All right. A style guide. Yes. Good evening and welcome to the City of Falcon Heights regular meeting of the City Council on February, Wednesday, 02/11/2026. I'll call this meeting to order at 07:03 and roll call. Gustafsson. Here. May. Here. Bogan. Present. Milke. Present. Lostenberg. Here. Linehan. Here. Alright, any changes to tonight's agenda? None. That's published and done? Okay. Do I hear a motion to approve the agenda? So moved.
Senator Wossenberg. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye. All those opposed same sign. Motion carries five-zero. We don't have any presentations tonight but we do have minutes from our January 28 City Council workshop meeting and our January 28 City Council regular meeting minutes. Any changes to those minutes that may not have been done or noticed earlier to staff? Do I hear a motion to approve the minutes from January 28 workshop and regular?
So moved. So moved by Wasenberg. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed same sign. Motion carries five-zero. We've approved the minutes. We don't have any public hearings tonight we do have a consent agenda consisting of four items we have our general disbursements through February 3 $118,354.66 should include payroll through January wire payments through January 29 $16,340.42
Approval of city licenses, three, tree vendors are now licensed, following tonight. Approval of public works purchase of a 2017 Elgin Pelcam NP Street Sweeper. And number four, approval of a General Fund Budget Amendment for our share of the City of St. Anthony Village Police Department purchase of Axon body worn cameras. I'll move the consent agenda. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed same sign. Motion carries five-zero. Policy tonight which I think has brought everybody out tonight,
is our consideration of ordinance 20 six-zero-one amending chapter two of the Falcon Heights City Code concerning stewardship of community resources. On this for an explanation of, how this will work, I'm gonna turn this over to administrator Linehan to explain to the process and then we'll go from there. Yeah. Thank you, mayor and council. So this has been a continuing discussion, that the city council has discussed, first at our January 4 or most recently, I should say, January 14 city council meeting, kind of in consultation with city attorney.
We were directed to bring forward a resolution and draft ordinance. We brought the resolution at our January 28 meeting, as well as the ordinance discussed at the workshop and then approve the resolution at the workshop meeting. We also were given direction to draft this or to bring this draft ordinance had been posted you know, to our website, for the ten day notice to the state, and having those requirements. So a little bit about this ordinance. So the ordinance is written, essentially, as stewardship of city resources. So it follows up with our resolution.
Our resolution were kind of our statement of values, our explanation as to why we're getting to this point. The resolution makes, clear kind of where we stand. The ordinance puts into city code our rules and regulations around this. And it does further spec, stipulate that city resources and city property is to be used for, nondiscriminatory purposes, for public purpose. And so as part of that, this ordinance, what it would do is it would clearly define that. We'd be able to mark through signage that this property is for city intended use
city property in, in relation to this ordinance. Violation of this, this is where it does get different. Some of this is best practice of seeing what's happening in other cities that have adopted ordinances, is it is enforced administratively through the city attorney's office versus a police officer. What we've found throughout the metro area, every city can attest to this that does have kind of a similar ordinance, police officer goes out, they interact with the, the federal agents, and they are not, usually successful in getting them to move. They're not usually very cooperative. They're not given a lot of information, and so they continue to use the city property.
We're approaching this from an administrative standpoint. What we're saying kind of through our city attorney is we want the employees to document, to report it. San Antonio police, they're willing to go talk to the the or even kinda go out there and, like, see it. They're gonna document it for us if they get a police call relating to it. They forward that to the city administrator within five days in the ordinance. I take that, hopefully, much quicker than that, bring it over to the city attorney, sent to the city attorney's office, and they will send a cease and desist to, the appropriate federal agency. Obviously, the first one might generally be somewhat disregarded.
We don't know for certain. But what we can do is we're gonna build a case. Right? And so we send a cease and desist. This property, we've made it clear. You're in violation of our ordinance. A second one, same type of thing. We're gonna build a case over time, and that is where our attorneys believe that the strongest, grounds the city has to further clarify our use of property. So those are the goals behind the ordinance. In the packet, we've received about 17 written comments, and we know there might be more additional comments. So we've included all the packet info that is part of the packet. But that's kind of where we've gotten to.
We continue to discuss with other cities working together, and kinda collaborate on some best practices and how to move this forward to the next step. So that is how we recommend it. That's how the city attorney has helped us draft it. And, that's the the general overview of the proposed ordinance. Thank you. The, as we, look at this, we did note as part of, how we wanted to to address this to engage some more public comment. We've had this up on our website, hence why we have, written, these written comments. I don't know if we're going to read those or not. But anyway, we would offer at this time,
or here's part of that, to hear from the community. And if you'd like to speak to this, the city adopting this this ordinance, I'd open up the podium now for for a bit of comment period. And then if you could limit your remarks to three minutes so that we're we can expedite the whole process, we'd appreciate it. But we do wanna hear from people if you want to, if you want to say something to us. And I would ask that the comments be read because Yep. It came from people who are not able to attend.
Yep. Okay. K. Hey, Jude. This the So what will timer. Oh, okay. I can't it doesn't signal. It doesn't signal over there? No. Okay. Alright. Just when you're ready to hit 3. So when when we're ready to go, I just hit the 3, right? Yep. Okay. All right. So I don't know if you'd like to hear the written comments first or if from from there before before we open it there, these are the folks who have done that. Mayor, would you like me to read them? I I've got my Okay. The right vision ongoing here.
So, Well, you don't have to time yourself. Yes. And then I won't time myself. So which button do I put to turn this off? I have to click through it. Okay. I would just let Jack do it. So we'll let you do that. It doesn't carry any Hey, Jim. I be happy to ask for him if you'd like me. Sure. Well, I tell you what, let's go every other one. All right. All right. Oh, Eastern, read Emmett for the timing. Yes. So, Mark Mioska and Linda Starr from Pasco Street, right? My wife and I fully support this effort, our son as well.
We're proud that Falcon Heights leadership is pursuing this and helping community cope through what action they can do. As our family, this has impacted us through friends we know that are here legally that are being pursued as well as our son who was tear gassed while peacefully protesting. Next by Matt Kocotovich at 1896 Sheldon Street. I support an ordinance amending Chapter two of the Falcon Heights City Code concerning stewardship of city resources. Sharon Preeves. Greetings. I am a proud resident of Falcon Heights and am writing in strong support of
passing this ordinance. I, unfortunately, can't make the public hearing on February 11, so please use this email to record my support. Thank you for your important important work in keeping our community and neighbors safe. Annika Willis. Dear city leaders, I am writing in support of the proposed ordinance amending chapter two of the Falcon Heights City Code regarding the stewardship of city resources and immigration enforcement. I appreciate the city council's commitments to public safety, responsible governance, and the well-being of all residents, regardless of immigration status or national origin. This ordinance would help build trust between the city and our community while ensuring city
resources are used appropriately and lawfully. Thank you for inviting public input and for your leadership on this urgent important issue. Mary and Dane Bauer on, eighteen eighty four Albert Street North. You are doing the right thing. I am very grateful. Next is Mary Catherine Stevens. Back 100% exclamation point. K. All the ordinances in the world don't help if there is no help. That is the issue. Karen Closer, dear council members, I applaud our city council for this proactive amendment to the city code to help safeguard Falcon Heights residents from the rampant abuse,
unlawful detainment, and arrest of people based on their skin color, accent, or residence. DHS unleashed on us poorly trained and armed domestic terrorists in the form of ICE and executed US citizens for all the world to see. Thank you for your service to our your constituents. Bob Olson. Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this resolution. I would encourage taking a longer comprehensive look at the wording. Today, it's the federal immigration issue. How can it be worded to encompass other federal overreach in the future? Michael Polis. So what Falcon Heights Democrats are saying is that they support 40,000
to 80,000 illegal criminals coming into Minnesota, and you're going to copy the anti ICE, anti Trump message of Waltz and Klobuchar and Ellison. Shame on you exclamation point exclamation point exclamation point. Sarah Rickner. I support the creation of this new ordinance. Jennifer Wick. Hello. I'm emailing with a comment concern regarding the following statement seen on the Falcon Heights, FB page. My concern is with the vague part at the end, quote, or similar lawful authorization, unquote. What I fear is that federal immigration enforcement will use that vague line to claim
that they have lawful authorization. Please leave that part out of the ordinance and only say unless authorized by a judicial warrant or subpoena. Barbara Leary, Iowa Avenue West. Dear Falcon Heights City Council, it gives me great pleasure to give my blessing and support of resolution twenty six twelve affirming community values and city action related to immigration enforcement and responsible stewardship of city resources. This resolution reminds me of why my family chose to make our home in Falcon Heights fifty five years ago. This resolution is not just about how our city streets and public spaces are used,
but it is the moral high ground to what has been taking place in our great state of Minnesota. Know that your efforts and efforts in keeping our community safe and informed. Please add my name to the list of community members who support resolution 26 dash 12. I'll just go ahead and do a correction on that if you don't mind there. Know that your efforts and thoughtfulness on this topic are much appreciated and worthy of the great praise that has heaped upon your efforts, in keeping our community safe and informed. There we go. Jump aligned. I did jump aligned. Small print. You wanna yes. Robert Goode.
+1 91961 I cannot attend the city meeting on Wednesday, February 11. I am in full support of the ICE ordinance not allowing mobilizing on city property. Thank you for protecting our city. James Colton, Tatum Street. Council members, I'm writing for myself as well as my wife, Susan, who receives a copy of this. We wholeheartedly approve of your recent adoption of Resolution 20 six-twelve affirming the city's commitment to public safety and the well-being of all residents and visitors, regardless of immigration status or national origin,
and outlining the responsible use of city resources. We are also encouraging an affirmative vote on an ordinance to prohibit the use of city property or resources for federal immigration enforcement activities unless authorized by a judicial warrant, subpoena, or similar lawful authorization. And those are our written comments that we received. And, at this time, I'd, open up the, the podium to those, who would like to, to speak directly, to this and to the members here and those in the meetings. Never start
over. Just hit 3 when they when if somebody comes up. And when you do, please state your name and address, and we'll, we'll start the timing after you've settled in at the, at the podium. Is is the mic on? Is is the mic on? Is it one of these? Nope. Nope. The I get it. Talk loud. Yeah. Give me one minute just for the the podium mic to catch on. Oh, did we unplug it? Yep. It got unplugged, while we were plugging in the workshop once. So one second. Sorry, Mark. Sorry, Mark. It doesn't count against your time.
It's going to happen to you, Mark. You're a tester. It's going to take us three minutes. Time's up. Thank you. Thanks. Thanks. It will be in a moment. Let's give it a time. Hello. Oh, there we go. Nice work. Thank you. My name is Mark Hovey. I live at 1824 Tatum Street, Falcon Heights, Minnesota 55113. And here's what my face looks like. I am very proud to be standing with you to, make a point that, some of these federal agents have been stepping, I think, well beyond their legal rights, and I see your action as a way to try and keep federal activities within
constitutional limits. So I'm very much in support of the prohibition of the use of city property or resources for federal immigration enforcement activities unless authorized by judicial warrant or subpoena. I appreciate learning that you guys are learning from other metro cities and adjusting your policy as federal agents resist various efforts. Thank you. Thank you, Mark. Hi. I'm I'm Jenny Allen. Live at 1490 Idaho Avenue West. I'm fully in support of this ordinance, and thank you very much for all the hard work that you've been putting into
it. I have just one question. Jackie had mentioned that, cities have been finding that police enforcement has been completely ineffective against the federal actions that we've been seeing in the city and that there's the hope that cease and desist orders might be an avenue for something being more effective. It sounds like those cease and desist orders would be ignored just as much as any kind of police action. What is it about the cease and desist that we have the hope that they might be more effective? We don't answer questions, so we just take it. We don't. Okay. So the only chance for comments then.
And that would be a comment of mine that I would wonder about that. And a clarification that's perfect. And then a clarification is when the council has discussion, that's an opportunity for us to go back and answer questions potentially. Excellent. Thank you. I'm Sue Hagenes, 1824 Orona Street. I fully support this initiative, but I would ask you to consider tightening up the language like that one comment said about a legally authorized subpoena. And I also wonder since, you know, the cops can go out there, can they get their names at least?
You know, that's all I'm thinking. If you they can get their masks down long enough for them to get their names. I think that's all I was gonna say. I I think there needs to be some kind of something, some action if to protect a person who may be being snatched away on a public area. There needs to be something we can do besides just a cease and desist. Anybody else? Good evening. My name is Carl Eamon, also at 1824 Arona Street with Sue.
I fully support what you're trying to do here. I am curious about the, you're trying to restrict the use of the federal, out of control people, to use city property. Does that apply to public streets? Aren't these our city streets? Just asking. Thank you. Okay. Anyone else? Okay. We'll, do that. And then what we'll do is, let's see. I have no idea how we're gonna turn this out. I set it to ten minutes, and every ten minutes, I'll hit it again. So that oh, here. Better yet.
Okay. So I'll, I'll turn this over to, open this up for comments from council, on the ordinance and our immigration enforcement stewardship of resources. I've got a question for I think probably for Jack or anybody else that can answer it. Are we able to change the wording on this without going through the legal counsel again? Yes. Generally, yes. I mean, it depends I mean, it couldn't be major, but some small wording changes.
Yep. You can do general small wording changes. Okay. It's yeah. And I guess if there's certain depends on where it goes, it would recommend potentially legal review. But if it's words or other stuff, sure. Okay. Okay. I'd be happy to answers or address some of the issues at least from my point of view. Sure. Just some of the thoughts. First of all, we did talk, with, counsel, about the issues of streets versus parks. And, as a former city attorney, I know streets are held in in in a communion for the city.
Parks are are more of ownership, so there's a different line of our ability to control. So we had the opinion from counsel that we couldn't limit rights of way in the same way. I also wanted to address the question about the use of, lawful other lawful authorization. Another thing that we did raise with counsel and and and I've talked with, about and I've reached to the point where I'm comfortable with it. And my thought thinking for the counsel is two bases. One is that, the counsel is recommending this language even after it was raised.
And second, that this isn't, we're not talking about somebody's house. We're talking about the lawful authorized, authorization to use our park. So it's not as extreme of a violation if they're using an administrative warrant or something of that nature to get into our access. So, I'm I'm comfortable with the language that we have because, to be honest, there's some limitation as to what language we can use. And then finally, I guess I had three reasons. The third one is that it's qualified as judicial, authorization,
subpoena, and other law. So just the language of that really raises the bar from being simply a, just a general administrative authorization. I guess, I would like to just a minor wording thing to include data in the Section 2.157 just so it specifies the data. I mean, in another place, we say that two-one hundred and fifty nine that we can't If it is legal for them to ask for data, then we have to provide it.
So why not say in two-one hundred and fifty seven that data is included in the things that we do not provide if it's not legal? I think I had the same question from a from an e mail from a person, from Kathy Quick, actually. And I had asked it of Jack. Jack consulted the attorney and sent back a nice e mail to that point. Yeah. Yeah. There is. And so there is consideration for it, to kind of this is back kind of at one of our our legal opinions we've gotten from the city attorney,
kind of shared with the council on the twenty eighth, this information. So essentially, the city has obligation under the data Minnesota Data Government Practices Act to provide access to public data regardless of the requester's identity. So and then it gets deeper into private data, public. We also aren't collecting immigration data. That's an important thing that we already have said into our policy. We do not collect immigration data. So any data requests we would get from the federal government, again, not a police agency, would be, you know, can we look at your cameras? Can we do other stuff? We would follow then our practices through the city attorney.
So it's their argument essentially is we can't restrict the federal government any more or less than we would another citizen or another requester of data. All right. And so that was their reason to say don't include data. All right. Okay. And then it's not about this ordinance, but we're hearing from folks here and in the comments. And it's been a concern of mine, is that I moved in your direction. We're going to use cease and desist. We want to create a record
and a history and all that. But to me, that does not directly address the public safety issues that are associated with ice being on our properties, right, because there's going to be a time delay. So I can it's hard for me, but I can go okay with I can be okay with this ordinance as written, which doesn't specify as police action. But I want us as a council and as a city to develop the relationship with the St. Anthony Police Department and be able to communicate that to our residents so that if
they were in that park when 10 ICE cars pulled up and they might be a vulnerable person that is just about everybody that these people decide isn't an American by their color or accent or whatever, that we can tell them what kind of protection they can expect. I don't mean that we're telling the police what to do. I mean but I just think we need to be able to communicate clearly to our residents what they can expect if they have this experience in our parks or in our public
property, and they call 911 and say. And I think the concern also is it kinda raises back to a false sense of security, right, that we can provide something that we cannot. And that is regardless of if it's Minneapolis with the large the largest police force in Minnesota, Saint Paul. I haven't seen example, and I guess I'd be curious if there are good examples of the police able to provide that protection in parks. And we know that that's where there are limitations in that. Now the Saint Saint Anthony Police had a great discussion with chief Speese yesterday.
We talked through it, kind of talked about expectations. The officers, they their goal again is public safety. They want to help the community. They wanna help, but there is also the considerations of, you know, and and that's kind of what this aims to the idea that a police officer on scene can accurately sort through what is a lawful authorization, what is not, that's the goal of this too, right, is to allow the courts and allow the attorneys, allow the legal process to determine that. It doesn't help anything in the in the intermediary, and I know that's frustrating to people.
But that is the reality of, I think, the current environment, and that's a broader challenge beyond Falcon Heights, that I think is gonna be a challenge ongoing. And so what the goal is is at the limitations of our power, the idea is that this is the most powerful thing that we can do as a city and the most powerful protections we can provide, which is very limited. Yeah. And, you know, I understand that that's what we can do with this ordinance, and this is the best thing we can do with this ordinance. What I'm saying is a separate goal that, say, the communication that you've had with the St.
Anthony Police, both outlining their, what they can and can't do, that that be communicated clearly to our residents so they can make their own decisions about their risk, you know, like it might come down to, am I going to the park today? Or it might come down to, you know, what can I expect if I'm in a park and I call 911? Just so that I'm not again, I'm not telling the police what their job is, but they're telling us what their job is,
and then we're clearly communicating that to the residents. Because I think we're hearing that, that a lot of people want to know that. I think Georgia, I just I I mean, one one concern I have about that is, I heard, last two weeks ago, a police chief make a what I thought to be a brilliant statement about how you call 911, and we will come, and we will protect you. And it was, I thought it I thought it was like, why doesn't every police chief make that statement? And then not even three days later, something happened in the chief's city,
and they didn't do what I think the chief said that they're going to do. And so I'm I'm just I think the concern that Jack expressed, at least I share, is that is that we can't promise anybody an action based on a hypothetical or what's going to potentially happen. So and so I don't know what I don't know what we would tell people. I if you can come up with it, then great. But I I don't know what we would tell people that this and this and this will happen. No. No. I'm just I'm saying what we should communicate very clearly to our residents and and
yeah. Our residents is here's the SAPD's responsibilities and their abilities and what they can and can't do. And then this allows like if they say we cannot come over there and rescue you from ICE, they'll probably say it a lot better than that. But if they if that's what they're saying and that is their policy, then the individual can make their own decisions, right? Yes. I hear what you're saying, Georgiana.
And it's it may be very dissatisfying to residents to hear what the actual extent of the authority of our police is, but it is probably good for them to know it. I can imagine, through through experiencing conversations through this whole debacle we have, that what the police may do is you call 911 what they could promise to do. You call 911, they could promise to show up. They could promise to do their best to mediate the situation, but then there are a whole host of things that they are really not able
to do. And to enumerate some of those might be helpful and clarifying for our residents because there may be residents out there. I wouldn't think too many anymore, but, who think that if if ICE is is abducting him off the street, that the police will come and save them. And I think it's important to disabuse people of that notion for their own safety. So I'm just talking about clear communication to our residents of the police policy. Yes. And I think we own that. It's yeah. We can share some of St. Anthony's. You know, again, their policies are online,
and that will be how they will implement and operate. Right. Hardly exactly mentioned. They will come if they're called. They will respond. Likely, they're not gonna get in and determine the status of a warrant. Right. That's just, you know, again, that kinda goes. That's beyond it. It's not one one clarification I wanna make is it's not they're not afraid of difficult conversations, and they're not afraid of being told what to do. Right? We pass ordinances. We do other stuff. And every day, they have really uncomfortable conversations. Right? They you know, the chief had given me examples of the different difficult conversations they'll have on a
daily basis. Yeah. The clarification, and some of it is, is, you know, a lot of this, they are gonna be cognizant of obstruction, of being careful of the legal system, and this idea of kind of these nuanced situations and coming up with answers as to, like, where it is in various it it always depends, and it's always evolving. And so I just I I I but I get it. I know that's not what you're saying. I just know that's also a limitation of what they can what they can put out. But I think that we further you know, it's kinda Saint Anthony Village. They're having they had a meeting last night.
They talked about it kind of at their council. I think there's opportunity. I've kind of relayed that there's an interest to have kind of additional conversations with police and get to, see what that is, whether it's a community open house, people can kinda come talk to each other. They're open to it because they're also seeing this and kinda seeing what they're how to respond to various issues, and it's a challenge in the police world right now. Yeah. And, you know, this isn't to be thought of as as a criticism of the policy of Saint Anthony Police Department. I've read it, and it's pretty straightforward.
I just think if there's some kind of further elaboration of that policy, like here's some likely scenarios because we're seeing them happen all over the Twin Cities. I mean, not infinite scenarios, but a few common scenarios that have happened. What are you able to do and what aren't you able to do? I will note after my further comment, I've thought about it here a little bit more. And we may want to be careful about saying what we what the police cannot do because I don't think we want to make anything to be construed as a legal
statement about what we don't about what the enforcement abilities are of our police department or of our city, because I foresee, well, with any luck, long projected legal battles in the coming years about what has been happening here. And so I don't think we want to admit or claim less authority than we actually think that we should have. Yes. Again, yes. I just I think our residents would, based on the comments we've received, would welcome some additional and clear kind of policy explanation.
Well, I think that everybody in America who's tuned into this is wondering what can we do and what can we do to stop this administration and its minions from, violating the constitution and violating people of color, people that that they don't deem, worthy of being, being humans, to treat them as as people. And I think that that's, you know, we'd all like to see that. We'd like to see these illegal activities by federal law enforcement on constitutional efforts being
done. So what I think what we're doing here is the city for what we can do. We're establishing we're establishing some boundaries that we can point to in litigation or in the future to to state that these these illegal activities cannot happen on in Falcon Heights. And so we're and hence, a cease and desist, whereas we go there to stop it because that's what we can do so that we can follow-up later in court court proceedings.
We have something to point to to show that we are not in support of these activities happening on our public spaces, those areas that we can control, that we want all activity that happens on city property to be legal and constitutional. And and that's why we're having to establish this this policy. And it'll it'll carry forward, in years to come, as part of this and just why you have to word it the way that you do with to to handle the court cases. But and I think that our,
city attorney legal counsel has has helped us draft something that long term we can use to, to protect our city as best as we can. It's as we go there. We we do pass laws against people speeding and, people speed. You know, there's, we do we do have ordinances against, you know, vandalizing or laws against robbery, yet people still rob and steal. And then we follow-up later with, with things to to do. And that's hence, we now have something to base,
Should that activity happen here, we have a way of seeking seeking some sort of reprieve from the judicial process. We open for a motion? Yep. Any further discussion? Everybody said their piece. Questions answered. I move approval of ordinance 26.01 and authorize staff to publish the summary ordinance 26.01. Okay. We've got consideration of motion to to pass ordinance 2,601 and it's summary. All those further discussion?
Hearing none, all those in favor of Logan's motion signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed same sign. Motion carries five-zero. Thank you. The next we have approval of or before us, Resolution 20 six-thirteen, authorizing the City to join the Nonpartisan Coalition of Cities for Safe and Stable Communities. Administrator Linehan, would you like to introduce this for council and people here? Yeah. Thank you, mayor and council. So this is kind of a newer development that's come about in the last week
or so. So 12 founding cities kind of brought on through their, kind of a issued through their mayors, kind of through the metro mayors executive commission or committee is how I understand it, got together in some of the largest suburban cities and formed this coalition. And so the idea behind this coalition is kind of a bipartisan effort, kind of rebuilding community trust, you know, and getting our city safe largely, again, in response to the federal immigration efforts. And so these initial 12 cities,
what they did is they did hire a, lobbying advocacy group that has kind of a nonpartisan lien. They will be lobbying at the state and federal levels especially, to try to, you know, get additional, support for having federal intervention into some of these, you know, operations and surgeons, just these general, concerns of lawlessness that have occurred, I guess, in the cities. And so the idea behind this coalition is there's two ways to join. One is you can become a free member, and so you can sign on and say that we support it.
And they encourage that. They're looking for cities to do that. They're also looking for cities that want to become kind of, you know, I don't have a good word for it. I can't remember what their word is. But, essentially, like, participating members where you support financially, that helps kind of the, advocacy. As more cities sign on to that, that price comes down. I did list that, essentially, it does sound their initial ask for the initial 12 cities was around $10,000 per city. They think it's getting down to about $5,000 per city, and it's flat flat rate depending on the size of the city. So they're continuing to look for this coalition to build this and continue to try
to make a difference, lobbying this, further. So that's kind of the coalition. There are benefits and kind of included some FAQs as to becoming a member and to see what that is. These cities, they are able to pull different of our sizes of cities and powers of their, administrators and their financial power. They kinda just sign on. I need to bring it to you guys for authorization, if there was any interest in signing up. So the initial city signed on immediately without council action. We would require council action based on cost and and unbudgeted expense. Or I could take direction of kinda third option is that we,
participate as a, a non contributing city. Informed and engaged as an ally is how they they phrase it. Okay. So it would be an if if we sign on as a a paying member, it could be as as much as or it could be at at a minimum $5,000 and maybe less? Or If if enough cities join. So essentially, what they're seeing is they see it as probably a four to five month engagement or so, and they pay per month to the firm. Right? And so that we're really paying for the lobbying communication support.
But, again, that's kinda the the approach of this as the city struggle, and we try to the idea is we try to kind of do what we can as cities and we're frustrated by the limitations of it. The success of this is really federal intervention. And to be honest, you know, not to but, like, a bipartisan effort looking at swing districts right now, kind of at a federal level and showing, hey. This is, you know, how poll numbers are hitting, how this is not gonna go well in November. Here is what's happening and why you should care about what's happening in Minnesota.
And so that is kind of, I think, a little bit of the the general approach and the benefit of of joining a coalition to have that additional push and to make get something done. Okay. And on this print document, we don't have the list of cities who are participating, and I know that was on their website. And it's evolving every day now. Right. Yep. But it's pretty it's Exactant. Is 20 by now. It's 30 is the last 30. Okay. Yep. Been following it and checking it. So how are our numbers? Yes. I think we make our voice heard and we put our money where our mouth is, especially if we're talking about I mean,
I'm guessing most residents would give a dollar to have this stop. A strip, dollars 5,000 is about $1 a person, but the babies have to pay. Yes, well. I'm sorry, go ahead. I'm just curious about how these funds are used because they say they're not a lobbying organization. So it's just for the staff to provide this coordination amongst cities? Yes. I think so. Okay. As I understand it. Yeah. It's not a yeah.
Political advocacy. It's intergovernmental coordination. I I I have a 100% support of showing our support, and participating in this in in any way. I think it's valuable to focus on, swing districts and communities from a local point of view. Swing districts. We're not exactly a swing district. The, I will say that, and I hate to be cheap, but we are a city that is about a twentieth of the size of, the big members of this, Bloomington, Minnetonka, Brooklyn Park, and we're paying the same.
And to me, that is a problem. So I just wanna lay that out there. I'm not positive that laying the equal equal share of the participation even if it is only 5,000 is, is the way to be fiscally responsible. Administrator Lanham, maybe you can make a clarification because I was I was a little bit confused when you said it's a flat rate based on your population. So it's not based on your population. It's flat rate. Yeah. Flat rate for participation. They're hoping the more that join, but it is it they are running it kinda flat. And initially, the initial city is kind of all committed that,
hey. We'll just share this, and then they're inviting more to kinda participate. The costs aren't increasing, is my understanding, unless it goes for more months. So the more members who participate, the cheaper it gets. But their estimate is around 5,000. Can one join as a supporter and then later, as they find that they have dollar needs that are gonna come back and and then we can, put put dollars forward that kinda represent the size of our of our budget and the size of our city. Because if you've got 5,000
people and you've got a town of, you know, those that are leading it are 80,060 and a 110. It kind of yeah. What does, Yeah. Falcon Heights, I okay. They have one more name. And then, we're, that helps as a supporter. And then as they maybe develop tier levels for, cities under under 10,000 in population that the cost may be $2,500 something like that that might, be worthwhile. $5,000 is a lot of money to this city.
Yeah. I know that they did not set it up that way. Right? And that was kind of part of it. And I I get that there is that for sure of kind of the you know, there are tiers. I think they set it up that everybody's in equal equal vote, equal voice. So that is a a limitation. And I think what we could do is if there is council direction too, we could, you know, we could set a limit. We could set, you know, say, hey. We'd be willing to participate, but not for that amount or other parts. I think all of that's reasonable. I just they don't have that. They're building this right now too. I would say it's about a week old, so it's still everyday of mine.
That being said, Jim, I do like the idea of Falcon Heights being a leader on it. I certainly understand physical constraints because we are a very financial lightweight in the Twin Cities. But we're also going to gain from the depths of staff that these larger cities have that we can put forth more ideas. So you're in favor? I'm in favor of doing the 5,000. That's a good point. We're actually leveraging that to these larger staffs and whether staff they're supporting
on the project. If you're doing that with a if you have equal voice so that our town of 5,000 has an equal voice as a as a one in 30 voice on this thing versus, just being participating. But we have everybody has an equal voice, it sounds like, is what they're trying to say. That, you know, founding members. So at some point, the town of Dundas with two fifty three people is going to join in. And if they pony up $5,000, they've got an equal voice too.
In theory, that would be the idea. Right? Is that that's kind of the they're not vote allocating based on size. Based on size. But they're also not cost allocating based on size. So how I'm sorry. How are we I noticed that it says that there's a governing board of city managers. First of all, we don't have city manager. And second, how is that being decided? Do we know? I don't know. They've reached out. So I've talked to so, essentially, Minnetonka, Richfield, and Brooklyn Center, they've reached out as kind of the the leadership group of it, and they've reached out and just kinda gave an additional information.
But I'll be honest, I don't know too much more than what you guys know. Mhmm. So had a little bit of con conversation. We're having a Ramsey County meeting on this tomorrow as kinda people look at it and see. That that's about the extent of of what we know. Your time is up. It's a little bit of, just knowledge. Yeah. What is the We could we could outplug it, man. There. What is the smallest I got it. That you see on the list right now, Jack? Hopkins. This is Smollett. For gas, Hopkins. And then everywhere. 15,000? Yes. Yes. I'd say let's go for it.
I think so too. It's $5,000 is a chunk of change, but for our size city. But we have an opportunity here to join in and show it's sort of a vote of confidence in ourselves and in the neighboring cities and that we're going to work together and oppose this foreign occupation of our city. So you don't have to quote me on that. Anyway, I see it as a vote of confidence in ourselves and in our state, in the cities,
and I say, let's go for it. Yeah. I'd like to support as much as we can to, council member Mogan's point. I think it's an extremely smart approach because, going after swing districts and because really the only thing that is going to stop this is if there is a cessation of support from both parties, one in particular. And that's only gonna happen if those representatives feel that their political position is in danger. And this is a good way to make that point to them because I believe their political position is in danger. So I keep asking what more can we do when we Yeah.
It just feels so limited. So this feels like an action we can do. I'll throw in I'll throw in the $3 for my family. Me too. The, do I have a A motion? Motion to approve resolution twenty six thirteen, authorizing the city to join the nonpartisan coalition of cities for safe and stable communities. So moved. So moved by Melki. Does that in a separate note, do does and that includes, authorizing Authorizing, expenditure up to $5,000
for Membership. For membership? Yeah. Is that your motion? Is that your motion? That's what it was. Yes. I was looking right. Yes. That gives direction of kind of where we can go for that. So that that is helpful. And, you know, and obviously if it comes back and the bills are more, I'd I'd seek authorization before we pay the bill. Right? So if we get a bill and it's 5,600, I would bring that back to city council. But knowing I have up to 5,000 and knowing it's within the interest of the city. That that helps me and gives something I can point to. Okay. Right. Further discussion?
Okay. All those in favor of, approval of resolution twenty six thirteen signified by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed same sign. Motion carries five-zero. Next we'll move to information and announcements that takes care of our policy items. Hear from council and, activities in the last couple couple of weeks since we, last met. Council member May. Alrighty. I get to go first because I'm on this end. Yes. Okay. You'd like to call it in. It rolls back and forth. Next week, Moe goes up. Yes. My activities have been associated with the Environment Commission.
We had an excellent joint meeting with Parks and Rec, specifically focused on well, getting to know each other's goals and responsibilities, which I think is a very helpful thing in general, but also specifically focusing on the community garden and the question about whether to increase the availability of community gardens. We had a really good conversation, and we're going to use the extra spaces that are available in the park will be put into basically a lottery,
which is how we're how the Parks and Rec has decided to allocate new garden spots. And that lottery will also allow us to assess the demand on the resource, and therefore, we then we'll do some more work to understand whether we need to expand the community garden. So I thought that was a really great outcome of that joint workshop. And then the Environment Commission itself is planning the upcoming sustainability fair on April 18.
For those of you who participated last year, I think this was a terrific success. That was the first year we ran it. There'll be exhibits with information from various groups around the area that deal with various aspects of sustainability. And I think we are going to have some talks so you can get a lot of information. And then there'll be also some activities to do if you're still cleaning out your attic and have a lot of paper that needs to be shredded,
for example. You can shred your paper. Anyway, and that's being organized by Hannah Lynch, our liaison to the our staff liaison to the Environment Commission. She's doing a great job. And Adam Kistler, who's the Chair now. Cool. Jim? Sure. I, last week, I had the opportunity to attend the municipal finance, conference put on by Ehlers, who acts as our municipal agent for financial matters for the city, including bonding. It was a really great conference. I didn't know, exactly what to expect. They had a nice list of topics,
but I was very impressed. There was a lot of horsepower in those rooms, especially when, during discussions with League of Minnesota cities and and with Ramsey County. There was a a broad range of people, not just from Ehlers, but also, other people from the finance and development, sectors of the economy, particularly with regards to municipal activities. And, I was very happy to do it, especially because, as we face the all the work that's ahead of us with the, development of the Les Paulsack Golf Course, there's there are many thing aspects to that community engagement,
the actual planning of what's going to go where, but a very large piece of it is how it's gonna get paid for. And I feel like I'm much better educated after last week. So thank you to the city for supporting my attendance. And, if anybody else on the council actually wants to hear a little bit about what I think I learned, I'd be happy to discuss with them. So Cool. Thank you. Council member Melky. Paula. Sure. It was at nine North board meetings, and that is always a good opportunity to be with council members from the nine cities that make up that. Nine North is our cable channel.
The Community Engagement Commission held a workshop to discuss and brainstorm goals and missions are it's going great. Enthusiastic group. I had my onboarding for the university's Good Neighbor Fund board last week, and then, was grateful for the opportunity to attend the League of Minnesota trading last week. It's just, had really good sessions and always value talking to council members from around the state. Thank you. I also was able to attend, the League of Minnesota Cities, the the newly elected as well as with Georgiana I forgot to say who just
experienced. Who who, and I yes. I think the, the the, obviously, training on some, core issues such as open meeting law and, how cities work and kinda some good advice from, other experienced, members that, on how to, get community involvement and how to respond to certain things. But most importantly, it was, I thought felt the, value was networking and getting to know some other newly elected leaders and hear their stories as well as some experienced leaders. I, I wanna congratulate, people on, the attending caucuses,
last Tuesday. The, the core, the base, of grassroots democracy in Minnesota, pluses and minuses with the process. But, it is the caucus system and, in Minnesota, we are proud of it and, it is well, mostly proud of it. And it is a, it was it was good to see, people showing up. And then, as liaison to the planning commission, we haven't met since the last meeting. It is next Tuesday, and I'm looking forward to, that meeting. I think that's it. Super. The I got to attend my first parks and rec Commission meeting with the environment.
That was really, really fun. Enthused group of, citizens back to, back to be fun and, with the parks and all of there's a lot happening there. If you are interested in, getting a community garden spot this year, the those that, are not that they didn't renew will be available to Falcon Heights residents via a lottery system. The, ability to to get them in contact, city hall, give them a call at the 7600 number, or I think the website has a has information on how to how to apply
for a community garden spot and to to get interested in. The Parks and Rec Commission has been looking at how to improve the, the garden community garden experience, for the last year or so. And so this year, they've got some new, new programs involved in that that sound very exciting. There's an advisory board amongst the, those that garden there to make certain that things are gonna work right. We'll have, you know, the water and how it's all all gonna operate so that when that park, the the gardens will be,
will be ready and, probably people will be planting their gardens before the official opening of the park. But, we're looking forward to seeing the, the community park unveiling of the new playground and the buildings, happening here within early summer. So stay tuned for for that and watch the development there. It's really, really something. And, yeah, that's basically about what I've, what I've got. I wanna thank everybody for, doing what they they can to make, make this crazy world,
livable and doable and and helping each other out with, with that and restoring maybe we'll restore constitutional, adherence at some point by the federal administration. Administrator Linehan, what else is happening in the city? Yeah. Thank you, mayor and councilor. That covers a lot of it. Just a couple other items. So community park progress, you know, electricity has been pulled to the building. They're starting in getting the final permitting through the state. So working on that to continue kind of the, sewer connections, water connections, have had good updates on the splash pad and other stuff.
Can't share yet, but we're see that's quite positive. For permits, so, we've issued a building permit for a remodel of the former Sumo and Smo, property, restaurant, and so to another quick service restaurant. So we're excited about that. That's going through kind of its permitting process. So not full announcement, but it is public data that there is a restaurant looking at that space. So just to clarify, that's the building on Hamlin And Hoyt? Yep. Hamlin And Hoyt. Yep. So in that kind of former spot. So there's been different, Egg Roll Queen at one point, kind of their kitchen, and so now it works.
It was beloved coffee grounds. Yep. Coffee grounds were always Using the day. Yep. Yeah. And then yeah. And, so, yeah. So that's continuing. Public works, they continue to go out and flood the rinks in the morning, when it's cold. And let it melt in the afternoon. They're going down with the ship. So but they're keeping it going, so get your final skating in. And so they're working on that. And I'm gonna leave it at that. We're busy though. Cool. Alright. And I'd, open up, the podium for a community forum as if, somebody would like to address the council for three minutes on an item that,
they bring. We, we can they'd be probably any items would be referred for consideration. While we may ask questions, we won't take any formal action at this time, but at least you can get items, brought onto our radar and and or comments if somebody would like to communicate with community forum. I'll ask us a second time for, for Community Forum and the third time for Community Forum, and I'll close Community Forum. The, next what's gonna happen, is the council is going to,
enter closed session and then adjourn following that. So we'll be going into a closed session pursuant to Minnesota statute 13 d five subdivision three c one and two to review confidential or protected non public appraisal data and to discuss an offer for the purchase of real property located at 1407 Larbinger Avenue in Falcon Heights. Following the closed session, there will be no formal action or business by the city council other than the adjournment of the meeting.
So the adjournment vote will be open to the public and recorded in our meeting minutes, but will not be televised on nine North as we will be, entering closed session. Do I have a motion to enter closed session? So moved. So moved by Muldrow. All those in favor, do we have to vote to go into closed session? Yes. All those in favor of closing, go entering closed session, signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed, same sign. Motion carries five o. Oh. Thank you everybody for coming out tonight. Thank you, everyone. And thanks for coming.
Thank you for, being engaged. We really appreciate it. And, once that the room's cleared and we close the doors, we'll, we'll go to closed session.