williams stated Sonder House is in the process of obtaining new licensure. Mr.
Anderson stated they are in the renewal process for the first time. It currently looks like they will
obtain a two-year license. Commissioner Williams asked if the recommendation would impact
Sonder House. Mr. Anderson stated Sonder House is past the point of first -round licensure, and
the recommendation only impacts the first-time licensing.
Staff Liaison Jesse Anderson added if the recommendation were implemented, it is unlikely it
would impact Wangstad Commons or the Opportunity Site,
Vice Chair Donnelly and Commissioner Freund voted against the same. Chair Enger,
Commissioner Best-Deyoe and Commissioner Gayflor voted in favor of the motion.
Commissioner Williams was in attendance virtually and expressed that she supported the motion.
The consensus of the Housing Commission was to recommend the City Council consider that a
new license can qualify for a Type 2 two-year license but will be reviewed at the one-year marls
and if their license changes based on code violations or validated nuisance police calls for service,
it would be change to that new license type.
There was a motion by Vice Chair Donnelly and seconded by Commissioner Freund to recommend
the City Council consider keeping current licensing ordinance that provides for a 2 year license
maximum for initial rental license at New Construction.
Chair Enger, Gayflor, and Best-Deyoe voted against the same. Motion failed.
Staff Liaison Jesse Anderson noted he would relay details of the discussion to the Council and that
Commissioner Williams participated remotely when the recommendation is presented.
CITY CO UNCIL LIAISON REPORT
This item was considered after Future Meeting Topic Schedule — July 18, 2023 — Presentation on
Tenant Protection Data and invite property owners/representatives.
FUTURE MEETING TOPIC SCHEDULE
JULY 18, 2023 — PRESENTATION ON TENANT PROTECTION DATA AND INVITE
PROPERTY OWNERSIREPRESENTATIVES
Staff Liaison Jesse Anderson explained there was direction from Council for the Housing
Commission to consider the Tenant Protection Ordinance. At a future meeting, tenants and
7/18/23 -6-
Page 95 of 194Page 200 of 299
advocacy groups will be invited.
Chair Enger pointed out she would be unable to attend the August meeting, but she would like to
participate virtually. Mr. Anderson stated he would confer with City Clerk Barb Suciu to determine
their options.
Staff Liaison Jesse Anderson stated there are two main components to the tenant protection
ordinance. First, there is a 30-day pre -eviction notice requirement. Second, there is a requirement
that non -renewals have just cause. This establishes requirements that prevents a property owner
or property manager from non -renewing an existing tenant's lease without just cause. Options of
just cause include the non-payment of rent, material non-compliance, tenant nomenewal,
occupancy by property owner of family member, building demolishing or conversion,
rehabilitation or renovation, complying with a government order to vacate, occupancy conditioned
on employment.
Mr. Anderson explained in 2018-2019, the City first looked at adopting a tenant protection
ordinance regarding the sale of an affordable housing property. In conversation with City Council
on housing policies, the Council wanted Staff to look at additional tenant protections in 2021. Staff
reviewed ordinances and met with staff from the City of St. Paul. Due to the lawsuit against the
City of St. Paul, City of Brooklyn Center decided to only bring forward a few sections for tenant
protections. The proposed ordinance was brought to the Housing Commission on October 19,
2021. The Housing Commission heard from housing advocacy groups and numerous tenants
throughout the process.
Mr. Anderson stated the proposed ordinance was brought to City Council on November 8, 2021
for a discussion and first reading. During the council meeting, staff presented the two proposed
tenant protections. It was brought back to City Council at the December 13, 2021 meeting. There
was public comment from property owners, tenants, and tenant advocacy organizations. The City
Council continued the discussion for the meeting in January 2022.
Staff Liaison Jesse Anderson noted during the City Council meeting on February 14, 2022, the
Council continued the tenant protection conversation with three proposed changes: adding a
provision for landlords to track non -renewals of leases and report them to the City when request:
reduction of the pre -eviction notice from 30 days to 14 days, and addition a provision that would
allow property owners to give a 90-day notice for non -renewal without giving a reason. The
Council requested that the proposed changes be reviewed by the Housing Commission.
Mr. Anderson stated at the February 28, 2022 City Council Meeting, Staff presented and reported
on the February 15, 2022 Housing Commission meeting. The Housing Commission preferred a
30-day pre -eviction notice but would consider a 14-day notice as a good compromise. The
Commission was split on the 90-day non -renewal notice without just cause. The Commission
agreed that the property owners should be required to document and report non -renewals. Public
comment was heard regarding the proposed changes. Council had a discussion about the changes
and voted to approve Resolution No. 2022-30 which included the 30-day pre -eviction notice, just
7/18/23 -7-
Page 96 of 194Page 201 of 299
cause non -renewal, and tracking and reporting of non -renewals.
Mr. Anderson pointed out in January 2023, City Council requested an update on the Tenant
Protection Ordinance related to the landlords' non -renewals documentation. Staff sent out a survey
to all property owners and managers on April 5, 2023. The survey was sent via GovDelivery and
to 350 emails including single family and multifamily owners/managers. Another email was sent
on April 24, 2023 directly to large property owners/managers in the City. Staff also directly called
managers to request the survey be completed. A total of 27 responses were received.
Mr. Anderson summarized the results of the landlord survey. 95 percent of landlord participants
stated their property is considered affordable housing. 23 landlords sent out less than 5 evictions
while two sent out 6-10 evictions and another two sent out 30-60 evictions. The eviction filings
were for a number of reasons. 11 landlords stated evictions were for non-payment of rent, three
were for abandonment, and two for lease violations.
Mr. Anderson stated there was a question on how long the landlord waiting for an eviction hearing
with Hennepin County. 13 landlords did not file an eviction, six waited 5-8 weeks, five waited 0-
4 weeks, and three waiting more than 9 weeks. As for results of the hearing, 10 were issued a
write of recovery, five resulted in a mutual termination, and three ended up in mediation.
Mr. Anderson added there was a question about how many lease non -renewals were issued in 2022.
18 issued 0-5 non -renewals, four issued 6-10 non -renewals, one issued 11-15 non -renewals, and
two issued more than 15 non -renewals. 61.5 percent of non -renewals were for late rent and 38.5
percent were for material lease violations such as property damage, smoking, non -cooperation with
pest control, and unsanitary conditions.
Mr. Anderson noted 77 percent of landlords stated that the tenant protection ordinance did not
impact their decision to issue an eviction. 70 percent of landlords stated that the tenant
protection ordinance did not impact their decision to issue a non -renewal.
Mr. Anderson added the Council was also interested in the feedback received by Minneapolis and
Saint Louis Park after implementing their tenant protections. Both cities have not received or are
not aware of any complaints regarding violations of the ordinance. Minneapolis stated that they
had originally proposed 30 days based off feedback from their public hearing, but after feedback
from the property managers and owners, the City lowered it to 14 days. Saint Louis Park originally
proposed 10 or 14 days for a notice, but after the owners opposed the length, they lowered it to
seven. Both cities have been unable to determine the effectiveness of the program due to the
eviction moratorium.
Eric Falkman, COO with Soderberg Apartments, explained they own and manage about 2200 units
around the Metro, with about 785 units in Brooklyn Center. The tenant protection ordinance came
up in a unique time as they were coming out of COVID-19 restrictions and civil unrest. Currently
at the State level, they are working on a comprehensive tenant protection ordinance. Brooklyn
Center has some of the most severe tenant protection ordinances in the State.
Marty McDonough, Director of Government Affairs with Minnesota Multi Housing Association
7/18/23 -8-
Page 97 of 194Page 202 of 299
MHA), agreed Brooklyn Center has some of the most severe tenant protection ordinances in the
State. He stated the Association is comprised of about 2200 members serving over 600,000 renters
throughout the State. The membership includes small-scale landlords, apartment management
companies, developers, common interest communities, and providers of related products and
services.
Mr. McDonough pointed out Saint Louis Park was the first City that wanted some sort of protection
ordinance for tenants should a rental facility come under new ownership. From there, other cities
followed suit.
Mr. McDonough explained something unique about Brooklyn Center was defining affordable units
as those under 80 percent area median income (AMI), while every other city has their definition
at 60 percent AMI. 80 percent AMI for an efficiency apartment is $1,468 per month, a one -
bedroom is $1,574, a two -bedroom is $1,889, and so on. That definition includes almost all units
in Brooklyn Center. The majority of cities chose the definition of 60 percent AMI for consistency
as renters may move around or as property owners may operate units in multiple cities.
Mr. McDonough stated there is a section of law in Minnesota, called 504B, with extensive
information defining the roles and responsibilities of landlords and tenants. Some cities don't even
have a rental licensing program. For example, Eagan is just starting a rental license process.
Mr. McDonough stated there has been an assumption for quite some time that a tenant is aware of
the cost they are agreeing to upon signing a lease and when it is due. However, the ordinance in
Brooklyn Center requires the landlord to notify the tenant of their nonpayment at or after the due
date before they are able to start any eviction process. It then takes on average six weeks for the
case to get a court hearing, during which time the landlord won't be receiving any payment. The
issue only compounds on itself from there.
Mr. McDonough noted Minneapolis has a 14-day notification period and St. Louis Park has a
seven-day notice. However, Brooklyn Center is at a 30-day notice. There is a new Statewide
requirement of a 14-day notice since Brooklyn Center created their ordinance. St. Louis Park will
likely eliminate their ordinance all together and just abide by the State's requirements.
Minneapolis' timeline is the same, but they have different reporting requirements. MHA is
working with Minneapolis to get the requirements more in line with the State.
Mr. McDonough explained the States requirements have a lookback period of only three years for
evictions. Also, pending evictions will no longer be public. There is an option for tenants to
request an inspection of the unit bcf'ore moving in, and there is a tenant remedies portion to report
non -working elements such as air conditioning, refrigerators, or elevators. There are provisions
about breaking leases for health issues, required disclosure of any non -optional fees, and 24-hour
notice before entry.
Mr. McDonough added just cause non -renewals can be dangerous for cities to do. For example,
there could be a problem tenant who is causing other tenants to leave, but the reason isn't only the
list of just causes. Brooklyn Ccntcr is the only City to have a just cause non -renewal component.
7/18/23 -9-
Page 98 of 194Page 203 of 299
The only other city that has tried is has had it repealed.
Mr. Falknian stated his company ('eels the same way. It is ultimately for the ease of the renters
because Brooklyn Center has unigric rules that don't apply elsewhere, Soderberg Apartments has
fielded numerous questions and concerns from tenants trying to move into or out of Brooklyn
Center due to the tenant protection ordinance. There are similar issues in Saint Louis Park.
Overall, Soderberg Apartments has great relationships with tenants, and they want to maintain
those relationships.
Mr. Falkman shared examples of problem tenants that caused other tenants to leave and couldn't
be removed due to just cause. The problems couldn't be substantiated such as smoking or creepy
behaviors. An eviction is the last resort for landlords, and non -renewals are a valuable tool to work
together with tenants. The ordinance forces landlords to start the eviction process much sooner
than they would like because of the additional time constraints. They would prefer to work
together with the tenant.
Chair Enger asked where they can find information cited by the presenters. Mr. McDonough
agreed the information is difficult to find and was part of a Bill with other random topics such as
gun control.
Mr. Anderson confirmed he would send out the information on the Bill and how to access it. He
noted he previously sent out I lomcl,inc's summary of the new regulations.
Mr. Falkman added there has been a serious increase in stolen identities in the State, which is
another concern for landlords. Councilmcmber Jerzak agreed there are issues created for the
victim of the stolen identity, the neighboring tenants, and the landlords. It is virtually impossible
to chase down the criminals, and law enforcement doesn't have the capacity to handle such
concerns.
Commissioner Gayflor explained Brooklyn Center is unique to most other cities in Minnesota.
There may need to be certain regulations to protect its diverse community. She asked why this
topic is a priority and how consistency matters.
Mr. McDonough stated consistency is important for both landlords and tenants. Both sides can
expect similar processes for applications, inspections, leases, non -renewals, evictions, and the like.
It is easier to teach and train employees and also makes it easier for tenants to know their rights.
Mr. Falkman noted the discrepancy can cause conflict. He pointed out Brooklyn Center already
has one of the strictest rental licensing programs he has ever encountered. The City has strong
tools in their licensing to support tenants. I. andlords may see it as burdensome, but he sees it as a
benefit as it raises the standard of housing and prevents bad actors from renting units in Brooklyn
Center.
Commissioner Williams asked what the purpose of the presentation is. Chair Enger stated it is
educational and the Commission N•vill hear from tenants and tenant advocacy groups in a fixture
meeting. Then there will be a future discussion to determine if any recommendations should be
7/18/23 -10-
Page 99 of 194Page 204 of 299
made to the Council.
Commissioner Laura Freund pointed out 70 to 77 percent of landlords were not impacted by the
ordinance, according to the survey. She asked what brought up the topic. Mr. Anderson asked for
feedback on the ordinance from the Housing Commission,
Mr. Falkman added many housing providers don't understand the ordinance and aren't sure on
how to implement it.
Chair Enger noted only 27 responses were received from 350 survey requests. The lack of
response may also reflect the lack of understanding by landlords.
Mr. Falkman stated landlords were solicited for feedback during the process. Landlords didn't
even know about the potential ordinance until the second reading. Housing providers in the
community feel as though their opinion is unimportant or not valued, and that may have resulted
in fewer survey responses.
Councilmember Jerzak pointed out parr ol'tlhe process for the ordinance required that there be a
survey of landlords after the ordinance was in place for a while. Since the ordinance process
began, there is a new Mayor and two new Councilmembers. Also, there weren't any State
regulations in place when the ordinance development began. The inspectors have been caught in
the middle of the issue as well, and that is not their role.
Commissioner Williams stated Brooklyn Center isn't trying to be different and may not have an
issue with becoming consistent with the Stalc regulations, There needs to be further discussion
before universal claims are made,
Commissioner Gayflor stated the lacl< o I' survey responses from landlords show that landlords
don't really care.
Chair Enger thanked Mr, Falkman and \/Ir. N/1cDonough for their time. Mr. Falkman noted he left
his card if anyone wanted to speak further,
AUGUST IS 2023 — PRESI.N71 1 T%ON ON TENANT PROTECTION AND INVITE
TENANTSANDADVOC11 CY GROUP
None.
SEPTEMBER 19 2023 — UI_I IIOUS[AfG REPORTPRI:SENTATION
None.
CITY COUNCIL LIAISON REI'OR7'
Chair Enger stated this item will no( he addressed as Council Liaison Councilmember Kris
Lawrence -Anderson was not present.
OTHER B USINESS
Chair Enger showed a documeni that she lound on the City website related to the ULI Housing
7/18/23
Page 100 of 194Page 205 of 299
Report. There are short- and long-term ideas of things to implement. She suggested there be a
presentation on the topic and why the document was created. Mr. Anderson stated he sent it out
previously to the Commission, but he cam rescnd it. The presentation is scheduled for September.
Commissioner Best-Deyoe stated the housing market in Brooklyn Center is slowing down.
Chair Enger added there is a Council agreement that the Councilmembers follow during their
meetings. She explained she put together a similar document that could ensure the Housing
Commission is working as a collective and all parties feel equal. She provided a copy of the
document to the present Commissioners. Mr. Anderson proposed the item be a discussion topic at
a future meeting.
Commissioner Freund asked where Chair Eiigcr found the methodology. Chair Enger stated she
learned it from the Council and modeled it iI'm, the Council norms.
Councilmember Jerzak noted Commissions tend to have a set of bylaws or code of conduct that
the Staff Liaison could provide to the Commission. Mr. Anderson stated the bylaws were provided
to each member of the Commission, but review of the bylaws can be added to the agenda.
ADJOURNMENT
There was a motion by Commissioner Gaynor and seconded by Commissioner Donnelly to
adjourn the meeting. The motion passed. 'I'Iic Brooklyn Center Housing Commission adjourned
at 9:08 mm.
7/18/23 -12-
Page 101 of 194Page 206 of 299
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND STATE OF MINNESOTA
REGULAR SESSION
SEPTEMBER 19, 2023
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission was called to order by Chairperson Enger at 7:42 p.m.
MEETINGATTENDEES
Chair Gretchen Enger
Vice Chair Michael Donnelly (Absent)
Commissioner Lori Best-Deyoe
Commissioner Laura Freund
Commissioner Jerry Gayflor
Commissioner Elizabeth Riel (Excused)
Commissioner Florence Williams (Absent)
City Staff present: Community Development Director and Staff Liaison Jesse Anderson and
Associate Planner Krystin Eldrige.
Also present: Brian Bosire, ACER; Samuel Spaid, HOME Line; Jessica Szuminski, Housing
Justice Center; Pastor Paul Bushey; Trent Grammer, ACER; Crest Resident Khadija Hardin; New
Crest Resident;
WELCOME AND INTRODUCTION The
Commissioners and Staff introduced themselves. APPROVAL
OFAGENDA Chair
Enger suggested amending the agenda to reflect the accurate date of the October Housing Commission
meeting. There was no objection by the rest of the Commission. There
was a motion by Commissioner Freund and seconded by Commissioner Gayflor to approve the
agenda as amended. The motion passed. APPROVAL
OFMINUTES There
was a motion by Commissioner Freund and seconded by Commissioner Best-Deyoe to approve
the minutes for the July 18, 2023 Housing Commission meeting as submitted. The motion passed.
PRESENTATION
ON TENANT PROTECTION HISTORY AND FEEDBACIC FROM TENANTSAND
ADVOCACY GROUPS 9/
19/23 -1-
Page 102 of 194Page 207 of 299
Community Development Director and Staff Liaison Jesse Anderson gave an overview of the
history of tenant protection in the City. The most recent ordinances require a just cause for non -
renewal of a lease and create a 30-day notification requirement for eviction.
Mr. Anderson stated the City first considered tenant protection ordinances in 2018 with a 90-day
notice of lease changes. In 2021, a Fair Housing Policy was adopted. Following the eviction
moratorium and a legal case in St. Paul regarding tenant protection rights, the City began working
on the just cause non -renewal and eviction notification timeline. The Housing Commission
submitted the proposals for the two items in November 2021. Following that, there were some
public hearings and discussions where the Council heard from tenants and landlords. There was
some discussion regarding alternative timelines to the 30-day eviction notification and other
compromise attempts.
Mr. Anderson noted there has been some changes in State legislation that impact tenant protection
rights, so the Council requested the Housing Commission review the tenant protection ordinances.
BRIAN BOSIRE —ACER INC
Brian Bosire thanked the Commission for their service to the City. He introduced himself as an
organizer and Brooklyn Center resident. He explained social justice includes housing justice. The
process for eviction and just cause non -renewals need to include equitable outcomes for both
parties.
Mr. Bosire pointed out many tenants and landlords are still unaware of the new regulations
surrounding non -renewals. The City could be doing more in terms of community education on
housing rights. As he has educated residents about the ordinances, the tenants are consistently
excited.
Mr. Bosire noted some people have concerns about differences in regulations between various
cities. However, Brooklyn Center has the opportunity to continue to lead in the Twin Cities.
Tenants still cite lack of accountability for landlords. He encouraged the Housing Commission to
uphold the tenant protection rights previously based by the Commission.
Chair Enger asked which method Mr. Bosire recommends to connect with more people in the
community. Mr. Bosire stated the communication channels have to include multiple strategies to
meet people where they are at. Some examples include social media, radio, and television.
Communication can also be a collaboration with local community organizations, such as ACER.
SAMUEL SPAID — HOME LINE
Samuel Spaid introduced himself as an attorney with HOME Line, which is a statewide
organization that provides free legal advice to tenants among other things. It has been a little over
a year since the ordinances were passed, and HOME Line continues to support them. The
ordinances allow people to stay in their homes and promote stability. The eviction timeline
requirements allow tenants to seek out legal advice or learn about their options. The protection
offered in the just cause requirement for non -renewals is vital to protecting tenants from retaliation
or other biased non -renewals.
9/19/23 -2-
Page 103 of 194Page 208 of 299
Mr. Spaid noted several landlords cited Brooklyn Center as having the most severe tenant
protection ordinances in the State. The landlords with that belief don't seem to support tenant
protections or promoting safe and stable housing. Brooklyn Center should continue to promote
safe and stable housing.
Mr. Spaid added Brooklyn Center's ordinances are more detailed than the State's upcoming
legislation. The legislation also allows for cities to pass their own ordinances to further protect
tenants.
OTHER GROUPS
Trent Grammer, graduate student in public policy partnering with ACER, explained he has been
looking at statewide eviction data. There are significant health and educational impacts on people
who have experienced evictions. Some research has been done on just cause non -renewals in
California, which has shown positive impacts of such policies.
Mr. Grammer provided a handout to the Commissioners. The handout showed a summary of
eviction trends over time. Causal inference is difficult, but the information is still descriptive of
the experiences in Brooklyn Center.
Mr. Grammer explained Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Park are very similar demographically.
The two cities had very similar eviction rates up until the end of February 2022. Since then, the
Brooklyn Park eviction rates increased while Brooklyn Center's remained flat. Since the time the
tenant protection ordinances were adopted, there was a decrease of 2.9 weekly evictions per 10,000
renter -occupied housing units.
Mr. Grammer noted the Statewide context for the timing was following the cessation of the eviction
moratorium. Most places have had an increase in evictions after the moratorium, but Brooklyn
Center's flat statistic is a good indicator that the tenant protection ordinances have been successful.
Pastor Paul Bushey agreed a number of local organizations are more than willing to provide
educational information regarding tenant protections. He explained he lived in The Crest
Apartments for more than a decade. The building's long-term renovation during that time had
dire impacts on residents, particularly for disabled tenants. For 35 days, one tenant was told he
was unable to use the kitchen nor unpack his things during his apartment's renovation. Brooklyn
Center should consider additional tenant protection ordinances.
Kadija Hardin noted her agreement with the comments made by Pastor Bushey. In her eight years
living at The Crest, there have been eight different managers. She experienced similar issues
during apartment renovations as cited by Pastor Bushey. After 7.5 years in one unit, she was forced
to move to a new unit. She stayed in her unit for six weeks unable to use her kitchen.
Ms. Hardin explained she was the last of the tenants who received reimbursement for food
reimbursements, but all tenants were made the same promises. Hotels were provided for two of
the 13 floors of the building, and two floors of the building along with five or so residents on her
floor received any financial compensation. Later on, management claimed the check recipients
where committing a form of fraud.
9/19/23 -3
Page 104 of 194Page 209 of 299
Ms. Hardin stated The Crest Apartment recently had an afternoon shooting in the parking lot.
Nothing was done by management. She stated she doesn't feel safe in her apartment anymore, and
management is not doing anything to respond to safety concerns.
Ms. Hardin added many tenants are receiving notices that their rent is unpaid, although that is not
the case. She has approached management multiple times regarding the issue. She has been fined
for random things without explanation or just cause.
Jessica Szuminski, attorney with the Housing Justice Center, explained her organization provides
advocacy and legal support all over the State. They are attempting to promote similar ordinances
in other jurisdictions. The ordinances make the rental process more predictable and creates time
for tenants to seek out assistance when faced with an eviction. The ordinances also empower
tenants to advocate for better living environments without fear of retaliation. Additionally, long-
term housing stability is made available to minority groups by addressing long-standing systemic
issues. Since tenants are unable to negotiate leases, it is vital that entities such as Housing
Commissions and City Councils advocate for renters in their communities.
Ms. Szuminski pointed out the statistics related to decreased evictions are compelling. However,
they don't begin to address undocumented forms of evictions. There is a low vacancy rate in the
City, so when tenants are displaced, it makes it even harder for them to stay in their home
communities. There is also a lack of affordable housing available throughout the Metro. The 30-
day eviction notice requirement allows the tenant to look into legal options, financial support
opportunities, or find another place to live. Plus, alternatives to evictions save the time and money
for both tenants and landlords. On behalf of the Housing Justice Center, she urged the Commission
to preserve the ordinances.
New Crest Resident explained she is newer to the Brooklyn Center community and lives in the
new Crest Apartments. The advertisements and promises made about the building and its
amenities are false. Even though the building was new, the elevator was broken the day she moved
in and has since been broken multiple times. New Crest Resident noted she is disabled, and it is
not physically possible for her to use stairs. Management never shows up to work on time, and
some days no one shows up. The fobs are inconsistent, and she has yet to be able to access the
promised heated garage. Also, the exercise room is used for nothing but storage.
New Crest Resident noted the main manager is difficult to work with and not a people -person. She
doesn't answer questions asked by tenants. New Crest Resident explained she needs a help bar
near the toilet and in the shower. Her disability advocate did the paperwork with the main manager
in July 2023. The manager claimed this never happened. New Crest Resident and her advocate's
supervisor met the manager in person. The manager finally acknowledged that she made a
mistake, but there are still no help bars installed.
New Crest Resident added there is a security guard that is there only to protect the staff from
tenants. The main level has random people in it at all hours, which is unsafe. She also shared
experiences with a previous apartment in Minneapolis.
9/19/23 -4-
Page 105 of 194Page 210 of 299
Chair Enger thanked the commenters for sharing their experiences with the Commission.
NEW NEIGHBOR BAGS
Mr. Anderson stated some of the new neighbor bags are ready. He offered for the Commissioners
to grab the bags divided by neighborhoods to distribute on their own. Also, some badges are ready.
Chair Enger suggested wearing Brooklyn Center shirts to have more success with delivering bags.
Mr. Anderson stated he would work with Communications Staff to see if they have available t-
shirts.
FOLLOW UP
OCTOBER 17, 2023 — TYPE IV REPEAT RENTALS, TENANT PROTECTION_FOLLOW UP
Staff Liaison Jesse Anderson explained the meeting will go into more depth on Type IV repeat
licenses, and that will be combined with other license categories for the Council to consider. Also,
there will be an opportunity to discuss the commentary fiom the present meeting.
Mr. Anderson added the Opportunity Site needs some discussion. The Council has developed an
infrastructure guide for the redevelopment, and there is a Master Plan for the site. The planning
could be reviewed by the Housing Commission. Alternatively, there could be discussion about
another topic of interest for the Commission. For example, there could be a presentation on the
new tenant protection legislation beginning in 2024.
Chair Enger stated she would like a presentation on new tenant protection legislation beginning in
2024. Mr. Anderson stated HOME Line has good resources on the topic, and they could invite Mr.
Spaid to present at that time. There are some strong additions like a required eviction timeline.
However, there is nothing about a just cause non -renewal.
Mr. Anderson added previous Commissions have considered repercussions for landlords that
provide false maintenance charges or deny renters based on their income.
NOVEMBER 21, 2023 — THANKSGIVING BREAK? MEET WEEK BEFORE OR AFTER
Mr. Anderson stated the date of the meeting also needs to be discussed because of its proximity to
Thanksgiving.
Chair Enger stated she was available on November 21, 2023 for a meeting. There was a consensus
by the Commission to keep the meeting on November 21, 2023.
Chair Enger asked what management company handles The Crest Apartments. Mr. Anderson
stated Aeon manages The Crest, and they tend to focus on low-income housing. It's a nonprofit,
mission -based organization. Staff has worked with the Fire Department regarding the broken
elevator. The elevator cable broke sooner than the organization had budgeted for. Since they are
a non-profit organization, they have been raising funds to replace the cable.
Mr. Anderson added the nonprofit grew immensely in a short amount of time. The goal was to
prevent developers from turning the buildings into market -value units and to preserve affordable
housing. They have good intentions, but they grew too quickly.
9/19/23 -5-
Page 106 of 194Page 211 of 299
ADJOURNMENT
There was a motion by Chair Enger and seconded by Commissioner Best Defoe to adjourn the
meeting. The motion passed. The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission adjourned at 9:02 p.m.
9/19/23 -6-
Page 107 of 194Page 212 of 299
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND STATE OF MINNESOTA
REGULAR SESSION
OCTOBER 17, 2023
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission was called to order by Chairperson Enger at 7:10 p.m.
MEETINGATTENDEES
Chair Gretchen Enger
Commissioner Lori Best-Deyoe
Commissioner Laura Freund
Commissioner Jerry Gayflor
Commissioner Florence Williams
Vice Chair Michael Donnelly was absent and excused.
Commissioner Elizabeth Riel was absent.
City Staff present: Community Development Director and Staff Liaison Jesse Anderson,
Associate Planner Krystin Eldridge, and City Council Liaison Kris Lawrence -Anderson.
Also present: None.
APPROVAL OFAGENDA
There was a motion by Commissioner Best-Deyoe and seconded by Commissioner Freund to
approve the agenda as submitted. The motion passed.
APPROVAL OFMINUTES: SEPTEMBER 19, 2023
There was a motion by Commissioner Best-Deyoe and seconded by Commissioner Freund to
approve the minutes of the September 19, 2023 meeting as submitted. The motion passed.
LANDLORD/TENANT ORDINANCE FEEDBACK DISCUSSION
Commissioner Enger summarized the general discussion of the feedback heard from the
landlords and tenants regarding the Tenant Protection Ordinance. She mentioned comments
made by Marty and Eric from the Landlord Housing Commission Meeting; the commenters
expressed the difficulty evict troubled tenants with the 30-day notification requirement in place.
They added the Ordinance presents burdens to the landlords to manage the different expectations
throughout different jurisdictions. Overall, the preference of the landlords is for the City to adopt
an Ordinance in -line with the State's recommended 14-day pre -eviction notice timeline.
Commissioners expressed confusion about the timeline and process around pre -eviction and
actual eviction notices. There were questions about how much time a tenant has when an actual
10/17/23 -1- DRAFT
Page 108 of 194Page 213 of 299
eviction notice is received by a tenant.
Chair Enger also relayed a summary of feedback from the session with Crest Residents, Tenant
Advocates, and HOME Line. During the meeting, Samuel Spaid, Housing Attorney with HOME
Line pointed out how rates of eviction climbed significantly in other cities compared to Brooklyn
Center.
The Commissioners also asked questions about the meaning of just cause non -renewals.
Commissioner Williams explained she works within the shelter system. She stated that many of
the shelter habitants list non -renewal of their lease as their reason for needing shelter.
Commissioner Williams expressed her support of the 30-day ordinance.
City Council Liaison Kris Lawrence -Anderson explained that the undue burden the City places
on landlords to evict tenants. She noted if landlords cannot evict problematic tenants, then they
may not want to continue supporting the Brooklyn Center rental market. City Council Liaison
Lawrence -Anderson stated she supports the option for a 14-day ordinance within Brooklyn
Center to promote a business -friendly environment and avoid the burden of vacant buildings in
the City.
City Council Liaison Kris Lawrence -Anderson noted the hardship of balancing business owner
interests and renter interests. There is a wholistic view that needs to be considered when the
evaluating City dynamics. Property taxes should also be considered when evaluating these
ordinances as well.
Commissioner Williams added she is concerned about property taxes as well. She stated she is
experiencing the same increases and would prefer to have lower taxes. However, she would
prefer tax dollars be used to support the community members rather than landlords.
Commissioner Gayflor stated he is unsure about which eviction timeline he supports due to the
lack of data for how each timeline impacts renters.
Community Development Director and Staff Liaison Jesse Anderson explained the data may be
unavailable as it is not information renters nor landlords report.
Commissioner Freund noted she is generally in support of the 30-day timeline ordinance because
of the power imbalance between renter and landlord. The Commission should consider the
social dynamics of discrimination within the system when drafting the Ordinance. She added she
would support even stricter tenant protections on landlords.
Commissioner Williams and Chair Enger both consider equitable outcomes for both Landlord
and Tenant regarding the Tenant Protections Ordinance and
Commissioners Williams, Gayflor, and Freund expressed their support of upholding the current
Ordinance.
10/17/23 -2- DRAFT
Page 109 of 194Page 214 of 299
There was a motion by Chair Enger and seconded by Commissioner Williams to recommend the
City Council uphold the current Tenant Protection Ordinance. The motion passed.
7100 BROOKLYNBOULEVARD — HOUSING PRESENTATION
Associate Planner Krystin Eldridge presented the Planning Commission application proposed for
7100 Brooklyn Boulevard.
7100 Brooklyn Boulevard will be a 17-unit multi -family residential property. It would be a
conversion from office to residential. It was originally a credit union. In its location to the North
Brooklyn Center United Methodist Church and to the south are office condos. To the West are
single family residentials and a stormwater pond directly to the West. Planning Commission was
not in support of the project and neighbors surrounding the property were not in support either.
Chair Enger asked about feedback from surrounding properties and the minutes and recording
fiom the meeting. She also asked how long the building was vacant and what the prior use was.
Ms. Eldridge explained the other business tenants would prefer the business district be
maintained and expressed concern about increased traffic. Additionally, the church at the north
end of the development requested installation of a fence along the property line. Developers
were receptive to installing a fence and noted a fence was already proposed for the project. A
simple extension of the fence would appease the church's request.
Commissioner Freund and Williams noted their support of more housing and diversity of
housing choice within Brooklyn Center.
FOLLOW UP
NOVEMBER 21, 2023 —REPEAT RENTALS —TYPE IV
Staff Liaison Jesse Anderson stated the following Housing Commission meeting would address
repeat rentals.
ADJOURNMENT
There was a motion by Commissioner Williams and seconded by Commissioner Best-Deyoe to
adjourn the meeting. The motion passed. The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission adjourned
at 8:45_ p.m.
Chair Enger
10/17/23 -3- DRAFT
Page 110 of 194Page 215 of 299
C ouncil R egular M eeng
DAT E:5/22/2023
TO :C ity C ouncil
F R O M:D r. Reggie Edwards, City Manager
T H R O U G H :J esse A nders on, I nterim C ommunity D evelopment D irector
BY:X iong Thao, H ous ing and Community S tandards S upervis or
S U B J E C T:Tenant P rotec0ons U pdate
Requested Council A con:
- S taff is providing an update on the tenant protecon ordinance. No council acon is required.
B ackground:
I n 2018-2019 the City first looked at adop0ng a tenant protec0on ordinance regarding the s ale of an
affordable housing property. This ordinance provided no0ce to tenants of the sale and any material lease
changes, including rent rate changes. I n the ordinance if the ow ner did not provide sufficient no0ce per the
ordinance the tenant w ould then be allowed to receive re-loca0on as s is tance. This ordinance w as adopted
in January of 2019.
I n further conversa0on with C ity C ouncil on hous ing policies , the council w anted S taff to look at addi0onal
tenant protec0ons beginning the early part of 2021. S taff received direc0on from City Council to look at
tenant protec0ons that the C ity can adopt to give tenants /residents addi0onal protec0ons in addi0on to the
S tate s tatutes .
S taff review ed the adopted tenant protec0ons by the C ity of S t. Paul and then met with C ity of S t. Paul staff
to dis cus s the adopted tenant protec0ons . The adopted tenant protec0ons by City of S t. Paul w as
challenged in court and City of S t. Paul ul0mately rescinded the ordinance. D ue to the lawsuit agains t the
City of S t. Paul, C ity of Brooklyn C enter decided to only bring forward a few tenant protec0ons .
The C ity had s everal convers a0ons w ith landlords /property owners, tenants , tenant rights organiz a0ons ,
and M N M ul0-H ous ing A ssocia0on to discuss the proposed tenant protec0ons in hopes of bringing
together a compromis e. D uring the mee0ngs, s taff w as able to hear both s ides expres s their concerns for
adop0ng the ordinance as is , the proposed changes to the ordinance, and the City doing nothing to further
tenant protec0ons in the City.
The propos ed ordinance w as brought to the H ousing Commission on O ctober 19, 2021. The H ousing
Commission heard from hous ing advocacy groups and numerous tenants and w as as ked to approve the
proposed ordinance. The H ous ing C ommis s ion unanimous ly approved recommenda0on to approve the
proposed ordinance.
The propos ed ordinance w as brought to C ity C ouncil on November 8, 2021 for a discussion and first
reading. D uring the council mee0ng, staff presented the tw o proposed tenant protec0ons.
· P re-Evic0on F iling No0ce: This w ould provide tenants a 30 no0ce that the property ow ner intends to
Page 111 of 194Page 216 of 299
file an evic0on for non-payment of rent or a material breach of leas e.
· J us t Caus e Non-Renew al: This w ould prevent a property owner or manager from non-renewing an
exis0ng tenant ’s leas e without jus t cause and provide tenants a reas on as to why their leas e was being non-
renewed by the property ow ner.
o Non-payment of rent
o M aterial non-compliance of the leas e
o Refus e to renew a lease agreement
o O ccupancy by the property owner or family member
o Building demolishing or convers ion
o Rehabilita0on or renova0on
o C omplying with a G overnment order to vacate
o O ccupancy condi0oned on employment
· Waiver is not allowed by a tenant to w aive their rights under the new ordinance
· P rivate enforcement – A tenant or former tenant of an affordable housing harmed by an ow ner in
viola0on of this ordinance may bring an ac0on against the ow ner in dis trict court
I t was brought back to City Council at the D ecember 13, 2021 mee0ng for a public hearing and approve a
res olu0on adop0ng the second reading and to publish a s ummary of the ordinance. S taff also provided
addi0onal informa0on on the current housing s tatus in Brooklyn C enter and explained each of the new
proposed tenant protec0on in further detail. There w as public comment from both property ow ners ,
tenants , and tenant advocacy organiza0ons. The discussion among Council members agreed to con0nue
the tenant protec0ons at the next council mee0ng in January 2022.
D uring the City Council mee0ng on February 14, 2022 the Council con0nued the tenant protec0on
conversa0on there w ere three proposed changes. F irst, an added provision that w ould require property
ow ners to track and report to the City any non-renewals of leas es and the reas on for nonrenew al. The
s econd change w ould reduce the pre-evic0on no0ce from 30 days to 14 days. The third change would be to
add a provis ion that would allow property ow ners to give a 90 day no0ce for non-renew al without giving a
reason.
P ublic comment w as heard and C ouncil Members had a lengthy dis cus s ion about the proposed changes.
The C ouncil w anted to hear from the H ousing Commission about the propos ed changes s o it w as as ked that
the agenda be brought back to the February 28, 2022 council mee0ng.
D uring the Council mee0ng on February 28, 2022 staff presented and reported the February 15, 2022
H ousing Commission mee0ng dis cus s ion about the three propos ed changes . The H ousing Commission
preferred a 30 day pre-evic0on no0ce but w ould cons ider a 14 day no0ce as a good compromise. The
Commission was s plit on the 90 day non-renew al no0ce without jus t cause and finally the Commission
agreed that the property owners should be required to document and report non-renewals .
A gain, public comment w as heard regarding the propos ed changes . C ouncil had an ac0ve dis cus s ion about
the changes and voted to approve Res olu0on No. 2022-30 which included the 30 day pre-evic0on no0ce,
just caus e non-renew al, and tracking and repor0ng of non-renew als.
S taff s end out a s urvey to all property owners and managers on A pril 5, 2023. The s urvey w as sent via
G ov D elivery and emailed to all property ow ners approximately 350 emails. The G ov D elivery and email
w ent out to both single family and mul0-property owners/managers . A nother email w as sent on A pril 24,
2023 to the large property owners /managers in the C ity. A total of 27 res pons es were received.
The survey was nine ques 0ons and asked s pecifically about evic0ons and non-renewals . Res pons es were
Page 112 of 194Page 217 of 299
aggregated s o no individual property ow ner could be iden0fied. A summary of the survey results:
1. I s your property cons idered an affordable housing unit?
a. 95% stated their property is considered affordable housing
2. H ow many evic0ons did you file in 2022?
a. 23 owners filed 0-5 evic0on; 2 filed 6-10 evic0ons ; and 2 filed 30-60 evic0ons
3. W hat w ere the evic0on filings for?
a. 11 filed for non-payment of rent; 3 s kipped/abandonment; 2 leas e viola0on
4. O n average, how many days /weeks did you wait for an evic0on hearing with H ennepin County courts?
a. 13 did not file an evic0on; 6 waited 5-8 weeks ; 5 waited 0-4 weeks ; and 3 w aited 9+
weeks
5. W hat w ere the res ults of the evic0on hearing?
a. 10 was is s ued a w rit of recovery; 5 w as mutual termina0on; and 3 res ulted in media0on
6. H ow many lease non-renewals did you issue in 2022?
a. 18 issued 0-5 non-renewals ; 4 issued 6-10; 1 issued 11-15; and 2 is s ued 15 or more
non-renew als
7. W hat w ere the leas e non-renew als for?
a. 61.5% w ere for exces s ive late rent; 5 for material lease viola0ons; and 3 for mutual
termina0on
8. D id the tenant protec0on no0ce of evic0on impact your decis ion to file an evic0on?
a. 77% stated that the tenant protec0on ordinance did not impact their decis ion to is s ue an
evic0on.
9. D id the tenant protec0on of leas e non-renew al impact your decis ion to is s ue a leas e non-renew al?
a. 70% stated that the tenant protec0on ordinance did not impact their decis ion to is s ue a
non-renew al
B udget I ssues:
There are no budget is s ues to consider.
I nclusive C ommunity Engagement:
A nracist/Equity Policy Effect:
S trategic Priories and Values:
Resident Economic S tability, S afe, S ecure, S table C ommunity
AT TA C H M E N TS :
D escrip0on U pload D ate Type
A pril 2023 Tenant protec0on survey results 5/2/2023 Cover Memo
02-28-2022 C ouncil Memo 5/16/2023 Backup M aterial
Page 113 of 194Page 218 of 299
Tenant Protection Survey
1 / 9
92.59% 25
7.41% 2
Q1 If your unit rents at or below the rates in the chart, your property is
considered affordable. Is your property considered an affordable housing
unit?
Answered: 27 Skipped: 0
TOTAL 27
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Yes
No
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
Page 114 of 194Page 219 of 299
Tenant Protection Survey
2 / 9
Q2 How many evictions did you file in 2022?
Answered: 27 Skipped: 0
# RESPONSES DATE
1NONE 4/25/2023 3:32 PM
2Zero 4/24/2023 4:13 PM
30 4/16/2023 4:15 PM
45 4/12/2023 11:41 AM
51 4/11/2023 11:18 PM
6None 4/11/2023 11:15 AM
70 4/11/2023 10:27 AM
80 4/11/2023 9:33 AM
99 4/10/2023 4:39 PM
10 none 4/10/2023 3:24 PM
11 2-3 4/10/2023 2:24 PM
12 0 4/10/2023 11:17 AM
13 two 4/10/2023 10:58 AM
14 30 4/10/2023 8:03 AM
15 60 4/9/2023 11:01 PM
16 none 4/8/2023 2:44 PM
17 0 4/8/2023 1:46 PM
18 0 4/8/2023 11:43 AM
19 5 4/8/2023 7:37 AM
20 0 4/8/2023 1:38 AM
21 2 4/7/2023 8:35 PM
22 0 4/7/2023 7:29 PM
23 0 4/7/2023 7:01 PM
24 5 4/7/2023 4:55 PM
25 0 4/7/2023 4:17 PM
26 6 4/7/2023 3:58 PM
27 0 4/7/2023 3:58 PM
Page 115 of 194Page 220 of 299
Tenant Protection Survey
3 / 9
84.62% 11
7.69% 1
23.08% 3
15.38% 2
Q3 What were the evictions filings for?
Answered: 13 Skipped: 14
Total Respondents: 13
# IF YOU CHECKED LEASE VIOLATION PLEASE STATE THE REASON BELOW DATE
1 under the just cause eviction it is nearly impossible to evict for lease violation, how do I prove
somone is dealing drugs?
4/24/2023 4:13 PM
2 Various 4/9/2023 11:01 PM
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Non-payment of
rent
Lease violation
Skip/Abandonmen
t
If you checked
lease violat...
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Non-payment of rent
Lease violation
Skip/Abandonment
If you checked lease violation please state the reason below
Page 116 of 194Page 221 of 299
Tenant Protection Survey
4 / 9
Q4 On average, how many days/weeks did you wait for an eviction hearing
with Hennepin County courts?
Answered: 27 Skipped: 0
# RESPONSES DATE
1 IT TOOK 3-4 MONTHS FOR OUR OTHER PROPERTIES 4/25/2023 3:32 PM
2 6 weeks ( evictions were at other properties ) 4/24/2023 4:13 PM
3N/A 4/16/2023 4:15 PM
44 weeks 4/12/2023 11:41 AM
54 4/11/2023 11:18 PM
6N/A 4/11/2023 11:15 AM
7 no one was evicted 4/11/2023 10:27 AM
80 4/11/2023 9:33 AM
945 days 4/10/2023 4:39 PM
10 0 4/10/2023 3:24 PM
11 3-4weeks 4/10/2023 2:24 PM
12 N/A 4/10/2023 11:17 AM
13 I waited a few months.4/10/2023 10:58 AM
14 Approximately 7 weeks 4/10/2023 8:03 AM
15 8 weeks 4/9/2023 11:01 PM
16 0 4/8/2023 2:44 PM
17 N/A 4/8/2023 1:46 PM
18 0 4/8/2023 11:43 AM
19 6 4/8/2023 7:37 AM
20 n/a 4/8/2023 1:38 AM
21 90 days 4/7/2023 8:35 PM
22 n/a 4/7/2023 7:29 PM
23 0 4/7/2023 7:01 PM
24 12-14 4/7/2023 4:55 PM
25 15 days 4/7/2023 4:17 PM
26 8 weeks 4/7/2023 3:58 PM
27 n/a 4/7/2023 3:58 PM
Page 117 of 194Page 222 of 299
Tenant Protection Survey
5 / 9
100.00% 10
30.00% 3
50.00% 5
Q5 What were the results of the eviction hearing?
Answered: 10 Skipped: 17
Total Respondents: 10
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Writ of
recover was...
Recommend
mediation
Mutual lease
termination...
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Writ of recover was issued
Recommend mediation
Mutual lease termination approved by the Court
Page 118 of 194Page 223 of 299
Tenant Protection Survey
6 / 9
Q6 How many lease non-renewals did you issue in 2022?
Answered: 27 Skipped: 0
# RESPONSES DATE
18 4/25/2023 3:32 PM
2 you cant do this ???4/24/2023 4:13 PM
3N A 4/16/2023 4:15 PM
415 4/12/2023 11:41 AM
51 4/11/2023 11:18 PM
6N/A 4/11/2023 11:15 AM
70 4/11/2023 10:27 AM
80 4/11/2023 9:33 AM
911 4/10/2023 4:39 PM
10 0 4/10/2023 3:24 PM
11 0 4/10/2023 2:24 PM
12 N/A 4/10/2023 11:17 AM
13 two 4/10/2023 10:58 AM
14 Approximately 2 dozen 4/10/2023 8:03 AM
15 10 4/9/2023 11:01 PM
16 none 4/8/2023 2:44 PM
17 0 4/8/2023 1:46 PM
18 0 4/8/2023 11:43 AM
19 7 4/8/2023 7:37 AM
20 n/a 4/8/2023 1:38 AM
21 6 4/7/2023 8:35 PM
22 2 4/7/2023 7:29 PM
23 0 4/7/2023 7:01 PM
24 2 4/7/2023 4:55 PM
25 2 4/7/2023 4:17 PM
26 0 4/7/2023 3:58 PM
27 0 4/7/2023 3:58 PM
Page 119 of 194Page 224 of 299
Tenant Protection Survey
7 / 9
61.54% 8
38.46% 5
23.08% 3
38.46% 5
Q7 What were the lease non-renewals for?
Answered: 13 Skipped: 14
Total Respondents: 13
# IF YOU CHECKED MATERIAL LEASE VIOLATION PLEASE STATE THE REASON. DATE
1 UNSANITARY LIVING CONDITIONS, DID NOT COOPERATE WITH PEST CONTROL,
PROPERTY DAMAGE,. SETTING OFF BOTTLE ROCKETS INSIDE BUILDING HALLWAYS
4/25/2023 3:32 PM
2 Many reasons, mostly smoking violations and not payment of rent 4/12/2023 11:41 AM
3N/A 4/10/2023 2:24 PM
4n/a 4/8/2023 1:38 AM
5 Excessive damage to property 4/7/2023 8:35 PM
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Excessive late
rent payment
Material lease
violation
Mutual
agreement
If you checked
material lea...
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Excessive late rent payment
Material lease violation
Mutual agreement
If you checked material lease violation please state the reason.
Page 120 of 194Page 225 of 299
Tenant Protection Survey
8 / 9
22.22% 6
77.78% 21
Q8 Did the tenant protection notice of eviction impact your decision to file
an eviction?
Answered: 27 Skipped: 0
TOTAL 27
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Yes
No
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
Page 121 of 194Page 226 of 299
Tenant Protection Survey
9 / 9
29.63% 8
70.37% 19
Q9 Did the tenant protection notice of lease non-renewal impact your
decision to issue a lease non-renewal?
Answered: 27 Skipped: 0
TOTAL 27
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Yes
No
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
Page 122 of 194Page 227 of 299
C ouncil R egular M eeng
DAT E:2/28/2022
TO :C ity C ouncil
F R O M:D r. Reggie Edwards, City Manager
T H R O U G H :M eg Beekman, C ommunity D evelopment D irector
BY:J esse A nders on, D eputy D irector of Community D evelopment
S U B J E C T:A n O rdinance A mending C hapter 12 of the City Code of O rdinance Regarding Tenant
P rotec0ons and A pprove a Resolu0on to allow a S ummary P ublica0on of the O rdinance
Requested Council A con:
- Motion to approve a resolution approvi ng of the second reading of an ordi nance amendi ng Chapter
12 of the Ci ty of ordi nances regardi ng tenant protecti on and summary publ icati on of the ordi nance.
B ackground:
Overview
B ased on f eedback from the City Council, staf f have prepared and attached a draft resolution and
ordinance that includes the 30 day pre-eviction notice and removes the 90 day notice of non-
renewal without just cause provision.
February 15, 2022 – T he Housing C ommission met and discussed the different version of the ordinance. T hey
passed a mo0on sta0ng the following:
A tenant protec0on ordinance is needed.
The commission would prefer a 30 day pre-evic0on no0ce, but w ould cons ider the 14 day 0me
period to be a good compromis e.
The commission was s plit on w hether or not to include the 90 day non-renewal no0ce w ithout
just caus e.
(3 Commissioners preferred to remove the 90 day non-renew al without jus t cause and 2
Commissioners preferred to keep it in the ordinance)
The commission agrees that the property ow ners /managers should be required to document
and report non-renewals .
The H ous ing C ommis s ion passed the following mo0on:
C ommissioner H ester moved and C ommissioner Oman seconded to provide feedback to the C ity C ouncil
that the H ousing C ommission agrees there is a need for a tenant protecon ordinance, favors the 30-day
pre-evicon noficaon but can compromise with the 14-day pre-evicon noficaon, is split on the just
cause non-renewal provision, and supports the data collecon provision. The moon passed.
February 14, 2022 - T he C ity C ouncil met and discussed a revised version of the ordinance. T he C ouncil
suggested addi0onal feedback from the Housing C ommission and it was requested that staff return with an
ordinance including the 30 day pre-evic0on no0ce and no 90 day renewal without just cause.
January 19, 2022 – An email went out to the property owners/managers who a<ended the public hearing or A R M
Mee0ng, tenant Advocacy groups, and the Housing C ommission with a copy of the revised ordinance.
Page 123 of 194Page 228 of 299
January 12, 2022 - J anuary 12, 2022 staff met with rental owners, property managers, and tenant advocacy
representa0ves. Staff met with rental owners, property managers, and tenant advocacy representa0ves.
Generally, the majority of landlords spoke against the ordinance as a whole and would prefer that no version of
an ordinance be adopted. T he suggested compromise by landlords was to reduce the no0ce period for the pre-
evic0on no0ce to 7 or 5 days and to adopt a renewal no0ce period rather than a just cause non-renewal.
January 6, 2022 - staff met with approximately 20 landlords at the A R M Mee0ng and discussed the proposed
ordinance. T he feedback from landlords was consistent with the feedback provided at the public hearing.
December 13, 2021 - T he C ity C ouncil met and held the public hearing on this item. A@er the public hearing and
C ouncil discussion, the vote on the second reading of the ordinance was delayed un0l J anuary 24, 2022.
N ovember 8, 2021 – T he C ity C ouncil met and approved the first reading and called for a public hearing for
D ecember 13, 2022.
October 19, 2021 - T he B rooklyn C enter Housing C ommission meet on and discussed the proposed tenant
protec0on ordinance. T he Housing C ommission unanimously approved a recommenda0on to approve the
proposed ordinance.
Feedback from the C ity of M inneapolis
City s taff received the follow ing feedback from the City of Minneapolis regarding their tenant protec0on
ordinance.
H as the city received complaints from residents about not receiving the no0ce?
We have not yet received a complaint regarding this ordinance yet
H ow does the city handle complaints ?
Enforcement is on a complaint bas is only right now
We rely on complaints coming from renters through our 311 call center, a case is created and
s ent to myself and a team of liais ons
We have a group of Renter H ous ing L iaisons who will do research and follow up to as k for
documenta0on and other suppor0ng evidence to confirm there was a viola0on.
I f a viola0on is found we have a proces s for issuing a viola0on no0ce and possible cita0ons –
the cita0ons are adminis tra0ve and can be put on a property as a special as s essment if not paid
by the end of the year
H ow has the courts help or hurt this ordinance?
To my knowledge w e haven’t had any is s ues with the courts on this ordinance.
We w ere very mindful of talking with our City A<orneys to ensure we could pass an ordinance
that would be able to be held up
O ther info?
We are only able to enforce this if we get a complaint right aw ay and are limited to s ending
viola0on no0ces and cita0ons or fees – w e rely on partners like H omeLine and other external
s takeholders w ho w ould repres ent a renter if they had to go to court to fight an evic0on or use
the pre-evic0on filing no0ce ordinance as a defens e if 14 day no0ce was not given.
We created a template for no0ce as a s ample for ow ners to us e in cas e they had ques0ons , we
have it on our w ebsite – h<ps://w w w 2.minneapolis mn.gov/busines s -s ervices /licens es-
permits/rental-licens es/renter-protec0ons /renter-no0fica0on-requirements/
A n important thing to note is that w e pas s ed this ordinance during the evic0on moratorium so
w e implemented it during a 0me that evic0ons for non-payment of rent weren’t really
happening.
Page 124 of 194Page 229 of 299
D o you guys get feedback on w hether the 14 days w as too long / too short?
W hen I talked w ith S t. L ouis Park they did 7 days and w e knew that w ould probably be too
s hort. We pres ented the 14 day no0ce and w e got feedback at our public hearing that we
s hould look at 30 days . We aligned our 14 days with the provis ion of emergency as s is tance and
the involved 0meframes for acces s ing and obtaining assistance. A gain, this was pre<y early on
before issues w ith RentH elpM N and long wait 0mes, but it w orked for us to align it to
s omething exis 0ng.
Ordinance Summary
The propos ed ordinance amendment summary:
Pre-Evic0on Filing N o0ce requires an owner of an affordable housing unit to provide a 30 day wri<en
no0ce to a tenant prior to filling an evic0on.
J ust C ause N on-Renewals establishes requirements that prevents a property owner or property manager
from non-renewing an exis0ng tenant lease without just cause.
N on-Payment of Rent
Material N on-compliance
Refusal to Renew
O ccupancy by property owner of family member
B uilding D emolishing or C onversion
Rehabilita0on or Renova0on
C omplying with a Government order to vacate
O ccupancy condi0oned on employment
(90 day non-renewal no0ce w ithout just caus e removed)
Waiver is not allowed by a tenant to waive their rights under the new ordinance.
Private E nforcement – A tenant or former tenant of an affordable housing united harmed by an owner in
viola0on of this ordinance may bring and ac0on again the owner in district court.
Require property managers to track and report to the city any non-renewals of leas es, and the reason
for the ac0on.
Added Separability and Severability statement
Background
City staff have had multiple discussions with the City C ouncil relating to af f ordable housing policies
and programs. T he City is currently working with the C enter for Urban and Regional Affairs
(C UR A ) and R esearch in A ction (R I A ) on a citywide housing study. T hat work has completed its
engagement phase, and the Housing A dvisory C ouncil is being reconvened to begin reviewing that
work and identif ying policy recommendations for the C ity. T he housing study is anticipated to be
completed in early 2022. T he deliverables from the study will be used to complete a Housing
P olicy A ction Plan to address the housing priorities in the city. Staff is anticipating moving forward
with programs and polices based on the results of that study. However, while that work is wrapping
up, B rooklyn Center and the Twin Cities region are continuing to experience ongoing and extreme
low vacancy rates. According to a recent 2020 C ensus Report
(https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2021/08/united-states-housing-vacancy-rate-declined-in-
past-decade.html), Minneapolis has the lowest vacancy rate among the 30 largest U.S. cities.
I n addition to a significant and sustained housing shortage, the state legislature recently repealed
the eviction moratorium. The state has created an of f -ramp process to step back from the
moratorium, but already B rooklyn Center has seen increased calls about evictions, and is seeing
an increasednumber of f ilings. W ith the lifting of the eviction moratorium, landlords can once again
get rid of unwanted tenants through non-renewals, avoiding the eviction process altogether.
S taff has been meeting regularly with residents to talk about issues related to tenant protections
Page 125 of 194Page 230 of 299
and to understand the concerns and increased issues they are f acing as a result of compounding
regional and national housing shortage trends.
A s a result of extensive input from community, S taff have been working with the City A ttorney’s
office to draf t an ordinance relating to tenant protections. T his ordinance was to include multiple
areas of concerns from tenants.
· J ust Cause Non-renewal
· P re-eviction Notices
· Maintenance Fees
· Damage Deposits
· Material changes to the lease
· Discrimination relating to public assistance status
B ased on the current low vacancy rates and the urgency created by the phasing out of the E viction
Moratorium, staff thought it to be necessary to expedite the ordinance relating specif ically to items
addressing evictions and non-renewals. Putting anti-displacement measures into ef f ect sooner
rather than later is intended to get ahead of a growing problem, and provide renters with more
leverage in negotiations with landlords.
Housing and the policy issues related to housing have become some of the most pressing and
important matters facing communities today. F or most suburban communities, housing comprises
a significant majority of a cities land use and tax base. Maintaining and preserving a safe, quality,
and desirable housing stock is critical to a community's long term economic health and resiliency.
Further, a diverse housing stock which of f ers a wide range of housing choices and price points
ensures that a community can be resilient through economic ups and downs as well as provide
housing options f or a diverse population throughout their lives. I n addition to maintaining a quality
and diverse supply of housing, communities are more and more becoming f ocused on concerns
regarding livability and accessibility of housing.
Brooklyn Center’s Current Rental Housing
The result of the regional trends facing the Twin C ities are being felt in B rooklyn C enter. Vacancy
rates in the community remain lower than the regional average, hovering around 2 percent. T his is
common in communities with more affordable rental units. T hirty-seven percent of Brooklyn
Center's housing stock is comprised of rental units. Nearly 100 percent of the multi-f amily housing
in B rooklyn Center are one and two bedroom units built between 1961 and 1971, and nearly all of it
is naturally occurring affordable housing (NO A H).
Average rents in B rooklyn Center are naturally occurring affordable because the market rents,
based on the age and condition of the units make them af f ordable at around 50 percent A MI in the
metropolitan area. Rents in B rooklyn C enter are lower than the regional average. W hile NO A H
properties are affordable, they can be at risk of being lost as market demand increases and rents
continue to go up. T hey can also experience disinvestment over time, causing deterioration, loss of
value, and most importantly poor quality or unsafe living situations if they are not properly inspected
and maintained.
The City's 2040 Comprehensive Plan identifies several broad housing goals
2040 Housing & Neighborhood Goals:
P romote a diverse housing stock that provides safe, stable, and accessible housing options
to all of B rooklyn Center’s residents.
Recognize and identif y ways to match B rooklyn Center’s housing with the C ity’s changing
demographics.
E xplore opportunities to improve the C ity’s housing policies and ordinances to make them
more responsive to current and future residents.
Maintain the existing housing stock in primarily single-family neighborhoods through proper
ordinances, incentive programs and enforcement.
Page 126 of 194Page 231 of 299
E xplore opportunities to incorporate new af f ordable housing into redevelopment areas that
promote safe, secure and economically diverse neighborhoods.
I n addition to these goals, the 2040 Comprehensive P lan identifies implementation strategies as
well as resources and tools for achieving its housing goals.
B udget I ssues:
There are no budgetary issues to cons ider at this 0me.
I nclusive C ommunity Engagement:
S taff has been working clos ely w ith hous ing advocacy groups, and met regularly with residents to gather
informa0on regarding the need for this ordinance.
S taff held an A R M Mee0ng on J anuary 6, 2022 at city hall. A ll licens ed landlords/property ow ners w ere
invited to a<end. Feedback w as provided and a s ummary is a<ached.
A dis cus s ing was held with advocacy groups and rental landlords on J anuary 12th, 2022. A s ummary of
that discussion is a<ached.
A nracist/Equity Policy Effect:
Renters in Brooklyn C enter are dis propor0onately more likely to be people of color than home ow ners .
O ver 50 percent of Brooklyn Center renters pay more than 30% of their incomes on rent and are cons idered
low income. L ow income renters have the fewes t hous ing choices and are more likely to experience
retalia0on by landlords , evic0ons and displacement. The purpos e of this ordinance is to provide protec0ons
for primarily low -income and renters of color in Brooklyn Center.
S trategic Priories and Values:
S afe, S ecure, S table C ommunity
AT TA C H M E N TS :
D escrip0on U pload D ate Type
Res olu0on 2/22/2022 Resolu0on Le<er
Tenant P rotec0on O rdinance 2/22/2022 O rdinance
Tenant P rotec0on O rdinance - Redlined Version 2/22/2022 Backup M aterial
10-19-2021 D ra@ H ousing Commission M inutes 10/25/2021 Backup M aterial
2-18-2022 D ra@ H ousing Commission M inutes 2/18/2022 Backup M aterial
J anuary 12 Joint M ee0ng Recap 1/14/2022 Backup M aterial
J anuary 6 A R M Mee0ng Recap 1/18/2022 Backup M aterial
Page 127 of 194Page 232 of 299
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-____
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING CHAPTER 12 OF THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES REGARDING
TENANT PROTECTION AND SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF THE ORDINANCE
WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center (“City”) previously amended the City Code to
establish certain protections for tenants of affordable housing units and now desires to expand
those protections; and
WHEREAS, City staff developed a proposed ordinance titled “An Ordinance Amending
Chapter 12 of the City Code of Ordinances Regarding Tenant Protections” (“Ordinance”), which
amends Sections 12-201, 12-912D and 12-1401 of the City Code; and
WHEREAS, the City Council discussed this issue at several work sessions and the
proposed Ordinance was presented to the City Council to conduct a first reading on November 8,
2021 in accordance with Section 3.04 of the City Charter; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Ordinance was presented to the City Council to conduct a public
hearing and a second reading on December 13, 2021 in accordance with Section 3.04 of the City
Charter; and
WHEREAS, the City Council continued the second reading from December 13, 2021 to
February 28, 2022, and the City Council acted at its meeting on February 28, 2022 to adopt the
above-referenced Ordinance; 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, by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn
Center as follows:
1. A second reading has been conducted and the Ordinance is hereby adopted.
Page 128 of 194Page 233 of 299
2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to publish the following notice and summary
of the Ordinance, which is hereby approved, once in the City’s official newspaper:
City of Brooklyn Center
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 12 OF THE CITY
CODE OF ORDINANCES REGARDING TENANT PROTECTION
Please take notice that the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center has
adopted an ordinance to amend Chapter 12 of the City Code by amending Section 12-
912D to expand the protections provided to tenants of affordable housing units. The
ordinance establishes new requirements for landlords to provide tenants a notice at least
30 days before filing an eviction action, to provide notice explaining the basis of a just
cause nonrenewal of a lease, and to provide for filing a private enforcement action in
district court for a violation of the tenant protections under the section, including the
seeking of an award of attorney’s fees. A copy of the full ordinance is available on the
City’s website.
3. City staff and consultants are authorized to take such other actions as may be needed to
incorporate the Ordinance into the City Code and to otherwise carry out the intent of this
Resolution.
February 28, 2022
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 129 of 194Page 234 of 299
1
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 13th day of December, 2021, at
7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard to consider an ordinance related to
tenant protections. City Council meetings are being conducted by electronic means under
Minnesota Statutes, section 13D.021 and information on how to connect to the meeting is
provided on the City’s website. Please notify the City Clerk at 763-569-3306 if there are any
questions about how to connect to the meeting.
ORDINANCE NO. ________
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 12 OF THE CITY CODE OF
ORDINANCES REGARDING TENANT PROTECTION
THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN:
Article I. Legislative Findings. The City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center hereby finds
and determines as follows:
a. Tenants of affordable housing units have an income of 80% or less, and in some case much
less, of the area median income and so have few resources to fight predatory practices,
unjustified repair fees, retaliation, or other practices that exploit tenants within affordable
housing buildings;
b. Vacancy rates in the City, at approximately 2%, are very low and are even lower than the Twin
Cities regional average;
c. In addition to a significant and sustained housing shortage, the residential eviction moratorium
enacted in Minnesota in response to the COVID-19 pandemic has nearly been entirely phased
out, and with only very limited exceptions, tenants are able to be evicted;
d. The City Council regularly receives complaints at its meetings from residents of affordable
housing units regarding how they are treated by the owners and the resulting negative
emotional and financial impacts of those interactions;
e. The City's 2040 Comprehensive Plan identifies several broad housing goals, including (1)
promoting a diverse housing stock that provides safe, stable, and accessible housing option to
all of the City’s residents, (2) recognition and identification of ways to match the City’s
housing with the City’s changing demographics, (3) exploring opportunities to improve the
City’s housing policies and ordinances to make them more responsive to current and future
residents, (4) maintaining the existing housing stock in primarily single-family neighborhoods
through proper ordinances, incentive programs and enforcement, and (5) exploring
opportunities to incorporate new affordable housing into redevelopment areas that promote
safe, secure and economically diverse neighborhoods;
Page 130 of 194Page 235 of 299
2
f. In addition to these goals, the 2040 Comprehensive Plan identifies implementation strategies
as well as resources and tools for achieving its housing goals;
g. The City Council previously adopted Section 12-912D to establish certain tenant protections
for those living within affordable housing units as an initial step to address the exploitation of
these tenants, and the City is currently working with the Center for Urban and Regional Affairs
and Research in Action on a citywide housing study;
h. However, in light of the current housing shortage, the reversal of the eviction moratorium, and
in response to complaints from tenants of affordable housing units in the City, the City Council
determines it is necessary to expand the initial protections in order to promote housing stability
and protect the health, safety, and welfare of those living within affordable housing units; and
i. The tenant protections adopted as part of Section 12-912D are intended to be part of the health
and safety covenants in Minnesota Statutes, section 504B.161, subdivision 1(a)(4) and as
additional conditions provided for by ordinance as acknowledged in subdivision 4 of the same
statute.
Article II. Brooklyn Center City Code, Section 12-201 is amended by adding the following
definition and renumbering the subsequent definitions as needed:
__. Just Cause – any of the bases listed under Section 12-912D(5) upon which an owner of an
affordable housing building may terminate tenancy.
Article III. Brooklyn Center City Code, Section 12-912D is amended by adding subsections 12-
912D(4), 12-912D(5), and 12-912D(6) as follows, and renumbering the subsequent subsections as
needed:
4. Pre-Eviction Filing Notice. Except as provided otherwise in this subsection, an owner of an
affordable housing unit shall provide at least 30 days’ written notice to a tenant prior to filing
an eviction action on the basis of either: (a) an alleged non-payment of rent; or (b) an alleged
material breach of a lease.
a. Notices for Non-payment of Rent. For an allegation of any non-payment of rent, the notice
shall, at a minimum, include the following information:
(1) The name, mailing address, and telephone number of the person authorized to
receive rent and fees on behalf of the owner;
(2) The total amount of money due and owing to the owner by the tenant;
(3) A specific accounting of the money due and owing to the owner by the tenant,
including any past due rents, any late fees, and any other charges; and
Page 131 of 194Page 236 of 299
3
(4) The deadline by which the total amount due and owing to the owner by the tenant
shall be paid to avoid an eviction action, which shall be no earlier than 30 days
from the date on which the notice is delivered.
b. Notices for Material Breach of a Lease. For an allegation of a material breach of a
lease, the notice shall, at a minimum, include the following information:
(1) The name, mailing address, and telephone number of the owner;
(2) A description of the specific conduct that the owner alleges is a violation of the
lease, including the dates of the violations and the persons who committed the
alleged violations;
(3) Identification of the specific clause of the lease alleged to have been violated;
(4) Notification that the tenant has the right to correct the alleged breach;
(5) Notification of how the tenant may correct the alleged breach;
(6) The deadline by which the alleged breach shall be corrected to avoid an eviction
action, which shall be no earlier than 30 days from the date on which the notice is
delivered; and
(7) A copy of the lease attached to the notice.
c. Exception for Expedited Eviction Actions. For an expedited eviction action filed
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 504B.321, subdivision 2, the owner shall
provide the notice required by Section 12-912D(4)(d) at least three days in advance of
filing the eviction action.
d. Additional Notice Requirements. All notices under this subsection shall also include
the following information:
(1) Notification that the tenant may be evicted if they do not pay the past due rent or
correct the alleged breach of lease by the deadline, as applicable;
(2) Information about accessing rental assistance by calling 211 or visiting
https://www.211unitedway.org/; and
(3) Information about accessing legal help by visiting the Law Help Website at
https://www.lawhelpmn.org/.
e. Delivery of Notice. The owner, or an agent for the owner, shall deliver any notice
required by this subsection personally or by first-class mail to the address of the
affordable housing unit. Such notice may, in addition to but not in place of personal
Page 132 of 194Page 237 of 299
4
delivery or delivery by first-class mail, be delivered to any email or other electronic
means to the tenant at the tenant’s email address or electronic account.
f. Enforcement. In addition to any other remedy available at equity or law, failure to
comply with the provisions of this subsection may result in adverse rental license
actions, the imposition of administrative fines, or other penalties as provided in law.
g. Waiver Not Allowed. The parties to a written or oral lease of an affordable housing
unit shall not waive or modify the requirements imposed by this subsection. Any such
waiver provision that may exist in a lease is not enforceable.
5. Just Cause Notice of Nonrenewal of Lease to Tenants.
a. Just Cause Notice. An owner of an affordable housing unit shall not issue a notice of
nonrenewal of tenancy, refuse to renew, or issue a notice to quit unless the owner is able
to establish one or more of the following grounds for such action:
(1) Non-payment of Rent. The tenant fails to pay all monies owed to an owner after
receiving a written notice of non-payment from the owner;
(2) Material Non-Compliance. The tenant fails to cure a material breach of the lease after
receiving a written notice from the owner;
(3) Refusal to Renew. The tenant refuses to renew or extend the lease after the owner
requests in writing that the tenant do so;
(4) Occupancy by Property Owner or Family Member. The owner, in good faith, seeks to
recover possession of the unit so that the owner or a family member may occupy the
unit as that person’s principal residence;
(5) Building Demolishment or Conversion. The owner either:
(i) Elects to demolish the building in which the affordable housing unit is located,
convert it to a cooperative, provided the owner complies with the provisions of
Minnesota Statutes, chapter 515B, or convert it to non-residential use, provided
that the owner shall obtain all permits necessary to demolish or change the use
before terminating any tenancy;
(ii) The owner seeks, in good faith, to recover the unit to sell it in accordance with a
condominium conversion, provided the owner complies with the provisions of
Minnesota Statutes, chapter 515B; or
(iii) The unit is being converted to a unit subsidized under a local, state, or federal
housing program and the tenant does not qualify to rent the unit under that
program;
Page 133 of 194Page 238 of 299
5
(6) Rehabilitation and Renovation. The owner seeks, in good faith, to recover possession
of the unit that will render the unit uninhabitable for the duration of rehabilitation or
renovation;
(7) Complying with a Government Order to Vacate. The owner is complying with a
government agency’s order to vacate, order to abate, or any other order that necessitates
the vacating of the unit as a result of a violation of City Code or any other provision of
law including, but not limited to, Section 12-911 related to conduct, disorderly
activities, or nuisances; or
(8) Occupancy Conditioned on Employment. The tenant’s occupancy is conditioned upon
employment on the property and the employment relationship is terminated.
b. Owner Responsibilities. Any lease for an affordable housing unit shall include just
cause notice language as follows:
“The landlord under this lease shall not unilaterally terminate or attempt to terminate
the tenancy of any tenant unless the landlord can prove that just cause exists. The
reasons for termination or nonrenewal of tenancy listed in the City of Brooklyn
Center’s Just Cause Notice (Section 12-912D(5)), and no others, shall constitute just
cause under this provision.”
c. Nonrenewal Notice Requirements. An owner providing a notice of nonrenewal of a
tenancy to a tenant of an affordable housing unit shall: (1) comply with all notice
requirements under the lease and applicable law; (2) include in such notice a written
statement of the reasons for the nonrenewal and the facts in support of those reasons,
and (3) maintain documentation totaling the number of notices of nonrenewal issued
by the owner.
d. City Right to Inspection of Nonrenewal Notices. Within ten days of any request by the
City, the owner of an affordable housing building shall provide to the City copies of its
documentation totaling the number of notices of nonrenewal issued by the owner.
e. Application. This Section applies to every lease, written or oral, for an affordable
housing unit.
f. Waiver Not Allowed. The parties to a written or oral lease of an affordable housing
unit shall not waive or modify the requirements imposed by this subsection. Any such
waiver provision that may exist in a lease is not enforceable.
6. Private Enforcement of Tenant Protection Ordinance. Any tenant or former tenant of an
affordable housing unit harmed by an owner’s violation of this Section 12-912D may bring
an action against the owner in district court. Such person shall be entitled to all remedies
available at law or in equity including, but not limited to, damages and injunctive relief. Any
plaintiff that prevails in such action may be awarded reasonable attorney’s fees and expenses.
Page 134 of 194Page 239 of 299
6
Article IV. Brooklyn Center City Code, Section 12-1401 is amended by adding the double-
underlined language and deleting the stricken language as follows:
Section 12-1401. SEPARABILITY. Every Section, provision, or part of this Ordinance
Chapter is declared separable from every other Section, provision, or part to the extent that if any
Section, provision or part of the Chapter shall be held invalid, it shall not invalidate any other
Section, provision or part thereof.
Article V. Severability. Should any section or part of this ordinance be declared by a court of
competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision will not affect the validity of the ordinance as
a whole or any part other than the part declared invalid.
Article VI. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty
days following its legal publication.
Adopted this 28th day of February, 2022.
_______________________________
Mike Elliott, Mayor
ATTEST: _________________________
City Clerk
Date of Publication
Effective Date
(Strikeout indicates matter to be deleted, double underline indicates new matter.)
Page 135 of 194Page 240 of 299
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 13th day of December, 2021, at
7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard to consider an ordinance related to
tenant protections. City Council meetings are being conducted by electronic means under
Minnesota Statutes, section 13D.021 and information on how to connect to the meeting is
provided on the City’s website. Please notify the City Clerk at 763-569-3306 if there are any
questions about how to connect to the meeting.
ORDINANCE NO. ________
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 12 OF THE CITY CODE OF
ORDINANCES REGARDING TENANT PROTECTION
THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN:
Article I.Legislative Findings. The City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center hereby finds
and determines as follows:
Tenants of affordable housing units have an income of 80% or less, and in some case mucha.
less, of the area median income and so have few resources to fight predatory practices,
unjustified repair fees, retaliation, or other practices that exploit tenants within affordable
housing buildings;
Vacancy rates in the City, at approximately 2%, are very low and are even lower than theb.
Twin Cities regional average;
In addition to a significant and sustained housing shortage, the residential evictionc.
moratorium enacted in Minnesota in response to the COVID-19 pandemic has nearly been
entirely phased out, and with only very limited exceptions, tenants are able to be evicted;
b.The City Council regularly receives complaints at its meetings from residents of affordabled.
housing units regarding how they are treated by the owners and the resulting negative
emotional and financial impacts of those interactions;
The City's 2040 Comprehensive Plan identifies several broad housing goals, including (1)e.
promoting a diverse housing stock that provides safe, stable, and accessible housing option to
all of the City’s residents, (2) recognition and identification of ways to match the City’s
housing with the City’s changing demographics, (3) exploring opportunities to improve the
City’s housing policies and ordinances to make them more responsive to current and future
residents, (4) maintaining the existing housing stock in primarily single-family
neighborhoods through proper ordinances, incentive programs and enforcement, and (5)
exploring opportunities to incorporate new affordable housing into redevelopment areas that
promote safe, secure and economically diverse neighborhoods;
1
Page 136 of 194Page 241 of 299
In addition to these goals, the 2040 Comprehensive Plan identifies implementation strategiesf.
as well as resources and tools for achieving its housing goals;
c.The City Council previously adopted Section 12-912D to establish certain tenantg.
protections for those living within affordable housing units as an initial step to address the
exploitation of these tenants, and the City is currently working with the Center for Urban and
Regional Affairs and Research in Action on a citywide housing study;
d. TheHowever, in light of the current housing shortage, the reversal of the evictionh.
moratorium, and in response to complaints from tenants of affordable housing units in the
City, the City Council determines it is necessary to expand thosethe initial protections in
order to promote housing stability and protect the health, safety, and welfare of those living
within affordable housing units; and
e.The tenant protections adopted as part of Section 12-912D are intended to be part of thei.
health and safety covenants in Minnesota Statutes, section 504B.161, subdivision 1(a)(4) and
as additional conditions provided for by ordinance as acknowledged in subdivision 4 of the
same statute.
Article II. Brooklyn Center City Code, Section 12-201 is amended by adding the following
definition and renumbering the subsequent definitions as needed:
__.Just Cause – any of the bases listed under Section 12-912D(5) upon which an owner of an
affordable housing building may terminate tenancy.
Article III. Brooklyn Center City Code, Section 12-912D is amended by adding subsections
12-912D(4), 12-912D(5), and 12-912D(6) as follows, and renumbering the subsequent subsections
as needed:
4.Pre-Eviction Filing Notice. Except as provided otherwise in this subsection, an owner of an
affordable housing unit shall provide at least 30 days’ written notice to a tenant prior to filing
an eviction action on the basis of either: (a) an alleged non-payment of rent; or (b) an alleged
material breach of a lease.
Notices for Non-payment of Rent. For an allegation of any non-payment of rent, thea.
notice shall, at a minimum, include the following information:
The name, mailing address, and telephone number of the person authorized to(1)
receive rent and fees on behalf of the owner;
The total amount of money due and owing to the owner by the tenant;(2)
A specific accounting of the money due and owing to the owner by the tenant,(3)
including any past due rents, any late fees, and any other charges; and
2
Page 137 of 194Page 242 of 299
The deadline by which the total amount due and owing to the owner by the(4)
tenant shall be paid to avoid an eviction action, which shall be no earlier than 30
days from the date on which the notice is delivered.
Notices for Material Breach of a Lease. For an allegation of a material breach of ab.
lease, the notice shall, at a minimum, include the following information:
The name, mailing address, and telephone number of the owner;(1)
A description of the specific conduct that the owner alleges is a violation of the(2)
lease, including the dates of the violations and the persons who committed the
alleged violations;
Identification of the specific clause of the lease alleged to have been violated; (3)
Notification that the tenant has the right to correct the alleged breach; (4)
Notification of how the tenant may correct the alleged breach; (5)
The deadline by which the alleged breach shall be corrected to avoid an eviction(6)
action, which shall be no earlier than 30 days from the date on which the notice is
delivered; and
A copy of the lease attached to the notice.(7)
Exception for Expedited Eviction Actions. For an expedited eviction action filedc.
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 504B.321, subdivision 2, the owner shall
provide the notice required by Section 12-912D(34)(d) at least three days in advance
of filing the eviction action.
Additional Notice Requirements.All notices under this subsection shall also included.
the following information:
Notification that the tenant may be evicted if they do not pay the past due rent or(1)
correct the alleged breach of lease by the deadline, as applicable;
Information about accessing rental assistance by calling 211 or visiting(2)
https://www.211unitedway.org/; and
Information about accessing legal help by visiting the Law Help Website at(3)
https://www.lawhelpmn.org/.
Delivery of Notice. The owner, or an agent for the owner, shall deliver any noticee.
required by this subsection personally or by first-class mail to the address of the
affordable housing unit. Such notice may, in addition to but not in place of personal
3
Page 138 of 194Page 243 of 299
delivery or delivery by first-class mail, be delivered to any email or other electronic
means to the tenant at the tenant’s email address or electronic account.
Enforcement. In addition to any other remedy available at equity or law, failure tof.
comply with the provisions of this subsection may result in adverse rental license
actions, the imposition of administrative fines, or other penalties as provided in law.
Waiver Not Allowed. The parties to a written or oral lease of an affordable housingg.
unit shall not waive or modify the requirements imposed by this subsection. Any
such waiver provision that may exist in a lease is not enforceable.
5.Just Cause Notice of Nonrenewal of Lease to Tenants.
Just Cause Notice. An owner of an affordable housing unit shall not issue a notice ofa.
nonrenewal of tenancy, refuse to renew, or issue a notice to quit unless the owner is able
to establish one or more of the following grounds for such action:
Non-payment of Rent. The tenant fails to pay all monies owed to an owner after(1)
receiving a written notice of non-payment from the owner;
Material Non-Compliance. The tenant fails to cure a material breach of the lease after(2)
receiving a written notice from the owner;
Refusal to Renew. The tenant refuses to renew or extend the lease after the owner(3)
requests in writing that the tenant do so;
Occupancy by Property Owner or Family Member. The owner, in good faith, seeks to(4)
recover possession of the unit so that the owner or a family member may occupy the
unit as that person’s principal residence;
Building Demolishment or Conversion. The owner either:(5)
Elects to demolish the building in which the affordable housing unit is located,(i)
convert it to a cooperative, provided the owner complies with the provisions of
Minnesota Statutes, chapter 515B, or convert it to non-residential use, provided
that the owner shall obtain all permits necessary to demolish or change the use
before terminating any tenancy;
The owner seeks, in good faith, to recover the unit to sell it in accordance with a(ii)
condominium conversion, provided the owner complies with the provisions of
Minnesota Statutes, chapter 515B; or
The unit is being converted to a unit subsidized under a local, state, or federal(iii)
housing program and the tenant does not qualify to rent the unit under that
program;
4
Page 139 of 194Page 244 of 299
Rehabilitation and Renovation. The owner seeks, in good faith, to recover possession(6)
of the unit that will render the unit uninhabitable for the duration of rehabilitation or
renovation;
Complying with a Government Order to Vacate. The owner is complying with a(7)
government agency’s order to vacate, order to abate, or any other order that necessitates
the vacating of the unit as a result of a violation of City Code or any other provision of
law including, but not limited to, Section 12-911 related to conduct, disorderly
activities, or nuisances; or
Occupancy Conditioned on Employment. The tenant’s occupancy is conditioned upon(8)
employment on the property and the employment relationship is terminated.
Owner Responsibilities. Any lease for an affordable housing unit shall include justb.
cause notice language as follows:
“The landlord under this lease shall not unilaterally terminate or attempt to terminate
the tenancy of any tenant unless the landlord can prove that just cause exists. The
reasons for termination or nonrenewal of tenancy listed in the City of Brooklyn
Center’s Just Cause Notice (Section 12-912D(5)), and no others, shall constitute just
cause under this provision.”
Nonrenewal Notice Requirements. An owner providing a notice of nonrenewal of ac.
tenancy to a tenant of an affordable housing unit shall: (1) comply with all notice
requirements under the lease and applicable law;and (2)include in such notice a
written statement of the reasons for the nonrenewal and the facts in support of those
reasons, and (3) maintain documentation totaling the number of notices of nonrenewal
issued by the owner.
City Right to Inspection of Nonrenewal Notices. Within ten days of any request byd.
the City, the owner of an affordable housing building shall provide to the City copies
of its documentation totaling the number of notices of nonrenewal issued by the
owner.
d.Application. This Section applies to every lease, written or oral, for an affordablee.
housing unit.
e.Waiver Not Allowed. The parties to a written or oral lease of an affordable housingf.
unit shall not waive or modify the requirements imposed by this subsection. Any
such waiver provision that may exist in a lease is not enforceable.
6.Private Enforcement of Tenant Protection Ordinance.Any tenant or former tenant of an
affordable housing unit harmed by an owner’s violation of this Section 12-912D may bring
an action against the owner in district court. Such person shall be entitled to all remedies
available at law or in equity including, but not limited to, damages and injunctive relief.
5
Page 140 of 194Page 245 of 299
Any plaintiff that prevails in such action may be awarded reasonable attorney’s fees and
expenses.
Article IV.Brooklyn Center City Code, Section 12-1401 is amended by adding the
double-underlined language and deleting the stricken language as follows:
Section 12-1401. SEPARABILITY. Every Section, provision, or part of this Ordinance
Chapter is declared separable from every other Section, provision, or part to the extent that if any
Section, provision or part of the Chapter shall be held invalid, it shall not invalidate any other
Section, provision or part thereof.
Article V.Severability. Should any section or part of this ordinance be declared by a court of
competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision will not affect the validity of the ordinance as
a whole or any part other than the part declared invalid.
Article VI.Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty
days following its legal publication.
Adopted this 1328th day of DecemberFebruary, 20212022.
_______________________________
Mike Elliott, Mayor
ATTEST: _________________________
City Clerk
Date of Publication
Effective Date
(Strikeout indicates matter to be deleted, double underline indicates new matter.)
6
Page 141 of 194Page 246 of 299
Page 1
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND STATE OF MINNESOTA
REGULAR SESSION
OCTOBER 19, 2021
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission was called to order by Chairperson Goodell at 7:00
p.m. The meeting was conducted virtually.
MEETING ATTENDEES
Chair Mark Goodell
Commissioner Paul Oman
Commissioner Michael Donnelly
Commissioner Zarita Hester
Commissioner Johnson Yang
City Staff present: Staff Liaison Jesse Anderson, Community Development Director Meg
Beekman, City Attorney Sam Ketchum, Planning Staff Olivia Boerschinger, and City Council
Liaison Kris Lawrence-Anderson.
Also present: Anab; Agnes; Leah DeGrazia; Lana Hamilton; Victoria Karmo; Madeleine Lerner,
ACER; Fadumo Mohamed; Lovetee Polahn; Eric Hauge, HOME Line; Samuel Spaid, HOME
Line; Tally; Shana Tomenes; Marie Vincent.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
There was a motion by Commissioner Oman and seconded by Commissioner Donnelly to approve
the agenda as submitted. The motion passed.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
There was a motion by Commissioner Oman and seconded by Commissioner Donnelly to approve
the minutes of the Housing Commission meeting on August 18, 2021. The motion passed.
TENANT PROTECTION ORDINANCE DISCUSSION AND DRAFT ORDINANCE REVIEW
Staff Liaison Jesse Anderson gave an overview of the proposed tenant protection Ordinance He
added the City Council has held multiple work sessions regarding housing programs, and the City
is currently undergoing a City-wide housing study, which will provide recommendations for City
housing policies, housing priorities, and a housing action plan.
Mr. Anderson stated there is urgency related to this issue created by the phasing out of the eviction
moratorium as well as low vacancy rates. The proposed Ordinance addresses evictions, requiring
a 30-day written notice as well as preventing landlords or property owners from not renewing an
existing tenant lease without cause. He added some just cause reasons for non-renewal, as listed
in the proposed Ordinance, are non-payment of rent; material non-compliance; refusal to renew;
Page 142 of 194Page 247 of 299
Page 2
conversion, demolition, rehab or renovation; compliance with a government order; or occupancy
conditional upon employment. He noted the Ordinance also addresses evictions and non-renewal
and provides support for tenants who have just cause to bring action against landlords.
Mr. Anderson stated City Staff received feedback and recommendations from ACER, HOME Line
and the Housing Justice Center to expedite the proposed Ordinance due to urgency related to
evictions and non-renewals. He added representatives of community organizations have joined
tonight’s meeting. He noted the proposed Ordinance will likely have its first reading at the
November 8, 2021 City Council meeting, and second reading and public hearing scheduled for the
City Council’s December 13, 2021 meeting, with the Ordinance going into effect in January 2022.
Chair Goodell requested feedback and comments from the Housing Commissioners and guests.
Commissioner Oman requested clarification regarding the timing of the Ordinance and actions that
can be brought against landlords for something that has already happened. Mr. Anderson stated
the Ordinance would go into effect in January 2022, so any violations could not have happened
before that.
City Attorney Sam Ketchum agreed with Mr. Anderson's assessment. He added the enforcement
provisions would apply to evictions after the Ordinance goes into effect.
A resident requested clarification regarding what control renters have with regard to friendly rental
agreements. Chair Goodell stated he believes there has been some investigation into concerns
about rental agreements, in terms of changes to a renewal or other limitations.
Mr. Anderson stated the proposed Ordinance amendment relates to non-renewals and evictions.
He added there are some areas of the Ordinance that have not been brought forward yet, that could
provide limitations on changes to lease agreements, which may be discussed under a future
Ordinance amendment.
The resident stated he has been living at Georgetown for 11 years, and management does whatever
they want, and imposes restrictions. He added he got a letter that they will not renew his lease and
put him on a month-to-month lease. He added he is concerned and hopes the Commission can
make some changes. He asked whether the Commission could go into people’s homes and find
out how they live and how they are being treated.
Chair Goodell thanked the resident for his comments. He added the Commission is interested in
hearing about the issue of lease agreements, although tonight’s amendment relates to evictions and
non-renewals. He added City Staff is researching these other important issues, and he appreciates
the resident bringing his concerns to the Housing Commission’s attention.
A resident, Tally, stated retaliation by landlords at Georgetown is not fair to tenants, and they are
not allowed to have visitors. She added they are not being treated as though Georgetown is their
home. She noted they have been towing cars and not giving any information about restrictions or
when they can park their cars.
Page 143 of 194Page 248 of 299
Page 3
Another resident agreed, stating people do not speak up because they are afraid that they will get
an eviction notice. She added she was given an eviction notice because she did not apply for rental
assistance. She noted she told them her application was pending.
Tally stated it is not fair to Georgetown residents. She said the landlord does not fix anything, but
no one asks questions or asks for help. She added they are taking cars.
Lovetee stated she has been a Georgetown tenant for 2-3 years. She added she is concerned about
tenant protections. She asked what it will protect. She noted she has 6 living children , and the
Ordinance cannot protect her from being evicted. She added her lease has not been renewed for
no reason, and the landlord gave her 3 months to find a new home.
Lovetee stated she went to the office to ask about why her lease cannot be renewed, and she was
told she could not enter the office and she was not welcome. She added she is a tenant, and they
have no reason for not renewing her lease. She noted this is an emergency and she asked the City
for help. She noted the Ordinance needs to be passed now so their leases can be renewed.
Lovetee tasked whether something can be added to the Ordinance about lease renewal. She added
the only reason a lease should not be renewed is if a tenant does something crazy. She noted
landlords should not be able to renew leases without a reason.
Chair Goodell stated there are some serious issues with renewal of leases and evictions, and it is
his understanding that this Ordinance amendment will address both lease renewals and evictions.
He added the Ordinance would put restrictions on evictions and eviction notices, and a limit list of
reasons why a lease cannot be renewed. He noted the Ordinance will directly affect the residents’
situations when it is passed.
Chair Goodell stated the Housing Commission will not be passing the Ordinance, but rather
making a recommendation to the City Council. He added the Commission is a board of volunteer
citizens, and their job is to provide feedback and recommendations to the City Council. He noted
he truly appreciates everyone’s comments and feedback.
Sam Spaid, staff attorney for HOME Line, stated his organization supports the proposed
Ordinance. HOME Line is a state-wide nonprofit organization providing free, confidential legal
advice to residential tenants in Minnesota. He added the personal statements that are being
expressed tonight are the same things that HOME Line staff hear on a daily basis from tenants in
Minnesota. He noted the proposed Ordinance will address many of these issues – preventing non-
renewal without cause and giving tenants time to solve the problem when there are eviction threats,
and to seek legal advice to protect their interests.
Mr. Spaid stated there are tenant protections under State law, but they fall short of providing
solutions and do not help tenants as much as they should. He added tenant protections are
extremely important especially now that Covid restrictions are being lifted.
Madeleine Lerner, Organizing Manager at ACER, thanked the Housing Commission for the
opportunity to address this issue. She added the proposed Ordinance is a critical first step in
Page 144 of 194Page 249 of 299
Page 4
instituting more comprehensive tenant protections in the City of Brooklyn Center. She n oted
ACER staff continuously hears these same stories about evictions without notice, no direct contact
from landlords, and insufficient notice period for eviction or non-renewal.
Commissioner Zarita Hester stated she fully supports the Ordinance as there should be protection
for renters, because there is protection for landlords. She asked whether the Ordinance addresses
non-renewal of a lease if the property changes hands. She asked whether the Ordinance addresses
leases that are reduced to month-to-month leases.
Mr. Anderson stated there is an existing Ordinance on the books adopted 2 years ago that has a
notification requirement of 120 days before the landlord can make any changes to a lease.
Mr. Anderson stated the issue of month-to-month leases is not addressed and could be reviewed
in a different revision of this Ordinance, and a future policy change.
A resident asked whether there must be a specific cause for a landlord to change to a month -to-
month lease. He added landlords are using month-to-month leases as a form of retaliation.
Mr. Anderson stated just cause for non-renewals is included as a requirement in the Ordinance.
The proposed Ordinance will make it more enforceable.
Marie Vincent stated she has lived in Georgetown for 2 years. The lease renewal and eviction
issues are very serious, and reasons for eviction should be revealed to the tenant. One neighbor
stated that she could not go to the office and speak her mind because she was afraid of being
evicted. Brooklyn Center should be a free place for people to live and speak their minds, but they
are not able to do so at Georgetown. She asked for the Commission’s help with these issues.
Chair Goodell stated the proposed Ordinance includes a limited list of items that could be a reason
for eviction or non-renewal of lease, but notice needs to be given to the resident, and there must
be facts to support it.
Tally asked if the agreement could include information about when cars are going to be towed in
Georgetown. She asked whether the City has anything in place for people with a low credit score
to help them get a home, so they don’t have to go through this anymore.
Chair Goodell stated he is unsure about the towing regulations at Georgetown. He added the
proposed Ordinance being reviewed tonight does not address towing in particular.
Mr. Anderson agreed, adding further discussions can be initiated with the City Attorney for this
issue under future Ordinances, regarding regulations and enforcement.
Mr. Anderson stated the City of Brooklyn Center has a down payment assistance program that
provides up to $10,000 assistance for current Brooklyn Center renters who want to buy a home in
Brooklyn Center.
Chair Goodell agreed to post a link for the down payment assistance program in the chat function.
Page 145 of 194Page 250 of 299
Page 5
A resident asked what the Commission is doing to support townhomes and rental complexes as
homes that people live in. He added people should not have their cars towed. He asked whether
the Commission plans to do something to see how people are living.
Chair Goodell stated he understands the resident is interested in having the Commission or City
do a survey of rental properties to find out what conditions tenants are living in, and what their
lives are like. He added there are concerns about towing. He noted the proposed Ordinance is
related to evictions and just causes for lease changes, but there are many other areas that the City
is looking at and these items can be included.
Chair Goodell stated the Housing Commission is a volunteer board that makes recommendations
to the City Council, with input from City Staff. He added the City will continue to look into these
issues and he appreciates everyone sharing their stories and concerns.
Eric Hauge, HOME Line, stated his organization has provided suggestions and recommendations
regarding policies for immediate response to the end of the eviction moratorium. He added his
organization hears about these kinds of issues regularly, and there has been inadequate response
from the State legislature to address tenant and landlord issues. He noted HOME Line is
committed to working with the City of Brooklyn Center to address these issues, recognizing that
the majority of tenant/landlord law is at the State level, but cities like Brooklyn Center are taking
important roles in regulating the businesses that operate in their City.
Community Development Director Meg Beekman stated the City began a Housing Study in
January 2021. An Advisory Council was formed, and the City contracted with CURA an d
Research in Action to provide quantitative and qualitative analysis regarding housing stock and
housing gaps. The Advisory Council, made up of residents, will provide recommendations
focused on housing needs in the community, including anti-displacement and tenant protections,
as well as housing choice and diversity. The recommendations of the Advisory Council are
expected to be received by the City Council early in 2022. These recommendations will form the
basis of City-wide Housing Policy Action Plan.
Ms. Beekman stated tenant protection issues are important and extremely urgent, and some
housing topics have been tabled until the Housing Study is completed, to form recommendations
and implement solutions, so tenant protections can move forward more r apidly. She added City
Staff have met with tenants of Georgetown multiple times, as well as ACER and HOME Line, to
identify a broad collection of regulations pertaining to tenant protections, and to address concerns
that have been voiced this evening, including repairs and maintenance, towing policies, and safety
and security.
Ms. Beekman stated, as part of this review, the City has looked at how other cities, particularly St.
Paul, have addressed these issues. The City of St. Paul adopted a broad tenant protection
Ordinance last year, which covers many of the provisions proposed in the draft Ordinance,
including non-renewal without just cause. St. Paul was promptly faced with a lawsuit brought by
landlords, and the city rescinded the Ordinance due to an injunction. This situation has been part
of the City of Brooklyn Center’s consideration and discussions, and the provisions addressed in
Page 146 of 194Page 251 of 299
Page 6
the proposed Ordinance that is being reviewed tonight address urgent anti-placement concerns
driven by the ending of the eviction moratorium.
Ms. Beekman stated there will be many more discussions, and City Staff will continue to work
with residents and community organizations. She added she wants to underscore that the City
Council takes these issues very seriously and they have directed City Staff to focus on actively
pursuing solutions.
Chair Goodell stated, to underscore the urgency of the situation, the eviction moratorium ended on
October 12, 2021.
Sam Spaid, HOME Line, stated most protections ended October 12, but there is still protection for
tenants who are behind on rent but have already applied for financial assistance through Rent Help.
He added protection for tenants with pending applications is extended through June 2022.
Meg Beekman stated these issues are not unique to Brooklyn Center. She added it has been a
failing of the State legislature to leave cities to deal with these concerns. She noted no other cities
have adopted a non-renewal without just cause Ordinance, and this is new territory, so the City
wanted to be fairly cautious about how it is brought forward to address concerns within the
authority of the City.
Mr. Hauge stressed the importance of understanding that there is nothing that automatically stops
an eviction from happening, which is why this Ordinance is so critically important. He added
housing instability can happen even when there are protections in place. He expressed his
agreement with Ms. Beekman that this is a unique and important protection that no other city in
Minnesota has ever done and that the State of Minnesota has not provided support in these areas.
Chair Goodell requested feedback from the Commissioners.
Lovetee asked how strong the Commission is in its relationship with the City. She added the
Commissioners have said they are a group of volunteers. She asked how much influence the
Commission has over the City. She asked whether the City could have a meeting with landlords
and tenants, to create a safe environment for renters and keep people safe in their homes. She
added she wants the City to create an atmosphere in which landlords and tenants can be friendly
and cooperative, so that non-renewals and evictions will stop. She noted she has lived in Brooklyn
Park and Crystal where meetings were held with landlords to evaluate leases.
Chair Goodell stated the Housing Commission is an advisory body comprised of citizens of
Brooklyn Center, whose job it is to review issues related to housing and provide recommendations
to the City Council. He added the Commission will provide a recommendation to the City Council
regarding this Ordinance, and that will be part of their consideration, but the Commission does not
pass Ordinances. He noted there have been questions in the past about improving relationships
between landlords and tenants.
Ms. Beekman stated the State law related to landlord/tenant relations is vague and untested, and
what cities can and cannot do has not been addressed in State statute. She added some cities are
Page 147 of 194Page 252 of 299
Page 7
considering measures, including Minneapolis, which is looking into a Charter amendment via
referendum that would circumvent State statute with regard to addressing these issues. She noted
it is difficult to regulate mutual respect and common decency in landlord/tenant interactions,
especially when there are underlyin g factors, although many landlords and property owners have
positive relationships with their tenants.
Ms. Beekman stated City Staff is exploring ways to clarify expectations for how residents should
be treated, and what regulations are within the City’s authority to impose. She added the City does
not regulate private contracts but has some leverage with rental housing licensing. She noted Type
3 and Type 4 rental license properties are required to enter into a mitigation plan, which includes
demonstrating communication with tenants.
Commissioner Oman stated the Ordinance should be passed as soon as possible, as it is well -
written and concise, and addresses concerns raised by the community.
There was a motion by Commissioner Oman and seconded by Commissioner Hester to recommend
City Council approval of the Tenant Protection Ordinance. The motion passed.
Chair Goodell stated he supports expediting this Ordinance as much as possible.
Commissioner Donnelly asked whether the lawsuit regarding the St. Paul Ordinance affects this
Ordinance in any way, and whether the City should be concerned about lawsuits.
Ms. Beekman stated the City Attorney’s office drafted the proposed Ordinance and followed the
proceedings in St. Paul very closely, although no decisions were made in that case.
Mr. Spaid stated the proposed Ordinance is quite different from St. Paul’s Ordinance, as it focuses
on two items – notice for non-renewal and evictions. He added there is always a risk for a lawsuit
in this arena, but this Ordinance is taking a more targeted approach toward anti-displacement.
Chair Goodell thanked everyone for their input, and for sharing their stories and concerns. He
added it has been very moving and he appreciates all the comments. He noted the issue of tenant
rights and protections is of primary concern to the City Council and Commissions, and there will
be many more discussions on this issue.
A resident thanked the Housing Commission for listening to them and expressed her appreciation
for everything the City is trying to do for them.
Another resident thanked the Housing Commission for listening. She added she is overwhelmed
and hopeful that things will work out. She added the Commission and City Staff explained things
well, and she hopes that the City will move as fast as possible so change can come, and they can
be happy in their homes.
Lovetee requested a recap of the timetable for the Ordinance. Mr. Anderson stated the first reading
of the proposed Ordinance will be at the City Council’s November 8, 2021 meeting, at which they
will call for a second reading and public hearing, to be held at the City Council’s December 13,
Page 148 of 194Page 253 of 299
Page 8
2021 meeting. He noted the earliest the proposed Ordinance would go into effect would be mid-
January 2022.
NEW NEIGHBOR WELCOME PROGRAM
Chair Goodell stated there have been two deliveries of New Neighbor welcome bags since the
Housing Commission’s last meeting, and they covered approximately 100 homes. He added there
are 139 homes left on the list, and he would like to suggest a few weekend dates for deliveries. He
noted, after the last meeting, he sent out a poll with potential dates, and he can do that again. The
Commissioners agreed.
City Council Liaison Kris Lawrence-Anderson requested that she be added to the email
distribution list. Chair Goodell agreed.
Chair Goodell thanked Commissioners Oman and Yang for delivering bags with him last time. He
thanked Mr. Anderson for putting the welcome bags together.
COUNCIL LIAISON REPORT
City Council Liaison Lawrence-Anderson stated City Staff are updating the City calendar with
links to Commission meetings. She requested that the Housing Commission meeting information
be sent to City Clerk Barb Suciu to be added to the calendar. She added she would like to receive
links to the Charter Commission meetings as well.
City Council Liaison Lawrence-Anderson stated the City Council will be finalizing 2022 budgets
at their first meeting in December.
City Council Liaison Lawrence-Anderson stated the City is working to secure the safety of
residents and City Staff in preparation for the trial of Kim Potter which starts on November 30,
2021.
City Council Liaison Lawrence-Anderson stated she hopes to request a City Council review of the
issue of solicitor’s licenses in terms of predatory practices. She added this could be related to
tenant protections.
Chair Goodell asked whether there has been any movement from the City Council on Commission
re-appointments. He stated he received Commissioner Amdahl’s resignation recently, so there
will be another opening. He added Commissioner Amdahl has been on the Housing Commission
since 2008.
City Council Liaison Lawrence-Anderson stated that is very sad, and she will reach out to
Commissioner Amdahl.
City Council Liaison Lawrence-Anderson stated the City Council reviewed several applications at
our their meeting, and additional appointments will be reviewed at the next meeting in November.
Page 149 of 194Page 254 of 299
Page 9
Chair Goodell asked whether that will include re-appointments for Commissioners whose terms
have expired. City Council Liaison Lawrence-Anderson confirmed this.
CHAIRPERSONS REPORT
Chair Goodell expressed his appreciation to the Commissioners at tonight’s meeting. He thanked
City Staff for their hard work on the proposed Ordinance.
OTHER BUSINESS
There was no other business addressed by the Commission.
ADJOURNMENT
There was a motion by Commissioner Oman and seconded by Commissioner Yang to adjourn the
meeting. The motion passed. The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission adjourned at 8:41 p.m.
__________________________________
Chair Goodell
Page 150 of 194Page 255 of 299
2/15/22 -1- DRAFT
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND STATE OF MINNESOTA
REGULAR SESSION
FEBRUARY 15, 2022
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission was called to order by Chairperson Goodell at 7:00
p.m. The meeting was conducted virtually.
MEETING ATTENDEES
Chair Mark Goodell
Commissioner De’Ja ’Carter
Commissioner Michael Donnelly
Commissioner Zarita Hester
Commissioner Paul Oman
City Staff present: Staff Liaison Jesse Anderson, and City Council Liaison Kris Lawrence-
Anderson.
Also present: Adam; Alexander Koenig; Marty McDonough, MHA; Fadumo Mohamed, ACER;
Lovetee Polahn.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
There was a motion by Commissioner Oman and seconded by Commissioner Carter to approve
the agenda as submitted. The motion passed.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
There was a motion by Commissioner Oman and seconded by Commissioner Hester to approve
the minutes of the Housing Commission meeting on January 18, 2022. The motion passed.
VICE CHAIR ELECTION
Chair Goodell explained they did not have full attendance at the least meeting, so it was decided
to move the election to the February meeting. He noted the role of the Vice Chair is to run the
meeting in the case the Chair is unavailable. He added people can nominate themselves or
nominate another member of the Commission. Hearing no nominations, Chair Goodell stated the
position would remain open for the time being.
UPDATE ON TENANT PROTECTION ORDINANCE PROGRESS
Staff Liaison Jesse Anderson explained the Tenant Protection Ordinance has been presented to the
Council a few times. He noted the Ordinance was presented to the Commission and there was a
first reading of the Ordinance in November 2021. The City Council met on December 13, 2021,
and held the public hearing on this item. There was a lot of public comment at the hearing. After
Page 151 of 194Page 256 of 299
2/15/22 -2- DRAFT
the public hearing and Council discussion, the vote on the second reading of the ordinance was
delayed until January 24, 2022.
Mr. Anderson stated based on direction from the City Council in response to the public hearing,
Staff held two meetings with landlords to discuss the proposed ordinance. Then based on the
feedback received, and in discussions with both landlords and housing advocates, staff made three
modifications to the proposed ordinance. The Council met on February 14, 2022 and requested
additional feedback from the Housing Commission.
Mr. Anderson stated there were three changes suggested and presented to the Council on February
14. First, there was an addition of a provision that would require property managers to track and
report to the city any non-renewals of leases, and the reason for the action.
Mr. Anderson stated the second change was to reduce the eviction notification period from 30 days
to 14 days. The change would match Minneapolis' ordinance and would keep any actions to within
a single rent cycle, which was the request of the landlords.
Mr. Anderson added the last change to the Ordinance was to add a provision which would allow
landlords the option of either following the non-renewal without just cause requirements in the
ordinance or providing a 90-day lease termination notice without needing to give a reason. This
would provide options to deal with the examples that property managers raised at the public
hearing, but would still allow for a greater notice to renters than the existing 30-day notice period.
Mr. Anderson noted there was an added separability and sever ability statement, which makes the
Ordinance stronger legally.
Mr. Anderson stated the first version has a 30-day eviction notice and only just cause non-renewal.
The second version, which was the most recent version proposed to the Council, includes a 14-day
eviction notice and just case non-renewal or a 90-day notice for non-renewal.
Commissioner Hester asked if the 14-day notice would happen after the grace period landlords
tend to give. Mr. Anderson stated the notice depends on the lease. They cannot provide notice of
eviction if the tenant is not in violation of the lease. He added if the tenant wanted to avoid an
eviction being filed on their record, they would have to leave within 14 days. However, if they
went through eviction court, they could continue to live there through the court process.
Commissioner Hester stated she has a concern with landlords who give people a grace period for
late rent or for people that have to pay in increments. The Ordinance could change the landlord’s
flexibility. She added there have been concerns brought by the public that the Ordinance could
cause a long-term impact of increasing the rent.
Mr. Anderson stated a landlord could file the notice, be it a 14-day or 30-day notice, but they
would not be required to file the eviction paperwork just because they provided the tenant with
notice. He added landlords have mentioned they would be less flexible with the proposed eviction
notice period.
Page 152 of 194Page 257 of 299
2/15/22 -3- DRAFT
Commissioner Donnelly asked when an eviction goes on someone’s record. If someone is only
14 days late on rent and receives an eviction on their record, it makes it more difficult for them to
obtain housing later on. Mr. Anderson stated the effect of an eviction record depends on the type
of application they are using. He added the eviction record would make it more difficult for the
person to find housing. Commissioner Donnelly explained he doesn’t agree with the 14-day
eviction notice as that would negatively impact the renter later on.
Chair Goodell stated one of the comments was that 30 days of notice is extreme. He asked what
other communities have for eviction notice. Mr. Anderson stated St. Louis Park has a 7-day notice
and Minneapolis has a 14-day notice for evictions. No other cities in the State have an eviction
notice period. He added Community Development Director Meg Beekman mentioned pending
legislation that would require a 14-day notice, but that is early on.
Commissioner Donnelly asked if there is any information about the differing effects on tenants
between the 7-day notice in St. Louis Park and the 14-day notice in Minneapolis. Mr. Anderson
stated a Councilmember asked for Staff to reach out to Minneapolis for information on the
question, but housing advocacy groups would have better information on that as they are the ones
working directly with renters.
Commissioner Hester noted her agreement with the 30-day filing notice component because
evictions can be difficult to get expunged or wait for the eviction to leave their record after seven
years.
Chair Goodell asked the Commission if they were open to hearing feedback from guests.
Commissioner Donnelly stated he would like to hear from guests. There were no objections from
Council.
Fadumo Mohamed, Housing Organizer with African Career and Education Resource (ACER),
explained ACER is a housing advocacy group based in the north suburbs. She asked if they could
do a round of introductions to get to know one another better.
Ms. Mohamed stated ACER worked with a Brooklyn Center tenant in 2021 who had an eviction
filed against even though she didn’t know what she was doing wrong. The idea of the notice period
is to give tenants time to fix the issue. If they are unable to fix the issue, a tenant would need to
work with an attorney. Landlords have attorneys on retainer, but tenants would need to find an
attorney. The Ordinance is meant to protect low income folks, and there are limited housing
attorney resources available. Housing advocacy organizations take several weeks for the intake
process and being assigned to an attorney. Tenants must also take time off work to attend eviction
court hearings. Ms. Mohamed explained the 30-day notice would allow for the tenant to obtain
resources to fight the eviction.
Lovetee Polahn explained she is an organizer with Georgetown Apartments. She stated landlords
are not doing maintenance work such as carpet. Tenants agree to pay rent if the facilities are being
taken care of. Landlords are not doing their part.
Page 153 of 194Page 258 of 299
2/15/22 -4- DRAFT
Chair Goodell asked Mr. Anderson what action tenants can take if landlords are not maintaining
their facilities. Mr. Anderson stated the City has a Code they enforce for rental properties. Carpet
issues can be addressed through Code enforcement only if the carpet is a tripping hazard. He
added City Staff have conversed with landlords regarding low interest loans to dedicate affordable
units in a property.
Chair Goodell stated renters can contact the City if they have concerns. City Council Liaison
Lawrence-Anderson put a phone number into the chat feature for the City.
Chair Goodell asked how long it takes for the City to respond to reports. Mr. Anderson stated they
can have inspectors at a property within a day or two. If an inspector finds a violation, they would
notify the landlord of the changes that need to be made. If the landlord does not address the
changes, then the City would cite the landlord. Mr. Anderson noted it usually does not get to the
point of citation. He added rental properties are inspected before licensing.
Chair Goodell added some tenants have expressed concerns about retaliation through non-
renewals. Mr. Anderson stated landlords have noted there are anti-retaliation policies in place that
prohibit them from non-renewals as a form of retaliation. However, landlords currently don’t need
to provide a reason for non-renewal. Therefore, the landlords are not retaliating in the eyes of the
law.
Ms. Mohamed stated the tenants she work with support the first draft of the Ordinance with the
30-day notice and just cause for non-renewals. It is easy for landlords to hide behind non-renewals
currently. If landlords have concrete evidence for wrongdoing, then they go the route of eviction.
Chair Goodell stated landlords have commented the just cause non-renewal requirement would
prevent them from getting rid of bad tenants. He asked if anyone on the call has had the experience
of a tenant moving out due to bad neighbors.
Commissioner Hester stated she works in housing. She has not worked with tenants that have
moved due to bad neighbors, but she has worked with landlords that have to file a lot of paperwork
due to the population. There is an addendum to leases that require no drugs or criminal activity in
rental units. Commissioner Hester stated if landlords are concerned about removing problematic
tenants, then they could add an addendum for tenants to sign.
Commissioner Hester noted one landlord stated people have moved out of their properties because
of one nuisance neighbor. Being an annoying neighbor is not a viable excuse to push back on the
Ordinance so much.
Mr. Anderson stated one landlord gave an example of a tenant smoking marijuana. A neighbor
moved out due to the smell, but the landlord was unable to remove the tenant who may have been
smoking marijuana.
Commissioner Hester explained someone could be using marijuana for medical practices and
removing someone for medical marijuana use would be discriminatory. Landlords are just trying
Page 154 of 194Page 259 of 299
2/15/22 -5- DRAFT
to keep loopholes in place to benefit themselves. Renters are able to move if they do not like who
they live next to.
Commissioner Donnelly stated he did a quick google search, and an eviction notification would
not count against a renter in the future.
City Council Liaison Lawrence-Anderson stated the Council had a very lengthy discussion and
she wanted the item to go to the Housing Commission for review. She stated they need buy-in
from landlords and from tenants, so they need to compromise to create an Ordinance that almost
everyone can agree on.
City Council Liaison Lawrence-Anderson noted she is worried about the unintended consequences
and long-term effects of the Ordinance. They want to make sure they have a livable City while
maintaining housing stock. St. Paul was sued for their ordinance, but the Brooklyn Center City
Attorney has worked to remedy some of the issues St. Paul had in their ordinance. If there isn’t a
compromise, the Ordinance will go to court. No one wants an eviction to happen.
City Council Liaison Lawrence-Anderson stated that non-renewal is the only option for landlords
besides evictions. The second draft of the Ordinance would allow landlords to have the option of
90-day lease termination notice without needing to give a reason or to do a just cause non-renewal.
The 14-day notice in question is not a 14-day notice for the person to move out.
City Council Liaison Lawrence-Anderson stated she would have liked all parties to be present at
the November 2021 meeting, similar to the meeting held in January 2022 because the meeting was
very informative. She noted the area of just cause notification is where people are hung up, but
the Council wants the best outcome for everyone.
City Council Liaison Lawrence-Anderson added she is concerned the proposed Ordinance will not
address the concerns expressed by the tenants. They need to consider what the City can and cannot
do and make sure the City doesn’t take over the role of landlord.
Ms. Polahn stated they staged a protest last year. The tenants had their cars broken into, and they
requested security cameras from the landlord. Right after the protest, two tenants were evicted.
She explained she has always paid her rent on time, but she is still facing retaliation. She asked
how landlords can distinguish between problematic and non-problematic tenants.
Chair Goodell clarified the first Ordinance requires a just cause for non-renewal, while the second
Ordinance allows for a just cause non-renewal or for a 90-day eviction notification. Therefore,
attending a protest would not be a reason for a just cause. Ms. Polahn thanked Chair Goodell for
the clarification.
Ms. Mohamed stated housing advocates are working to balance power. The fair thing to do would
be to give renters protection. Home is more than four walls; it is where people do life. Some
people view rentals as a way to make money while others view it as a foundation of their lives.
Page 155 of 194Page 260 of 299
2/15/22 -6- DRAFT
Ms. Mohamed added landlords are business owners. It is their job to attend meetings relevant to
conducting their business. It is not fair to punish renters because landlords fail to attend meetings.
It is not the role of the Council to ensure landlords attend certain meetings.
Ms. Mohamed stated there are low vacancy rates, and it will take several years for the vacancy
rates to level out. Housing instability leads to community instability. The entire community has
a stake in the matter.
Marty McDonough introduced himself as Director of Government Affairs for the Minnesota Multi
Housing Association (MHA). He stated the Council meeting happened just last night, so Ms.
Mohamed was not being fair to landlords with her comments. He added the item was on the
Council’s agenda before landlords knew it was happening, so advocacy groups are behind when
they are forced to respond to an ordinance.
Mr. McDonough explained MHA has been trying to work with the Council. In short, a lease is a
legal document. Tenants know the rules of the lease when they sign a lease. Currently, if a renter
is late on their rent, the landlord reaches out on the third day or so to check in. After a couple of
weeks of non-payment, the landlord will check in again. Forcing a 14-day or 30-day eviction
notice period will push landlords to require the rent is due on the first day of the month and not
have as much flexibility. From there, the landlord is in the position to file the 14-day or 30-day
notice on the second day of the month. Filing the notification will create unnecessary stress in
landlord to tenant relationships. Mr. McDonough stated it should be no surprise to tenants for
being evicted for not paying their rent.
Mr. McDonough added the current law states that non-renewal is the same time period for the
tenant and the landlord. A landlord has to give 60 or 30 days’ notice if they are not going to renew
the lease. A tenant has the same requirement if they are not going to renew the lease. It has been
that way for a long time. There are times when a tenant may not be a good match for the property
and may be receiving complaints from neighbors. Good neighbors are the ones that would have
to suffer the effects of the bad neighbors.
Mr. McDonough stated he believes they should start the process over. At the Council meeting, it
appeared the Mayor and Councilmembers disliked both drafts of the Ordinance. The stakeholders
should all get together to create something more people support.
Chair Goodell added they had a discussion on the matter back in November and had community
comment at the Housing Commission meeting at that time, so it is not a new topic for the Housing
Commission to address.
Commissioner Hester thanked Mr. McDonough for his comments. If the Ordinance goes into
effect and the landlords change their practices, it is their choice. Landlords can continue to
function the same way. The Ordinance is a protection for renters with landlords who do not do
their jobs. There are plenty of landlords doing their jobs. The Ordinance gives a baseline for new
landlords on how to function as a good landlord.
Page 156 of 194Page 261 of 299
2/15/22 -7- DRAFT
Commissioner Hester stated a renter is still a tenant until they move out. The should still be treated
with respect by all parties while they remain a tenant. She explained she is pro-tenant, but that
does not mean she is anti-landlord. She added giving landlords the wiggle room to choose the
option of a 90-day eviction notice without cause does not hold landlords accountable.
Mr. McDonough stated a 90-day non-renewal notice would be the last 90 days of the lease. A
non-renewal only occurs at the end of a leasing period, and it is a business decision. The notice
periods would cause the landlords to be out of even more rent money, which may be required for
the landlords to afford mortgages.
Commissioner Hester stated there may need to be another conversation about ways to help cover
the expense of the landlords if they do not receive the money owed to them. Mr. McDonough
noted his agreement with Commissioner Hester’s comment.
Ms. Mohamed stated City Council Liaison Lawrence-Anderson’s comments about not swaying
too far one way or another comes with the assumption that there is currently a fair balance. There
is a power imbalance, and tenants have very little if any negotiating power with the current market.
The Ordinance allows for landlords to remove bad tenants within the confines of the law.
Commissioner Donnelly stated he would like more information on what reasons for just cause
could be. He added even 90 days may not be enough time for a tenant to find another affordable
housing unit. He asked for response on each of his comments.
Mr. Anderson showed a slide with a list of just cause reasons. The reasons include non-payment
of rent, material non-compliance, tenant non-renewal, occupancy by property owner of family
member, building demolishing or conversion, rehabilitation or renovation, completing with a
government order to vacate, and occupancy conditioned on employment.
Commissioner Donnelly asked for further explanation of the material non-compliance just cause.
Mr. Anderson stated any violation of the lease would be an example of material non-compliance.
Potential forms of material non-compliance could be having a pet against the rules or property
damage.
Commissioner Donnelly asked what the differences would be for a landlord between a 90-day
notice and a 30-day notice. Mr. McDonough stated behaviors are not covered on the list of just
causes. Having large parties, smoking, or propping open doors are things that bother neighbors
that would not be covered for the just cause non-renewal.
Mr. McDonough stated the goal of the MHA is making property ownership a profession and
keeping landlords out of trouble. He noted Brooklyn Center has good tenants in the community.
In most situations, the landlord doesn’t have to give a reason for non-renewal just as the tenant
doesn’t have to give a reason for non-renewal. He explained there was a circumstance where a
tenant took pictures of children at the facility’s pool. It is not against the rules of his lease, so the
just cause list would mean the landlord couldn’t do anything to protect the children. St. Paul’s
tenant protection ordinance was rescinded after being ruled unjust by a federal judge. Ultimately,
the just cause requirement will tie the hands of landlords from addressing behavioral issues.
Page 157 of 194Page 262 of 299
2/15/22 -8- DRAFT
Commissioner Donnelly asked what effects the 60-day notice would have in comparison to a 90-
day notice. Mr. McDonough stated the MHA uses a the 60-day notice option in their leases. Even
if a staff member were harassed, they would have to continue dealing with the tenant for the
entirety of the notice period.
Mr. McDonough added landlords do not issue non-renewals for good tenants. Chair Goodell stated
people are worried about retaliation for protesting living conditions or landlords not maintaining
the facilities. He asked if Mr. McDonough can understand that. Mr. McDonough stated he can
understand that, but it is against the law for landlords to retaliate. Chair Goodell stated renters
cannot prove retaliation if there is no reason for a non-renewal. Mr. McDonough stated renters
can claim anything is retaliation. There are times when a renter is not a good fit for a property,
and both the property owner and the tenant should have a right to act on that poor fit.
Commissioner Carter noted her agreement with Mr. McDonough. There are times when a tenant
may have poor attitudes or other issues that make them a poor fit for the living situation. She
added 60 days is enough time for someone to find a new place to live. If a tenant is having issues
with a landlord, they would not want to continue living there.
Commissioner Hester stated she has no criminal background, a full-time job, and a decent credit
score. However, it took her six months to find somewhere to live even before the pandemic.
Having worked in housing, she has never been able to house someone within a month, but she may
be able to house someone within three months if they are lucky.
Commissioner Hester stated taking photos of children on private property, that is a safety concern,
and there should be something in the lease that should speak to that. If someone is causing harm
to other tenants, that should be addressed in the lease.
Ms. Mohamed stated just case non-renewals has been approved by the United States Supreme
Court, so it has judicial backing. The St. Paul ordinance covered a variety of items, so it is
speculation to say the just cause portion caused it to be overturned.
Ms. Mohamed added it is a good question to ask why a tenant would want to live somewhere
where they have a problem with their landlord. She explained people live in certain places because
of the communities, school districts, proximity to amenities, or other considerations. Moving a
child to a new school district has long-term negative effects on the youth and the overall
community.
Commissioner Oman stated the 14-day notice is more than enough time for an eviction
notification, and they are never going to find a solution that everyone likes. He added that the
issue of landlords losing money is disingenuous because almost all leases require first and last
month’s rent to be paid in advance.
Commissioner Carter stated not every landlord requires first and last months of rent.
Commissioner Oman stated the landlord does have the option to require first and last months of
rent in the lease if they choose to protect themselves in that way. Commissioner Carter stated if a
Page 158 of 194Page 263 of 299
2/15/22 -9- DRAFT
landlord does not require first month’s rent, the last month’s rent, and a security deposit, it is better
for the tenant. There aren’t many tenants who can afford to pay all of those expenses at one time.
Chair Goodell asked if there is a requirement for a 30-day or 60-day non-renewal notice in leases
or if that is a choice made by the landlords in their writing of the lease. Mr. McDonough stated
the only requirement is that both the tenant and the landlord have the opportunity to not renew.
Commissioner Donnelly noted his agreement with Commissioner Carter that collecting first
month’s rent and last month’s rent does not guarantee the landlord will not lose money. Landlords
may lose multiple months of rent in the process of removing a tenant, especially if the property
owner is more flexible with the timeline of a tenant paying their rent.
Chair Goodell noted his agreement with Commissioner Donnelly about losing money as a
landlord. Chair Goodell noted he is a part-time landlord, and losing money is the cost of being a
landlord. The Commission needs to balance the needs of the renters and the property owners.
From the perspective of a landlord, they would want very little regulation. On the other side, the
renter would like as much regulation as possible. Ultimately, the Ordinance needs to balance those
two perspectives.
Commissioner Donnelly stated he agreed with the comments of Chair Goodell. Being a business
owner comes with risk, and they must be prepared for unprecedented circumstances with a
financial cushion.
Chair Goodell stated the Council is looking for feedback and a recommendation from the Housing
Commission about the two versions of the Ordinance. He asked Mr. Anderson what the concerns
of the Council were.
Mr. Anderson stated there were questions from multiple Councilmembers regarding the success
of the tenant protections in Minneapolis and other items. The Mayor seemed to prefer the first
version of the Ordinance. Councilmembers have asked for more data and more discussion on the
matter.
Chair Goodell noted the original version of the Ordinance was recommended by the Housing
Commission previously. Mr. Anderson confirmed he original version of the Ordinance was
recommended by the Housing Commission previously. He added the Council is open to
recommendations beyond the two options that have already been presented to them.
Commissioner Hester stated she can appreciate the option for a 14-day eviction notice, but not
without a just cause non-renewal requirement. The 14-day notice doesn’t go on the record, but it
provides them the opportunity to resolve any issues with the landlord.
Commissioner Donnelly noted his agreement with Commissioner Hester. He explained he would
like to find a compromise between the two versions, but he does not have a specific preference
either way. Commissioner Donnelly added he would like to hear from a landlord and a housing
advocate as to which of the portions of the versions are most important.
Page 159 of 194Page 264 of 299
2/15/22 -10- DRAFT
Ms. Mohamed stated both portions of the Ordinance are important. Ms. Polahn agreed with Ms.
Mohamed. Ms. Mohamed added the notice and the just cause components are bare bones of tenant
protections.
City Council Liaison Lawrence-Anderson pointed out the 30 days and the 14 days refer to pre-
eviction notices. Chair Goodell asked City Council Liaison Lawrence-Anderson to outline the
process. City Council Liaison Lawrence-Anderson stated she does not understand the entirety of
the process.
City Council Liaison Lawrence-Anderson noted the purpose of the non-renewal currently is to
avoid the eviction process. Landlords have expressed concerns that evictions would increase with
a just cause non-renewal requirement. The 14-day notice and the 30-day notice would allow for a
grace period to resolve concerns before an eviction were to be filed.
City Council Liaison Lawrence-Anderson stated she was in the room with HOMELine, ACER,
and other tenant advocacy groups at two meetings. At the December Council meeting, she
suggested they get all affected parties in the room together to discuss the Ordinance. From there,
MHA, Minneapolis Realtors, and various Brooklyn Center landlords joined the discussion. The
landlords have said they want to make the Ordinance work, but they do not want the end result to
be more harmful.
City Council Liaison Lawrence-Anderson added there may be a third meeting incorporating all of
the parties. It was her hope for that meeting to happen before presenting the Ordinance to the
Council for a second time.
Commissioner Oman stated the second version is a good compromise between the interested
parties.
Commissioner Hester noted she has concern about the language surrounding the 90-day non-
renewal without just cause as that is too much of an open arena for landlords. Chair Goodell asked
if she had an idea of a better time period for the non-renewal without just cause. Commissioner
Hester stated they could do something close to 60 days, but she didn’t have a specific timeline in
mind. She explained landlords can use the non-renewal without just cause to get rid of tenants,
and the language did not sit well with her.
Ms. Polahn stated when laws are made, it may affect people positively or negatively. Poor people
are the ones who are more likely to be negatively impacted. Many landlords don’t live in the
community, and they aren’t familiar with the suffering they experience. Just cause non-renewal
would be fair for tenants.
Ms. Mohamed explained the last meeting with landlords was very eye-opening for her. Landlords
see property as a source of income rather than a life-or-death situation. Housing is crucially
connected to health. One landlord said they put all of their tenants on a 60-day lease regardless of
their history, which is an example of predatory behavior by landlords. The two portions of the
Ordinance being asked for by tenants and housing advocates is a bare minimum to provide stability
to renters.
Page 160 of 194Page 265 of 299
2/15/22 -11- DRAFT
Chair Goodell stated he has heard that the Housing Commission feels an ordinance is important.
Commissioners Oman, Donnelly, and Hester stated they agree an ordinance is important. Chair
Goodell added he is hearing there is not a consensus between the two options. Commissioners
Oman, Donnelly, and Hester noted their agreement with that statement.
Chair Goodell asked if there was consensus for the 14-day or 30-day pre-eviction notification.
Commissioner Hester stated she would be okay with the 14-day pre-eviction notification, but she
would prefer the 30-day pre-eviction notification.
Commissioner Oman stated he would support the 30-day pre-eviction notification, but he could be
okay with the 14-day pre-eviction notification.
Commissioner Donnelly noted they need to find a compromise, and the pre-eviction notification
seems easier to compromise on than the other portion of the Ordinance. Therefore, it would be a
good compromise to allow for a 14-day pre-eviction notification rather than a 30-day eviction
notification.
Commissioner Oman stated a concern he has heard with the 90-day non-renewal just case
requirement is already built into some leases so that both the landlord and the tenant would have
the ability to not renew the lease with the same amount of time. If they require the 90-day non-
renewal just cause portion of the Ordinance, they would take away that portion of the lease
agreements. That is likely why the compromise was suggested, and it is reasonable.
Chair Goodell stated the first proposal requires a just cause for all non-renewals, and the second
proposed draft gives landlords the options of a just cause for a non-renewal or a 90-day notice for
non-renewals without cause. He asked if that is a correct summary. Mr. Anderson confirmed
Chair Goodell’s summary was correct. He added the first proposal would require a 30-day pre-
eviction notice, and the second proposal would require a 14-day pre-eviction notice.
Chair Goodell stated the lease can determine the notification for either side to choose not to renew
the lease. If they pass the Ordinance to give landlords the options of a just cause for a non-renewal
or a 90-day notice for non-renewals without cause, then there would be an imbalance for the
landlords to provide longer notice than the tenants.
Chair Goodell stated people have said they would prefer the 30-day eviction notification, but they
would accept the 14-day pre-eviction notification as a point of compromise. He asked for
comments regarding the just cause portion of the Ordinance.
Commissioner Oman stated having 90 days of notice for a non-renewal without cause is a
reasonable compromise. Commissioner Hester stated having 90 days of notice for a non-renewal
without cause is not agreeable because there should be a reason for the landlord to not renew the
lease.
Page 161 of 194Page 266 of 299
2/15/22 -12- DRAFT
Chair Goodell noted his agreement with Commissioner Hester considering the current housing
climate. He asked if Commissioner Carter or Commissioner Donnelly had any additional
comments.
Commissioner Carter stated she would prefer the second version of the Ordinance where the
landlords have the option of a just cause for a non-renewal or a 90-day notice for non-renewals
without cause.
Commissioner Donnelly added 90 days doesn’t seem to be enough time because of the limited
housing options.
Chair Goodell summarized the Housing Commission agrees there is a need for the ordinance, the
Commission favors the 30-day pre-eviction notification but can compromise with the 14-day pre-
eviction notification, and the Commission is split on the just cause provision.
Commissioner Donnelly pointed out they had not discussed the provision requiring the tracking of
data related to evictions and non-renewals. Commissioner Hester stated the data needs to be
tracked.
Commissioner Oman explained he has not heard any concerns about the data collection provision,
so it is a reasonable portion of the Ordinance. Chair Goodell noted his agreement with the
comments of other Commissioners.
Mr. Anderson read the portion of the Ordinance related to data collection requirements. He
explained the landlords do not have to report the data to the City unless requested. Chair Goodell
asked if the City asks landlords for any metrics regularly. Mr. Anderson stated the City requests
rent rolls occasionally, but not regularly otherwise.
Chair Goodell thanked Commissioner Donnelly for mentioning the data collection portion of the
Ordinance. He stated the consensus of the Commission is in favor of the data collection portion
of the Ordinance.
Commissioner Hester moved and Commissioner Oman seconded to provide feedback to the City
Council that the Housing Commission agrees there is a need for a tenant protection ordinance,
favors the 30-day pre-eviction notification but can compromise with the 14-day pre-eviction
notification, is split on the just cause non-renewal provision, and supports the data collection
provision. The motion passed.
Chair Goodell thanked the Commissioners and the community members for their thoughtful
discussion and comments regarding the Ordinance.
UPDATE ON CDGB PROGRAMS
Mr. Anderson stated the City Council reviews the allocation of the 2022 Community Development
Block Grant (CDGB) funds. There is $258,000 available in the fund for 2022. In previous years,
the City has allocated approximately $100,000 to Down Payment Assistance Program and the
remaining $158,000 towards the Hennepin County Home Rehab Program. In 2021, they had four
Page 162 of 194Page 267 of 299
2/15/22 -13- DRAFT
loans close through the Down Payment Assistance Program.
Mr. Anderson explained the down payment assistance program is not very productive as there are
very few homes available in the City and it is a complicated process to get the loan. There is still
around $215,000 in the down payment assistance fund.
Mr. Anderson noted the Council recommended the 2022 CDGB funds be used entirely for the
Hennepin County Home Rehab Program and for the $215,000 to be retained for the Down Payment
Assistance Program. There is a contingency that the funds may be reallocated based on the
outcome of the housing study.
Mr. Anderson explained the Hennepin County Home Rehab Program isa forgivable loan for low-
income homeowners to improve their homes. The Down Payment Assistance Program offers
$10,000 for the purchase of the home and is forgiven after ten years.
Chair Goodell noted the housing stock availability is not something the City can control. He asked
if the City can do anything to make the application process less onerous. Mr. Anderson stated the
City has partnered with the Center for Energy and Environment (CEE), which is the agency that
processes the applications and PRG, which is an organization that helps people on the path towards
home ownership. PRG helps folks prepare to own a house and CEE helps with the application.
Chair Goodell asked how the City is advertising the programs. Mr. Anderson stated a mail flyer
was sent out to every tenant in the City and reached out to businesses to encourage employees to
consider the program. They also sent it to schools in the hopes they would send the information
home with students for their parents. Because of those efforts, PRG saw a 34% increase in calls
from Brooklyn Center. Mr. Anderson added they had two loans close through the Down Payment
Assistance Program in January 2022.
COUNCIL LIAISON REPORT
City Council Liaison Lawrence-Anderson asked if they wanted a report from her due to the late
hour. Chair Goodell stated City Council Liaison Lawrence-Anderson could share anything she
thought was important.
City Council Liaison Lawrence-Anderson stated the Tenant Protection Ordinance has been a focus
of the Council’s. She added the Implementation Committee process is underway, and the Council
will receive Committee recommendations at the next meeting. She stated they should fill the
existing Commissions and address those who have been serving with expired terms before
selecting the Implementation Committee. The Council has been negligent in making those
appointments, and they need to take care of the existing business first.
Chair Goodell thanked City Council Liaison Lawrence-Anderson for her report.
CHAIRPERSONS REPORT
Chair Goodell thanked Commissioners who have been able to attend the additional meetings and
their efforts.
Page 163 of 194Page 268 of 299
2/15/22 -14- DRAFT
OTHER BUSINESS
City Council Liaison Lawrence-Anderson thanked the Commission for their thorough discussion
and the time they have spent serving the Housing Commission.
ADJOURNMENT
There was a motion by Commissioner Oman and seconded by Commissioner Donnelly to adjourn
the meeting. The motion passed. The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission adjourned at 9:07
p.m.
__________________________________
Chair Goodell
Page 164 of 194Page 269 of 299
Tenant / Landlord Tenant Protection Meeting Recap
January 12, 2022
There were a total of 25 participants, 3 city staff, city attorney, and 2 council members.
Staff provided a brief overview the current tenant protection ordinance stating that it applies to the
transfer of ownership.
Staff provided a brief recap of the concerns that were brought up at the ARM meeting. Those concerns
were:
What is the definition of affordable housing, needed some clarification about affordable.
The city getting involved with a private contract between landlord and tenant, city getting
involved with contract law.
Landlords calling the police for service would impact their license type.
If landlords are required to give a 30 day notice it would further delay their rent collection and
could take as long as 90 days to get the unit back.
There were questions about the data used to come up with the ordinance.
State statutes give tenants’ rights such retaliation protection and tenant remedies act in the
event that the repairs are not being done.
Possible compromise such as shortening the 30 day notice to 14 days and replacing just cause
non-renewal with a notice period for just cause.
Staff provided an explained the 30 day eviction notice. Minneapolis give a 14 day and St. Louis Park’s is
7 days. Staff cited that the city is open for a discussion.
The concern regarding the 30 day windows is that it is too long to resolve the issue and would push it
into another month of the tenant potentially being late again on rent. Landlords often work with
tenants on resolving the matter and requiring a 30 day notice would mean that a notice would be given
on the 2nd day requiring eviction which may case tenants to panic and break down the communication
between landlord and tenant.
The most common issues that cause late rent is car breakdown or medical bill. If the notice is 30 days,
most landlords isn’t willing to do a payment plan beyond 30 days.
Staff gave an example of issuing a code violation notice. Staff stated the notice is not a citation but the
notice states the amount of time given and also includes language about an abatement or a citation.
Once a payment plan is entered into and the tenant breaks that agreement, a Hennepin county judge
will throw the case out and would require a new notice.
The citation doesn’t pay the mortgage and a tenant who doesn’t pay impacts the landlord’s mortgage.
Pushing the rent back 30 days would compound the amount of rent due making it more difficult for
them to pay.
Sam from Homeline stated that landlords who make payment arrangements and could extend for 30-60
and if the tenant defaults the arrangement could be held up in court.
Page 165 of 194Page 270 of 299
If the notice is sent with language stating that the tenant is behind on rent, and rent isn’t paid, another
notice will be sent. The tenant would be behind on rent and before housing court, landlords have bent
over backwards to assist landlords. Many landlords reach out and willing to work something out.
A notice that states Eviction will cause a lot of stress, notices for noise violations already cause a lot of
stress, and a notice stating eviction will further cause stress. Tenants don’t know that they can call the
office to work out plan on how to pay the rent owed.
If a notice is not given to tenants and do not get a heads up they might not know that there is issue. A
suggestion was about crafting the notice so it is not threatening or intimidating. Regardless of the
language in the notice, the 30 day requirement would still mean the notice is given on day 2.
A concern about criminal would delay an eviction if a 30 day notice is required. It was stated that
criminal activity is exempt from the ordinance and there are state statutes that would allow for
expedited eviction.
Another concern was about the different rules that each city has in implementing tenant protection
laws. Staff stated that landlords should lobby MN Multi-Housing to lobby the legislature to pass laws
that would be implemented state wide.
Evictions take a long time and often times that tenants leave and landlords are not able to collect on the
back rent. If there are a few bad landlords only, why implement ordinance that impact the entire rental
property in the city. Further, the city already has a difficult rental license program and it is only
compounding regulation.
The cost of 30 days has impact on single family homes since there small margins on single family rentals
and as large investment companies leave and new ones move in, the cost of rent will increase. The
payment of rent language is in the lease and staff is willing to work with a date that will work with
everyone. It was suggested that the notice is shorted to 7 days. 7 days is not enough time for tenants
prepare and the more notice is preferred. Homeline suggested that the 30 day notice does not get
changed.
Staff stated that the courts have upheld Minneapolis and St. Louis Park’s ordinance so both dates would
be acceptable. 30 days would be in conflict with state statute, state statue is 14 days for a tenant to file
a rent abatement.
Landlords don’t want to file an eviction and have built a relationship with tenants. Using the word
eviction ruins the relationship. It was then stated that the relationship is a business relationship and not
friendship relationship.
An example of non-renewal just cause is a tenant who smokes marijuana but the landlord cannot evict
because there isn’t enough evidence which causes good tenants to move out. If the tenants are not
willing to testify, there is no way to get rid of the tenant. The only way would be to non-renew the
tenant. BC police does not respond to calls for service for marijuana and the current language would
require that the tenant is given an opportunity to correct the behavior.
Staff stated that there are real concerns that the city has continued to hear from residents about
maintenance and management practice and staff has to balance the interests of everyone.
Page 166 of 194Page 271 of 299
ARM Meeting Comments
We have 13 people that signed in, however, there were about 20 people that showed up. Emails (where
emails were provided) were sent to invite them back for the January 12 th meeting. Notes are not in any
particular order of discussion. Let me know if there are additions to this that I may have missed.
1. Questions were asked about the use of the word affordable housing and what would be
considered affordable housing. It was explained that affordable housing in the context of the
ordnance would be the rent amount based at 80% of AMI. The AMI amounts were referenced
in the ARM newsletter. It was suggested that the city adopt the state’s definition of affordable
housing.
2. The owner stated that due to the rent in Brooklyn Center, 80% of AMI would mean all properties
in the city are subject to this new ordinance since the rents are not more than the chart.
3. There were concerns about how the city is interfering with contract law since the contract is
between a landlord and tenant not with the city. There was a follow up about
enforcement. Staff explained that the ordinance would allow tenants to be more proactive and
would be able to use the ordinance as a defense in court. The city would not be enforcing the
ordinance.
4. A concern expressed if landlords are non-renewing because of police calls, they would need to
call the police for service which would ultimately impact their license type. Staff showed the
police calls for service chart and explained that not all calls for service would impact their license
type.
5. Many owners/landlords/managers expressed that they are already working with tenants on rent
issues and the ordinance would inhibit them to work with tenants since they would have to
serve a eviction notice after the 1st of them month.
6. A question about the data used for the reason to come up with the non-renewals. Staff
explained that the data for non-renewals do not exist however the data for eviction filings,
vacancy rates, and housing costs exist which was used to craft the ordinance to prevent further
displacement of low income families who lack housing options. Staff also cited the U of MN
study which showed the housing issues.
7. There was concern that the city would be creating an ordinance that would be in conflict with
state statutes around tenant rights. It was also expressed that retaliation is outlined in state
statutes along with rent escrow procedures for repair or other issues.
8. Questions about why staff didn’t engage landlords in a conversation sooner and waited till it
was about to be approved by city council.
9. Giving tenants a 30 day notice for eviction filing would mean that every tenant that does not pay
rent on the 1st will be served a notice of eviction. Tenants would be upset and cause additional
work for landlords. It would also further delay actual evictions up to 60 days and landlords
would be without rent up to 3 months without rent collection.
10. It would deter landlords from working with tenants, most already do try to work something out
if the tenants are behind on rent.
11. The city is allowing tenants who can’t pay rent to live rent free and not allowing the landlord to
get the tenant out sooner.
12. Retaliation is already a right under MN statute and if a landlord is retaliating, the tenant has
rights that they can utilize.
13. If landlord isn’t repairing things, the tenant can file a rent escrow which is protected under MN
statute as well.
Page 167 of 194Page 272 of 299
14. This ordinance is protecting bad tenants and allowing them to live in the unit while the good
tenants are going to suffer.
15. This is going to drive out good tenants because landlords won’t be able to evict bad tenants
quickly enough.
16. Just cause eviction would require that the landlords have enough evidence to prove in court
which is often difficult to do such as smoking or marijuana smoking.
17. The city should consider looking at St Louis Park’s tenant protection ordinance and change it to
7 day notice vs 30 day notice.
18. Comments were made about RentHelpMN and questions were asked if the city is helping with
tenants who need it. Staff stated that staff is not doing the technical assistance but referring to
partnering agencies such as CEAP and other organizations that assist with application and in-
person assistance. RentHelpMN is down to 30 days for 1 st time applicants and 2nd time
applicants are as long as 5 months.
Page 168 of 194Page 273 of 299
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-____
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING CHAPTER 12 OF THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES REGARDING
TENANT PROTECTION AND SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF THE ORDINANCE
WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center (“City”) previously amended the City Code to
establish certain protections for tenants of affordable housing units and now desires to expand
those protections; and
WHEREAS, City staff developed a proposed ordinance titled “An Ordinance Amending
Chapter 12 of the City Code of Ordinances Regarding Tenant Protections” (“Ordinance”), which
amends Sections 12-201, 12-912D and 12-1401 of the City Code; and
WHEREAS, the City Council discussed this issue at several work sessions and the
proposed Ordinance was presented to the City Council to conduct a first reading on November 8,
2021 in accordance with Section 3.04 of the City Charter; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Ordinance was presented to the City Council to conduct a public
hearing and a second reading on December 13, 2021 in accordance with Section 3.04 of the City
Charter; and
WHEREAS, the City Council continued the second reading from December 13, 2021 to
February 28, 2022, and the City Council acted at its meeting on February 28, 2022 to adopt the
above-referenced Ordinance; 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, by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn
Center as follows:
1. A second reading has been conducted and the Ordinance is hereby adopted.
Page 169 of 194Page 274 of 299
2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to publish the following notice and summary
of the Ordinance, which is hereby approved, once in the City’s official newspaper:
City of Brooklyn Center
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 12 OF THE CITY
CODE OF ORDINANCES REGARDING TENANT PROTECTION
Please take notice that the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center has
adopted an ordinance to amend Chapter 12 of the City Code by amending Section 12-
912D to expand the protections provided to tenants of affordable housing units. The
ordinance establishes new requirements for landlords to provide tenants a notice at least
30 days before filing an eviction action, to provide notice explaining the basis of a just
cause nonrenewal of a lease, and to provide for filing a private enforcement action in
district court for a violation of the tenant protections under the section, including the
seeking of an award of attorney’s fees. A copy of the full ordinance is available on the
City’s website.
3. City staff and consultants are authorized to take such other actions as may be needed to
incorporate the Ordinance into the City Code and to otherwise carry out the intent of this
Resolution.
February 28, 2022
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 170 of 194Page 275 of 299
10/21/25 -1- DRAFT
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND STATE OF MINNESOTA
REGULAR SESSION
OCTOBER 21, 2025
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission was called to order by Associate Planner and Staff
Liaison Krystin Eldridge at 7:03 p.m.
MEETING ATTENDEES
Commissioner Laura Freund
Commissioner Landon Straub (arrived at 7:05 p.m.)
Commissioner Seretha Lee
Commissioner Aniya White
Commissioner Jamal Said
Commissioner Alyssa Kuglin is absent and excused.
Commissioner Natalie O’Connor is absent.
City Staff present: Associate Planner and Staff Liaison Krystin Eldridge, Community
Development Director Jesse Anderson, and Housing and Community Standards Supervisor Xiong
Thao.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
There was a motion by Commissioner White and seconded by Commissioner Said to approve the
agenda as submitted. The motion passed.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
There was a motion by Commissioner ____, seconded by Commissioner ____, to approve the
minutes of September 16, 2025, as submitted. The motion passed.
NEW COMMISSIONERS INTRODUCTIONS
Ms. Eldridge asked the new Commissioners to introduce themselves.
Commissioner Straub arrived at 7:05 p.m.
Commissioners White and Lee introduced themselves by sharing why they wanted to be on the
Commission, how long they have been in Brooklyn Center, and what their interests are.
Commissioners and Staff introduced themselves as well.
NEIGHBORHOOD PACKETS
Page 171 of 194Page 276 of 299
10/21/25 -2- DRAFT
Ms. Eldridge stated that there were more neighborhood packets, about 80, at the meeting if
Commissioners were interested in getting to the rest of the neighborhoods that were talked about
in the last meeting. She noted that she also brought the 2026 Housing Commission Meeting
Schedule, and if Commissioners had anything specific to talk about or bring to the City Council
in the upcoming year, to let her know, and it could get on the schedule. She explained that some
of the past people who have come to talk are Mike Vraa, who spoke on new legislation, and ULI,
who did a housing study and gave a list of goals.
Commissioner Lee asked about having Mike Vraa come and speak to them. Ms. Eldridge noted
that if the Commission is interested, then Mike would be able to come back. Commissioner Lee
noted that she was interested.
Community Development Director Jesse Anderson asked if Mike Vraa met with the Commission
after the Legislative session in late July or August. Ms. Eldridge stated that it was at the
beginning of the year.
Commissioner Lee asked if it was someone from HOME Line, was at the last Housing
Commission meeting. Mr. Anderson stated that it was not Mike Vraa but Sam who attended the
last meeting. Housing and Community Standards Supervisor Xiong Thao noted that Sam is one
of the authorities who provides legal advice, and Mike is the managing director. Commissioner
Said asked what Mike and Sam do with the company HOME Line. Commissioner White
explained that HOME Line works with people who are getting evicted and listens to their
personal stories. Mr. Thao added that HOME Line does a lot of advocacy work, such as helping
to write letters to landlords. He stated that HOME Line also works for tenants at the state level,
advocating for protections and rights, and helping tenants navigate getting the necessary repairs
done.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PRESENTATION
A. Wrap up comments for the Rental License Program
Mr. Anderson explained that the first half of the packet was information from the last meeting,
which discussed the rental licensing inspection process, the performance-based system that is
based on how many violations were observed during the initial inspection, which determines the
license category. He added that included in the packet was feedback from both the tenants, who
noted they wanted more accountability for things to be fixed, and the landlords on what they would
like to see done with the system, which was not a performance-based system, rather a two-year
licensing with not as many units inspected.
Commissioner Freund asked about the motivations for bringing the information to the Housing
Commission and whether there are concerns or dissatisfaction with the current system. Mr.
Anderson explained that the Council asked for both topics of tenant protections and the licensing
process to be looked at. He added that the Staff’s response has been to meet with landlords and
tenants, meet with the Housing Commission, and then provide feedback to the Council, from which
the Council can make a recommendation to make changes after that. He noted that the same
request was made two years ago, and at the time, the Housing Commission recommended that
there be no change to the tenant protection. He speculated that the Council requested it because
there were constituents who made requests.
Page 172 of 194Page 277 of 299
10/21/25 -3- DRAFT
Mr. Anderson asked if there were any thoughts or questions about the rental licensing process that
was talked about in the last meeting.
B. Tenant Protections
Mr. Thao explained that the City first adopted the tenant protections in 2018, and that was for
notice of sale. He added that it particularly applied to multifamily properties. He stated that if a
large multifamily property was going to be for sale or had been sold, the property would have to
notify tenants that the property’s being sold, which allows the tenants to either stay in their current
unit or find new housing and allows for relocation assistance. He added that if the landlord was
going to raise rent or change the lease agreement, tenants have the option for relocation assistance.
He noted that the tenant protections also protect tenants from non-renewals or terminations. He
stated that in 2021, the City adopted two new protections: the pre-eviction notice and Just Cause
Non-Renewals. He noted that before adopting the two protections, the City met with landlords,
tenants, housing advocates, HOME Line, and many others, and came to the consensus to only
move forward with the two protections, and additional protections could come at a later date. He
stated that the City was watching what St. Paul was going through with being sued, and the two
protections were the least controversial. He explained that the pre-eviction notice gives tenants 30
30-day notice if a landlord is going to evict a tenant for not paying rent. He added that if there is
a material breach of the lease, the landlord also has to give a 30-day notice, and would have to
disclose what the material breach was so the tenant has the opportunity to cure the violations. Ms.
Eldridge stated that an example would be someone living in the apartment, and they are not
supposed to. Mr. Thao added that anything that violates the lease agreement is prohibited.
Commissioner Lee asked if the landlord needed to give time to make the corrections. Mr.
Anderson explained that tenants do get 30 days before the filing of the eviction. He added that
there is time that comes along with the filing, but the argument was that it is very difficult to
overcome an eviction in future housing applications, so the 30 days give a chance to avoid getting
an eviction filed against the tenant’s record.
Mr. Thao stated that the Just Cause Non-Renewal requires a landlord to give a reason why they
are not renewing the tenant, and the City has stated there are eight reasons a landlord can remove
a tenant: there is a lease violation, the tenant refuses to renew the lease, if the landlord or family
member will occupy the unit, if the building is being demolished, if there will be a substantial
rehab or renovation, government order, or if employment requires the person lives on the property.
He added that the 2021 tenant protection also gave the implicit right for tenants to sue their
landlords if their tenant protections were being violated.
Mr. Anderson noted that the enforcement of both of the tenant protections does not require much,
if any, Staff involvement; it is mostly just an education piece. He added that for the most part, the
tenant is responsible for telling the landlord, but the City will reach out and let the landlord know
if they violate either of the protections.
Mr. Thao stated that the HOME Line website lists the 2023 and 2024 state legislative amendments
that were passed. He highlighted a few: the eviction notice must have a minimum of 14 days,
landlords must disclose all fees as part of the total rent, minimum heat requirement laws, expanded
Page 173 of 194Page 278 of 299
10/21/25 -4- DRAFT
the emergency repair list, and clarified how much time is required for a landlord to give notice to
get into a unit, 24 hours. He noted other additional protections: the right to move in and out of
inspections, landlords cannot require pets to be declawed or devocalization, landlords cannot force
early lease renewal no more than six months before the lease ends, tenants cannot be evicted for
crimes that were not committed on the property, service support animal fees are prohibited, if a
property is condemned landlords cannot collect rent payments, gave the tenant’s rights to organize,
and utility rights in a multifamily property.
Mr. Thao stated that the purpose of bringing the two protections to the Housing Commission was
to receive feedback on the protections and to determine if any changes or additions were needed.
He added that in meetings with the landlords, they wanted fewer tenant protections. Mr. Anderson
explained that the pre-eviction notice has a 30-day curing period, so if the tenant is not paid within
this time frame, the eviction will be filed. He noted that the Just Cause Non-Renewal does not
have a curing period; it just forces the landlord to have a just cause or reason. Mr. Thao noted that
when meeting with the tenants, there were some things the City could not do, but there was a desire
for more education about tenant protections. He added that there was a landlord who gave notices
to a bunch of seniors, and they all moved out because the seniors did not understand their rights.
He stated that tenants also wanted more communication about what actions were taken against
particular landlords; they wanted the City to penalize the property owners for violating the
ordinances. He stated that HOME Line is putting together a list of additional tenant protections,
which is not ready yet, but one thing that will be on there is protecting tenants from discrimination
based on sources of income.
Commissioner Said asked about tenants who run businesses out of their homes and if they would
be protected if the tenant is doing certain things for the business. Mr. Anderson noted that there
is nothing in the ordinance that protects them or gives them that right, but the tenant does at least
have some right to the property and what it can be used for. He added that he is not aware of any
kind of protection that grants them the right to necessarily operate a business. Commissioner Said
stated that in other states, there have been tenants who have been kicked out because of doing
transactions on their properties. Mr. Thao explained that if Commissioner Said is talking about a
home-based business that violates city code or becomes a nuisance, then that might be the basis
for non-renewing somebody, or it becomes a lease violation. Mr. Anderson explained that there
is no protection for the ability to run a home-based business; it is just if your landlord says that
you cannot, then the tenant is not allowed to, just like having a pet. Commissioner Said stated that
in some of the newer, luxury apartments are stating in the lease states that the tenant cannot run
any business. Mr. Anderson explained that there is no regulation on that, and that the landlord can
do what they want if it is in the lease. He noted that for the Council, they would like to know if
the Commission is supportive of the 30 days or an alternative, and if the Commission is supportive
of the non-renewal.
Commissioner Freund asked if the Just Cause Non-Renewal is similar to the example given, noting
that if a tenant has a pet, which is not allowed in the lease, but then removes the pet, the tenant
may be allowed to stay. Mr. Anderson stated that the Staff is asking if the City should keep the
Just Cause Non-Renewal, change it to something else, or completely get rid of it. He explained
that the Just Cause Non-Renewal is that the lease terms are coming to an end, the lease probably
states the landlord needs to give a notice of non-renewals, but in Brooklyn Center, the landlord
Page 174 of 194Page 279 of 299
10/21/25 -5- DRAFT
must also include the reason for non-renewals.
Commissioner Lee stated that, due to seeing that elders are vulnerable to different things from
landlords and don’t know their rights, she would like to see both the Just Cause for Non-Renewals
and the 30-day notice in place. Mr. Thao noted that there are many cities around Brooklyn Center
that are pushing for the 30-day notice as well.
Commissioner Said asked about the 30 days, and if that gives tenants an extra 30 days before the
30 days. Mr. Anderson gave an example of a lease that states rent is due on January 1, January 1
comes and goes, and the landlord can give a 30-day pre-eviction notice on January 2, then the
landlord has to wait until February 2 before they can file that with the courts. He added that the
tenant feels the 30 days helps find space, find somewhere else to go, and helps them try to get
emergency assistance. He noted that a landlord would say it strains the relationship with the tenant
because things are starting to the process faster.
Commissioner Lee asked if it would be possible to include in the ordinance that the tenant can
move in the 15 days if able, but 30 days is a cushion, if it does not work out. Mr. Anderson stated
that he cannot think of another checkpoint in the middle, but the tenant would be able to move out
no matter what, and would probably still be breaking the lease. Mr. Thao noted that it does not
prevent the tenant from negotiating an early termination with the landlord before eviction is filed
with the court. Mr. Anderson explained that if the tenant is given the 30-day notice, and they know
they will not be able to pay, the tenant could go to the landlord and negotiate to sign a termination
lease and move out. He added that both parties would have to sign, but the tenant would be able
to do that in the 30-day pre-eviction phase.
Ms. Eldridge asked if the Staff had seen an early release letter or termination. Mr. Thao stated that
they have not; most of the pre-eviction notices have been for the full 30 days, and mostly for rent.
Commissioner Straub noted that he is in support of the 30 days. He stated that part of the landlord's
hesitation with the 30-day notice is that if they want to evict a tenant for not paying rent, and 30
30-day pre-eviction notice is given, and then after that, a tenant can be evicted, the landlord is
losing a full month’s worth of rent. He asked if there is a mechanism in place to help remediate
issues on the landlord’s end for missing a month’s worth of rent, and if there was, maybe the
landlord would be more willing to give the 30-day pre-eviction notice. Mr. Anderson noted that
the landlord has the potential for the landlord to pay, or the potential for the tenant to file for
emergency assistance, and the tenant to receive the emergency assistance, so the landlord can get
paid. He added that the City does not have a program right now for the landlord. Commissioner
Said noted that in many cases, the landlord has the deposit as well. Commissioner Straub stated
that many times in renting, deposits were just a few hundred dollars, rather than the thousand owed,
but that may be how the landlords are adapting to this situation. Commissioner Said added that it
is an incentive to the tenant to talk to the landlord if they are facing problems, because the landlord
may work with the tenant. Commissioner Straub stated that the necessity of a large security deposit
could be a barrier for a lot of people to secure housing. He added that it is an opportunity to
increase visibility to landlords of the options for the tenants in these situations. He noted that
increased education requirements for written notifications or ensuring that tenants are educated on
their rights are always a great thing. He stated that the justifications needed for non-renewals are
Page 175 of 194Page 280 of 299
10/21/25 -6- DRAFT
great tools to fight biases that exist.
Mr. Anderson asked for thoughts on the 30-day or 14-day notices. Commissioner Straub stated
that he does not think 14 days is enough, and with such a fast turnaround, it can be a tough time to
do what is needed in that time period.
Commissioner Said asked about raising rent and if there is any control over how much rent can be
raised. Mr. Anderson noted that the City does not have any control over rent raising, but the
landlords mentioned that they would still have to follow fair housing practices. Commissioner
Lee added that there is a margin in certain areas that landlords can only go so high. Mr. Anderson
stated that certain properties are funded a certain way, so their funding source requires them to be
affordable at a certain rate. Mr. Thao added that, generally speaking, the state is silent on how
much rent can be increased. He noted that the only city that has anything is St. Paul, and there is
a lot of pushback, and landlords can apply for an exclusion, which many have done because the
three percent increase does not cover property taxes. Mr. Anderson added that 95 percent of the
housing is not locked into a certain rate, there is a lot of naturally occurring affordable housing,
but it is not legally bound affordable housing.
Commissioner Straub asked if the income restrictions are known to the tenants. Mr. Anderson
stated that it is a known thing for sure and that the dollar amount does change from year to year.
He added that for Area Median Income, AMI, there must be so many units at 60 percent, and so
many at 80 percent, and that changes every year, so then landlords can raise rent, but it has to stay
at 60 percent. He stated that many tenants came to the City from Sonders when rent was increased,
but the landlord was under the expectation, so the increase was legal. Mr. Thao noted that the
AMI is calculated on the Twin Cities metro, and it is very high, about $90,000. Mr. Anderson
added that a six percent AMI is common, and for a two-bedroom at 60 percent, the monthly rent
would be $1,788. Mr. Thao stated that the number is skewed because of the few people with very
high incomes, and that is where AMI comes into play, which is calculated by the federal
government. Mr. Anderson noted that the City does not have any regulations on rent increases.
Mr. Thao stated that the only maximum requirement that landlords have is for late fees; they cannot
go above eight percent of the rent.
Mr. Anderson stated that technically, a landlord could increase rent, and the tenant could refuse to
renew the lease because of the increase in rent, then the landlord could Just Cause Non-Renew the
tenant for refusing to renew the lease.
Mr. Thao noted that in the conversations with tenants, it was brought up whether or not landlords
could require rent payments without having a rental license. He added that neither the City nor
the State regulates it, so if the landlord is operating without a license, it is unknown if that would
hold up in courts, and HOME Line is silent on it as well.
Mr. Anderson asked if there were more people on the same side as the other Commissioners.
Commissioner White, Commissioner Freund, and Commissioner Said stated that they agree with
the others as well.
Mr. Thao asked if there were any tenant protections that the Commission would like to explore.
Page 176 of 194Page 281 of 299
10/21/25 -7- DRAFT
Commissioner Said asked when a landlord raises rent, how is it known that they are doing so fairly
to all of the tenants. Mr. Anderson stated that the City does not know anything about rent; it would
take the tenant to investigate and take that information to a Fair Housing Agency. Commissioner
Said noted that many of the developers are targeting the new families and making promises that
are not kept. Mr. Thao added that many developers, for example, have a move-in introductory rate
of $1,500 when it would originally be $1,700, and then rent goes up to $1,900 after the lease is up
to the landlord, which is only a $200 increase because of the free introductory move-in rate.
Mr. Anderson stated that there has been discussion among the Staff about requiring the phone
number to be posted in common areas so that complaints can be made. Commissioner Said noted
that it is hard to find information, so it would be good to have posters that read know your rights
and information about that on them. Commissioner Lee noted that it is very hard for the vulnerable
and elderly, and that is why it is important to have the 30 days versus the 14 days. Commissioner
Said asked if it was possible to add a clause for the elderly or vulnerable that may be different from
the rest of the population. Commissioner Straub noted that it would come down to who defines
the vulnerable, and many are going to give different answers. He added that universality in
ordinances is more effective, because deciding who gets the 30 days versus 14 days, it is easier to
enforce and not lead to lawsuits. Commissioner Said mentioned that what if a landlord buys the
building and comes in and tells all the tenants they have to leave, this would be very hard on the
elderly person. Mr. Thao noted that this would be in the Just Cause Non-Renewals and would
have protection. Commissioner Lee stated that she is a big advocate for Just Cause because many
do not know their rights, and more education needs to be done, like the posters in Minneapolis.
Commissioner Straub noted that there are many people who would say that authority is telling me
to do it, so it must be right. Commissioner Lee stated that the vulnerability of elderly people is
that they trust people. Mr. Anderson noted that Commissioner Said’s comment about the sale of
the building is a different protection that was adopted in 2018. He added that when a sale takes
place within 30 days of buying, the landlord has to give a 90-day notice if they are going to make
material changes to the leasing criteria. Mr. Thao noted that many multifamily properties have
been sold in the last three years, and all tenants have been given the 30-day notice.
Mr. Anderson explained the process from here and what the Staff would do with the information.
He then went on to explain how the changing of the ordinance takes place. He added that it will
be a process to get through all of the information. He stated that it is possible that it goes to the
Council and nothing is changed, but if something is to be changed, it will take a little while.
Ms. Eldridge asked if the Staff has a feeling of whether Council is leaning one way or the other.
Mr. Anderson stated that when it initially passed in 2021, it took multiple meetings and went back
and forth several times, so it made for a very long process.
FUTURE MEETINGS (2026 SCHEDULE)
Ms. Eldridge noted that she spoke on this earlier in the meeting and would keep the Commission
informed of the things to come on tenant protections.
Mr. Anderson gave a general update: the Staff is working to finalize the Economic Growth Plan
and will present to Council on November 24. There was a market retail node that came from the
plan, and it should be noted that Brooklyn Center is having a slightly positive absorption rate.
Page 177 of 194Page 282 of 299
10/21/25 -8- DRAFT
Commissioner Straub asked about the net plus or minus of business. Mr. Anderson stated that
with Walmart closing, that is a negative, and a business moving in is positive, so it is even. He
added that overall, the City is gaining more than it is losing.
Mr. Anderson shared that there is a lot of budget discussion, and the preliminary levy that has been
adopted is $4,970,000, which will result in the reduction of positions in City Hall and throughout
the City. He added that the City is still working towards the construction of the opportunity site.
He explained that the opportunity site is 80 acres, right in the middle of the city, which has a master
plan for the site, and the City owns 40 acres of it. He explained that the developers and investors
pulled up when the interest rates went up, so that is continuing to be worked through. He added
that the first thing to be built will be a road, and then apartments that the City is hoping to start on
in the next year. He noted some of the other construction happening in the City.
ADJOURNMENT
There was a motion by Commissioner White and seconded by Commissioner Lee to adjourn the
meeting. The motion passed. The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission adjourned at 8:32 p.m.
__________________________________
Commissioner Freund
Page 178 of 194Page 283 of 299
09/16/25 -1- DRAFT
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND STATE OF MINNESOTA
REGULAR SESSION
September 16, 2025
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission was called to order by Commissioner Freund (Acting
Chair) at 7:04 p.m.
MEETING ATTENDEES
Commissioner Laura Freund
Commissioner Aniya White
Commissioner Jamal Said
Commissioner Landon Straub
Commissioner Natalie O’Connor is absent and excused
Commissioner Alyssa Kuglin is absent
City Staff present: Associate Planner and Staff Liaison Krystin Eldridge, Community
Development Director Jesse Anderson, and Housing and Community Standards Supervisor Xiong
Thao.
Also present: Community Member Sam Golden
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
There was a motion by Commissioner Freund, seconded by Commissioner Said, to approve the
agenda as submitted. The motion passed.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
There was a motion by Commissioner Freund, seconded by Commissioner Straub, to approve the
minutes of June 17, 2025, as submitted. The motion passed.
NEW NEIGHBOR BAGS UPDATES FROM COMMISSIONERS
Staff Liaison Krystin Eldridge asked for feedback on how the New Neighbor Bags delivery went,
where the Commissioners delivered to, what things could be improved, and that they would mark
on the map where they went. She noted that only Commissioners Straub and Freund went out to
deliver the bags.
Commissioner Freund stated that the neighborhoods in which she delivered bags. She noted that
she could do more, but would need additional bags.
Ms. Eldridge asked how Commissioner Freund felt things went or if there was anything that needed
improvement. Commissioner Freund stated that people were friendly.
Page 179 of 194Page 284 of 299
09/16/25 -2- DRAFT
Commissioner Straub stated that the neighborhoods in which he delivered bags, and that he would
be willing to go to more neighborhoods with additional bags. He added that the people were
interested to see what was in the bags, and that the information which was contained in the bags
was a great resource to have. He noted that there was no negative feedback from the people with
whom he interacted.
Ms. Eldridge stated that they would try to deliver bags again before it gets cold. She asked if the
Commissioners had neighborhoods that they preferred. Commissioner Freund stated that she
could do some neighborhoods. Ms. Eldridge stated that she would not expect the whole
neighborhood to be complete, as they are spread out, but if they go again, they could go in pairs
or trios if more people are there.
Commissioner Said noted that he would be willing to go with others the next time they go out to
deliver bags.
Ms. Eldridge stated that at the last meeting, they discussed putting together a list of contractors
and handymen, but when talking to the City Attorney, they felt it was too much of a liability to
collect people’s information and keep it; however, if the Commissioners wanted to create a
Facebook group or something like that, they could. She noted that people might think the City is
showing preference to certain contractors, or do they have insurance, and how does that work with
the City, so it was just best to not include the list in the bags.
Community Development Director Jesse Anderson added that the City cannot determine which
contractors to recommend and which not to recommend, so it has asked to stay away from making
recommendations for anything, because it can make the City liable for those recommendations.
Ms. Eldridge noted that if there were any other recommendations to send them to her and she could
follow up on them.
Community Standards Supervisor Xiong Thao stated that having a handout to direct people to the
Department of Labor and Industry’s website, and information on how to use it to find a licensed
contractor, or even an unlicensed one, might be helpful to have.
Commissioner Said noted that the original idea was to get in touch with your neighbor's handy
person instead of looking for someone in a different city, but he understands that the City cannot
endorse that. He added that getting a list together that is just used personally and shared with those
who want it would still be a good idea to help form that sense of community. Ms. Eldridge stated
that she understood the thought behind it, but it would need to be done not as Commissioners, but
rather members of the community.
Mr. Thao added that by going to the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry website, a
person can look for contractors for specific zip codes or business names. Commissioner Said asked
what the website was. Mr. Thao stated that it is MNDOLI, and the website uses IMS, so an account
would need to be created, but then a search can be done for various types of contractors, etc.
Commissioner Straub asked when more bags would be put together. Ms. Eldridge stated that she
Page 180 of 194Page 285 of 299
09/16/25 -3- DRAFT
would have them by the next meeting.
Commissioner Said asked about putting more things in the bags that were discussed previously,
such as coupons or finding other things to add. Ms. Eldridge stated that she did get some things
from Dos Hermanos and had reached out to a few others, but had not heard back, so she could do
another outreach.
Mr. Anderson stated that there is an application that the businesses can fill out, and that the
Commissioners could have some as well to hand out if they would like to do that. He noted that
he would look for that form to share with everyone.
ALL COMMISSIONER APPRECIATION NIGHT
Commissioner Freund introduced the topic of All Commissioner Appreciation Night.
Ms. Eldridge stated that the event would be held on October 8, from 6:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m., and
all of the Commissions would be present. She added that there would be activities, a presentation
on what the Commissions have done for the year, and some awards.
TENANT PROTECTIONS UPDATE PRESENTATION
Commissioner Freund introduced the topic of the Tenant Protections Update Presentation.
Mr. Anderson stated that the Council directed Staff to review two different parts of the rental
ordinance: the rental licensing program and tenant protections. He noted that Council had sent
this before the Housing Commission previously, and the Commission made a recommendation not
to change the ordinance, and now the Council is making the request again to review it.
Mr. Thao explained that he had presented to the group before, and that Mr. Anderson had stated
the reason for the conversation, but the background is that the City of Brooklyn Center has always
had a license program since the 1970s. He added that historically, those licenses have been two-
year licenses, so you do an inspection and then you get a two-year license, but in 2010, the City
changed the rental license program to a performance-based program, and with that change, it
created four license types. He noted that the four license types are: a three-year, Type One; a two-
year, Type Two; a one-year, Type Three, which requires an action plan; and a six-month, Type
Four, which requires a mitigation plan. He explained that the purpose of an action and mitigation
plan is for the City to add additional things to their license that are not part of the inspection process,
such as lighting. He stated that the rental license program is based on the number of code violations
found during the initial license inspection. He noted that the fewer the code violations that are
found, the longer the license period a property qualifies for.
Mr. Anderson stated that the intent behind this is to motivate the landlords to keep the property
maintained in good condition, so that they do not have to have inspections as frequently. He added
that about five percent are Type Four properties, out of the 700 licenses in the City, and 15 percent
are Type One, which is the second most common category, and everyone else is in the other two.
He noted that 20 percent are in the lower performing category, while 80 percent are performing at
a high level and not requiring as frequent inspections.
Page 181 of 194Page 286 of 299
09/16/25 -4- DRAFT
Mr. Thao added that the City is really encouraging landlords to be more proactive and pay attention
to their housing in Brooklyn Center, rather than reacting to a list that would be given to them to
do repairs every six months or three years.
Mr. Thao continued to talk about the license time frame and how the renewal process works. He
noted that for a new license, you need to apply for a license, schedule the inspection within two
weeks, then, after the initial inspection takes place, there are 30 days for the property owner to do
anything that needs to be done, and then there is a follow-up inspection. He stated that after this
inspection, whether the property passes or fails is decided. If the property passes, then the City
Council needs to approve the license; if the property fails, then the process will continue to take
place until it passes. He added that the process can turn very tedious, because the property owner
needs to stay on top of it and renew when needed.
Mr. Thao noted that 100 percent of the units are inspected during the process; they do not miss
anything or pick and choose. He added that inspections are also done on complaint-based as well,
so if a tenant notes to the inspector that things were reported and not fixed, then it will be added to
the correction list as well.
Commissioner Said asked if the tenant requests an inspection or makes a report, the landlord is
given a chance to make corrections before it is added to the list. Mr. Thao stated that if they are
already in the unit, then they will add it to the list because they will be back anyway to check it
out, and it is better to have added it to the list so that it gets done. Mr. Anderson added that
complaints from tenants outside of the maintenance of licensing are also taken into consideration
and will need to be corrected, but no inspection fees need to be paid.
Commissioner White inquired about a tenant issue, specifically whether the tenant was removing
a smoke alarm that was present upon initial inspection what the response would be. Mr. Thao
noted that it would be written up as a missing smoke alarm and that the landlord would need to
address the situation, but the inspectors do not determine guilt.
Mr. Thao stated that there are weather deferrals as well, so if there is anything exterior that can’t
be done in the winter, the inspection is passed, so it can go to the City Council to be approved. He
added that paying the fee starts the fee of the process, but it does not mean that the license has been
given.
Mr. Thao stated that the Council asked them to bring options to the Housing Commission to
consider. He noted the first option is eliminating the Crime Free Housing Training, because very
few cities are offering it.
Commissioner Straub asked if it is a class that teaches landlords how to create lower crime
environments. Mr. Thao stated that it is a class that teaches a lot of different things about crime
prevention, such as locks, lighting, vegetation, and being alert to possible crime in the area. Mr.
Anderson noted that currently, it is only required if you are not a type one, but there are not really
any classes right now. Commissioner Straub asked who runs the classes. Mr. Thao stated that it
is through different cities, but not many are offering it anymore, and it is tough to get new landlords
into the class because it fills up quickly.
Page 182 of 194Page 287 of 299
09/16/25 -5- DRAFT
Mr. Thao stated that the second option would be to eliminate the Crime Prevention through
Environmental Design requirement, which is done by the City inspectors. He continued with the
third option, which is to eliminate the Rental Plan requirement; number four is to address the
inspection point system, and finally, number five is to change the inspection cycle, no longer
having the tiered system.
Commissioner Freund asked if the City is noticing that with the tiered system, there is an advantage
to encouraging people to take care of their properties. Mr. Anderson noted that, from his
perspective, it allows the City to focus more on the lower-performing properties.
Mr. Thao stated that the City gained feedback from tenants and landlords in regards to the
ordinance. He stated that they asked questions in an August 26th meeting of tenants, and found
that they wanted more regulations, rules about vehicle parking, and information on landlords who
do not have an active license. He noted that if the City takes about the license, then they also lose
their enforcement tool. Mr. Anderson stated that the best way to get compliance is the property
owner’s motivation to obtain the license, and that generally, revocation of a license is not the way
to go about getting compliance.
Commissioner White asked if, to rent out a property, it is mandatory to have a license. Mr. Thao
stated that if the property is not owner-occupied, then it requires a rental license.
Mr. Thao continued to share information about the feedback from the tenants, who wanted to see
more postings in the buildings in addition to email notices, more city engagement around tenant
rights and tenant protections, notification of the residents of the City’s actions against property
owners or managers, and to create a City escrow account that the City manages to do repairs. He
noted that internally, the idea of an escrow was discussed, but it would not work very effectively
because there is already a state statute process. Mr. Anderson stated that some of the suggestions
have some challenges, such as the more regulation suggestion, because with the codes,
craftsmanship cannot be regulated. He added that generally speaking, tenants would like more
information, more regulations, and more inspections.
Mr. Thao stated that they met with the landlords to receive feedback from them. They noted that
they wanted fewer regulations, fewer inspections, and the main concern was that the City was
doing too many inspections. He added that the landlords liked Brooklyn Park’s inspection rental
license program: Brooklyn Park only inspects 30 percent of the units one time per year, and the
license is for one year. He noted that the landlords wanted to change the property code violation
types because they did not want to get penalized for things that the renters were doing, but the City
noted that it would be hard to figure out who was at fault for the violation. He stated that the
landlords also asked for reduced costs for the inspections, so money could be used elsewhere, and
the landlords would like a more uniform inspection process. He noted that the inspectors are put
through training, and then once a year, there is a consistency training.
Mr. Thao asked if there were any comments or questions. Mr. Anderson noted that there is a work
session for Council coming up on this subject, and that the minutes from this meeting would be
brought to Council, so if there was anything the Commissioner would like noted, now would be
the time to do so.
Page 183 of 194Page 288 of 299
09/16/25 -6- DRAFT
Commissioner Freund asked if it was about keeping the tiered system. Mr. Anderson stated that
it is part of it, but it could be other things as well. He added that maybe it would be getting rid of
the performance-based system, which many landlords, even those with three-year licenses, would
agree with because of the time spent getting ready for the inspection.
Commissioner Straub noted that if landlords were keeping their properties in good shape all the
time, then they would not need to spend the time to get ready for the upcoming inspection, so it
seems like they would be taking less care of the property than is needed.
Commissioner White asked if the information would be going to the October meeting. Mr.
Anderson stated they are hoping to bring it to the October 13th meeting.
Commissioner Said asked if there is a way to know what the general inspection is. Mr. Thao stated
that there is a brochure with the common code violations that are found during an inspection for
both single-family and multi-family, and that contains most things. Mr. Anderson noted that the
list has the 200 most common codes that are violated, but the City uses the International Property
Maintenance Code. Mr. Thao noted that the code was adopted in 2018 to have a more standard
code, rather than just their own code.
Commissioner White asked about the codes and if they were life safety. Mr. Thao noted that the
codes are a combination of life safety and maintenance.
Commissioner Straub asked if all code violations are treated equally, or if there is a sliding scale
based on severity. Mr. Thao stated that at this point, all code violations are weighted the same,
but some cities have a weighted system, Minneapolis and St. Paul. Mr. Anderson noted that when
this version of the code was designed in 2009, and the City went from every two years to a
performance-based system, they looked through two years of records and kind of calculated based
on that.
Commissioner Said asked about the inspection being whether the property is liveable, but does not
meet a certain standard, and it would still be able to be passed. Mr. Anderson noted that it could
be challenging if the City went to an inspection program that was only life, health, and safety,
because drawing that line for the inspection would be hard to do.
Commissioner Said asked if the inspection is seen as an obstacle because there are too many of
them. Mr. Thao stated that the standards that are used are a minimum standard; they do not look
at the quality of the work or the cross-mission of the work. He added that they are minimum codes
that are being enforced, mixed with the health, life, and safety. Mr. Anderson noted that there are
some gray areas, such as what kind of wall a hole is located in, or what door needs to work, and
which door does not need to work, and that would require everything to be written into the code
on what exactly to enforce.
Mr. Anderson asked for thoughts on the performance-based system and if it should go away, and
if not, then should it be changed to make it easier on landlords, and should fewer units be inspected,
no longer inspecting 100 percent of the units.
Page 184 of 194Page 289 of 299
09/16/25 -7- DRAFT
Commissioner Said stated that personally he thinks that 30 percent would be a good way to do it
because then time can be dedicated elsewhere, and they would be back in two years anyway, and
it is more friendly to the landlord as well. He noted that it may lead to more companies wanting
to come into the City as well.
Mr. Thao asked when Commissioner Said noted being more friendly to the landlords, if he had
any recommendations or ideas as to what he would like to see or recommend. Commissioner Said
noted that when landlords do not have to spend as much on an inspection, then they can spend it
elsewhere, and that would make the property more landlord-friendly. He added that this was why
he suggested the health and safety-focused inspections.
Commissioner Straub stated that he has the opposite opinion on most of the thoughts about
landlords. He noted in some respects, some areas could be made more flexible for the landlords,
such as the training that could just be done through a well-thought-out PDF or document, without
needing to be an in-person class. He added that, as someone who has rented in the past, he feels
that many landlords do the bare minimum on inspections because it is not profitable for them to
go above and beyond, and many of the advocacy options are ways for landlords to make more
money and work around providing tenants with proper livable spaces. He stated that 30 percent
of units per year is something that theoretically could be reasonable, depending on how it is done.
He noted that he was not sure about how quickly the average rental degrades, but over the course
of three years, a lot of damage can be done. Mr. Thao noted that more code violations are seen in
family units because of the kids.
Commissioner Straub suggested that maybe the number of rooms inspected is a scale that changes
depending on how many rooms are on the property, or if there is a multi-family versus single-
family property. Mr. Anderson noted that Brooklyn Park has an annual license, and they have to
inspect 33 percent. Commissioner Straub asked if it was the rooms that were marked down as
inspected. Mr. Anderson noted that it was by floors. Commissioner White asked if that was true
of single-family as well. Mr. Anderson stated it was the whole house, but it is done every two
years, and apartments are done every year, but only 33 percent.
Commissioner Straub noted that there were easy wins for tenants that were being shown, that
require very little effort from the landlord, but provide direct value to the tenant, such as towing
and visitors, and that should be obvious information. He added that the physical posting of notices
should be required, and also the notification of residents of the City’s actions against the property
owner. Mr. Thao noted that the information of where the complaint comes from is not public
knowledge, but everything else is public data, and a citizen can request the information, and that
will be provided to them.
Mr. Anderson noted there was another topic, so he wanted to know if there were any more
comments. Commission Freund stated that the tiered system is working well and she likes it.
Community Member Sam Golden agreed with the appreciation of the tiered system, but maybe
have a two-year versus a three-year, and also not inspecting 100 percent of the units because of
the cost burden to the property owner.
Page 185 of 194Page 290 of 299
09/16/25 -8- DRAFT
Commissioner White asked if reinspection of the units is 100 percent of the units inspected. Mr.
Thao noted that only the units where code violations are, are reinspected.
Commissioner Said needed to leave the meeting. Mr. Anderson noted that the next topic could
not be able to be discussed because that would not leave enough time, and if Commissioner Said
left, then there would not be enough Commissioners for a quorum.
Mr. Thao explained that the handouts that he gave to the Commissioners were the state’s ten
protections passed in 2023 and 2024.
Commissioner Said asked if there was a way to do it via email. Mr. Anderson noted that it could
be done that way, but it may be best to discuss it as well. He added that they would talk internally
to see if the Council wants to still move forward in October without feedback or if they want to
delay until November.
ADJOURNMENT
There was a motion by Commissioner Freund, seconded by Commissioner Straub, to adjourn the
meeting. The motion passed. The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission adjourned at 8:26 p.m.
__________________________________
Chair O’Connor
Page 186 of 194Page 291 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-23 City Ordinance
on the licensee, sent by First Class mail to the licensee's last known address or, if
neither method of service effects notice, by posting on a conspicuous place on the
licensed premises.
7. Enforcement. Enforcement actions provided in this Section shall not be exclusive,
and the City Council may take any action with respect to a licensee, a tenant, guests,
or the licensed premises as is authorized by this Code or state law.
Section 12-912A. NO RETALIATION. No licensee shall evict, threaten to evict, or take
any other punitive action against any tenant by reason of good faith calls made by such tenant to
law enforcement agencies relating to criminal activity, suspected criminal activity, suspicious
occurrences, or public safety concerns. This Section shall not prohibit the eviction of tenants from
a dwelling unit for unlawful conduct of a tenant or invitee or violation of any rules, regulations, or
lease terms other than a prohibition against contacting law enforcement agencies.
Section 12-912B. FALSELY REPORTING VIOLATIONS. No person shall report a
violation of this Chapter or City Ordinance knowing or having reason to know that the report is
false with the intent to affect the licensing status or inspection schedule of the property.
Section 12-912C. TENANT RESPONSIBILITIES.
1. Access to Premise. When required by Minnesota Statutes, each tenant or occupant
of a rental dwelling must give the owner, owner’s representative or authorized City
official access to any part of such rental dwelling at reasonable times for the
purpose of inspection, maintenance, repairs, or alterations as are necessary to
comply with the provision of this Chapter.
2. Compliance with Regulations. A tenant must comply with applicable City Codes
and all applicable local, state, and federal regulations. A tenant is responsible for
applicable property Code, nuisance, and violations of disorderly conduct as
specified in Section 12-911 that occur on the property, including violations
committed by household members or guests.
Section 12-912D. TENANT PROTECTIONS.
1. Purpose. It is the purpose of this Section to provide housing stability and
protection to tenants in affordable rental housing units who are facing
displacement when there is a transfer of ownership of an affordable housing
building. This Section requires, upon such a transfer, notice to the tenants and the
City and the payment of tenant relocation assistance when affordable housing is
converted and tenants are required, through direct or indirect means, to move
without adequate time to find new housing. This Section is to be interpreted
broadly to ensure the tenants of affordable housing units are afforded the
protections intended by this Section.
2. Transfer of Ownership.
Page 187 of 194Page 292 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-24 City Ordinance
a. Notice. Within 30 days after the transfer of ownership of an affordable
housing building, the new owner shall give written notice to each
affordable housing unit tenant of the building that the property is under new
ownership. The notice must, at a minimum, include the following
information:
(1) The name, mailing address, and telephone number of the new
owner;
(2) The following statement: Brooklyn Center City Code, Section 12-
912D provides for a three-month tenant protection period for
affordable housing unit tenants after an affordable housing building
is transferred to a new owner. Under Section 12-912D, affordable
housing unit tenants are entitled to relocation assistance from the
new owner if, during the tenant protection period, the new owner:
(i) Without cause, terminates or does not renew the tenant’s
lease;
(ii) Raises the rent and the tenant submits a written notice of
termination of their lease;
(iii) Requires existing affordable housing unit tenants to
comply with new residency screening criteria and the
owner or tenant terminates or does not renew the tenant’s
lease; or
(iv) Imposes, without the tenant’s consent, a material change in
the terms of the lease and the owner or tenant terminates
or does not renew the tenant’s lease.
(3) Whether there will be any rent increase during the tenant protection
period, the amount of the rent increase, and the date the rent
increase will take effect;
(4) Whether the new owner will require existing affordable housing unit
tenants to comply with new residency screening criteria during the
tenant protection period and, if so, a copy of the new screening
criteria;
(5) Whether the new owner will, without the tenant’s consent, impose
a material change in the terms of the lease during the tenant
protection period and, if so, the language of the material change
and an explanation of its effect;
Page 188 of 194Page 293 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-25 City Ordinance
(6) Whether the new owner will, without cause, terminate or not renew
the tenant’s lease during the tenant protection period, and if so, the
date the lease will terminate and the amount of relocation
assistance that will be provided;
(7) The date the tenant protection period will expire; and
(8) Whether the new owner, within 30 days following the tenant
protection period, intends to: increase rent; require existing
affordable housing unit tenants to comply with new residency
screening criteria; impose a material change in the terms of the lease;
or, without cause, terminate or not renew affordable housing unit
leases.
b. Language Requirement. Each notice required by this Section shall contain
an advisory that reads as follows: “This is important information about
your housing. If you do not understand it, have someone translate it for
you now, or request a translation from your landlord.” This advisory must
be stated in the notice in the following languages: English, Spanish,
Somali, and Hmong. Upon written request by a tenant that identifies the
tenant’s native language, the owner must provide a written translation of
the notice in that language.
c. Affidavit. The new owner shall prepare and execute an affidavit of having
provided the notice required by this Section that, at a minimum, identifies
each tenant to which the notice was provided, the date on which it was
provided, and the method of delivery. A copy of the notice provided shall
be attached to the affidavit.
d. Copy of Notices to City. The new owner shall provide a copy of the notices
and of the affidavit required by this Section to the City within three days
of having provided the notice to the tenants.
e. Copy of Rent Roll to City. If the new owner claims the building or the unit
does not meet the definition of an affordable housing building or an
affordable housing unit, the owner shall, upon request, provide the City a
copy of the rent roll, including the amount of lease rents paid by tenants.
3. Relocation Assistance.
a. When Required. A new owner of an affordable housing building must pay
relocation assistance to affordable housing unit tenants if any of the
following occur during the tenant protection period:
(1) The new owner, without cause, terminates or does not renew the
tenant’s lease;
Page 189 of 194Page 294 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-26 City Ordinance
(2) The new owner raises the rent and the tenant submits a written
notice of termination of their lease;
(3) The new owner requires existing tenants to comply with new
residency screening criteria and the owner or tenant terminates or
does not renew the tenant’s lease; or
(4) The new owner imposes, without the tenant’s consent, a material
change in the terms of the lease and the owner or tenant
terminates or does not renew the tenant’s lease.
b. When Paid. The new owner shall, when required, pay relocation
assistance to the tenant of an affordable housing unit within 30 days after
receiving tenant’s written notice of termination of the lease or within 30
days after the owner notifies the tenant that the lease will be terminated or
not renewed.
c. Affidavit. The new owner shall prepare and execute an affidavit that, at a
minimum, indicates the date of the notice of termination, identifies each
tenant to which relocation assistance was paid, the amount paid, the check
number for each payment, the payment date, and the address used to mail the
payment.
4. Pre-Eviction Filing Notice. Except as provided otherwise in this subsection, an owner
of an affordable housing unit shall provide at least 30 days’ written notice to a tenant
prior to filing an eviction action on the basis of either: (a) an alleged non-payment of
rent; or (b) an alleged material breach of a lease.
a. Notices for Non-payment of Rent. For an allegation of any non-payment of
rent, the notice shall, at a minimum, include the following information:
(1) The name, mailing address, and telephone number of the person
authorized to receive rent and fees on behalf of the owner;
(2) The total amount of money due and owing to the owner by the
tenant;
(3) A specific accounting of the money due and owing to the owner by
the tenant, including any past due rents, any late fees, and any
other charges; and
(4) The deadline by which the total amount due and owing to the
owner by the tenant shall be paid to avoid an eviction action,
which shall be no earlier than 30 days from the date on which the
notice is delivered.
Page 190 of 194Page 295 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-27 City Ordinance
b. Notices for Material Breach of a Lease. For an allegation of a material
breach of a lease, the notice shall, at a minimum, include the following
information:
(1) The name, mailing address, and telephone number of the owner;
(2) A description of the specific conduct that the owner alleges is a
violation of the lease, including the dates of the violations and the
persons who committed the alleged violations;
(3) Identification of the specific clause of the lease alleged to have been
violated;
(4) Notification that the tenant has the right to correct the alleged breach;
(5) Notification of how the tenant may correct the alleged breach;
(6) The deadline by which the alleged breach shall be corrected to avoid
an eviction action, which shall be no earlier than 30 days from the
date on which the notice is delivered; and
(7) A copy of the lease attached to the notice.
c. Exception for Expedited Eviction Actions. For an expedited eviction
action filed pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 504B.321, subdivision
2, the owner shall provide the notice required by Section 12-912D(4)(d) at
least three days in advance of filing the eviction action.
d. Additional Notice Requirements. All notices under this subsection shall
also include the following information:
(1) Notification that the tenant may be evicted if they do not pay the
past due rent or correct the alleged breach of lease by the deadline,
as applicable;
(2) Information about accessing rental assistance by calling 211 or
visiting https://www.211unitedway.org/; and
(3) Information about accessing legal help by visiting the Law Help
Website at https://www.lawhelpmn.org/.
e. Delivery of Notice. The owner, or an agent for the owner, shall deliver
any notice required by this subsection personally or by first-class mail to
the address of the affordable housing unit. Such notice may, in addition to
but not in place of personal delivery or delivery by first-class mail, be
Page 191 of 194Page 296 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-28 City Ordinance
delivered to any email or other electronic means to the tenant at the
tenant’s email address or electronic account.
f. Enforcement. In addition to any other remedy available at equity or law,
failure to comply with the provisions of this subsection may result in
adverse rental license actions, the imposition of administrative fines, or
other penalties as provided in law.
g. Waiver Not Allowed. The parties to a written or oral lease of an
affordable housing unit shall not waive or modify the requirements
imposed by this subsection. Any such waiver provision that may exist in a
lease is not enforceable.
5. Just Cause Notice of Nonrenewal of Lease to Tenants.
a. Just Cause Notice. An owner of an affordable housing unit shall not issue a
notice of nonrenewal of tenancy, refuse to renew, or issue a notice to quit
unless the owner is able to establish one or more of the following grounds
for such action:
(1) Non-payment of Rent. The tenant fails to pay all monies owed to an
owner after receiving a written notice of non-payment from the owner;
(2) Material Non-Compliance. The tenant fails to cure a material breach
of the lease after receiving a written notice from the owner;
(3) Refusal to Renew. The tenant refuses to renew or extend the lease
after the owner requests in writing that the tenant do so;
(4) Occupancy by Property Owner or Family Member. The owner, in
good faith, seeks to recover possession of the unit so that the owner or
a family member may occupy the unit as that person’s principal
residence;
(5) Building Demolishment or Conversion. The owner either:
(i) Elects to demolish the building in which the affordable housing
unit is located, convert it to a cooperative, provided the owner
complies with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, chapter
515B, or convert it to non-residential use, provided that the
owner shall obtain all permits necessary to demolish or change
the use before terminating any tenancy;
(ii) The owner seeks, in good faith, to recover the unit to sell it in
accordance with a condominium conversion, provided the
Page 192 of 194Page 297 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-29 City Ordinance
owner complies with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes,
chapter 515B; or
(iii) The unit is being converted to a unit subsidized under a local,
state, or federal housing program and the tenant does not
qualify to rent the unit under that program;
(6) Rehabilitation and Renovation. The owner seeks, in good faith, to
recover possession of the unit that will render the unit uninhabitable for
the duration of rehabilitation or renovation;
(7) Complying with a Government Order to Vacate. The owner is
complying with a government agency’s order to vacate, order to abate,
or any other order that necessitates the vacating of the unit as a result of
a violation of City Code or any other provision of law including, but
not limited to, Section 12-911 related to conduct, disorderly activities,
or nuisances; or
(8) Occupancy Conditioned on Employment. The tenant’s occupancy is
conditioned upon employment on the property and the employment
relationship is terminated.
b. Owner Responsibilities. Any lease for an affordable housing unit shall
include just cause notice language as follows:
“The landlord under this lease shall not unilaterally terminate or attempt to
terminate the tenancy of any tenant unless the landlord can prove that just
cause exists. The reasons for termination or nonrenewal of tenancy listed in
the City of Brooklyn Center’s Just Cause Notice (Section 12-912D(5)), and
no others, shall constitute just cause under this provision.”
c. Nonrenewal Notice Requirements. An owner providing a notice of
nonrenewal of a tenancy to a tenant of an affordable housing unit shall: (1)
comply with all notice requirements under the lease and applicable law;
(2) include in such notice a written statement of the reasons for the
nonrenewal and the facts in support of those reasons, and (3) maintain
documentation totaling the number of notices of nonrenewal issued by the
owner.
d. City Right to Inspection of Nonrenewal Notices. Within ten days of any
request by the City, the owner of an affordable housing building shall
provide to the City copies of its documentation totaling the number of
notices of nonrenewal issued by the owner.
e. Application. This Section applies to every lease, written or oral, for an
affordable housing unit.
Page 193 of 194Page 298 of 299
City of Brooklyn Center 12-30 City Ordinance
f. Waiver Not Allowed. The parties to a written or oral lease of an
affordable housing unit shall not waive or modify the requirements
imposed by this subsection. Any such waiver provision that may exist in a
lease is not enforceable.
6. Private Enforcement of Tenant Protection Ordinance. Any tenant or former tenant
of an affordable housing unit harmed by an owner’s violation of this Section 12-
912D may bring an action against the owner in district court. Such person shall be
entitled to all remedies available at law or in equity including, but not limited to,
damages and injunctive relief. Any plaintiff that prevails in such action may be
awarded reasonable attorney’s fees and expenses.
7. Notice of Violation. A tenant of an affordable housing unit who believes the new
owner of the affordable housing building has not provided the tenant the
protections required under this Section 12-912D may submit a notice of violation
to the City. The purpose of the notice is to inform the City of an alleged violation
of this Section to assist the City in determining whether to impose an
administrative penalty provided for in this Section, not issue a rental license to the
new owner as provided in Section 12-901(8), or to take action on the rental
license as provided in Section 12-910. The City is not required to take any
particular action in response to a notice of violation and any enforcement action it
does take shall be on behalf of the City, not the tenant. Filing a notice of violation
does not prohibit the tenant from pursuing any remedy available to the tenant
under law.
8. Penalties.
a. Administrative Penalty. Failure to provide the notice of transfer or to pay
relocation assistance when required under this Section is an administrative
offense for which a citation may be issued and a civil penalty imposed as
provided in Chapter 18 of this Code.
b. Separate Offenses. A violation of this Section as to each dwelling unit
shall constitute a separate offense.
Section 12-913. TYPE IV PROVISIONAL LICENSES.
1. Eligibility. Rental properties that meet the provisional licensing criteria as described
in Section 12-901 are eligible only for provisional licenses.
2. Monthly Report. The City will provide by mail to each licensee a monthly report of
any police and fire calls and incidents and applicable property Code violations as
described in Section 12-901.
3. Mitigation Plan. The applicant for a provisional license must submit for
Page 194 of 194Page 299 of 299