Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026.06.08 CCM STUDY06/08/26 -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 STUDY SESSION JUNE 8, 2026 CITY HALL – COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Study Session called to order by Mayor Pro Tem Teneshia Kragness at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Pro Tem Teneshia Kragness, and Councilmembers Dan Jerzak, Kris Lawrence-Anderson, and Laurie Ann Moore. Also present were Interim City Manager Daren Nyquist, Interim Deputy City Manager & Public Works Director Liz Heyman, Planning Manager Ginny McIntosh, Police Chief Garett Flesland, City Clerk Shannon Pettit, and City Attorney Siobhan Tolar. Mayor April Graves was absent and excused. CITY COUNCIL MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION ITEMS Mayor Pro Tem Kragness noted that Mayor Graves was running late but would arrive shortly. Councilmember Jerzak stated he wanted to thank Staff for getting the Cultural Arts in Commission and all the terms in the Friday update. He noted that the Hennepin County Library is seeking applications for the Library Youth Advisory Committee and suggested to Staff that it could be posted on the City's website in case some youth would like to participate. The Riverview Neighborhood Potluck Picnic will be on Tuesday, June 16, 2026, at 6:00 p.m. at the Riverwood Neighborhood Association. He asked if he could continue with a correction in minutes or if he should wait until the EDA session. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness stated Councilmember Jerzak could address his correction now. Councilmember Moore asked if it was a correction in the EDA minutes. Councilmember Jerzak stated that there were corrections to the EDA minutes. Councilmember Moore noted that his correction should wait. Councilmember Moore stated that, at this time, and it may be the Mayor’s preference, as well as the City Manager ’s , to list all proclamations and read those at every meeting, and it was discussed that it was all or nothing, and one that was not added was PTSD Awareness month. She noted that the City has lost in the last few weeks, First responders, including both Fire and Police, to PTSD 06/08/26 -2- DRAFT and, in some cases, suicide. She reiterated that it is an all-or-nothing proposition on the proclamations and wanted to at least acknowledge that PTSD Awareness Month is June. Councilmember Moore continued that the Council received an invitation for the neighborhood meeting on June 30, which she has not discussed with the City Manager, but there were discussions regarding how the Council was going to restructure neighborhood meetings. She added that June 30 is three weeks away and there has been a very poor turnout in these neighborhood meetings for the past several years. She stated the Interim City Manager probably got input from Staff because it had been discussed previously, but she is concerned with the June 30 date of the first one, and the next one is in September, and the location is also at the Brooklyn Center Middle School, which is a change as well. She noted she does not know how the other Councilmembers feel, but it is not very far off in terms of timing, and she knows Staff has tried to do a lot of marketing and public relations around these meetings, which have sadly been to no avail in terms of any actual resident participation. She asked the Council to potentially postpone the neighborhood and just have the one in September. She asked if Mayor Pro Tem Kragness wanted to wait to discuss that. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness told Councilmember Moore to keep going with her items. Councilmember Moore continued that she received a phone call from Myrna Kragness-Kauth, regarding the Heritage Center. She noted that she had discussed with the Interim City Manager whether or not the City could sell the property and the land. The City bought it from the University of Minnesota, and the Interim City Manager is actually researching all of that, along with his Staff in his free time. She added that she did respond to Myrna Kragness-Kauth that when the City bought the farm, the Heritage Center was not on it, so that was a separate discussion that the Council would be seeking, in terms of its continued management of that Special Revenue Fund and whether or not someone else could manage it better than the City, with better outcomes. She noted that the Council will get that information today with the presentation, but she wanted to provide that update and suggest discussing further as an agenda item. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness added that in January, at the first meeting, the Council got the list of all the proclamations that they would be doing. The Council can go through those, and if anyone notices anything that is missing, it can be added. The ones on the list are the ones that the Staff is putting together, and more can be added, but we should make sure that the Council is following that list from January. Interim City Manager Daren Nyquist stated that the thought was that there is a general list that has been agreed upon by the Council, month by month or meeting by meeting, if there is some things that pop up that could see Council consensus at the Study Session, if there is something that the Council sees maybe for the month prior or the next meeting to raise it during the Study Session and Staff can add that to the meeting or not. So that was the path forward for those things. He noted that a few years ago, there was one proclamation for them all for the entire year. For now, there is a list of agreed-upon events, and then that can be brought up individually as a Council if Councilmembers feel the need. 06/08/26 -3- DRAFT Councilmember Moore noted that she is quite aware of the list of the Council’s that was approved, and there are other focus points in making sure the Council has this all-inclusive list every month or every two weeks in a month to recite proclamations. Other cities just acknowledge that this is “X” month, this is “X” month, and the whole proclamation is not read. She noted that the Council’s time, and she is not discounting the importance of the City recognizing, but there are other priorities to focus on in terms of the Council’s time. Councilmember Lawrence Anderson noted that Organ Donation Month is recognized in April, and it has impacted her immediate family twice. The Council has recognized it in the past, but she has dropped the ball on it, and that was in April. Councilmember Jerzak added that every once in a while, Councilmembers may be approached about a specific proclamation. The Council has a policy on how to specifically deal with that and how to get approval of it, to move it forward, and that should not be interfered with. Specifically, if somebody approaches a Councilmember, they go through all of the approvals, and want to remind the Council of that specific policy. That includes special events, or a dog rescue, or something like that, and he does not want to discourage individuals from approaching the Council with those, but there is a specific policy regarding how that goes forward. CITY MANAGER MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION ITEMS BUDGET CALENDAR UPDATE Mr. Nyquist stated that he wanted to have a conversation about the budget calendar update and put that in front of the Council to talk about, because Staff is approaching the time to start working on this in a serious manner. There are some things that the Staff and the Finance team feel that once this schedule is proposed, it puts the Staff in the best place to get the budget done in a timely way, limits the stress of a compressed timeline, and, given the situation in the organization, it allows the Council to have some good conversations. He noted there has been discussion with the Council previously to add extra meeting dates to this calendar, and this is the global calendar of the things that need to be done to get everything submitted to Hennepin County, and then start the new year with the agreed-upon budget. In this calendar, if the Council feels the need to add extra dates to this, they can, and the Council should have that conversation now to see if one or two more dates should be added, or if not, then Staff will stick with the proposed calendar. He added that the big dates to think about are September 30 and then December 28, and anything critical that needs to happen before September 30. If it is going to be an in-depth conversation, the December 28 date is more or less the administrative things that Staff need to accomplish. If the Council is going to add extra dates, it should be in the next few weeks, but that conversation with Council needs to happen now, and the Council should discuss how they feel about the budget timelines they have seen in the meetings, or if Council needs to add more meetings or time to discussions. Mr. Nyquist noted that after this meeting, he will send out an invitation to the Finance Commission and invite them in for an hour-long meeting to talk about the process this year, because it can be slightly different. Council does not need to be present for that, but is welcome to come if any 06/08/26 -4- DRAFT Councilmembers want to sit in on that or watch it remotely, as well as it will be more of an informal sort of meeting with that group to get them comfortable with the process, talk about this year, so no decisions will be made. The meeting will be more of a meet and greet, where Staff will discuss the calendar and the goals for this year, and will happen next week. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked if the Council was going to see budgets from each Department, as they have had in the past. There used to be Police and Fire, and all the Departments would present their budgets. Mr. Nyquist replied that that is the more granular budget calendar that the Council will see shortly, and this is more the big ticks that need to be decided between this June and July. In September, the bulk of the Department-by-Department meetings will be seen, and the Council will have to go through all of those funds. The Council will go through all the Departments, go through all the Special Revenue Funds, and will have that conversation along with the Finance Commission. He asked if the Council will need to plan more time to have those kinds of conversations, or not, given the situation. Councilmembers have talked about having extra meetings with more time to talk about the line items or the Department budgets, so it needs to be discussed if the Council wants to expand the budget calendar. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness noted that she goes through the budget line by line, and pointed out that Staff could point out differences, highlight them if there has been a change, so the Council's eyes can go straight to those changes versus going through every line that is always the same, and that would slow down the questions. Councilmember Jerzak asked what the status of the hire for the Finance Director is, and noted that the fact that the Finance Commission contributes, and if the Finance Director is part of the Ehlers group, that would be unfair. Even if there is a person that the City has tendered an offer to for the position, it is going to be a tough journey. Mr. Nyquist explained that it is going to be a little bit of a tag team approach this year, and it is not going to be a bad situation for a new Finance Director coming in the middle of the budget; they will get trial by fire early, and he stated he can say that from experience, it is not a bad thing, and people learn quickly. The plan would be that Dan Tienter from Ehler’s would be the primary leader of the budget process, and the new Finance Director would shadow that person. We have that person starting as Finance Director in mid-July, so they will be coming in at the very beginning, but still late enough when the process is already starting. He added that Dan Teinter from Ehler’s will be the primary contact for the Finance Commission and facilitator of those conversations. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness added that she is the liaison for the Finance Commission and will assist if they have questions as well. Councilmember Moore asked why Mr. Nyquist has not picked the June 22 or July 13 date. She asked if there was any reason why the Council would not pick both those dates, including August 10 and August 24, and then make sure that they are posted for the public. If there is a need to 06/08/26 -5- DRAFT cancel it, then it can be cancelled, but we would much rather err on the side of having enough meetings for scrutiny and adopting a proposed and final budget for the City and a property tax levy. She noted that June 22 would work, but does not know if that is too soon, July 13, July 10, July 17, and then maybe another day, that is August 17. That is just a proposition to have it on the calendar, and if it needs to be cancelled, it can be, but the Council will have enough questions that it will not need to be cancelled. Mr. Nyquist stated that the July 13 date is the one that is going to hold for the City now. There may be an extra day in there on June 22 that can be added. It is easier to cancel than to add because of the posting rules around that, so if the Council makes a decision to post, that needs to be done so many days prior. It is probably easier to get something on the calendar sooner than to cancel if the Council does not need it. Councilmember Moore stated the Council needs to decide today to add July 13, 10, and 24. At the July 14 meeting, the Council will vote on a proposed property tax levy, so it would seem that if the Council does want to add another date, then it should be decided tonight. Mr. Nyquist agreed and explained that the September 30 date is a preliminary levy. So that is the cap because Hennepin County needs to have that number in to do their truth-in-taxation notices to residents. So that is the reason for that, and it is not the final adopted levy; it is the preliminary. These meetings will be at 5:30 p.m. and will be happening on the day of the City Council meetings, and the Staff is trying to time the meetings so that everyone does not have to hop in and out of their evening schedules, and make the time together as efficient as possible. The finance meetings do need to start at 5:30 p.m., just to fit them into the schedule. Councilmember Moore stated that, while she did not want to pressure her colleagues to select a date immediately, the Council could review their calendars before the next meeting on June 22, given that the first Finance meeting is scheduled for July 13. She suggested considering August 17 or another potential date and noted that the meeting would not need to be held on a Monday if it was not scheduled in conjunction with a Council meeting. Mr. Nyquist noted that the agreement or consensus was just to add a date or two, and that would be good enough, and he will have to go back and check with the Department Directors themselves to make sure dates do not conflict with any major Staff vacations. So if there was a consensus to add more time, or a number of extra meetings is good enough, he will come back with some dates. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness noted that in the past, the meeting was typically toward the end, right before submitting something, because it was Council-requested changes, and then Staff was going back and working some numbers. If there was a date to be added, it would be more beneficial to have it closer to the end. Mayor Graves arrived at 6:15 p.m. Councilmember Moore suggested adding a meeting on September 14. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness 06/08/26 -6- DRAFT agreed. Councilmember Jerzak added that the Council has to allow Staff ample time to prepare, too, because these things just do not suddenly appear, and the Council needs to be cognizant of those limited resources. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness noted that this is why Mr. Nyquist is suggesting the Council pick a date now, or at least sooner than later. Councilmember Moore added that the Interim City Manager said he needed to check Director schedules and will get back to the Council on possible dates. Mr. Nyquist stated he was looking for consensus on adding more time and would find the date. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness noted that Mr. Nyquist was trying to figure out if the Council needed a date and is hearing that the Council wants at least one more. The Council all confirmed that is correct. SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS WITH CITY COUNCIL PROVIDE INPUT Mr. Nyquist explained that this item would have to be punted to the next meeting, as Police Chief Flesland had a personal thing come up that took him out of this conversation. So the Staff will bring this conversation back to the next Study Session. As a reminder, this is a conversation with Council about how the Council would like to be updated on emergency situations in the City. Mayor Graves reminded everyone that she will not be at the next Council meeting. Councilmember Jerzak asked if she would prefer to hear this presentation. Mayor Graves stated she would be fine as long as it is just a consensus Work Session discussion, she does not think she needs to be there, and will look at the minutes and then provide any additional input of her own. Councilmember Jerzak pointed out that the reason he asked is that both he and Mayor Graves were pretty adamant about this topic. Mayor Graves agreed. Councilmember Jerzak noted that perhaps Mayor Graves could have her one-to-one talk with Mr. Nyquist about it, because it is important. Mayor Graves noted it is important, but so is the reason she is missing the meeting. METROPOLITAN COUNCIL PRELIMINARY POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLD ESTIMATES Mr. Nyquist introduced Planning Manager Ginny McIntosh to present the Metropolitan Council’s 06/08/26 -7- DRAFT preliminary population estimates. He added that this is important as the Staff gets into budget season, and there is some good information for us to know, as it relates to growth in the City, which has an effect on the tax base. Ms. McIntosh explained that the City just received its formal letter from the Metropolitan Council with the preliminary population and household estimates. Just to set the tone, Minnesota statute, subsection 4.73,24 requires Community Development researchers to prepare an annual population and household estimate for all cities, townships, and counties in the seven-county Twin Cities region. Ultimately, what these estimates do is inform funding decisions for state programs like local government aid, state aid for local transportation, and the region’s Fiscal Disparities program. It also provides local governments and stakeholders with timely estimated counts of people, households, and housing units for smaller geographic regions or areas, and allows researchers to highlight recent and relevant population and development trends in the Twin Cities region to policymakers. These estimates are reviewed by local governments before they are revised and ultimately certified by the Metropolitan Council. There is a one-year lag with these estimates, so the most recent data was published in July of 2025 for populations and households in 2024. These estimates do not include building permits that were issued in 2025. This is because it is unlikely that the work would have been completed by the estimated date of April 1, and data inputs are refreshed each year, so the estimate should not be compared directly with the 2024 estimates sent last year. She noted that the 2020 census provided a more comparable reference point in these cases. Ms. McIntosh continued that for Brooklyn Center, based on the estimates as they stand, there are 12,070 housing units, 11,855 households, and an average household size of 2.9 persons per household, which comes in at 34,122 people. The information has separated 525 people living in group quarters facilities. She noted that she would walk through some of the infographics and charts that the Metropolitan Council provided. In comparison between the 2020 census and the 2025 estimate, there are 2.9 persons per household. The new 2025 estimate shows an increase in the population, with 34,122 being the estimate for the City’s population. For further breakdown, the report does get into the housing units and types. Brooklyn Center has a large number of single- family detached homes as the predominant housing type, and the City has added some obviously since 2020. Based on that number in the data, that was due to the Center Development at East Brook a few years back. The report also shows some modest growth with the multifamily homes, with 245 that were added since 2020, and were likely due to real estate equities. Ms. McIntosh noted there are other changes since 2020 that she needed to dive into a little bit more. The 127 multi-family units mentioned might also have been real estate equities, and in that case, Staff will need to go back to the Metropolitan Council and have them add in Langston Commons. The report is also not showing any Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), but the City has had some homeowners come through with ADUs. Those have been internal ADUs, and there has been no standalone ADU use, but there has been some. Mayor Graves asked what she meant. Ms. McIntosh explained that the City has different types of accessory dwelling units, or ADUs. There are internal ADUs and detached. Detached ADUs are 06/08/26 -8- DRAFT going to be a completely standalone accessory structure. The City has not had any of those. Mayor Graves asked what Ms. McIntosh meant by detached. Ms. McIntosh noted a detached ADU could be a garage conversion, which would be a standalone ADU, and the primary reason for not doing those is cost. A standalone structure has to run separate utilities, so it is not usually what people want to do; a lot of them have been basement ADUs, for instance. Councilmember Jerzak asked if the City has any tiny houses or requests for them. Ms. McIntosh responded that, currently, no, but there has been some interest. The interest that the City has been to either bring in a small mobile home on the chassis and leave it there, or even for a tiny home to just bring it in that is sitting on a chassis. That is something that she and the Staff have had to try and work through because, for permanent structures and dwelling units, they need to be on permanent foundations. Staff is also working through manufactured homes, how the City could modify them with plumbing that is not connected the way it needs to be, and is exposed. She noted that it has been a struggle for Staff to work through, but there have been a couple who have wanted to bring in an existing manufactured home like a trailer, and there has been maybe one inquiry for a tiny house, but nothing has gone forward. Councilmember Jerzak stated that he thought the UDO addressed, for example, if a resident had a mother-in-law suite or something that they wanted to put in up to one year, there were advantages if the resident could do that, but it was temporary. He asked how that got worked out. Ms. McIntosh asked if he was referring to the temporary accessory structure. Councilmember Jerzak confirmed that that is what he was talking about. Ms. McIntosh continued that that was attached to a health care provision and noted that the City had a time limitation on it, and that was before the adopted UDO. Councilmember Jerzak stated that she answered his question, but he just did not know what happened to it. He noted the reason he brought it up is that, on occasion, he generally sees churches that try to advance that, and was wondering in case somebody asked. Ms. McIntosh pointed out that the situation is almost under a separate category, and those are called sanctuary villages. So if a religious entity wanted to come through with a sanctuary village, and there is one in Saint Paul, for instance, the City would have to consider that, and there are state statute provisions for that, but only for religious assembly. Ms. McIntosh continued that she would further break down the estimated occupancy rates, households, and persons per household, which is just more data on data. She added that she would explain the breakdown of these estimates and how they are developed. The Metropolitan Council actually uses a housing stock-based model to estimate their households and population, and ultimately finds it easier to track how many housing units there are and how many people live in them than it is to try to find every birth, death, and household that is moving in and out of that area. The 2020 census provides a count of all the housing units, which forms a baseline for these estimates, and from there, the Metropolitan Council uses three main steps to produce those estimates. The Metropolitan Council takes residential building permit data from the local governments. This means that whenever the City has a permit come through Hennepin County’s 06/08/26 -9- DRAFT assessors, the Metropolitan Council will log them. There may be adjustments to housing valuation if there is a renovation happening, and occupancy rates are customized for each of these housing types to estimate the number of households, and then the average household size is taken based on the housing type to estimate how many people are in those households. Residents living in facilities are not counted as part of the housing stock, and that is the group quarter designation, but it does help generate the total estimated population count. Mayor Graves noted the Metropolitan Council takes the average household size, customizes each housing type to estimate the number of people within households, and if that is customized specifically to Brooklyn Center, or if that is a customized housing type, no matter where it is. Ms. McIntosh noted that she assumed they are using historic Brooklyn Center data. In the chart, there are different numbers associated with the housing for persons per household. So single- family detached, townhouses, and then duplexes and triplexes had a higher person per household count. When the chart gets into ADUs, which the City does not have any, so that should not really factor in, but then the multifamily did have a lower number per household, so that would have brought that number down. Mayor Graves stated that the number seemed a little low. Ms. McIntosh added that it actually surprised her as well, and she thought it would be at least three. She continued that this data helps form decisions with local government aid, the Disparities Program, and also plays into the Comprehensive Plan. The Metropolitan Council is a regional planning agency that is charged with planning and coordinating growth and development in the seven-county Metro region. State law requires the Metropolitan Council to create regional plans and policies that ultimately guide the City’s growth and manage regional systems for transportation, aviation, water resources, and regional parks. That same law applies to the City or local governments, which is why the City needs to update the Comprehensive Plan every ten years. The Comprehensive Plan planning cycle begins with a release of data from the US census, which in the City’s case would have been 2020, and that also serves as the starting point for the Metropolitan Council to develop its forecasts for regional and local changes. Ms. McIntosh continued that from there, that is where the City ends up with the Metropolitan Councils' Imagine 2050 plan, which was just released last year. The Imagine 2050 Plan is a guiding document for the City, and is a regional development guide and long-range plan that was adopted in early February 2025. It has five policy plans embedded within it for the City’s land use, water, regional parks, trails, transportation, and housing, and these plans serve as a guide for Staff to start working on Comprehensive Plans. The Metropolitan Council generates a minimum checklist of everything each city needs to provide in its Comprehensive Plans. Brooklyn Center needs to meet those minimums, which is why there is a timeline now to get Brooklyn Center’s Comprehensive Plan in by 2028. On the schedule tonight, the Staff are applying for a grant to the Metropolitan Council, and have started working with a consultant, and will take all the information into account regarding the estimates for households and population, because the Metropolitan Council lays out for the Staff how many housing units to anticipate and where to put them. Every city has goals that they are supposed to achieve, and this time around, it will be affordable housing for Brooklyn Center. 06/08/26 -10- DRAFT Ms. McIntosh continued that the City has a very low necessity for affordable housing. There are 52 units between the 80 percent and the 30 percent AMI range. Other cities have way higher counts, but the Metropolitan Council does look at it on a case-by-case basis. The biggest next step right now is that since the City has received these household and population estimates, the Metropolitan Council is requesting that Staff submit any comments or changes to them by June 24th, and then these estimates will become final in July. Mayor Graves asked Ms. McIntosh to repeat what she said about counts. Ms. McIntosh asked which part, because there are a couple of counts. Mayor Graves noted that Ms. McIntosh stated something about Brooklyn Center’s units versus other units. Ms. McIntosh explained that each city receives its own checklist. Coon Rapids is going to have its own checklist. Brooklyn Center is going to have its own checklist. Every township or city in the seven-county Metro is going to have its own checklist. Within each checklist, there will be certain goals that the Metropolitan Council is looking to see. Depending on each city, some might have higher requirements, or lesser requirements. In this particular case, housing counts, and affordable housing counts as an example, because those are in the housing plan, there will be a number of anticipated population growth. If Brooklyn Center has an anticipated population growth of so many people, Staff need a plan for it, and within the City’s own comprehensive plan, Staff need to know where to put that density to achieve that number, which really means where the City is putting its people. The same thing goes for affordable housing. The Metropolitan Council lays out a chart, which is included in the memo, that breaks down how many housing units at this AMI level area median income, and that is where to set the goal unless Staff thinks otherwise. Mayor Graves noted that Staff can recognize that the Metropolitan Council does create those lists and expectations for each city. But many cities do not follow through on what they are supposed to do. Affordable housing is very important, but the City is at 80 percent naturally occurring affordable housing. Ms. McIntosh added that it is probably closer to 90 percent. Mayor Graves agreed and stated that affordable housing is above 80 percent in Brooklyn Center, and one of the things that she has been questioning and advocating for is more accountability for the share of affordable housing to not just be in Brooklyn Center. Mayor Graves noted that the City has even been part of a lawsuit a few years back, specific to this issue, and does not know whether it saw any traction or whether there are any more levels of accountability or pressure applied to other cities to help provide affordable housing. The reality is that it is a regional issue, and one City, especially a City that is already struggling with not the strongest tax base, should not be bearing the brunt of all of that by itself. She reiterated that she is not against affordable housing, and the City is protecting the naturally occurring affordable housing to the best of its ability. She noted a question she would like to send back to the Metropolitan Council is where the accountability is to make sure that the cities that are supposed to be providing help are also providing help, and that that is not falling more heavily on certain cities than others, and there needs be questions around their estimate of household size, and if there is a way to vet that with a different measurement someplace else to see if it is really accurate because that does affect funding that the City would receive, so that number needs to be correct. 06/08/26 -11 - DRAFT Ms. McIntosh noted that the number does play into the City’s growth, so it is a factor. She added that, as an example, because it was the easiest one to pull from for affordable housing, for instance, in that chart, Brooklyn Center was actually one of the lowest numbers for units that were in need of affordable housing. Brooklyn Center came in at 52; there were other cities that had hundreds. Mayor Graves pointed out that other cities probably have not been doing affordable housing. Ms. McIntosh agreed, but to the point of the follow-through, what would the Metropolitan Council be using to make sure that people are actually holding up their end. Mayor Graves asked if other cities still get the same amount of money as they normally would and what the incentive is for them to follow through. That would be some feedback that should be sent back to the Metropolitan Council. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson noted that she could not agree more, and was in that meeting, and Brooklyn Center has a high concentration of low-income housing, and asked what Maple Grove is doing for affordable housing. Mayor Graves stated that if there is no accountability, and Not In My Backyard (NIMBY) is still very real, and that is how the cities see it, showing up in places that do not have those lower counts. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson noted that for the Maple Groves and the Rogers, and she does not know what the Council could possibly do about that, but it comes down to the carrot and the stick, and cities do not get the money if they do not do what they are supposed to do. Councilmember Jerzak stated it might be apples and oranges, but he does recall a state statute that a lot of the developers in the more wealthy communities could write a check, and then that goes into offset costs, so for them, it is the cost of doing business, and Brooklyn Center can not compete against that, so it becomes disproportionate to the City. He stated he really appreciates Ms. McIntosh’s presentation. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson added that the concentration of poverty is what is happening, and that is her concern. Councilmember Moore asked Miss McIntosh if she could confirm, based on the 2025 estimate, that the population is 34,122 and not 33,597 when reporting the numbers. That number would indicate that the City had a loss of residents from 33,782, which is on the City’s sign. She stated maybe the Mayor already clarified that, but it would seem that the 34,122 is what the Metropolitan Council is going on. Ms. McIntosh agreed and stated that is a question she had too, because the Metropolitan Council separates out the group quarters or group living facilities, which she assumed are group homes for the most part or communal living. The Metropolitan Council is counting it for population, but is not counting it in the housing unit count for some reason. Councilmember Moore stated that Staff should provide that feedback as well. In terms of the 06/08/26 -12- DRAFT Metropolitan Council, they are, in fact, appointed by the Governor and are not elected officials. They make decisions on a variety of projects around, and everything the Council has said in terms of comments should definitely be included in terms of some of the disparities around affordable housing, assuring that the City is not going to get cut somehow from our LGA and other grants and whatnot for the City. Just as the Mayor pointed out, Brooklyn Center has been on the short end of the stick when it comes to funding from the Metropolitan Council and a variety of other county and state resources. Mayor Graves asked if Ms. McIntosh is going to provide that feedback to them from the Council. Ms. McIntosh stated that she can reach out to the Metropolitan Council because comments are due, but she does not know how quickly they will respond. Mayor Graves added that she wanted to make sure that it gets submitted by the deadline, and that Ms. McIntosh would submit them, and is not waiting for the Council to submit them. Ms. McInotsh noted that the Council is welcome to submit their own comments, but she will take the comments that have been provided and will listen to the meeting again and then pull those together in an email back to the Metropolitan Council. Mayor Graves thanked Ms. McIntosh for doing that. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked if Ms. McInotsh could copy the Council on any correspondence with the Metropolitan Council. Ms. McIntosh confirmed that she would. Councilmember Moore asked if the Council could get the link to provide feedback directly, as it is not provided in the packet. Mayor Graves stated she thought she had an email as well that was sent to her, and she forwarded it to the City Manager, so the City Manager can forward it to Councilmember Moore, and the link should be in the email. EARLY VOTING LAW CHANGE OPTIONS Mr. Nyquist explained that this conversation is a fast and furious conversation happening across cities right now, coming from some legislative changes this year that are opening up the possibility for cities to rethink their preliminary voting deadlines. He introduced City Clerk Shannon Pettit to lead the Council through this conversation and explained what that means. He noted that from what he understands, this could have been an administrative decision, but given the election year, it was really important to get Council conversation and feedback on what direction the City wants to take. This is a heavy topic, and he apologized for the quick turnaround, but there is a timeline the City is on based on the memo coming out of the state. Ms. Pettit will show the Council some good data on previous voting history and the options on the table for the City. Ms. Pettit explained that in the Council’s packet, there was a Q&A that was done at one of the local recent Hennepin County-led election trainings that had some statistics in it, as well as some statistics from the past few Brooklyn Center elections that show the number of early voters. This used to be called direct balloting, and the percentages of how many voters came in for those 06/08/26 -13- DRAFT elections during those different time frames. Typically, there is early voting for 46 days before every election. The law just changed, which allows the City to change that to 18 days, which is what is considered the early voting period. So the full 46 days, that first portion of it, voters can come in and have to complete an absentee ballot application as well as complete the absentee ballot and envelope. Residents will be able to cast their vote, put it in the envelope, and submit it that way. During the last 18 days, voters will be allowed to put their ballot directly into the machine, and that is why the numbers are so different. That is a lot of voters, and the Council should notice that it is anywhere between 75 and 80 percent of voters that come in those last 18 days versus about 20 to 25 percent that come in the first 28 days. She stated that she wanted to pose this to the Council because obviously, Staff has talked, there are some pros and cons to both, and basically, looking for some feedback from the Council if there is a preference. She added that she is happy to go over some of the pros and cons, and what the Staff is looking for. Councilmember Jerzak stated his preference to the benefit of the Staff is to go to the 18 days for several reasons; one is that it is really not stopping anybody from voting absentee or taking advantage. Particularly when he used to issue correction orders, people would want an extension that gives reason to procrastinate. He stated he really would support this not only for the Staffing reduction, but it is very hard, and the City has a small Staff, and if there is a consensus, the only thing that he would ask is when the Council would make a motion to send it to the regular Council meeting to vote on it so that a resolution occurs, so Hennepin County can accept that. This issue was quite litigated at the state level before it got to the Council, so he is comfortable with that. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she supports the 18 days as well. Mayor Graves stated she does not support the 18 days; it seems like more of the things being seen at the national level are reducing time frames and taking away people's ability to go and vote. She stated she understands the pros of a reduction in some of the expenses and is sympathetic to that, but the other side is potentially losing voters, and that does not gel with her at all, and she would be in support of option one, no change. This would also still be in alignment with neighboring cities. Councilmember Moore asked Ms. Pettit to confirm that, in terms of response to the Mayor’s concern, which all the Council should have, whether this would be limiting access to the voting booth, if this change to 18 days limits time for folks at all to get to the voting booth in terms of the time frame, because she had mentioned 20 percent. Ms. Pettit responded that if the City were to reduce it to 18 days, the 46 days would still exist at Hennepin County for that entire time frame, whether the City is doing it or not. Hennepin County will also be administering early voting, and folks will still be able to request a ballot to be mailed to them as well. So there are still options available to voters. Councilmember Kragness stated that when she is looking at the numbers, they are pretty similar to Hennepin County’s . Brooklyn Center is showing 22 percent voting from the first 28 days and 78 percent voting during the last 28 days; however, even though there are 80 percent that vote 06/08/26 -14- DRAFT early, if the City were to go to just 18 days, it would lose and only capture roughly three out of four of the early voters. Even though it is a small number, the City is not capturing the full number. Looking through these recommendations by Staff, it did not list voter access as a con, which tells her that Staff believes that residents would still have access to vote other ways as well. She added that giving people as much time to vote as possible is what she is more in favor of. Councilmember Moore pointed out that she is actually in favor of option two, the 18 days, as long as the City tries to make sense of the muck, in terms of the well-debated topic at the legislature, there are still options. Hennepin County still has the option, as well as the request for ballots. Unless a person is a newer voter, they pretty much have their way of voting. She added that she can not remember what the cost is for Staffing during an election, but this will be a savings, and while she is just as concerned about access as well, for the voters who vote both in primaries and general elections, they will find a way to vote. Councilmember Jerzak asked if the Council needs to make a formal motion. Mayor Graves stated she did not think so, as Staff was looking for consensus, and they heard consensus from Councilmember Jerzak, Councilmember Moore, and Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson that the City would like to reduce early voting from 36 days to 18 days. Councilmember Jerzak asked if it needs to be brought to the Regular session. Mayor Graves stated it was on the work session, and the City Manager also said that it was really an administrative decision, but out of courtesy to the Council, they brought it up for discussion. Mr. Nyquist stated that is how he understood it, but it would not hurt to have a formal resolution if the City gets into that territory to submit it to Hennepin County. He noted he would ask the City Clerk if other cities have done formal resolutions, or not, and in context with other City Clerks around the area. Ms. Pettit explained that there has not been a consistent process across the board. Some cities have just been notified, and there is a large group of cities that are missing from the list of those that have notified Hennepin County. That is because those cities are going to their council, so there is not a consistent way of notifying Hennepin County, and they do not require resolution, but she is happy to put one together if the Council would like. Mayor Graves stated that the only reason she would be interested in a resolution is to make sure that there is a record of the decision, and would request that the Council give time to public comment, to get some feedback from the residents on their feelings. She asked if the Staff had done any vetting with any Commissions or community groups or anything like that. Ms. Pettit stated that the Staff has not, however, the deadline to notify Hennepin County by state law is June 12. Mayor Graves noted that that does not leave a whole lot of time to do anything. Mr. Nyquist stated that, from his understanding, this change went live on May 18. Mayor Graves noted that this adds to her concern about the fast pace to hurry up and decide about 06/08/26 -15- DRAFT reducing the number of days that people can do early voting and make that decision in less than 30 days. That does not feel good at all, and not being able to get any input from the community about it. Councilmember Moore stated she would have to agree, and with that clarity and the fact that the Council was not notified timely by the county, she follows a lot of the legislature, but there is a process in place. She added that the City has the same number of Staff that they have always had doing this, and would now agree to keeping it the same, that way residents would know what to expect and would go with option one. She stated she had to change her choice based on continuing to ask questions because she is all about access to the voting booth, as that has been stripped away from individuals in this country. Councilmember Lawrence Anderson added that she likes the idea, but the pace is too rapid. She noted that for the next election, she would like to see that, as a Council, they can make a decision and give ample time and warning on the City’s website and newsletter. Due to the short time, she is going to concede and say that in this election, they should leave the status quo and revisit it for the next election. Councilmember Jerzak stated that based on new information, he concurred. Mayor Graves noted that the Council cannot wait until two years from today to take up this discussion again, and she is grateful that her fellow Councilmembers agreed that it was just too fast to turn around. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated that the City can start the education process on the website and through the newsletter. The next election is in two years, so this will be the time frame so that nobody is surprised and the Council is being transparent. Mayor Graves added that it would be good to get some more community feedback in that process. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson suggested putting a survey on the website. Councilmember Moore noted that it is an election year, so no one knows what the legislature's going to look like next year and what they will decide to keep and not keep and debate and so on. She added that the Staff has done an excellent job trying to keep on the pulse of the state, the county, and so on, and as that information becomes available, the Interim City Manager or Staff can bring it to the Council. Mayor Graves noted that there is not a formal process for notifying the county; it just sounds messy, and the City does not want a mess right before an election. ADJOURNMENT 06/08/26 -16- DRAFT Councilmember Moore moved and Councilmember Kragness seconded to adjourn the Study Session at 6:57 p.m. Motion passed unanimously.