HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Workshop Agenda Packet 7-01-2020CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS
City Council Workshop
City Hall
2077 West Larpenteur Avenue
AGENDA
July 1, 2020
6:30 P.M.
NOTE: THIS MEETING WILL BE HELD BY WEB CONFERENCE
A. CALL TO ORDER:
B. ROLL CALL: ANDREWS ___ GUSTAFSON____ LEEHY___
MIAZGA ___ WEHYEE___
STAFF PRESENT: THONGVANH____ NANDKUMAR____
C. PRESENTATIONS:
D. POLICY ITEMS:
1. Guidelines to Request Agenda Items
2. Fire Services to the City of Lauderdale
3. Public Safety Contract
4. Community Conversations
5. Sanctuary Ordinance
6. Noise Control Ordinance
7. Community Park Building Assessment
E. INFORMATION/ANNOUNCEMENTS
F. ADJOURNMENT:
*You can view the meeting by clicking the following Zoom link:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/86258938311.
BLANK PAGE
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Families, Fields and Fair __________________________
The City That Soars!
Item Guidelines to Request Agenda Items
Description
City of Lake Elmo Example:
§ 31.04 ORDER OF BUSINESS AT REGULAR MEETINGS. (A) Order established. Each meeting of the Council shall convene at the time and place appointed for the meeting. Council business shall be conducted in the order determined by
the Council at its first annual meeting or as thereafter amended by the majority vote of the
Council. (1) Order of business. The standard order of business for Council meetings shall be the following: (a) Call to Order/Pledge of Allegiance;
(b) Approval of agenda;
(c) Approval of minutes from past meeting(s); (d) Public comment; (e) Presentations; (f) Consent agenda;
(g) Regular agenda;
(h) Report of the Council. Council reports will not be part of the order of business for meetings falling 3 months before a local election; (i) Reports from city staff; and (j) Adjourn.
(B) Agenda. An agenda will be prepared for all regular Council meetings by the staff or
recommendation of the Council at a work session. Members of the public wishing to place an item on the agenda must do so by contacting city staff or Council Members, or by speaking during the public comment period. No member of the general public may add any items to the agenda.
(1) Special meetings. When a special meeting is called pursuant to applicable law, the
agenda for the special meeting must be included in the request for the meeting and in the publication of the notice of the meeting pursuant to M.S. § 13D.04, Subd. 2. (2) Agenda procedures. Any staff member, the Mayor or 2 Council Members wishing to add an item to any agenda pursuant to this section shall do so by complying with the
following:
(a) All requests from Council to place an item on the posted agenda must be received by the City Clerk/Administrator by 10:00 a.m. 11 days prior to the next Council work session meeting. For a regularly scheduled Tuesday work session, the deadline for agenda items would be 10:00 a.m. on the Friday preceding packet completion. All requests from the
Mayor or Council must first be reviewed at a Council work session before being placed on
the agenda of a regular meeting.
Meeting Date July 1, 2020
Agenda Item Policy D1
Attachment N/A
Submitted By Sack Thongvanh, City Administrator
1 of 206
(b) All requests to place an item on the posted agenda must be on the form prescribed by the City Clerk/Administrator. The form shall be completed with the goal of clearly describing the subject matter to be considered by the Council and any action requested or
required. Supporting information may be attached to the form as necessary.
(c) All requests to place an item on the posted agenda by city staff or Council Members must be reviewed by the City Clerk/Administrator or their designee prior to being included in the agenda. (d) The agenda, along with all related information materials, will be provided to all
City Council Members and the City Attorney at least 4 days prior to the Council meeting for
which it applies. For a regularly scheduled Tuesday meeting, the packet will be provided by 5:00 p.m. the Thursday preceding. (C) Consent agenda. A consent agenda may be used to improve the efficiency of meetings. The consent agenda allows the Council to consider several items at 1 time. Only 1
motion is necessary to approve all items on the consent agenda.
(1) Items that require findings of fact or an explanation of Council actions, such as land use matters and the consideration of licensing requests, should not be placed on the consent agenda. (2) An item on the consent agenda may be removed from such agenda for full
consideration by the Council upon request made by any Member of the Council. Items
removed from the consent agenda will be placed on the regular agenda for discussion and consideration. (D) Presentation, discussion and agenda item decisions. The following is the order of business for presenting and discussing items on Council agendas:
(1) Introduction of item;
(2) Report by staff or other presenter; (3) Questions from Council Members to the presenter in a round robin manner. The presiding officer will facilitate the round robin process by asking each individual Council Member for 1 question and allowing for a response to the individual question. Then the
presiding officer will ask the next Council Member, in sequence, until all Council Members
have asked and received responses to a question. No Council Member shall take more than 3 minutes to ask a question or comment on an item which is being presented before another Council Member has a turn to question and comment on the same item; (4) Receive questions/comments from the applicant/requesting party to the Council, and
allow each Council Member to respond in the round robin process;
(5) Allow questions from Council Members to the applicant/requesting party, if applicable, using the round robin process; (6) Allow questions/comments from the public to Council Members. Each member of the public shall state his or her comments in 6 minutes. Council shall not interrupt or interact
until all public comments are completed;
(7) At the conclusion of the round robin process, the presiding officer calls for a motion or discussion among the Council. Discussion on any presentation shall be kept to a minimum, and each Council Member shall only speak twice on the issue. This action is not an indication that the motion on the table is the motion that will be approved in its current
form. It is purely for discussion purposes;
(8) Discussion among Council Members using the round robin process with each Member speaking no more than twice on a motion; (9) Action by the Council on the motion. (E) Meeting schedule.
(1) Each meeting of the Council shall convene at the time and place appointed. All
2 of 206
public hearings shall commence at the advertised time. (2) Council business shall be conducted in the order of the prepared agenda, unless an alteration is approved by a majority of the Council.
(3) The last item on the agenda will be commenced no later than 12:00 a.m.
(4) If all business has not been completed by 12:00 a.m., the meeting shall be continued to another date and time following the notice provisions contained herein. (F) Public participation and comment at Council meetings. Council meetings are the forum for the Council to conduct the city's business. While Council meetings are open to the
public pursuant to the Minnesota Open Meeting Law, they are not a forum for public
expression. As such, members of the public are not allowed to participate in Council discussion and debate without a specific invitation and/or formal recognition by the presiding officer. Members of the public shall not applaud, engage in conversation, or engage in other behavior through words or actions that may disrupt the proceedings of the
Council.
(G) Members of the public shall follow the direction of the presiding officer. Members of the public who do not follow the direction of the presiding officer will be warned that further disruptive conduct will result in removal from the meeting. After such warning, if the conduct continues, the presiding officer may ask the member of the public to leave the
meeting room. If the member of the public refuses to follow the direction of the presiding
officer, the presiding officer may direct the sergeant-at-arms to remove the person through any lawful means. In emergency situations, or where the conduct is an egregious threat to the safety of the public or the Council, a warning is not necessary before the sergeant-at-arms is directed to remove the person.
(H) Public comment period. A limited forum for members of the public to speak with the
Council is provided on each agenda. Public comments during the public comment period are subject to the following limitations: (1) Speakers must be recognized by the presiding officer before speaking and are limited to 6 minutes for comment;
(2) When multiple speakers appear to speak on the same topic, comments should not be
repetitive. The presiding officer may request speakers to appoint a spokesperson; (3) The presiding officer may place a time limit on the public comment period if necessary to allow for the conduct of city business. If there is not sufficient time at the meeting to hear all public comments, the comment period may be deferred to the next
regular Council meeting or at a continued meeting;
(4) Speakers must sign up prior to speaking and provide their name, address, and a brief summary of the subject matter which they wish to address. The sign-up sheet will be available at the start of the City Council meeting; (5) Speakers must direct their remarks toward the presiding officer;
(6) Speakers shall not use obscene, profane, insulting, or threatening language, nor
conduct themselves in a threatening, loud, or boisterous manner that disrupts the conduct of the meeting or the security of the public; (7) Speakers are required to follow the direction of the presiding officer; and (8) The Council will generally not respond at the same meeting where an issue is
initially raised by a member of the public. Generally, the matter will be referred to staff for
further research and possible report or action at a future Council meeting. If Council responds, Council shall not interrupt or interact until all public comments are completed. (I) Public hearings. Public hearings are sometimes required by law to allow the public to offer input on Council decisions. Unlike public comment periods, public hearings allow the
public to speak on a matter currently before the Council. When public hearings are required
3 of 206
by law, notice shall be provided as required by state statute. Public hearings shall be commenced at the time advertised in any notice required by law. (1) General procedure/or public hearings. The order of business for all public hearings
conducted by the Council shall be:
(a) Opening comments by the presiding officer announcing the purpose of the public hearing; (b) The presiding officer opens the public hearing portion of the meeting; (c) Staff presentation, if any (i.e., Administrator/Clerk, Attorney, Engineer, etc.);
(d) Developer/other presentation, if any;
(e) Public comment (all individual comments limited to 6-minute maximum); (f) The Clerk/Administrator shall make note of any submitted written testimony; and (g) The presiding officer formally closes the public hearing portion of the meeting. (2) Speakers who wish to address the Council at a public hearing must follow the same
rules as contained herein for public comment periods. The presiding officer may allow more
time, where appropriate. (3) Speakers may also provide written comments to the Council before or at the meeting. Written comments shall be noted and provided to the Council and to anyone else as required by law.
(4) The presiding officer may continue the hearing, if necessary, following the
procedures for continuing a meeting contained in this section. (5) Council shall not interrupt or interact until all public comments are completed. (1997 Code, § 200.01) (Am. Ord. 97-201, passed 11-20-2007; Am. Ord. 08-133, passed 4-5-2016; Am. Ord. 08-143, passed 7-5-2016; Am. Ord. 08-150, passed 8-16-2016; Am. Ord.
08-164, passed 1-3-2017)
Budget Impact N/A
Attachment(s) • City of Lake Elmo Example
Action(s)
Requested
Staff looking for direction on how to proceed.
4 of 206
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Families, Fields and Fair __________________________
The City That Soars!
Item Fire Services to the City of Lauderdale
Description
The City Administrator will provide an update on actions taken by the City of
Lauderdale City Council to terminate the Fire Service Contract with the City of
Falcon Heights. We have not received any formal communication from the City of
Lauderdale regarding the termination, but discovered their Council discussed fire
services at their meeting early June.
An action form regarding our fire services to the City of Lauderdale was included in
their June 23 City Council action form with a draft letter to send the Mayor. The
City of Falcon Heights will determine the next course of action and conduct a
financial analysis of the termination of the contract.
Budget Impact N/A
Attachment(s) • Lauderdale Council’s Action Form (similar to our RCA)
Action(s)
Requested
Staff looking for direction on how to proceed.
Meeting Date July 1, 2020
Agenda Item Policy D2
Attachment Lauderdale Action Form
Submitted By Sack Thongvanh, City Administrator
5 of 206
BLANK PAGE
6 of 206
7
o
f
2
0
6
8
o
f
2
0
6
9
o
f
2
0
6
1
0
o
f
2
0
6
1
1
o
f
2
0
6
1
2
o
f
2
0
6
1
3
o
f
2
0
6
1
4
o
f
2
0
6
1
5
o
f
2
0
6
1
6
o
f
2
0
6
1
7
o
f
2
0
6
1
8
o
f
2
0
6
1
9
o
f
2
0
6
2
0
o
f
2
0
6
2
1
o
f
2
0
6
2
2
o
f
2
0
6
2
3
o
f
2
0
6
2
4
o
f
2
0
6
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Families, Fields and Fair __________________________
The City That Soars!
Item Public Safety Contract
Description
Request discussion on the formation of a study group to review the public safety
contract with the Ramsey County Sheriff’s Office.
Budget Impact N/A
Attachment(s) • Public Safety Contract with the Ramsey County Sheriff’s Office
Action(s)
Requested
Staff looking for direction on how to proceed.
Meeting Date July 1, 2020
Agenda Item Policy D3
Attachment Contract
Submitted By Sack Thongvanh, City Administrator
25 of 206
BLANK PAGE
26 of 206
27 of 206
28 of 206
29 of 206
30 of 206
31 of 206
32 of 206
33 of 206
BLANK PAGE
34 of 206
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Families, Fields and Fair __________________________
The City That Soars!
Item Community Conversations – Part II
Description
There was been a request to review and consider hold community conversations
around race.
Community Conversations – please review the attached documents thoroughly:
“Inclusion and Policing Task Force Overview of Recommendations” that included a
summary of each “Community Conversation” and “Community Conversations
Process Report”.
Mariah Levison, Director for the Office of Collaboration and Dispute Resolution –
MN Department of Administration has offered her services to revisit what has and
has not been accomplished for the Task Force’s recommendations.
Budget Impact N/A
Attachment(s) • The City of Falcon Heights Inclusion and Policing Task Force – Overview of
Recommendations
• Evaluation of the Falcon Heights Community Conversations Process Report
Action(s)
Requested
Staff is looking for direction on how to proceed.
Meeting Date July 1, 2020
Agenda Item Policy D4
Attachment See Below
Submitted By Sack Thongvanh, City Administrator
35 of 206
BLANK PAGE
36 of 206
Evaluation of the Falcon Heights Community Conversations Process
Prepared for:
Mariah Levison, Office of Collaboration and Dispute Resolution,
Minnesota Bureau of Mediation Services
and
Sharon Press, Dispute Resolution Institute Director, Mitchell Hamline School of Law
Authored by: Elizabeth Dressel, Master of Urban and Regional Planning student
University of Minnesota, Humphrey School of Public Affairs
November 30, 2017
37 of 206
1
Summary of Evaluation Findings
This report shares the results of an evaluation of the five community conversations that took place in
Falcon Heights from February through June 2017. The evaluation was commissioned by the Minnesota
Bureau of Mediation Services’ Office of Collaboration and Dispute Resolution, the Dispute Resolution
Institute at Mitchell Hamline School of Law, and the Center for Integrative Leadership at the University
of Minnesota with funding from the American Arbitration Association Foundation – International Centre
for Dispute Resolution Foundation. Elizabeth Dressel, a master’s student at the Humphrey School of
Public Affairs, led the evaluation with support from Kathryn S. Quick, PhD, Associate Professor,
Humphrey School of Public Affairs and Co-Academic Director of the Center for Integrative Leadership,
and Chen Zhang, PhD candidate, Humphrey School of Public Affairs.
Six main topics arose from the analysis of focus group transcripts and survey responses.
1. Divergent and Changing Concerns: Participants arrived and left with divergent concerns and
many changed their priorities over the course of the process.
2. Interface with City Council and Task Force: Participants wanted more action, accountability,
and interaction with these bodies.
3. Impacts of a Resource-Constrained Process: Participants observed and bemoaned that
limited resources had negative impacts on communication, childcare, and food.
4. Lack of Diversity: Participants explored multiple concerns with turnout and diversity of
perspectives.
5. Circle Format and General Process: Participants articulated feedback on the benefits and
limitations of the circle format and its implementation in this setting.
6. Facilitation Role: Facilitators reflected on the distinctions between a circle process and
other types of facilitation, and the ambiguity and tension they felt in this setting.
These topic areas are groups of frequently expressed ideas and comments. Within each were areas of
convergence and divergence. The report details the findings for each in greater detail.
Outcomes Highlights
One of the most interesting findings is a positive change in the emotional state of the participants.
Participants felt more optimistic and trusting and less cynical, sad and angry after participating in the
conversations. In addition, participants expressed feeling both more energized and more fatigued after
the community conversations.
Another noteworthy finding is changes to what participants hoped to accomplish through the
community conversations. Following the conversations, participants prioritized higher:
understanding the role I play in injustices within my community; and
making new connections with people in my community
These changes are reflective of the planning team’s goals that the conversations provide the
opportunity for impact at various levels including policy, community, inter-personal, and intra-personal.
The conversations did not make any difference in one prominent area of concern: both before and after,
the number one priority was changing the way the city handles policing practices. Notably, however,
38 of 206
2
framing that change in terms of St. Anthony Police Department (SAPD) became less important: fewer
people prioritized ending the contract with SAPD after the conversations than before them.
Process Highlights
91% of survey respondents said that they strongly or slightly agreed that participating in the community
conversations was a valuable way to spend their time. With a few key caveats, participants liked the
circle method. However, there was a clear message that there was too much material to cover at each
conversation. Both participants and facilitators often felt too rushed while trying to get through all of
the questions in each conversation. This did not allow participants to fully share, and some mentioned
they quickly passed or chose not to share so that others in the circle could have more time. It is
recommended that future processes allow more time to cover the materials either through extending
the time period or reducing the agenda.
Another key finding is that, participants would have liked to have had more time to directly discuss the
draft recommendations and provide direct feedback to the Task Force and City Council members. This
lack of direct interaction left many participants feeling frustrated and uncertain about the next steps,
and whether the recommendations and input will be implemented. Future processes should include
more time on the development of recommendations and allow for more interaction between
participants, Task Force, and City Council.
0%
20%
40%
60%
Optimistic Cynical Trusting Distrusting Energized Fatigued Anxious Angry Sad
Most dominant emotions (aggregated for all survey respondents)
Before After
0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%
Ensure my experiences and perspectives are represented.
Share my experiences and perspective with others.
Get the City Council to end the contract with St. Anthony…
Have courageous conversations about inclusion and exclusion.
Educate myself and learn from others' perspectives.
Work on dismantling racism in my community.
Make Falcon Heights a more inclusive community.
Become more active and involved.
Challenge myself to understand the role I play in injustice…
Make new connections with people in my community.
Change the way the city handles policing structure and…
Top Priorities To Accomplish
Before After
39 of 206
3
Overview of the Task Force and Community Conversations
The Falcon Heights Task Force on Inclusion and Policing was created by the City Council of Falcon
Heights, Minnesota, following the killing of Philando Castile by a police officer in Falcon Heights. The
Task Force was charged with articulating community values, identifying community needs, and
recommending programming and policies that would make Falcon Heights a more inclusive and
welcoming place for residents and guests.
The Task Force was comprised of 11 committed individuals with diverse experiences and perspectives.
Beginning in December 2016, they met for 13 regular task force meetings. To develop a set of
recommendations on policing and second set of recommendations on inclusion, the Task Force
deliberated with the interested public through five Community Conversations (the focus of this report),
and consulted with subject matter experts in four priority areas (policing, police-community
relationships, citizen oversight boards, and joint powers authorities). The Task Force members also
stayed connected with the broader community through individual dialogues with other residents and
guests of Falcon Heights, by attending City Council meetings, and by being involved in other community
events.
The policing recommendations lay out a set of goals for policy implementation and change relating to
restoring mutual safety and trust for community members and police. The final version of the policing
recommendations was adopted by the City Council on May 24, 2017, and may be found here:
www.falconheights.org (right-hand tab of the homepage).
The inclusion recommendations include a Statement of Community Values, and a series of
recommendations for building a more inclusive Falcon Heights. The foundation of all of the
recommendations is that many people feel that they do not fully belong in the Falcon Heights
community. The final version of the inclusion recommendations was adopted by the City Council on June
14, 2017, and may be found here: www.falconheights.org (right-hand tab of the homepage). At that
time, the Council also unanimously agreed to seek grants and allocate funds in upcoming city budgets in
order to be able to dedicate skilled staff attention to sustaining this work.
In conjunction with the Task Force meetings, more than 180 people participated in a series of
Community Conversations. The dialogue and feedback was used to develop and shape the
recommendations.
Conversation 1 - February 16, 2017: Conversations focused on personal and community values.
Conversation 2 - March 2, 2017: Participants helped develop options for how the City can live
out the Community’s values in its activities, policies, and policing policies and practices.
Conversation 3 - April 3, 2017: Participants reviewed and provided feedback on draft policing
recommendations.
Conversation 4 - May 1, 2017: Participants shared their thoughts on what is needed for
transformational change to begin and each made a personal commitment.
Conversation 5 - June 19, 2017: Commemoration of the work accomplished and development of
next steps for the community.
40 of 206
4
Data and Methods
Evaluation data was gathered in two ways. First, the evaluation team emailed a survey to all
participants who attended at least one of the community conversations and provided an email. In total,
the survey was emailed to 158 participants for whom we had email contact information, of whom 57
completed and submitted survey responses. Removing the 13 emails that bounced back due to incorrect
addresses, there was a 39 percent completion rate.
In addition to the survey, the evaluation team conducted four focus groups, two specifically for
community conversation participants and two for conversation facilitators. One focus group of each
type was held in June and a second pair was conducted in August. We intentionally invited individuals to
the first set of focus groups in June to represent diversity in terms of the number of community
conversations they attended/facilitated, where they were from, gender, and race or ethnicity. A second
invitation was emailed to all participants or facilitators and they were asked to RSVP if they were
interested in participating and providing feedback. Due to this methodology, the first participant focus
group was quite a bit more diverse including both residents, non-residents, varied ethnic and racial
background, and gender balance. Across all of the focus groups, 23 people attended - 13 community
conversation participants and 10 conversation facilitators.
A complete list of the survey questions and results can be found in Appendix A, and a complete list of
the focus group questions are located in Appendix B.
I want to acknowledge and thank Kathryn S. Quick, PhD, Associate Professor at Humphrey School of
Public Affairs and Co-Academic Director of the Center for Integrative Leadership, and Chen Zhang, PhD
candidate, Humphrey School of Public Affairs, for their assistance in designing the approach to the
survey and focus groups, for partnering with me to facilitate the focus groups, and for helping to analyze
the data from both the survey and focus groups. I am also thankful for Giulietta Perrotta for transcribing
all of the focus group recordings.
Key Findings
Six main topics arose from the analysis of focus group transcripts and survey responses.
1. Divergent and Changing Concerns: Participants arrived and left with divergent concerns and
many changed their priorities over the course of the process.
2. Interface with City Council and Task Force: Participants wanted more action, accountability,
and interaction with these bodies.
3. Impacts of a Resource-Constrained Process: Participants observed and bemoaned that
limited resources had negative impacts on communication, childcare, and food.
4. Lack of Diversity: Participants explored multiple concerns with turnout and diversity of
perspectives.
5. Circle Format and General Process: Participants articulated feedback on the benefits and
limitations of the circle format and its implementation in this setting.
6. Facilitation Role: Facilitators reflected on the distinctions between a circle process and
other types of facilitation, and the ambiguity and tension they felt in this setting.
These topic areas are groups of frequently expressed ideas and comments. Within each were areas of
convergence and divergence. Below, for each topic area, I provide a description and analysis of the
41 of 206
5
variety of reasoning and comments that were shared within each group, broken out by survey results, as
applicable, followed by findings from focus group comments. I conclude the report with a few short
recommendations for carrying this work forward in other communities.
Divergent and Changing Concerns
Participants arrived and left with divergent concerns and many changed their priorities over the course
of the process.
Survey Results
The priorities of participants before and after the community conversations are highlighted in Figure 1.
The conversations did not make any difference in one prominent area of concern: both before and after,
the number one priority was changing the way the city handles policing practices. Notably, however,
framing that change in terms of St. Anthony Police Department (SAPD) became less important: fewer
people prioritized ending the contract with SAPD after the conversations than before them. In contrast,
there were a few areas that became a higher priority for the survey respondents after the
conversations:
understanding the role I play in injustices within my community; and
making new connections with people in my community.
These changes are reflective of the design team’s goals that the conversations provide the opportunity
for impact at various levels including policy, community, inter-personal, and intra-personal.
Figure 1. Top three priorities before and after the community conversations.
Focus Group Comments
Many of the focus group participants shared their commitment and connection to Falcon Heights and
dedication to working to create a more inclusive community. Facilitators expressed a desire to help and
0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%
Ensure my experiences and perspectives are represented.
Share my experiences and perspective with others.
Get the City Council to end the contract with St. Anthony Police…
Have courageous conversations about inclusion and exclusion.
Educate myself and learn from others' perspectives.
Work on dismantling racism in my community.
Make Falcon Heights a more inclusive community.
Become more active and involved.
Challenge myself to understand the role I play in injustice within…
Make new connections with people in my community.
Change the way the city handles policing structure and practices.
Top Priorities To Accomplish
Before After
42 of 206
6
be involved in a topic they feel personally connected to even though they live outside of Falcon Heights.
Many expressed that they hoped to use their professional skills and passions to help the community.
As the organizers and facilitators anticipated and recognized during the conversations, there was no
single theme or concern that brought people to the table. We asked people in the focus group what had
compelled them to participate in the conversations, and found no consistent patterns. We heard a
variety of reasons for why people attended the community conversations and how they defined the
issues at hand. There was divergence on what participants perceived as the problem and how to move
forward. There were some who expressed that canceling the contract was the most important outcome
and the need to solidify a new contract was important. Others felt that the city would have been better
off continuing to work with SAPD. A number of ideas and differences arose over the need to gather
funding and make changes to the budget. The second participant focus group discussed the reality of
the upcoming election and whether new councilmembers would have power and control to change the
budget priorities. The take-away for evaluating this community conversation and planning comparable
kinds of processes in the future is that it’s important for the design team to expect and anticipate that
participants will present very diverse experiences, concerns, and priorities in the conversations.
Interface with the City Council and Task Force
Participants wanted more action, accountability, and interaction with these bodies.
Survey Results
The top priority that participants listed as wanting to accomplish before and after the community
conversation was to change the way the city handles policing structures and practices. Forty-nine
percent of participants listed this as one of their top three priorities before and after the conversations.
This indicates a high level of commitment to action and change within the city. Additionally, more
people expressed a priority to “make new connections with people in my community” and “become
more active and involved”. This highlights that many participants are interested in taking action and
making connections.
The comments in the open-ended response questions on whether this was a valuable use of their time
and whether or not they changed their mind indicated some survey respondents’ disappointment with
the actions of the city council. Some respondents stated they are unsure what the next steps are and
feel discouraged by that. Others feel that the conversations were a way to start informing
recommendations and feel that their voices were acknowledged and matter. In next steps, respondents
stated commitments to staying involved, connected, and on top of the implementation of the
recommendations. The desire for action and to see accountability from the city council and city officials
was a strong theme.
Focus Group Comments
Action and accountability themes arose throughout the focus groups. Community conversation
participants converged on the desire to take action personally, and the desire to see the city council take
action on the recommendations. There was frustration and feelings of uncertainty about the next steps,
and whether the recommendations and input will be implemented. Participants felt disappointed by
the lack of action and concrete next steps from the city council.
43 of 206
7
Specifically, they mentioned the final community conversation as particularly frustrating. Participants
felt that the conversation goals did not meet their personal goals of hearing the final recommendations,
having time to discuss them, and then moving into personal next steps. The circle questions during the
final conversation felt disjointed from the participants’ desire to focus on the final recommendations
and get to action steps. The questions at that particular conversation were noted as not allowing them
to connect to their actions. Additionally, they left without next steps and did not feel the follow-up
communication from the small groups met their desire for actionable next steps.
The design of the conversations did not align with the desire for action. The circle process constrained
the ability to have cross dialogue and move quickly towards actions, which is discussed further in the
Circle Forman and General Process section of this report. Based on the comments from the participants,
I would recommend more of an interface with the Task Force process and more structured ability to
have dialogue with the task force, and react to both the draft recommendations and the final
recommendations. In future processes that interface with a city council or task force, I recommend a
design that includes direct feedback and interaction with the task force/city council.
Impacts of a Resource-Constrained Process
Participants observed and bemoaned that limited resources had negative impacts on communication,
childcare, and food.
Focus Group Comments
There are constraints of an all-volunteer facilitation and recruitment team and the impacts of this were
seen by participants and facilitators alike. Across the focus groups, participants and facilitators named a
variety of visible resource constraints and the impacts these had.
o Childcare: The childcare was not well utilized because it was last minute and its availability was
not well advertised.
o Food: There was a lack of food at the conversations. People suggested offering healthier and
more robust dinner options. It was also noted to pay attention to culturally specific foods, such
as not offering pork and the timing of food being offered during Ramadan.
o Advertisement: Feedback on the location of advertisement was shared. Many suggested that
there could have been more outreach to local community leaders within the African American
community and publication through social media.
o Unclear Commitment from the City: Participants shared that is was unclear what the city had
committed to at the outset of the community conversations. There was not a clear timeline for
when and or how the city council would take up the policy recommendations.
o Plan for Action Oriented Follow-Up: There were concerns about steps community members can
take after the final community conversation. They wanted more information on follow-up within
action groups. It would have been helpful to have commitment at the outset from the city and
others involved in the design process on a plan for communicating next steps and potential
resources to support the work and places to hold meetings within City Hall.
o Facilitator Roles: Facilitators did not always feel clarity in their roles and where they could have
flexibility in the questions or structure of the conversation. Facilitators were able to use the
ambiguity to be creative and resourceful in a positive and productive way. At times when there
were extra facilitators for the evening, they felt a bit underappreciated. While they understand
the nature of a volunteer process, they encourage a different choice of wording when letting
44 of 206
8
people know they are not needed. They felt that being told they “have their night free now”
was dismissive of their commitment and preparation. They suggest language that thanks them
for their commitment and acknowledges that they may be disappointed.
Putting in more resources – both financial and personnel – would provide a better experience on a
number of the resource based constraints raised above. While there are a number of changes that
could be made in future engagement processes by utilizing more resources, respondents expressed that
this process was positive and worth their time.
Lack of Diversity
Participants explored multiple concerns with turnout and diversity of perspectives.
Survey Results
The survey respondents shared concern about turnout and the diversity of participants who attended. A
third felt somewhat or very dissatisfied with the diversity of attendees. Nearly 60 percent felt
somewhat or very satisfied with the participation. This is the section regarding the satisfaction with the
process that had the highest level of dissatisfaction.
Focus Group Comments
Across all of the focus groups, people had mixed feelings about the turnout at the conversations.
Diversity of participants was used to refer to a variety of types of diversity including: where people came
from, Falcon Heights resident versus outside of Falcon Heights, ideological diversity, and racial diversity.
The feelings ranged about whether there was enough participation and engagement from residents of
Falcon Heights. Some felt there was a lot of engagement for a sustained period of time while others felt
that there was not a high enough proportion of residents in attendance. We noticed convergence
around feelings of a lack of ideological diversity in participants. They noted that many of those in the
circle had similar thoughts and there could have been more people with divergent ideas in attendance.
There was a convergence of opinions around a lack of racial diversity among participants and facilitators.
They noticed that the majority of participants were white and that most circles had just one or two
people of color. Some participants noted that they felt that it was on them as person of color to explain
to the white participants the experience of being a person of color and that felt burdensome. People
expressed that they did not always feel heard or that their diverse perspective was listened to.
Additionally, there were discussions about police participation in the conversations. There was a
divergence on whether police should have been included in the community conversations in a formal
manner to provide a diversity of perspective or whether that would have caused some participants to
feel unsafe, not attend, or not have the ability to share freely. Safety can mean different things to
different people, but some participants expressed that police presence, whether in uniform or not, in
uniform could cause participants of color to feel unsafe; while others expressed the need to formally
include police into the conversation and that it would be important for them to attend in uniform in
official capacity. It was noted that to include police in a formal manner, a more professional level of
facilitation would have been needed to ensure all felt safe.
The take-away for planning future comparable kinds of processes is that extensive planning, outreach,
reflection, and design is needed to ensure diverse participation and productive dialogue among diverse
participants.
45 of 206
9
Circle Format and General Process
Participants articulated feedback on the benefits and limitations of the circle format and its
implementation in this setting.
Survey Results
Figure 2. depicts the survey responses on satisfaction with the process (see appendix A for individual
graphs of each question on process). It indicates a high level of satisfaction with the quality of dialogue,
facilitators, and the circle process. Overwhelmingly, survey respondents felt satisfied with the circle
format used in the conversations. Eighty-four percent of respondents were somewhat or very satisfied
with the circle format. Eleven percent felt neutral and five percent felt somewhat dissatisfied. No one
indicated being completely dissatisfied. The most dissatisfaction arose regarding the diversity of
participants. The concerns with turnout are discussed above in the Lacking Diversity: Exploration into
Multiple Concerns with Turnout and Diversity of Perspectives section of this report.
Figure 2. Survey responses based on number of responses to the satisfaction with the process.
Focus Group Comments
Circle Format
The topic of the process and circle format came up in each focus group. There was a consistent theme
that people liked the circle format. However, we saw divergence in the reasons for liking the circle
format. Some of the differing reasons for connecting with the circle process were:
o Allows people to have a voice.
o Talking piece can empower people to share and allow time to speak.
o Appreciate that the talking piece allowed the speaker to talk without interruption and
did not allow for cross talk.
o Each person has to look at one another.
o A circle with no barriers allows for vulnerability and for participants to become closer.
o Provides a safe space for people to share and be heard. Safety does not mean people
may not feel shame or be uncomfortable in the process.
o It is a focused process where people have to be engaged and respectful.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Very Dissatisfied Somewhat Dissatisfied Neutral Somewhat Satisfied Very Satisfied
Satisfaction with Process
Quality of the Dialogue Circle Format Diversity of Participants Quality of Facilitation
46 of 206
10
While all focus groups in general appreciated many aspects of the circle format, there are two notable
ways in which there was not full agreement on this:
Some participants had strong negative reactions to some aspects of the circle format. In the first
focus group of community conversation participants, many described the circle format as overly
constraining, too polite, and a structure that did not allow people to really get to know one
another, transform their own and each other’s thinking through genuine dialogue with one
another. Participants did not feel that the structure allowed for getting to action. They would
have liked to be allowed to have cross dialogue, to question one other, and dig deeper. In fact,
this focus group was challenging to keep on track in part because the participants were so
activated to engage in cross-talk and dialogue, and seemed to be using the focus group format
to express their resentment of what they experienced as an overly confining format in the
community conversations. The convergent and divergent comments on the circle process should
indicate future community dialogue process should allow time for cross dialogue and response
and developing actions and next steps.
Some of the facilitators found the circle worked poorly because there was not enough clarity
about whether the role of the facilitators was to hold or host a circle and/or to take a more
traditional facilitation role to guide dialogue. This is discussed in more depth below in the
Facilitation vs. Circle Process: Implications for the Facilitator Role section.
Space and Audibility
Space and audibility issues were named as concern. Many participants and facilitators mentioned that it
was hard to hear one another in the circle when they were sitting close to another group. The gym
location for the first community conversation was noted as particularly loud.
Flow of Time
Regardless of feelings toward the circle format, participants raised concerns about the process feeling
rushed and constrained. At times there were too many questions to move through. This did not allow
participants to fully share, and some mentioned they quickly passed or chose not to share so that others
in the circle could have more time. Both participants and facilitators shared that filling out the
notecards prior to the report out often happened quickly and in a rushed fashion. Feedback was
consistent regarding the desire for more time for each question. Alternatively, participants and
facilitators suggested that fewer questions and tasks be included to allow more conversation to take
place within the small groups.
Not all focus groups brought up the topic of how the organizers launched each community conversation,
but the second participant focus group felt strongly that too much time was taken in the beginning of
each evening by people at the front of the room – be it the task force co-chairs, mayor, facilitation team,
or hosts from the meeting site – giving a welcome, explaining the process, or making their own
statements. They especially noted the fifth conversation as an example of too much time being taken at
the beginning of the evening by the front of the room. They would have preferred to have more time in
their circles to alleviate the rushed nature.
47 of 206
11
Facilitation Role
Facilitators reflected on the distinctions between a circle process and other types of facilitation, and the
ambiguity and tension they felt in this setting.
Survey Results
The survey respondents felt very satisfied with the quality of the facilitation. Eighty-four percent of
respondents felt somewhat or very satisfied with the quality of facilitation and 9 percent felt somewhat
or very dissatisfied. These responses can be seen above in Figure 2. The tensions that facilitators felt
does not appear to have affected participants’ experiences.
Focus Group Comments
The facilitators named the tensions they felt between the roles they were asked to play as a circle
keepers sharing a piece of their own stories versus a more traditional neutral facilitation role. They
mentioned tensions they observed at the initial facilitator training about the role of a circle keeper vs.
the more neutral facilitation role and felt this did not resolve into clear direction for the role they should
play in the community conversations.
Facilitators individually sorted out this dual role tension, and shared the variety of ways they dealt with
it. A few facilitators were keenly aware of what they observed to be an overabundance of white female
facilitators. They were thinking a lot about racial and gender aspects of their identity, as white, female
facilitators, when facilitating conversations. Several mentioned their resentment, rolling forward into
these community conversations from previous experiences, of people of color all too often being
“facilitated” by white facilitators, which fed into their negative reactions against facilitators who took a
more traditional, intervening stance rather than keeping circle during these conversations. Some
explained that they fully embraced either end of the spectrum, from circle keeper to traditional
facilitator, and shared a personal story during the circle, while others stated that they chose to pass the
stone without sharing during the circle. Those who shared within the circle felt that it showed humility
and vulnerability. Additionally, if facilitators felt that the conversation was moving away from the
questions or personal sharing or that the lead facilitator was not keeping the circle, they could model an
answer to a question and reorient the conversation. While there was this tension between roles,
facilitators were able to make personal decisions to use the tools that the community conversation
organizing team provided in the preparatory training session, held on February 7, 2017 at Mitchell
Hamline School of Law, and the briefings that took place right before each the conversation. In future
processes, clearer identification of roles could eliminate this tension and confusion.
The facilitators felt that the format required them to do a lot at one time, which obliged them to switch
modes from holding the circle to filling out cards and notetaking. At times there was a lot that needed
to get done in the circle, and not always enough time to accomplish those goals. They had to rush
through questions to give enough time to each of them and transition into completing the notecard
activities. In the future, facilitators would like more time to complete the tasks or guidance on what
could be cut or shifted.
48 of 206
12
Other Observations
Attachment to Place
In analyzing the focus group data, we noticed a strong attachment to place among residents of Falcon
Heights. In identifying their purpose for attending community conversations, participants highlighted
that they felt connected to the community and to being involved. There was a sense that the length of
time living in the community was an important factor motivating participation. This theme is something
I make note of to pay attention to in future community based conversations. Community residents carry
this sense of commitment to the place they live and express a high level of expectation and commitment
from those organizing conversations.
Changes in Emotions
In analyzing the survey data, we noticed that participants’ emotions changed in noteworthy ways, when
comparing how respondents felt before and after the community conversations. Generally, the shift
was to the positive. The chart in Figure 3 outlines the percentage of participants who became more,
less, or still felt particular emotions. Thirty-four percent of individuals became more optimistic while 21
percent became less cynical. Smaller percentage of participants became less optimistic or more cynical.
Nineteen percent became more trusting and 17 percent were less distrusting. The graph lists the
changes seen across all of the emotions measured. Feeling energized and fatigued were both named as
more prominent feelings after the community conversations. Fewer people named feeling angry or sad
afterwards. These results indicate the community conversations potentially had an impact on the
prominent emotions of participants. These preliminary results indicate this process changed emotions
in a positive way.
Change Optimistic Cynical Trusting Distrusting
More dominant 34% (18) 8% (4) 19% (10) 8% (4)
Less dominant 17% (9) 21% (11) 9% (5) 17% (9)
Still dominant 17% (9) 9% (5) 8% (4) 11% (6)
Never dominant 32% (17) 62% (33) 64% (34) 64% (34)
More – Chose as dominant feeling after, but not before
Less – Chose as dominant feeling before, but not after
Still – Chose as dominant feeling both before and after
Never Dominant – Never chose the feeling
Figure 3. Most dominant emotions before and after the community conversations.
0%
20%
40%
60%
Optimistic Cynical Trusting Distrusting Energized Fatigued Anxious Angry Sad
Most dominant emotions (aggregated for all survey respondents)
Before After
49 of 206
Recommendations
Recommendation –Process
With a few key caveats, participants liked the circle method. People became tired with the repetition
and wanted to move towards action and felt hindered in that goal. However, there was a clear message
that there was too much material to cover at each conversation. Both participants and facilitators
often felt too rushed while trying to get through all of the questions in each conversation. This did not
allow participants to fully share, and some mentioned they quickly passed or chose not to share so that
others in the circle could have more time. It is recommended that future processes allow more time to
cover the materials either through extending the time period or reducing the agenda, and a design that
includes a variety of circle format and cross dialogue.
Another key finding is that, participants would have liked to have had more time to directly discuss the
draft recommendations and provide direct feedback to the Task Force and City Council members. This
lack of direct interaction left many participants feeling frustrated and uncertain about the next steps,
and whether the recommendations and input will be implemented. Future processes should include
more time on the development of recommendations and allow for more interaction between
participants, Task Force, and City Council members.
Recommendation – Facilitator Preparation
In future processes, clarify the role you are asking the facilitators to play and work out any potential
disagreement prior to training. This will provide more clarity and less tension. In addition, providing
guidance or suggestions for managing time and how to switch between a circle based conversation to
more task oriented activities would be useful.
Recommendation – General Resources
Provide adequate resources for future processes to ensure well-advertised and sustained child care,
substantial and culturally appropriate food, improved advertisement and outreach to ensure
participation of racially and ideologically diverse participants, and more complete facilitator training and
preparation.
13
50 of 206
Appendix A. Full Survey Questions and Responses (Total Survey Responses Received: 57)
Question 1. Which session (s) did you participate in?
Session 1: February 16, 2017: Conversations focused on personal and
community values.
29
Session 2: March 2, 2017: Participants helped develop options for how the
City can live out the Community’s values in its activities, policies, and policing
policies and practices.
31
Session 3 April 3, 2017: Participants reviewed and provided feedback on draft
policing recommendations.
31
Session 4: May 1, 2017: Participants shared their thoughts on what is needed
for transformational change to begin and each made a personal commitment.
26
Session 5: June 19, 2017: Focused commemoration of the work accomplished
and move towards next steps for the community.
34
Total Conversations Attended by Respondents
1 39% (22)
2 12% (7)
3 16% (9)
4 12% (7)
All 5 21% (12)
Question 2: Before Participating in the Community Conversations what were the top three things you
wanted to accomplish?
Change the way the city handles policing structure and practices. 50% (28)
Educate myself and learn from others' perspectives. 43% (24)
Work on dismantling racism in my community. 38% (21)
Have courageous conversations about inclusion and exclusion. 32% (18)
Make Falcon Heights a more inclusive community. 25% (14)
Share my experiences and perspective with others. 23% (13)
Get the City Council to end the contract with St. Anthony Police Department. 23% (13)
Become more active and involved. 16% (9)
Challenge myself to understand the role I play in injustice within my community. 14% (8)
Ensure my experiences and perspectives are represented. 13% (7)
Make new connections with people in my community. 5% (3)
14
51 of 206
Question 3: Rate your feelings on the statements below:
o I believe this process had an impact on the community of Falcon Heights.
o I believe I changed other participants’ perspectives.
o I learned something new from participating.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Strongly Disagree Slightly Disagree Neutral Slightly Agree Strongly Agree
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Strongly Disagree Slightly Disagree Neutral Slightly Agree Strongly Agree
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Strongly Disagree Slightly Disagree Neutral Slightly Agree Strongly Agree
15
52 of 206
Question 4: Rate your level of satisfaction on the process and format of the Community
Conversations:
o Quality of the Dialogue
o Circle Format
o Diversity of Participants
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Very Dissatisfied Somewhat Dissatisfied Neutral Somewhat Satisfied Very Satisfied
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Very Dissatisfied Somewhat Dissatisfied Neutral Somewhat Satisfied Very Satisfied
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Very Dissatisfied Somewhat
Dissatisfied
Neutral Somewhat Satisfied Very Satisfied
16
53 of 206
o Quality of Facilitation
Question 5: Rate your feeling on the statement below:
o I feel that participating in the Community Conversation(s) was a valuable way to spend my time.
Strongly Agree 64% (36)
Slightly Agree 27% (15)
Neutral 0%
Slightly Disagree 2% (1)
Strongly Disagree 7% (4)
Question 6: Please share why this was or was not a valuable way to spend your time.
The five major types of explanations given by those who agree are:
o The conversations brought people together to share and heal.
o It was good to listen to others and hear perspectives that were different from my own.
There was a sense that there was a diversity of opinions shared.
o It is important to show up and be engaged and the conversations were a way to do that.
o It was a good way to start to seek change and make connections within the community.
o The conversations were a way to start to inform the policing recommendations. This
thread acknowledged that some are not sure their voices and opinions mattered to the
elected officials.
Only five comments were made by those who felt it was not a valuable way to spend their time.
Direct quotes are below.
o “Invited to attend the final event as a resource person the turnout ended up being so
huge, and the groups so large, that no individual was able to meaningfully contribute to
the conversation, let alone determine which resources they would need going forward.”
o “Attendance was low, needed to stop and evaluate how to get more diversity in age and
race among attendees.”
o “The city council has no interest in actually implementing any real reforms. Nothing
happened because of the events.”
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Very Dissatisfied Somewhat Dissatisfied Neutral Somewhat Satisfied Very Satisfied
17
54 of 206
o “Participants were more interested in talking about parties and inclusion activities
rather than discussing the blatant racism of our police department which is obvious to
anyone who notices that it is almost always people of color who are stopped.”
o “I did not feel understood at all except by the facilitator.”
Question 7: People often change their minds through community dialogues. For example, they gain
new perspectives that lead them to change their understanding of a problem. They might learn about
options they had not thought about. They might become more optimistic or more pessimistic about
an issue. We are guessing you may have changed your mind in some way. Please tell us how.
Themes from those who shared how their mind changed:
o Gained a new awareness of issues facing people of color including racism from white people
and pervasive targeting by the police.
o Gained a new perspective and understanding of the difficulty of being a police officer and
city councilmember.
o Felt more pessimistic and discouraged. Some of these feelings were directed at the police
and/or expressed in terms of a lack of action by city councilmembers.
o Felt more connected to their neighbors and heartened by the participation of others in the
community.
o See the possibility for change. (A few people mentioned this, and also that they are in strong
support of the Task Force recommendations.)
Question 8: What are your next steps?
Themes based on those who shared their next steps.
Themes are similar to those that arose in community conversation #4: Transformational Change and
Personal Commitments.
o Personal actions and continued conversations: People list that they plan to continue to have
personal conversations and commit to specific actions.
o Ensure recommendations are implemented.
o Continue to make connections and stay involved.
o Educate themselves and to share the work the community is doing with others.
o Some respondents expressed that they are unsure about what their next steps will be and
that they are disappointed and discouraged.
18
55 of 206
Question 9: Below, please select up to three of your dominant feelings before and after the
Community Conversation(s).
Changes in dominant feelings (shifts within individual survey respondents)
Change Optimistic Cynical Trusting Distrusting
More dominant 34% (18) 8% (4) 19% (10) 8% (4)
Less dominant 17% (9) 21% (11) 9% (5) 17% (9)
Still dominant 17% (9) 9% (5) 8% (4) 11% (6)
Never dominant 32% (17) 62% (33) 64% (34) 64% (34)
More – Chose as dominant feeling after, but not before
Less – Chose as dominant feeling before, but not after
Still – Chose as dominant feeling both before and after
Never Dominant – never chose as dominant feeling
Question 10: Now, what the top three things you want to accomplish.
Change the way the city handles policing structure and practices. 51% (28)
Educate myself and learn from others' perspectives. 40% (22)
Work on dismantling racism in my community. 33% (18)
Make Falcon Heights a more inclusive community. 31% (17)
Have courageous conversations about inclusion and exclusion. 29% (16)
Challenge myself to understand the role I play in injustice within my community. 25% (14)
Make new connections with people in my community. 22% (12)
Become more active and involved. 20% (11)
Share my experiences and perspective with others. 20% (11)
Get the City Council to end the contract with St. Anthony Police Department. 18% (10)
Other 11% (6)
Ensure my experiences and perspectives are represented. 9% (5)
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Optimistic Cynical Trusting Distrusting Energized Fatigued Anxious Angry Sad
Most dominant emotions (aggregated for all survey respondents)
Before After
19
56 of 206
Demographics
What is your gender?
Male 49%
Female 51%
Other 0%
What is your ethnicity?
White/Caucasian 81%
Black or African American 9%
Hispanic or Latino 0%
Asian or Pacific Islander 0%
American Indian or Alaskan Native 2%
Other 9%
What is your age?
Under 18 0%
18-24 2%
25-34 2%
35-44 16%
45-54 12%
55-64 20%
Over 65 49%
20
57 of 206
Appendix B. Focus Group Questions
Focus Groups comprised of Community Conversation Facilitators
1. Why did you participate in the community conversation(s)? What was the key interest or concern
that initially brought you to participate?
2. Please share the moment during the community conversations that most impacted you. What
happened, and how did it impact you?
3. When things were working really well, what was going on? What specifically was happening, what
was positive about it, and do you have an explanation for what / how it was working?
4. Conversely, when things were not working well, what was happening?
5. Did you notice any variation in how accessible… or meaningful… or burdensome this process was to
people?
6. What suggestions do you have about improving accessibility for everyone?
7. If you were to rethink this process, what is one suggestion you would make?
8. How can you imagine using a process like this in another setting? I’ll give you a few minutes to think,
silently, about this, and then I’ll ask you to share. Please imagine a particular place or topic where
you would like to try some part of this. What is the setting? What would you carry forward from this
process? What would you change?
9. Did you have the support and preparation you needed? Are there any additional things you wished
you would have had or known?
10. Please share your 1 or 2 key “take aways.”
Focus Groups comprised of Community Conversation Participants
1. Why did you participate in the community conversation(s)? What was the key interest or concern
that initially brought you to participate?
2. Please share the moment during the community conversations that most impacted you. What
happened, and how did it impact you?
3. Do you feel the community conversations were a valuable way to spend your time? Why or why
not?
4. Did anything change for you, as you went through this process? What do you attribute that to?
5. Do you feel that the community conversations made a difference for the community as a whole?
Why or why not? What kind of change did you observe? Or, if you did not see a change, what kind of
change do you feel was missing?
6. Would you say that you started and ended with more (or less!) confidence or hope about your
community?
7. If we you were to participate in this again, what is 1) one thing that you would keep the same; and
2) one thing that you would do differently?
8. Please share your 1 or 2 key “take aways.”
21
58 of 206
The City of Falcon Heights Inclusion and
Policing Task Force
Overview of Recommendations
59 of 206
Background and Overview of the Process
2
The Falcon Heights Task Force on Inclusion and Policing was charged by the City Council to
articulate community values, identify community needs, and recommend programming and
policies to be an inclusive and welcoming place for residents and guests of Falcon Heights.
The Task Force is comprised of 11 committed individuals with diverse experiences and
perspectives. Since December, they have meet for 13 regular task force meetings. To develop
a set of recommendations on policing and second set of recommendations on inclusion, the
task force deliberated thoughtfully, engaged extensively with the interested public through four
community conversations (involving 142 individuals), consulted with subject matter experts in
four priority areas (policing, police-community relationships, citizen oversight boards, and joint
powers authorities), and had individual dialogues with other residents and guests of Falcon
Heights.
The policing recommendations lay out a set of goals for policy implementation and change
relating to restoring mutual safety and trust for community members and police. The final
version of the policing recommendations was adopted by the City Council on May 24, 2017.
The inclusion recommendations provide a Statement of Community Values, and a series of
recommendations on building a more inclusive Falcon Heights. The foundation of all of the
recommendations is that fundamental issues of inclusion and exclusion have left many people
feeling that they do not fully belong in our community. As we, as a community, pursue specific
implementation actions, we need to sustain an all-encompassing commitment to fight racism
and other kinds of discrimination and exclusion. We need to do relational, financial, legal, and
occupational development work to address inequity and build trust so that everyone is included
in our community. The final version of the inclusion recommendations was adopted by the City
Council on June 14, 2017. At this time, the Council also unanimously agreed to seek grants and
allocate funds in upcoming city budgets to dedicate skilled staff attention to sustaining this work.
In conjunction with the Task Force meetings, more than 140 people have participated in a series
of Community Conversations. The dialogue and feedback has been used to develop and shape
the recommendations. Full summaries of each community conversation can be found on City’s
website, www.falconheights.org.
•Conversation 1 - February 16, 2017: Conversations focused on personal and community
values.
•Conversation 2 - March 2, 2017: Participants helped develop options for how the City can live
out the Community’s values in its activities, policies, and policing policies and practices.
•Conversation 3 - April 3, 2017: Participants reviewed and provided feedback on draft policing
recommendations.
•Conversation 4 - May 1, 2017: Participants shared their thoughts on what is needed for
transformational change to begin and each made a personal commitment.
•Conversation 5 - June 19, 2017: This conversation will focus on commemoration of the work
accomplished and move towards next steps for the community.
60 of 206
3
Table of Contents
Overview and Background..............................................................................2
Statement of Community Values.....................................................................4
Summary of Inclusion Recommendations.......................................................6
Complete Inclusion Recommendations...........................................................8
Summary of Policing Recommendations........................................................11
Complete Policing Recommendations............................................................13
Summary of Conversation #1.........................................................................19
Summary of Conversation #2.........................................................................22
Summary of Conversation #3.........................................................................26
Summary of Conversation #4.........................................................................34
Summary of Conversation #5.........................................................................41
61 of 206
4
Statement of Community Values
Leadership. We aspire to become known for our leadership in creating
community relationships of mutual respect and welcome, for equity in service
to the community, and for working to recognize and heal historic patterns of
disparity and exclusion.
Trust, transparency, and accountability. We believe that mutual well-
being is created through mutual trust. We value relationships of mutual respect,
learning, and honesty in communication among community members and city
government. We value transparency, communication, and respecting diverse
perspectives in governance.
Equity, justice, and anti-discrimination. We value protecting and treating
all residents and visitors equally and fairly under the law. We value equity in the
provision of public services and in the city’s response to concerns. We recognize
the persistent work we must do, individually and collectively, to reject and
remedy prejudice, bias, and discrimination within individuals, the community,
and in our government and policing.
Welcome and inclusion. We value diversity, welcoming all people with
respect and dignity, and creating authentic relationships that honor our shared
humanity despite our differences. We aspire to harmonize the needs of all while
understanding varied individual needs, across generations, across racial or ethnic
or religious groups, and across other aspects of our rich identities. We recognize
the need to work together to heal and overcome divisions in our community.
We commit to work continuously to forge strong relationships and to be a place
where everyone is recognized and welcomed as part of our community.
Awareness. We value seeking diverse perspectives, listening with an open
mind, and taking time to learn from others. We commit to recognizing and
working to address our individual and collective biases.
Courageous Action. We value taking individual and collective responsibility
to uphold these values, including having the courage to name and confront
problems and to pursue solutions and healing when these values are not
upheld. We recognize that everyone has the responsibility for being engaged
and challenge others when we see or hear hurtful actions or comments.
Safety. We value safety, including protecting residents and guests from personal
harm and protecting groups from prejudice, discrimination, and hostility. Respect
for life and minimizing harm to all are our highest priorities in public safety and
policing. We believe that mutual safety is built through mutual trust.
We assert and uphold these values for our community, including residents and guests, in our
relationships with one another and in city government services, leadership, and policies.
Adopted by City Council with Inclusion Recommendations.
62 of 206
Inclusion Recommendations
Created by the Task Force with Community Input
5
Adopted unanimously by City Council on June 14, 2017
63 of 206
Summary of Inclusion Recommendations
Recommendation: Invest significantly to address persistent sources of
disparities and exclusion.
Address the sources of exclusion. The context and premise of these recommendations
is that fundamental issues of inclusion and exclusion have left many people feeling
that they do not fully belong in our community. As we pursue specific implementation
actions, we need to sustain an all-encompassing commitment to fight racism and other
kinds of discrimination and exclusion. The following implementation suggestions are
starting points for comprehensive work that needs to be done to build relationships
across difference, to build trust in the community among those who have felt left out,
and to work on building the financial, legal, and occupational resources of excluded
groups.
Below is the high level summary of the recommendations. Full details are
provided in the following pages.
Overarching Value for All Inclusion Recommendations
6
Recommendation: Promote reconciliation, healing, and inclusion through
connecting Falcon Heights with community partners doing excellent work in
these areas.
Recommendation: Sustain City commitment through: creating a Truth,
Racial Reconciliation, and Healing Committee of some kind; dedicating
substantial City staff time to this work; and re-framing existing City resources
to bring attention to equity.
Recommendation: Support and sponsor events within the community to
foster inclusion.
64 of 206
7
Process for Implementation of these Recommendations
Create two special resources to mobilize implementation and accountability of these
recommendations. Specifically, the Task Force strongly recommends that the City Council make a
commitment to create and sustain these two structures, for at least 3-5 years. It is critical that the
city make this commitment now to sustain the work over this period, to make sure that this work
lifts off and is sustained.
1) Create a dedicated Truth, Racial Reconciliation, and Healing Committee of some kind to
have responsibility for sustaining attention and accountability for these recommendations.
2) Dedicate city staff time (through reassigning existing staff time or expanding capacity
through consulting or new staffing) to forge partnerships, find grants, and recruit and
support volunteers to accomplish all of these efforts.
Across all of the full inclusions recommendations, these principles should be
applied:
Make continuous efforts. Inclusion is never done. We need to be continually attentive to
how accessible and inclusive we, as a city, are being, and keep recommitting ourselves to
improvement.
Use what we have. Whenever possible, we recommend integrating these ideas into structures
that are already in place. For example, we recommend enhancing the welcome packet for new
residents to include resources for building connections across differences.
Invest resources. In some cases, we are simply recommending that successful, existing programs
and systems be sustained or re-framed. In other cases, we recommend new investments
to leverage new opportunities. For example, the city could amplify the work of community
organizations and volunteers by enhancing the city website, providing training or other support
for community volunteers, or writing grants to expand partnerships with community institutions
that have skill and passion for this work.
Provide a variety of options and avenues for people to get involved. Inclusion means providing
variety in the types of activities to appeal to different people’s styles, skills, and availability.
Varying the times and locations, providing childcare, and minimizing cost will make opportunities
more accessible.
Inclusion is community-based work. City government and leaders have a key role to play, but the
City is not the only source of leadership and action for community healing and reconciliation. We
recognize and value the work of other community organizations and volunteers, and ask that the
City Council commit city staff effort (through a reassignment or an expansion of staffing capacity)
to build its own capacity to participate and to support these efforts.
65 of 206
Complete Inclusion Recommendations
8
•Provide workshops to support people to build their knowledge and resources for legal, financial, and
occupational opportunities and rights. This is an important step to address inequity.
•Build up career pathways program for low-income or minority youth. Other communities have had success
with a variety of models for summer employment, internships, apprenticeship, and small enterprise
development programs through partnerships among local high schools, businesses, business associations,
and city government.
•Invest in continuously sustaining and expanding affordable housing options.
Recommendation: Invest significantly to address persistent sources of disparities and exclusion.
For example:
•Partner with the Science Museum of Minnesota, to expand Falcon Heights participation in their
programming on race and our shared humanity.
•Work with the Minnesota Historical Society, Ramsey County Recorder’s Office and Registrar of Titles Office,
or The Historyapolis Project at Augsburg College to support documentation and research to make visible
historic policies and patterns, such as redlining and racially restrictive property covenants, that continue to
shape our community.
•Partner with Ramsey County Libraries to launch a “book of the year” or ongoing book clubs for people
interested in expanding their knowledge of diverse cultures and history.
•Recognize and promote the potential of local businesses to support this work. For example, encourage
residents to hold community gatherings in their spaces, advertise that guests driving through the city can
provide feedback on the community by stopping in local businesses, or involve local employers in youth
development programs.
•Expand partnerships with the University of Minnesota to bring more attention specifically to these areas
of work. The Center for Urban and Regional Affairs, the Art of Hosting community of practice, and The
Center for integrative Leadership have already supported this work, but there are many other options for
partnership.
•Work with foundations that are committed to improving diversity and inclusion, restorative justice,
police-community relationships, or related issues, to secure funding or direct technical assistance for
the programming, training, or events listed here. The Task Force’s research suggests that the Wilder
Foundation, Bush Foundation, Kellogg Foundation, JAMS Foundation and the St. Paul or Minneapolis
Foundations may be interested. The National Initiative for Building Community Trust and Justice has
resources and toolkits.
Recommendation: Promote reconciliation, healing, and inclusion through connecting Falcon Heights with community partners doing excellent work in these areas.
•Work with existing organizations to provide support and training on how to build relationships across
differences. Living Room Conversations provides tools and resources to allow people to connect and hear
different perspectives in small group conversations. There are a number of training programs operating
nationwide that have resources, including: Hope in the Cities; Sustained Dialogue; Alaska Native
Dialogues on Racial Equity Toolkit; Training for Change; and Race Forward –Racial Equity Impact
Assessment. Arts can be a way for people to connect; Intermedia Arts in the Twin Cities or Laundromat
Art Project out of New York City do this kind of work.66 of 206
9
•Use the city website and newsletter to emphasize the importance of this work and make
it accessible. On the city website, ensure that information about our values, resources
for community work on inclusion, and opportunities to participate are accessible, timely,
and easy to find. Expand the newsletter to consistently include highlights on diversity and
inclusion and push people to new opportunities and resources on the website.
•Expand the city’s information packets for block parties to include resources on how to build
relationships across differences, from having courageous conversations to knowing where
to turn for help with neighbor disputes.
•Use the newsletter and website to support the related work that other community groups
are doing, for example to promote events in the schools.
•Use the neighborhood welcome packet to emphasize that all are welcome, and provide
resources to new community members. Find a way to partner with landlords so they have
the most up to date packets to share with new tenants.
•Sustain and expand city trainings on implicit bias and de-escalation. We suggest that
these be open not only to city staff, but sometimes also to residents and others who are
interested. Other communities have very successfully strengthened their commitments and
capacities by having diverse groups of people go through the training together. This could
be an exciting programming opportunity to explore with foundations.
Recommendation: Build commitment and capacity through re-framing existing
City resources.
•Continue to host the events currently in place (ice cream socials, block parties), but enhance
them by having special activities, resource people, or information to engage people in building
relationships across difference.
•Keep the community conversations going, to intentionally bring people together but also
allowing for organic relationship building. Foundation support may be available to support
this.
•Host book and/or movie clubs and discussions relevant to racial inequity and inclusion topics.
•Connect events with the work the Community Engagement Commission is already doing.
Recommendation Support and sponsor events within the community to foster inclusion.
•Embed diversity and inclusion awareness and skill development into the summer camps
offered through the city.
•Use the park and recreation event structure that is already in place to advertise
opportunities to participate and to hire temporary employees support learning circles,
book or movie clubs, or trainings on how to have courageous conversations.
67 of 206
Policing Recommendations
Adopted by the City Council on May 24, 2017
10
68 of 206
11
Summary of Policing Recommendations
Below is the high level summary of the recommendations. Full details are
provided in the following pages.
Recommendation: Police-Community Relationships
•Mutual Safety is built through Mutual Trust.
•Ownership. Falcon Heights needs to have appropriate authority with the police
department serving our community, beyond annual reporting.
•Community engagement.
•Creation of a Community-Police Work Group for trend monitoring, relationship building,
and problem solving.
Recommendation: Training and Capacity
•Mental health care for people in crisis and officers, for mutual safety and well-being.
•Training, with a focus on de-escalation, cultural competency, and explicit and implicit
bias.
•Hiring and workforce development to emphasize community relationship-building.
Recommendation: Data and Transparency
•Data collection, sharing, and monitoring to detect and respond to trends.
•Public Feedback: surveys, multiple feedback channels, and information/feedback cards.
•Prompt, thorough, and open communication in case of serious incidents.
Recommendation: Priorities for Policing Activity
Respect for all is the foundation for policing in our community. The highest priorities for
policing activity are:
•Emergency response.
•Cultural competence and community engagement.
•Informative policing.
•In traffic policing, prioritization of serious moving violations.
69 of 206
12
Adopted Guiding Principles for Implementing Policing
Recommendations
The following policing recommendations set forth goals and frameworks for strengthening the realization of
community values for public safety and policing. We preface them with a few caveats about what they do
not include:
•We recognize that some of the following practices are already common practice in some police
departments, while others are quite new. Collectively, we believe these practices are good foundations for
ongoing, continual improvement in policing.
•Our charge includes making recommendations on inclusion more broadly, as well as on policing specifically.
In about a month, the Task Force will convey its recommendations for additional work on transforming
our community to continually combat stereotyping and prejudice and advance mutually respectful
relationships and inclusion of all.
•We recognize that there is much work to be done to spell out the operational details for implementing
these policing recommendations. In some cases, we are able to convey some more detailed
implementation suggestions based upon the input of our expert panels and our review of the literature,
although generally such work probably exceeds our domain of expertise and our compressed timeframe
as a Task Force comprised of community volunteers. Furthermore, the police department serving Falcon
Heights should be involved in sorting out the finer aspects of implementation. Clearly, however, the
Task Force is invested in the accomplishment of these goals, and we ask the City Council to commit to
implementation. Specifically, we suggest the City promptly enter into an agreement with subject matter
experts in equity, policing, and public policy to work with the City Council and police department to
develop a 2-year work plan and a 5-year strategy to implement these recommendations.
Culture and Values
Anti-discrimination culture. Everyone – residents, city government leaders, police officers, and others - need
to actively acknowledge the long history and current reality of racism and other forms of discrimination in our
country. In City Council meetings, community conversations, and our Task Force meetings, many people have
spoken to their lived experience of stereotyping and bias, yet privilege allows some people to even deny that
stereotyping and bias exist and are problems. The Task Force was charged to look at policing. We recognize
that policing reform is needed in our country. However, we emphasize also the need for work throughout the
community to recognize and address inequity, injustice, and discrimination.
Respect for Life. Respect for life and minimizing harm to all are our highest priorities in public safety and
policing. The mutual safety and well-being of the public and police officers are essential.
Community Values. Our community, including our public safety officers, should uphold and advance all of our
community values. A statement of these values should be included in any contract for police services.
Anti-profiling. Policing patterns that are in effect profiling are contrary to our community values and damage
community-police trust and the protection of everyone’s well-being. We strongly affirm the obligation to
treat all people fairly and equally under the law, without discrimination on the basis of race, color, creed,
religion, national origin, gender, marital status, familial status, disability, public assistance status, age, or sexual
orientation.
70 of 206
Adopted Guiding Principles for Implementing Policing
Recommendations
Adopted Complete Policing Recommendations
13
Mutual Safety through Mutual Trust. We care about mutual safety of community members and
officers, and feel this is enhanced through mutual trust. We want to know our officers, to have
them know and be attached to our community, and for community members to feel protected by
police and officers to feel that our community is a desirable and safe duty location. Falcon Heights
should continue to have law enforcement officers who work routinely in Falcon Heights and get to
know our community. The city’s website could include a link to photos and short introductions to
officers working in Falcon Heights, to help residents and visitors become familiar with the officers
serving our community.
Ownership. Falcon Heights needs to have appropriate authority with the police department serving
our community, beyond annual reporting. This is a foundation for realizing all of the implementation
recommendations we are making, particularly when it comes to building strong community-police
relationships and trust, living our community values, and training. It is also an essential foundation
to ensure that city leaders may respond in a timely and effective fashion if there is a serious (acute
or persistent) concern about a public safety issue or policing performance.
Community engagement. We recommend several actions to build mutual trust and appreciation
and to reduce separation between “the community” and “the police” and to break down “us vs.
them” boundaries. Police supervisors’ and officers’ duties should include participating regularly in
community conversations involving the interested public and police and other community events.
We recommend that the city and police department regularly participate in workshops (with the
public or with culturally competent liaisons who will work directly with diverse communities)
to explain what people’s civil rights are, in the event that they should have an interaction with
police. This is a relationship-building opportunity to build trust through positive interactions
and very visibly demonstrating the police department’s commitment to civil rights. Similarly, we
recommend that there be community-led and community-oriented trainings, for police officers
and any interested member of the public, to familiarize officers with the challenges that residents
and visitors face when it comes to public safety or policing. (Please refer to the full set of training
recommendations, below.)
Community-Police Work Group. The City will promptly enter into an agreement with subject matter
experts in equity, policing, and public policy to guide us on how best to bring these functions into
effect. This is a structure, independent of the police department, to enable ongoing communication
and relationship-building, timely response to emerging problems in public safety and policing,
and advocacy for changes in policies and resources to advance continual improvements in public
safety and policing. It is not a structure for performing investigations of complaints about police
misconduct. While a majority of members should be from the community, we strongly encourage
the involvement of a senior member of the police department and preferably at least one other
police officer in every meeting, to facilitate mutual learning from one another’s knowledge and
experiences about the contexts of crime and policing, to build relationships and trust, and to have
shared ground for working together on culture change to improve mutual safety and trust.
Recommendation: Police-Community Relationships
71 of 206
The three purposes of the Community-Police Work Group are:
•To serve as a channel for community members to give positive or negative feedback or register
complaints on police conduct. As an entity independent of the police department, this committee
provides an alternative option for anyone who would prefer not to present their feedback directly
to the police department. In addition, this provides a forum for conveying concerns that may not
reach the threshold for a full investigation by the internal affairs unit of the police department, yet
nonetheless deserve attention. This function of the Commission allows those issues to become
visible and get attention. If the Commission detects a pattern in these reports, it should offer
recommendations to respond to the problem.
•To support public safety by monitoring trends in public safety and policing. At least quarterly, the
committee should receive and review the department’s aggregate data on crime, enforcement
activities, complaints, and critical incident reports. This provides a mechanism for timely detection
of emerging trends regarding public safety, biases or other problems in enforcement, and other
issues. If issues are found, the Community-Police Commission might respond by continuing to
monitor or by recommending to the City Council that they negotiate with the police department to
make changes – for example, in programs, training, staffing, equipment, or budgets – to improve
public safety and policing.
•To safeguard the procedural integrity of the police department’s internal affairs process for
investigating and resolving complaints. We believe that it is in everyone’s interest to have an
investigation system that is trusted for investigating complaints in a timely and procedurally fair way;
this is essential to trust in the police department and to the safety of the community and officers.
At least quarterly, the committee should receive a report on all police conduct investigations, at a
level of detail to protect confidential information and yet permit monitoring of the completeness
and timeliness of police conduct investigations and yet with sufficient transparency to reveal any
persistent pattern of complaints about particular types or locations of policing activity or officers. At
least annually, the Community-Police Commission should make a written report to the City Council
and police department about whether programs and resources for training and the complaint
handling procedure should be sustained or changed.
The Commission needs to have teeth to accomplish any of these goals. The reviews it makes of
complaints, trends, and the procedural integrity of the police department must be consequential for the
Commission to have legitimacy and trust. That means that any recommendations that come of these
reviews should need to be acted on with fidelity to the purposes they are meant to accomplish. It is
hoped that direct communication between the civilian members and police department representatives
would proactively and easily resolve any issues. However, the Commission might sometimes also report
concerns or make recommendations – for example, for changes in community programs, training,
staffing, equipment, or budgets – to City Council, in its capacity as a steward for the wellbeing of
community members and employees (or contracted employees), authorizer of the policing contract, and
decision-maker about policies and budgets. We request that the City Council support well substantiated
recommendations made by the Commission. If the City Council subsequently acts on the Commission
recommendations by making a request to the police department, and the police department does not
respond by implementing the request or by explaining its inability to do so, the police department should
be considered to be out of compliance with its contract with the City of Falcon Heights.
14
72 of 206
15
Mental health for mutual safety and well-being. The city could arrange to have, on call at all times,
professionals with extensive training in social work or mental health to provide timely support for de-
escalation of policing situations, support for the mental health of police officers, and mental health
assistance to community members interacting with the police.
Training. Officers should have regular, high-quality training to build their capacity for de-escalation
of themselves and others and for recognizing and preventing all bias (including implicit and explicit
bias). As mentioned above, community-led and community-oriented training about the challenges that
community members face in public safety and policing is a key component of strengthening community-
police relationships generally, as well as for building police officers’ skills for community engagement.
The content of these workshops might include, for example, training on bias, matters relating to race,
community-led guidance about cultural norms for interacting respectfully with diverse groups in Falcon
Heights, or the historic origins of some persistent prejudices or disparities. We strongly suggest that
these forms of capacity building should receive attention on a par with the more conventional forms of
required training for law enforcement officers (e.g., on use of force or procedures for emergency vehicle
operations). Training for what is sometimes called a “warrior” mindset does not serve our community
values and the mutual safety and trust of the public and officers.
Hiring and workforce. The police department should continually strive to have a diverse workforce,
preferably one that reflects the diversity of residents and visitors in Falcon Heights.
Recommendation: Training and Capacity
73 of 206
16
Data collection. The police department should collect comprehensive data on all police interactions and
crime. Emerging research on best practices for building police-community trust suggest it is especially
beneficial to collect these types of data: basic demographic information; the public safety concern,
location, and context; the incident outcome (e.g., information given, warning issued, citation); and
whether the suspect(s) had weapons. Summary reports should be made monthly to the City Council and
published on the City’s website in as much detail as possible without violating privacy.
Public Feedback. The City of Falcon Heights should gather public feedback on policing through at least
three mechanisms:
•In every interaction, police officers should give the person with whom they are interacting a card that
identifies the officer by name and provides a phone number and website to submit feedback (positive
or negative), questions, suggestions, or complaints. Assuming the Community-Police Commission
is instituted, it should be listed as an option, independent of the police department, to provide
feedback.
•On an annual basis, the city should conduct a survey of households to solicit feedback on policing.
•At least semi-annually, the City Council, police department, and public should hold community
conversations to enable continued communication about community values, public safety issues, and
positive or negative feedback on policing.
Serious incidents. To build community trust, if serious incidents occur (e.g., public safety emergency,
officer-involved shooting, or a serious allegation of police misconduct), the police department and City of
Falcon Heights should communicate as promptly, thoroughly, and openly as possible.
Recommendation: Data and Transparency
74 of 206
17
Respect for all is the foundation for policing in our community. The highest priorities for policing
activity are:
•Emergency response to 911 calls and violent crimes are the highest priorities.
•Community policing. Officers need to get to know people. Some steps to engage with people
in non-enforcement activities include getting out of their cars, participating in community
events, etc.
•Cultural competence and community engagement. In an effort to build relationships, training
for cultural competency must be linked with positive cultural and community engagement to
build relationships.
•Informative policing. In enforcement-related interactions, officers should promptly inform
the individuals(s) involved about why they are being stopped (e.g., to explain that they were
observed running a stop sign). This should improve compliance with laws, the safety of the
public and officers, and community-police trust.
•Traffic policing. Dangerous moving violations are high priority. Policing for other motor
vehicle violations is a lower priority, and the policy for these could be to issue a warning.
We recommend the City explore opportunities to proactively intervene in downward cycles
associated with fines for minor violations. For example, the City might consider investing in
a program -- like the Lights on! program found in several Twin Cities communities – which
provides drivers with financial assistance to take care of minor problems with vehicle
equipment compliance.
Property crimes, although they are one of the most commonplace crimes in Falcon Heights, were
not mentioned as a priority during community conversations. We do not assume that it is a low
priority; possibly people did not mention it because they take this kind of policing for granted.
This reinforces the value of our recommendations about data reporting and public safety trend
monitoring to communicate and respond to public safety concerns and policing activities.
Recommendation: Priorities for Policing Activity
75 of 206
18
Ultimately the City Council has authority and responsibility for keeping a contract with SAPD
or moving to some other arrangement. In early April 2017, the City Council instructed the city
administrator to begin a Request for Interest from other potential providers. As of June 14, 2017
the City Council is actively exploring options for a partnership with the Ramsey County Sheriff’s
Office.
Many comments had been shared at the community conversations preceding the council
decisions. Those comments were to the effect that increasing and ensuring ownership that the
police department respects community values are more important than the specific structure of
the arrangement.
When participants in the community conversations were asked to express and explain their
preferences for different organizational arrangements for policing, the option of issuing a new
Request for Proposals to contract a police department received much greater support than any
other option. Two other options - renegotiating with SAPD (which received some support, while
some people completely opposed it) or constituting a shared police department through a joint
powers agreement – were less well supported. There was very little support for creating a police
department just for Falcon Heights.
On the basis of our consultations with subject matter experts and the literature on
organizational options for policing, we recommend constructing the contract to:
•Articulate community values as the foundation for public safety and policing.
•Emphasize mutual safety through mutual trust. Build structure and routines for regular
communication, mutually responsive consultation and problem-solving, and ongoing
relationship-building between the community, city leadership, and police department.
•Affirm the importance of ongoing, high-quality training – specifically including the forms
of training on implicit bias, de-escalation, and community-oriented training on community
experiences and to build cultural competence – and provide resources for this.
•Ensure mechanisms for data collection and sharing, accountability, and compliance.
•Provide clear and compelling consequences for non-compliance with the contract, which
should be designed to incentivize a prompt remedy to problems, but if neccessarily also
provide an option to exit.
Recommendation: Ownership
76 of 206
Collated by: Elizabeth Dressel
Master of Art in Urban and Regional Planning student at University of Minnesota, Humphrey
School of Public Affairs
Background On February 16, 2017 nearly 100 people attended the first of a series of five community
conversations on inclusion and policing. Information gathered at the community conversations will inform recommendations that the Falcon Heights Task Force on Inclusion and Policing will make to the Falcon Heights City Council in the spring of this year.
These are frequently expressed statements, grouped by theme. They are not consensus statements.
First Circle: Participants shared why they came and their most important personal value.
Why did people come?
•Resident of Falcon Heights
•Out of love for the community.
•Participation is a way to be active and involved.
•Feel dismay, shock, outrage, anger, upset over Philando Castile’s death
•Want to solve problems and see change
Personal Values
•Compassion, Caring, Empathy, Love: Treating others as you want to be treated. Caringfor others. Being open to others perspectives. Some referred to their religious faith in this context.
•Equality and Equity: Ensuring all have equal opportunities and that laws apply equally
regardless of race.
•Honesty and Openness: Being open, thoughtful, truthful, having difficult conversations.
•Integrity
•Relationships, Community, Connection: Building understanding through relationships.Being connected with others and sharing experiences.
•Respect, Dignity, Tolerance, Inclusion: Creating mutual respect. Honoring others.Treating people with dignity.
•Other personal values, not easily grouped with larger themes: Learning. Courage.Forgiveness. Professionalism. Hope.
Second Circle: Participants shared the value they would most like their neighbors and public officials to demonstrate, and why.
•Educate Selves and Seek Diverse Perspectives: Seeking out others perspectives and beinggenuinely open-minded. Listening to others, especially those we might not want to listen to.
Recognizing our own individual implicit biases.
19
Falcon Heights Community Conversation 1: February 16, 2017
Analysis of Key Themes
77 of 206
•Embrace the Greater Good: Creating a community beyond oneself and thinking beyondindividual values. Working to harmonize the needs of all while understanding different
individuals need different things.
•Empathy and Compassion: Upholding that we all want the same things as human beings.Insisting that officers need to engage and care.
•Equity and Equality: Fairness, inclusivity and equal justice.
•Forge Strong Relationships and Have Meaningful Communication: Creating acommunity by welcoming more diversity and welcoming new people into neighborhoods.Making all feel welcome and important regardless of race or age. Having honesty, creativity,
and transparency in communication.
•Honesty and Accountability: Expecting honesty from elected officials. Holding everyoneaccountable for actions. Upholding honesty and transparent communication in all directions.
•Honor Shared Humanity: Having mutual respect. Recognizing the value of everyone and
treating everyone as human beings. Finding a shared dignity and positive regard forneighbors and officials.
•Take Courageous Actions: Speaking up when we see something happening. Challengingothers when we see or hear hurtful actions and comments. Being engaged and take action.
Sensing that it is our responsibility to fix this.
Third Circle: Participants shared how they feel the community fails to live up to these values.
•Complacency: People not speaking up, asking questions, and taking action.
•Lack of knowledge, understanding, and awareness in the community: Privilege playinginto not knowing that things were different for people of color and into feeling like thingswere great in Falcon Heights. Not seeing the disparities in traffic stops and acknowledging
bias.
•Lack of integrity and accountability; Eroded trust: Breakdown in communication,transparency, and honesty from elected officials. Police who don’t represent values.
•Frustration, anger, and disappointment: Feeling that police and officials have failed
them, linked by some to disappointment in themselves for not looking and noticing.
•Fear and lack of safety: People of color fear for personal safety and security.
•Police values: Need to find ways to support police officers in living up to communityvalues. Need to examine the goals of the police, the revenue streams of the police, and pay
attention to abusive practices by police and damaging incentives from revenue structure.
Fourth Circle: Participants shared how they would like to see the City of Falcon Heights heal and how they would like to see themselves, their neighbors, and their public officials demonstrate the values.
•Community Engagement, Conversations, Communication: Conversations are important;these should be shared with the wider community. Let’s get to know others and make timeto connect. There should be diverse participation and events.
•Measurements, Accountability, Transparency: Make concrete decisions and haveaccountability and transparency. Leadership should be held accountable. Use statistics andfeedback to create measurements.
20
78 of 206
o Possible actions: Something should be done with the police contract. There needsto be better police training. Let’s explore restorative justice models. Police should be
out of the cars and in the community.
•Take Action and Build Trust: There needs to be action and communication by Mayor/CityCouncil/Police. The community also needs to take action. Police should be part of theconversation.
21
79 of 206
Collated by: Elizabeth Dressel
Master of Urban and Regional Planning student at University of Minnesota, Humphrey School
of Public Affairs
Background
Nearly 100 people attended the second in a series of five community conversations on inclusion
and policing. The theme of this conversation was developing options for how the city can live
out the community's values in its activities, policies, policing, and other practices. Information
gathered at the community conversations will inform recommendations that the Falcon Heights
Task Force on Inclusion and Policing will make to the Falcon Heights City Council in the spring
of this year.
Values identified at first community conversation (February 16, 2017)
These are frequently expressed statements, grouped by theme. They are not consensus
statements.
Educate Selves and Seek Diverse Perspectives: Seeking out others perspectives and
being genuinely open-minded. Listening to others, especially those we might not want to
listen to. Recognizing our own individual implicit biases.
Embrace the Greater Good: Creating a community beyond oneself and thinking
beyond individual values. Working to harmonize the needs of all while understanding
different individuals need different things.
Empathy and Compassion: Upholding that we all want the same things as human
beings. Insisting that officers need to engage and care.
Equity and Equality: Fairness, inclusivity and equal justice.
Forge Strong Relationships and Have Meaningful Communication: Creating a
community by welcoming more diversity and welcoming new people into
neighborhoods. Making all feel welcome and important regardless of race or age.
Having honesty, creativity, and transparency in communication.
Honesty and Accountability: Expecting honesty from elected officials. Holding
everyone accountable for actions. Upholding honesty and transparent communication in
all directions.
Honor Shared Humanity: Having mutual respect. Recognizing the value of everyone
and treating everyone as human beings. Finding a shared dignity and positive regard for
neighbors and officials.
Take Courageous Actions: Speaking up when we see something happening.
Challenging others when we see or hear hurtful actions and comments. Being engaged
and take action. Sensing that it is our responsibility to fix this.
22
Falcon Heights Community Conversation 2: March 2, 2017
PRELIMINARY Analysis of Key Themes
80 of 206
Circle: Participants shared barriers to honoring the values (above) in city and community activities and polices, and policing policies and practices.
These are frequently expressed statements, grouped by theme. They are not consensus
statements.
Challenge of Sustained Change and Action: New solutions and actions are needed to
create change.
City Government Structures: Policies within the city and a lack of mechanisms
understand and monitor what is taking place within the community creates a barrier.
Complacency and Apathy and Inertia: It can be easy to become tired, feel a lack of
control, and not expend the energy to be involved. Change needs sustained energy and
momentum and can be lost when people become consumed with daily lives. There is a
long history of no change and status quo.
Fear and Discomfort: Change can be scary and uncomfortable which can create
resistance to moving forward.
Need for Accountability: More accountability is needed for policy and city to realize
values. There is blame being pointed at multiple people and groups.
Personal Responsibility to Get Out of Circles: There is a need for personal action and
desire to get to know other people when living out community values. Individuals need
to interact and get to know others perspectives. Making the time and commitment to get
out of personal circles often does not happen.
Policing Structures: Current structure and values of policing stand in the way of living
out the community values.
Privilege, Bias, and Racism: Oppression, racism, white privilege, and biases must be
recognized and addressed in order for the community values to be honored.
Circle: Participants shared ideas on what it would look like for the City of Falcon Heights to live out these values in city and community activities and polices, and policing policies and practices.
Strongest Themes
Community Based Policing: Policies put in place to end stops for minor traffic offenses
such has speeding and equipment malfunctioning and remove the monetary incentives for
this type of enforcement. Move to a model of community policing where officers are out
of their cars and engaging with community members. Police officers lead and organize
neighborhood events where they can interact with community members and have a
commitment to community involvement. Increase the communication between police
officers and community members including ongoing listening session between the
community and police.
Community Events and Activities that Foster Broadening Perspectives: Numerous
ideas shared for events to build community and foster learning about each other. Ideas
included: community reading groups, workshops to explore cultural similarities and
differences, inter-active culture sharing events that celebrate diversity, programs and
2381 of 206
opportunities for mutually beneficial exchanges between community members of
different ethnicities and on-going community conversations.
Training for Police, City Staff, and Community Members: Increase the amount and
types of training offered to police. Training topics included implicit bias, diversity, de-
escalation skills, healing and restorative justice, trauma-informed services, and individual
coaching. Comments also reflected the need to offer training to city staff and community
members.
Very Strong Themes
City Accountability: Accountability and honesty by decision makers. Encourage the
City Council to clarify their expectations of police officers and resource allocation.
Action encouraged by the City Council to establish a community board or task force that
has ability review and monitor police and the power to affect change and create
accountability for law enforcement officials. Create continued space for citizen voice and
participation.
Collect, Share, and Utilize Data on Policing Practices: Report on policing to
community members to ensure the values are being met and action is being taken when
necessary. The city should monitor police data and increase the timeliness and visibility
of data on the city website.
Neighborhood Level Community Building: Encourage community members to get
know your neighbors’ stories, say hello to one another, and care about the welfare of
fellow neighbors. Ideas to create a neighborhood engagement toolkit to encourage
citizen participation and a neighborhood welcome letter to new community members
inviting them to be involved.
Policing Policies and Practices that Align with Falcon Heights Values: Use of de-
escalation tactics. Increased level of transparency. Recognize difficulties and dangers
police face. Create a culture of reflection and compassion.
Strong Themes
Consider Alternatives to Contracting with St. Anthony Police Department: End the
contract with St. Anthony Police and consider contracting with the Ramsey County
Sherriff’s Office or creating a small Falcon Heights only police force.
Forums for Truth and Reconciliation: Council should publicly apologize and take
responsibility for death of Philando Castile. A specific idea is to have the city council
commission a writer to create a case study, story, or play about the killing of Philando
Castile that becomes a part of school curriculum, and could be part of wider community
events. Forums for police to hear about the experiences of people of color.
Hire Diverse and Reflective Police Officers
Housing: Create more affordable housing in the community and create opportunities for
disparate groups to purchase homes in Falcon Heights.
Personal and Collective Commitment to Education, Reflection, Reflection andDialogue: Create opportunities for youth to learn about diversity and inclusiveness at a
2482 of 206
young age. Individual and collective commitment to learn about each other and explore
our own assumptions.
Utilize Terms of the Contract to Ensure that the City's Contracted Police ForceDemonstrates the City’s Values: When considering future contracts, incorporate
community values and create policies for steps to be taken when policing practices fail to
meet these values.
2583 of 206
Falcon Heights Community Conversation 3: April 3, 2017
Analysis of Key Themes
Collated by: Elizabeth Dressel, Master of Urban and Regional Planning student at University of
Minnesota, Humphrey School of Public Affairs
Background
On April 3, 2017 approximately 70 people attended the third in a series of five community
conversations on inclusion and policing. This meeting centered on reviewing and providing input
on a set of draft recommendations created by the Falcon Heights Task Force on Inclusion and
Policing. Information gathered will inform the final recommendations that the Task Force will make
to the City Council in the spring of this year.
These draft recommendations are oriented towards the procedures, policies, and programs of law
enforcement departments and officers. Residents, visitors, city leadership, and other community
institutions also have responsibilities for public safety. Recommendations about those contexts and
other measures to improve inclusion will be shared at the May 2017 community conversation.
The feedback below is drawn from frequently expressed statements, grouped by theme under the
associated recommendation header. They are not consensus statements.
Community Input: Themes Cutting Across All Recommendations
Communicate Goals and Values: There was a strong desire that the City’s goals and values be
clearly articulated in any type of contract or arrangement for police services. The City must achieve
clarity on those goals and values. Previous Task Force and community meetings have led to the
draft statements of community values circulated at the meeting.
Community Responsibility: There is support for the community to continue to be involved and a
sense that solutions are the responsibility of the entire community. There should also be structured
review and space for continued public feedback on the values and next steps. Numerous comments
addressed the ideas that “the police” and “the community” is a false dichotomy and that police
should be a part of our community and vice versa.
Measurable and Actionable: Across all of the recommendations there was strong support for
ensuring recommendations and expectations are measurable and actionable. There were some
concerns raised that some recommendations are not measureable and specific enough.
Ownership: Support for stronger ownership of the police force was expressed relating to all of the
recommendations - stronger ownership will be needed in order to set priorities for training hiring,
policing activities, etc. The idea of having designated Falcon Heights officers was expressed
frequently.
Positive Reactions: Many community members felt positively about the recommendations as a
whole and felt that this was a good start. People were thankful of the work that had been put in and
said it was nice to see the alignment of values and the recommendations.
Resources and Funding: Comments and concerns were raised about financial resources and
revenue streams for policing and the resources needed to support the policing.
2684 of 206
Falcon Heights Community Conversation 3: April 3, 2017
Analysis of Key Themes
Priorities for Policing Activity
TASK FORCE’S ORIGINAL DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS1
The highest priorities for policing activity are:
•Response. Responding to violent crimes and 911 calls.
•Community policing. Officers need to get out of their cars to engage regularly with people.
•Cultural competence and community engagement: Training for cultural competency
must be linked with positive cultural and community engagement to build relationships.
•In traffic policing, dangerous moving violations. Conversely, policing for minor traffic
violations are very low priority, and the policy for these should be to issue a warning.
Are there other areas or priorities to consider?
COMMUNITY FEEDBACK ON THESE DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS
Focus of Police Actions: There was support among groups that police should focus on
critically important responses including 911 calls and emergency calls with less focus on or
changes to traffic stops and equipment failure issues. Comments included seeing a stop to
racial profiling stops and no more stops for “driving while black,” no more shootings, and
ensuring safety and respect for all.
Support of Community Policing: There was support among groups that seeing police get
out of their cars and interacting with residents and having officers designated to Falcon
Heights so people can know and build relationships with officers is important. Clarification
was requested for what officers getting out of their cars would look like and mean in
practice.
Police Participation and Acknowledgement: Including police in the dialogue on
establishing priorities for policing activities was raised to ensure the final recommendations
are realistic and include the ideas of the police. There was a desire to have the police
acknowledge that inequity exists in policing and that the police could improve. There was a
desire for mutual learning.
Culture and Values
TASK FORCE’S ORIGINAL DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS
Community values. Officers will uphold and advance our community values.
1 The Task Force members supported with a high degree of unity all of the draft recommendations
circulated at the community conversation except where a yellow star indicates that we were not in
agreement and/or are seeking more information. Stars indicate areas where we especially invited
additional input.
2785 of 206
Falcon Heights Community Conversation 3: April 3, 2017
Analysis of Key Themes
Equity. All residents and guests of the city are to be treated fairly and equally under the law, across
racial and ethnic groups, generations, places of origin, socioeconomic status, religion, gender
identity, sexual orientation, etc.
Motivations. Revenue generation should never be a factor in law enforcement.
COMMUNITY FEEDBACK ON THESE DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS
Comments on Values: There was support for ensuring the values can be measured and
implemented. Concern raised by groups about the treatment of people of color and women
and that life needs to be valued above all.
Equity: Equity was expressed as important but a group would like to see justice added to
the statement. Desire was expressed for a stronger equity statement.
Healing: A need for a healing process was expressed.
Data and Transparency
TASK FORCE’S ORIGINAL DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS
Policing data collection: The police department will collect comprehensive data on all police
interactions and crime, to include: the impetus for the interactions (e.g., response to call for service),
the nature of the interaction (e.g., vehicle and pedestrian stops, searches, citations, arrests); location;
and any demographic information that the subjects offer.
Public Feedback: The City of Falcon Heights will gather public feedback on policing through at
least two mechanisms. Annually, the city will conduct a survey of households to solicit feedback on
policing. In addition, in every interaction, police officers will give the person with whom they are
interacting a card that identifies the officer by name and provides a phone number and website to
submit complaints, concerns, or questions about the policing interaction.
Reports and review: Reports on the data collected by the police department will be made monthly
to the City Council and published on the City’s website in as much detail as possible without
violating privacy. These reports and synthesis of any public feedback collected will be reviewed by
the Council, Police Chief, and Community Engagement Commission at least quarterly to identify
and respond to concerning patterns regarding crime and public safety and/or biases and disparities
in enforcement.
Serious incidents: When serious incidents occur, including use of deadly force, or incidence of
possible police misconduct, the police department and City of Falcon Heights will communicate
promptly, openly, and decisively, in a manner appropriate to the incident.
COMMUNITY FEEDBACK ON THESE DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS
Data Collection: Overwhelming support around the importance of data collection and
support for the recommendations on data collection. Data collection should include race and
demographic information on officers and civilians. Strong request that there be clarity
2886 of 206
Falcon Heights Community Conversation 3: April 3, 2017
Analysis of Key Themes
around who collects, analyzes, and reports on the data so that the community can trust that
information is unbiased.
Transparency and Accountability: There is consensus that transparency and
accountability is important. Comments included the need for space and process for
community input and grievances to be easily heard and concern about whether there is a way
for residents’ concerns to be heard.
Community Relationships
TASK FORCE’S ORIGINAL DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS
Presence. We want to know our officers and have them know and be attached to our community.
Falcon Heights should have law enforcement officers who work specifically and routinely in Falcon
Heights and who get to know our community.
Community engagement. From initial training through their ongoing work, their duties will
include participating in community-led trainings on interactions (before officers begin service in
Falcon Heights), community-police mutual listening sessions, and other community events. The
purpose is to build relationships and to be aware of and appreciate the diversity of our community.
Hiring and workforce. The police department will continually strive to constitute a workforce that
represents the broad diversity of the community that interacts with the police. For example, the
department could have a hiring priority for candidates who speak one of the top 5 non-English
languages spoken in the Roseville school district, or for candidates with demonstrated experience
with community service organizations or community engagement skills, as well as their formal
prior training and policing experience.
COMMUNITY FEEDBACK ON THESE DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS
Presence and Community Connection: There was very strong support of the
recommendations of having Falcon Heights officers and having a relationship between the
community and officers. Concern was raised that the recommendation does not do enough
to address relationships with people who drive through Falcon Heights. There was a
suggestion to make the profiles of officers’ available online/social media so people can
know their backgrounds and be more comfortable with those protecting them.
Hiring and Workforce: There was support for the focus on hiring and ensuring that
officers are diverse and/or culturally competent. Comments also centered on the need
education and training of the officers.
2987 of 206
Falcon Heights Community Conversation 3: April 3, 2017
Analysis of Key Themes
Training and Capacity
TASK FORCE’S ORIGINAL DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS
Training: Officers will have regular training to build their capacity for de-escalation of themselves
and others, for interacting effectively and respectfully with diverse persons in our community, for
recognizing and preventing bias (including implicit bias), and for minimizing the use of lethal
weapons. Conversely, training emphasizing a “warrior” or similar mindset should not be permitted.
Mental health. A social worker or trained mental health professional will be on call at all times to
provide on-site support for de-escalation and assistance to or with persons with mental illness.
COMMUNITY FEEDBACK ON THESE DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS
Training: Overwhelming support training specifically de-escalation and a need to have
experts in the field determining and leading training.
Mental Health: Groups expressed support for the focus on mental health training and social
worker component. One group was split on roles of police and social workers where some
wanted police officers who did not act as social workers and others in the group wanting
officers to have social work-like training.
Oversight
TASK FORCE’S ORIGINAL DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS
Oversight. Falcon Heights needs to have significant authority over our law enforcement officers
and police department. The current situation of a brief annual report and review of an externally
contracted agency does not provide sufficient oversight of a police department and its officers. The
City needs to be able to respond in a timely and effective fashion if there is a serious (acute or
persistent) concern, for example about police misconduct or a pattern of bias. If policing will be
provided by an externally contracted agency, the city should have provisions for regular review and
an out clause and/or penalty for non-compliance.
Civilian oversight: An entity independent of the police department will serve as a channel for
community members to give feedback on police conduct. The existing Community Engagement
Commission or an ombudsperson could accept and investigate complaints. This would require
resources to conduct investigations and the buy-in of the police department. The Task invites
community input about the idea and/or the structure of civilian oversight.
3088 of 206
Falcon Heights Community Conversation 3: April 3, 2017
Analysis of Key Themes
COMMUNITY FEEDBACK ON THESE DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS2
Support for Civilian Oversight: There was general support for civilian oversight but lack
of consensus on the form it should take.
Related Suggestions: Some ideas that were expressed include: A stand-alone review
committee; a panel that meets on an on-going basis; in addition to residents include visitors
to the community and membership should be diverse; ombudsperson role would need clear
definition.
Ownership
TASK FORCE’S ORIGINAL DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS
Ultimately the City Council has authority and responsibility for keeping a contract with SAPD or
moving to some other arrangement. Here are some of the major options being discussed in the
community. They offer varying levels of direct control by Falcon Heights over the police
department. All of these options would take time to implement, some probably more than others.
•Renegotiate with SAPD to implement changes that reflect community values and improve
service and control.
•Issue a new Request for Proposals to contract a police department. The RFP would
reflect community values and be a transparent foundation for negotiating the policing
contract. One negotiable item would be having a Falcon Heights representative on the hiring
panel for hiring officers serving our city.
•Create a new Joint Powers Authority: Falcon Heights could join with other small cities to
create a police force over which Falcon Heights and others would have joint ownership and
oversight. Saint Anthony and/or other cities might be a partner in a JPA.
The Task Force does not have a strong, unified opinion on this topic, and invites community input
to inform our next steps:
1.How important is it to enhance the City’s ownership of the police department?
2.Which options you prefer? Why?
3.If there are tradeoffs between acting quickly and accomplishing more systemic change, do
you have an opinion about how to balance those tensions?
COMMUNITY FEEDBACK ON THESE DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS
Importance of Ownership and Contract Language: There was consensus among groups that
there is a need for greater ownership and control. Many comments signaled that the desire for
2 Note from Task Force co-facilitators: Please keep in mind that additional input is being gathered
beyond the community input from this conversation. The Task Force heard many comments about
civilian oversight from the participants in the March 30 police specialists panel, and will have an
additional resource person attend the April 11 Task Force meeting.
3189 of 206
Falcon Heights Community Conversation 3: April 3, 2017
Analysis of Key Themes
ownership and ensuring our values were met was more important than the structure.
Additionally, many community members stressed the importance of the contract language and
detailed goals and values that should be included.
•Issue a new Request for Proposals to contract a police department. This option had
the most and substantially more support from community members than any other
ownership option presented in the draft recommendations. Comments expressed that
this option allowed for our values and priorities to best met. Questions were raised
about the number of responses the city would receive and what would happen if SAPD
was the only bidder.
Renegotiating a contract with SAPD or creating a joint powers authority were roughly equally
supported by participants. There was not strong support for a Falcon Heights PD.
•Renegotiate Contract with SAPD: Support was expressed from numerous community
members that the focus should be to renegotiate the current contract. Some community
members would like to see the community values expressed in the contract and if the
renegotiation does not work then open up a RFP. A very small number of participants
were completely opposed to renegotiating with SADP.
•Create a new Joint Powers Authority: There is split support for this option of
ownership. There was some support among community members for exploring this
option, but others felt that this was an unrealistic option as it is expensive, challenging,
and takes time.
Tradeoffs between acting quickly vs. systematic change: Community members are split on
this tradeoff. Some community members expressed a need for action to be taken now. There
were also frustration and anger over the question because the city has already not taken quick
action in the past nine months. Other community members expressed support for taking time to
make systematic changes and that the task force should take its time and not make hasty or knee
jerk reactions.
The most support was expressed for a combination of both short and long term actions and
that there cannot be one over the other.
•Actions that were expressed as options for the short term include: change in traffic stop
procedures; warnings vs. tickets; data collection; hear and valuing people.
•Actions that were expressed as options for the long term include: cultural change in
police force; long term continuous improvement.
Other Community Input (not directly tied to recommendations)
Keep the Conversations Going: Some community members expressed support for continuing
these conversations and ensuring conversation doesn’t end with this process. There is a sentiment
that there is still a long way to go and that hard conversations need to be continued.
32
90 of 206
Falcon Heights Community Conversation 3: April 3, 2017
Analysis of Key Themes
Anger and Frustration: Community members shared their stories of harassment and mistreatment,
and expressed anger and frustration. There is anger and frustration around the lack of change and
action.
Other Models/Ideas Proposed: Community members shared ideas for other recommendations or
models to look to. Ideas include: bold action and real innovations including using the restorative
justice process on all cases including police conduct review; Columbia Heights, MN – inviting
everyone to be a part of the community and having officers visiting mosques and other things in the
community; Camden, NJ – looking at their de-escalation techniques; considering the Department of
Justice report and best practices; thinking about kids and arrest rates for kids; adding a statement to
the values that includes “do no harm” policing.
3391 of 206
Collated by: Elizabeth Dressel Master of Urban and Regional Planning student at University of Minnesota, Humphrey School of Public
Affairs
Background
On May 1, 2017, 56 people attended the fourth in a series of five community conversations on inclusion and policing. This meeting centered on discussions of transformational change. Information gathered will
inform the final inclusion recommendations that the Falcon Heights Task Force on Inclusion and Policing will make to the Falcon Heights City Council at the end of May.
These are frequently expressed statements, grouped by theme. They are not consensus statements.
First Circle: Participants shared what they think it would take, beyond policing, for truly transformational change to take place in Falcon Heights and to genuinely fulfill community values.
•Acknowledge Racism: People expressed the need to acknowledge racism and understand whiteprivilege. Comments ranged from addressing racism within systems to a personal levelunderstanding of bias and privilege. Important for white people to understand their implicit biasand be aware of the experiences of others. People who have experienced pain and trauma need tobe heard and supported.
•Be Inclusive and Intentional: This work needs to be inclusive and respectful of all. It isimportant to be intentional to make change, to be aware, and talk with people who are differentfrom you. The values may change when you have conversations with people outside of your
circle.
•Events to Bring People Together: A variety of events were suggested for building community
and to better understand diversity.o Some ideas included: block parties; Night to Unite; events with food such as picnic inthe park or a day of celebration highlighting ethnic foods; movie nights; book clubs;
using the schools to engage youth and parents; documentaries of local citizens for cableTV; storytelling sessions.
•Personal Commitment: Many expressed a personal commitment to stay engaged, show up toevents, and continue to have conversations at neighborhood or one to one level. Personalexperiences telling personal stories can bring people together. A change in the community starts
at the individual level.
•Sustain the Work in the Future: A desire to see this work continue beyond the Task Force andsee it sustained and connections within the community strengthened. Many would like to continuehaving courageous community based conversations. There is a sense that this needs continue tofeel urgent and community members need to stay engaged. It was also acknowledged that this
work cannot be solved easily or immediately and must be in it for the long-haul.
•Transparency and Accountability from the City: There should be transparency from the cityso people can hold institutions accountable. Comments shared to put pressure on the city counciland mayor to make changes and address what has been discussed at the community meetings.People expressed a desire to see diverse perspectives in positions of power.
34
Falcon Heights Community Conversation 4: May 1, 2017
PRELIMINARY Analysis of Key Themes
92 of 206
Second Circle: Participants shared ideas for what they think it will take to get more residents involved in the process of engaging in dialogue to explore values and how to improve the city.
•Engage with Youth: Start engaging youth and focusing on events and conversations at schools.Starting with youth can provide a path to engage parents.
•Personalize Invitations: The method of how people are invited to events has an impact on
whether or not they attend. People suggested personal invitations, knocking on people’s doors,and having a phone tree to alert people of meetings and events as a way to increase the number ofpeople who attend.
•Opportunities to Learn and Hear Others’ Perspectives: In order to understand the need forparticipating, people need more opportunities to realize that there are a variety of experiences and
perspectives in our community. Provide opportunities to hear different perspectives and to learndifferent cultures from community members. Continue to have conversations with neighborsabout race and inequity. Ensure there is a range of housing options in the community tostrengthen the diversity within neighborhoods.
•Ownership of the Problem: People raised questions about how to make everyone feel like they
have a stake in this problem. It is important to get everyone to understand their stake in thesituation. White people need to speak up and take action when they see injustices occurring andstand up for people of color.
•Results Orientated: To keep people engaged, there needs to be tangible and measurable resultsto show community members that progress is being made. This includes putting energy into
actions that can happen in the short term to show visible progress. Changing the dynamic ofinteraction and engagement between the police and community is important to getting residentsinvolved.
•Variety and Accessibility of Events: Different types of events (intimate conversations, socialgatherings, speakers, etc.), with different focuses (dialogue, decision making, education), with
different hosts (city, commission, community) will appeal to different people. Look at makingthe conversations and events easier to access by providing childcare and food, holding them atdifferent times of day, going to people versus having them come to you.
Third Circle: Participants shared specific steps or actions they plan to take to be a champion of the community values.
•Personal Actions and Conversations with Neighbors: People expressed a personalcommitment to talk with neighbors and strangers and seek out diverse perspectives.
•Plan and Participate in Events: People made commitments to host events including blockparties, reconciliation and healing events, and to attend community sponsored events.
•Uncover Racial Covenants in Falcon Heights: People are looking into the racial covenantdeeds and redlining practices that relate to properties in Falcon Heights.
•Write: People committed to write op-eds for local papers, letters to officials, and blog aboutevents and activities.
•Speak Up Against Racism: People are committed to speaking up against hateful and racistcomments and actions they witness.
3593 of 206
•Advocate and Engage with City Council and Commissions: People committed to beinginvolved in local politics through showing up to council meetings and commission meetings andevents. People also plan to support and encourage people to run for local office.
•Engage with Youth and Schools: People committed to engaging with schools and youth to be apart of the change process and build community.
Specific Commitments
Personal Actions and Conversations with Neighbors
•Have honest conversations even when they're hard. (Probably especially when they're hard.)
•Try to treat anyone I meet as if they might be family
•Always treat others as I want them to treat me
•Talk with a stranger
•Be intentional - seek diverse perspectives
•Seek out people with different perspectives from mine and listen
•Continue to inform myself and become more involved
•To share a value - step forward at opportunities to interact/participate with others who represent
diverse characteristics - risk breaking the silence or differences, thereby expanding
appreciation/acceptance on both sides.
•Continue to connect with others learn, engage, push for change
•Build my network with local activism groups focusing on equity and racial justice
•Invite people to my home to begin conversations
•Talk 1:1 with neighbors/friends about issues, instead of waiting for a "meeting" where people
hold back their opinions.
•Continue to commit to equity and inclusion in daily life.
•Involve a friend
•Encourage others to learn about their neighbors’ experience.
•Smile, sit by someone new, more out of comfort zone.
•Learn to confront more.
•Personal accountability
•Have more brave conversations when interacting with others that don't see their privilege or bias.
•Learn more about these issues so I can further these discussions in St. Cloud.
•Continue to take part in community conversations and forums that provide a venue for truth
•Continuing research on models for successful community change. I am more engaged and
grateful for that. More information is needed.
•Listen carefully to people whose views make me uncomfortable and be willing to be transformed
•co-mingling with "others"
•Invite my neighbors to dinner
•I will discuss these values with 20 neighbors and ask how they will help promote them
•I plan new conversations with neighbors about these values - white and people of color
•To listen and actively participate in the conversation
•I will continue to work with "We Can Do Better" on a variety of activities
•Remain Engaged in the Community
•I value/believe in the usefulness of one to one conversations especially when difficult. I lie in
wait for these opportunities.
•Tell my neighbors what is going on in this discussion group - spread the word
3694 of 206
•Try to list some feedback information that would help people move to more equity and justice -
on of the community values
•Engage with individuals/groups about our own biases or experiences as object of bias
•Talk to my neighbors
•Connect with neighbors
•Talk in depth with ten neighbors
•Talk to my neighbors at least two people in the building where I live
•Talk to my employer and coworkers re: living wage/eliminating tipping. Theme: eliminating
wage discrimination that is largely racialized with increasing?
•Invite Randy (neighbor) to neighborhood gathering
•I will host a neighborhood discussion on this topic
•Continuing research on models for successful community change. I am more engaged and
grateful for that. More information is needed.
•I can't think of anything I could do that I'm not already doing! I need more time.
•I'm stumped. I've been working at these issues for decades.
•Unbusy myself so I can participate more in these activities
•Share a positive example of a good experience that is happening in Falcon Heights.
•Falcon Heights is an island community. People drive through.
•commit to social justice and equity work
•Engage with individuals and groups on our own bias
•"I'm already doing what I can to call people out. We need to try to get more people engaged."
•Hit a wall… Not sure how to show up in community. Listen to others whose views make me
uncomfortable and be transformed by views.
•Talk to everyone that I see… Things won't change until people come to things and share.
•Society of storytellers and story listeners
•We need to learn to love one another, no matter the color, creed, etc.
•Long term… Not an instant switch, solution
•Invite neighbors into home for hard conversations, help end complacency
•Ask neighbors to help promote Community Values
•Invite City Council Members to dinner
•Talk 1:1 with neighbors/friends about issues, instead of waiting for a “meeting” where people
hold back their opinions
•Talk to a stranger
Plan and Participate in Events
•To collaborate (work together) with others to plan the California Block Party (national night out)with the people at it so happen time (room relationships developed beforehand) -food- engagingwith others
•Invite families at Larpenteur and Snelling to CA Avenue block party in August
•Front Yard Patio Party
•Since my neighborhood is pretty close - everyone knows each other- I think it would be importantto encourage my neighbors to participate in activities that already exist in Falcon Heights
•Look for gathering places and plan events where people can come together. Events around foodwould be good.
•Find the movie "Do not resist" and share it
•Participate in city activities (volunteering)
•Participate in community engagement activities and community engagement commission
37
95 of 206
•Promote involvement of libraries
•Organize training or conversations at my church to encourage cultural competence and awarenessof systematic racism
•Implement events for reconciliation and healing
•Continue to advocate for restorative justice
•Show up to local government events. Vulnerability… Not forget that I am white, have biases, be
open, can help invite people into conversation, might be less afraid to engage.
•Offer by member in the group who is professionally trained to help in de-escalation training forpolice. Questions arose on cost, making these mandatory, and other barriers to training.
•Invite people from other backgrounds and cultures to local block parties
Uncover Racial Covenants in Falcon Heights
•Participate in the history of racial covenants and redlining project
•Working to gather info on early history of Falcon Heights housing patterns, racial covenants,redlining
•Encourage city to make a map of the areas of diversity in the city - so we can be more welcomingand inclusive
•Learn more about the racial covenants and redlining
Write
•Write about events, activities etc. blog, letters to officials, notices of meetings etc. re: value ofjustice
•Write op-eds for local papers to raise awareness and direct action
•Write and communicate about things done, things going on. Government task force law-enforcement and community engagement. Intend to keep writing.
Speak Up Against Racism
•Speaking out against hateful speech
•Call out hateful speak when I hear it
•Continue to speak out against any form of racism
•Be more observant of interactions that suggest that people of color are treated less respectfully orsafely than white folks
•Show up - with my body, mind, voice, heart, spirit. Stand on side of oppressed.
•Speak up when/if I observe someone not being treated fairly
•Communicate with others the progress I have seen in this area
•Use my voice and share my own personal expertise and opinion
•Actively praise people who have become more inclusive in their lives
•"I didn't create it or was a part of it. You step up. I've always been there. Allowing selves to bevulnerable.
•Continue conversations in organic settings and where people already are - churches and schools.Taking ownership and responsibilities as allies and leaders"
•Need for bias awareness
•Seek training on active bystander intervention/protection
•To never give up
•To never give up. We all have great resiliency, we forget that we have grit, need to be reminded. Iwill never give up.
•Stick up when someone is treated unfairly
•Call out my fellow white residents on their bias
3896 of 206
•Those who are deeply racist are cowards and bullies and will back-pedal quickly if they arechallenged
•Continue to be observant, when you see a person of color being mistreated, step in and call it out
•Challenge self and neighbors on racism
•support and praise other people doing this work
Advocate and Engage with City Council and Commissions
•Go to Falcon Heights community meetings.
•Follow-up on task force recommendations
•I will check out the final taskforce recommendations and do what I can to see that the council
adopts those recommendations
•Advocate for measurable actions/outcomes within the task force recommendations
•Continue to participate in Falcon Heights political structure
•Continued involvement with city-policing
•Continued involvement
•Continue participating with Falcon Heights We Can Do Better and following city council as itmoves forward with new policing. Community interaction yields actions.
•Form and content exhibition immigrant status
•Bring idea of intra-city meal gatherings to council committee
•Understand Minneapolis Police Structure
•I will do the same with every city council candidate at election time
•Act at a Minneapolis (my city) level and state level to support policing reform, economic justice,
focus on racial inequality. Tell the story of my experience in Falcon Heights as a positiveexample of community engagement
•Push City Council and Mayor to ensure that all police/public encounters and their outcomes (e.g.
traffic ticket vs. warning) are recorded in a permanent public data base (computerized)
•Talk to a council member
•Visit SAPD
•Lobby city council for more transparent and inclusive process in recruiting/appointment
commission members
•Elect some new leaders
•To city council meetings. Serve on Community Engagement Commission.
•Talk up at council meetings
•Invite progressive candidates to apply or run for political office, or serve on local government
commissions
•Actively participate in city government
•Solicit minority input to the facts
•Go to meetings of my local governing bodies to voice concerns and demand changes
•Lobby for more inclusive, welcoming, fun council meetings
•Keep the pressure on political leadership
•Participate in civic activities more often
•Ask council about affordable housing.
•Advocate for housing equity
•Trust, transparency, accountability. Provide data. Look for improvement.
•Follow city council evolution–there has been some movement
•Support individuals to run for office
3997 of 206
•Keep pressure on our politically elected leadership. Racism wins if we lose attention on these
issues and don't reform.
•Take a more active role in letting leaders know about problems we see and experience
•Maybe we should form another community Task Force to stay engaged with a new set of peoplewho were not previously engaged.
•Continued involvement behind the scenes of police-community relations.
•Have been involved in many city commissions through the years and will continue to be involved
•Participate in community engagement events. Use the community engagement events for more
than they are used for now...use it as a vehicle for community to address community concerns.
•Read Task Force recommendations and ensure that those changes are adopted. Especially civilian
review board. Follow-up on Task Force recommendations, hold self and city accountable.
•Stay involved in City Council campaigns
•Task Force and residents should follow-up with Michelle Gross of Communities Untied Against
Police Brutality. Ms. Gross has data on police brutality and information on insuring police.
•Elect some new leaders
•Push the city council to record not only police encounters but outcomes
Engage with Youth and Schools
•Call my son's school and ask them what efforts have they taken or plan to take to become change
agents in keeping the community inclusively safe.
•Raise my daughter to be aware of systematic racism and of her privilege. Teach her to stand up
for others
•Ask for more opportunities for parents from diverse backgrounds who attend the same school to
develop more "community"
•Safety: Work with schools and young people to educate them on how to interact with law
enforcement to stay alive.
•I would like to take St. Anthony High Schools "Dare to be real" conversation content and model
to my community (i.e. State Fair)
4098 of 206
Falcon Heights Community Conversation 5: June 19, 2017
Analysis of Key Themes
Collated by: Elizabeth Dressel, Master of Urban and Regional Planning student at University of
Minnesota, Humphrey School of Public Affairs
Background
On June 19, 2017, nearly 100 people attended the community conversations on inclusion and policing. A
total of 184 unduplicated individuals, plus dozens of volunteer facilitators, attended at least one of the five
conversations. This final meeting centered on processing the events of the past year and work that has
been accomplished thus far. Time was also spent discussing next steps for action and commitment for
members of the community. The final inclusion recommendations and policing recommendations as
adopted by the Falcon Heights City Council on May 24 and June 14, posted on the City’s webpage, were
shared with participants.
These are frequently expressed statements, grouped by theme. They are not consensus statements.
Reflections (first circle): Participants reflected on their feelings and personal journey given the events of
the last year: the death of Philando Castile; the response including the Task Force and community
conversations, and the acquittal of Officer Yanez.
Commitment to moving forward and making changes. Participants expressed their
commitment to moving forward, connecting with others in the community, and becoming a part
of the solution. There is a desire to not lose the urgency of this work.
Feelings of pain, sadness, anger, frustration, and loss of trust. Participants shared a range of
personal emotions. Some people expressed shock over the verdict, while others were not
surprised. Many people are struggling and processing the emotions of the past year. Others did
express feelings of hope and gratitude from the community conversation process.
Reflections on racism and white privilege. Participants shared personal experiences as a person
of color and the need for white people to address privilege and the racial disparities that exist.
Many shared that racism is being shoved under the rug or denied and that there is a need to bring
it to the forefront of discussion and the need for white people to take this on.
Reactions to officer Yanez’s actions and police accountability. Participants are concerned
with the language that the officer had no choice and feel that prejudice feeds unwarranted fears.
There is a desire for accountability for his actions and future accountability for police officers.
Systematic concerns within the justice system. Participants shared a range of feelings and
conflicts about the legal process. People expressed that there are a national and systematic
inequities that need to be addressed across the country.
Personal Next Steps (second circle): Participants shared their next steps, given the events of the past
year.
Address racism, bias, and discrimination. People asserted their commitment to work on
speaking up against racism, bias, and discrimination within the community. Some made a
personal commitment to address internal bias and continue to talk about race.
Advocate for changes in laws and policies. Some participants plan to become more politically
active and working to change laws related to policing and officer training.
Continue to connect with others through conversations. Some participants expressed an
interest in continuing conversations across various ideologies to build relationships and a stronger
community.
4199 of 206
Falcon Heights Community Conversation 5: June 19, 2017
Analysis of Key Themes
Engage with the community in personal and professional roles. Some participants shared
commitments to get involved within the community and their personal networks to be a part of
the solution. Some specific commitments shared were: hosting a block party; being involved in
the church; connecting with community outreach groups.
Engage youth. There is concern for children; people want to work more with youth.
Focus on accountability from the city and implementation of the Task Force
recommendations. Participants plan to pay attention and work to ensure these recommendations
are implemented and enforced by the City Council.
Mourn, heal, and process emotions. People want to take time to mourn, process emotions, and
heal as individuals. Some expressed a desire to not forget and to create a monument to facilitate
remembering, mourning, and healing.
Thematic Resource / Action Circles: Based on the commitments shared in the fourth community
conversation, this meeting concluded with five circles focused on specific topics for follow-up action.
Invited resource people assisted the discussion. Participants joined the topic area they were most
interested in to discuss actions to move forward on.
City Involvement and Implementation Committee. This group discussed the need for
resources and staff time to be invested to ensure implementation of the recommendations. Ideas
were shared to get feedback from people on costs for implementation and to lay out the financing
options visually to allow people to understand the costs and tradeoffs of different actions.
Courageous Conversations: Talking about race and privilege. This group shared ideas on
having conversations on race and learning how to listen and learn with openness, vulnerability,
and non-judgement.
Educational Programming. The following specific ideas were shared:
o Host a public showings of documentary films on bias and racism at a library or other
suitable location, with a community discussion following.
o Engage youth through positive interactions and trips with police officers to humanize
each other and remove fear. Match young and old, interactive multi-generational
activities.
o Record community member stories and reactions and post videos on city website.
Engaging Youth. This group talked about ways to listen and engage young people. Some of the
ideas they discussed include:
o Have circle conversations for kids to discuss racism.
o Promote ethnic studies and diversity curriculum within the schools.
o Promote learning about racial equity across ages and with parents. St. Paul and Roseville
schools have a model.
o Coordinate with other programs and initiatives in the Twin Cities.
History Project. This group reflected that history is not only in the past and that actions, such as
redlining, effect the current reality. The group shared ideas for the next steps that include:
o Encourage history in art, such as a competition that involves schools and youth or a play.
o Do projects mixing policy and history, for example with a theme, “Why are we so
white?”
o Document the popup peace gardens and other things that have been put together since
Philando Castile’s death.
o Make an educational presentation or website.
o Use Ramsey County Historical Society as a resource and venue.
42100 of 206
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Families, Fields and Fair __________________________
The City That Soars!
Item Sanctuary Ordinance
Description
The City has received a request from Council Member Wehyee for the Council to
consider drafting and adopting a “Sanctuary” Ordinance for the City of Falcon
Heights.
Budget Impact N/A
Attachment(s) • Minneapolis “Sanctuary” Ordinance
Action(s)
Requested
Staff is looking for direction on how to proceed.
Meeting Date July 1, 2020
Agenda Item Policy D5
Attachment See Below
Submitted By Sack Thongvanh, City Administrator
101 of 206
BLANK PAGE
102 of 206
Minneapolis “Sanctuary” Ordinance:
x CHAPTER 19. - EMPLOYEE AUTHORITY IN IMMIGRATION MATTERS
x 19.10. - Purpose and policy statement.
This chapter clarifies the communication and enforcement relationship between the city and the United States
Department of Homeland Security and other federal agencies with respect to the enforcement of civil immigration
laws. The city works cooperatively with the Homeland Security, as it does with all state and federal agencies, but
the city does not operate its programs for the purpose of enforcing federal immigration laws. The Homeland
Security has the legal authority to enforce immigration laws in the United States, in Minnesota and in the city. This
chapter ordinance shall be the only regulation within the city on this subject matter, and it shall supersede all
conflicting policies, ordinances, rules, procedures and practices. (2003-Or-092, § 1, 7-11-03)
x 19.20. - General city services.
(a) To the extent permitted by law, in determining eligibility for, and providing general city services, city
employees shall be governed by the following requirements:
(1)
City employees are to carry out their regular duties for the purpose of administering general city
services and programs. Employees may complete I-9 forms, may question a person regarding the I-9
form and documents supporting the I-9 form, and may allow Homeland Security to audit the I-9 forms
as allowed by law. Employees shall comply with any properly issued subpoena for the production of
documents or witnesses, even if related to immigration issues or issues of the Homeland Security.
(2)
City employees shall follow general city, state and federal guidelines to assess eligibility for services.
City employees shall only solicit immigration information or inquire about immigration status when
specifically required to do so by law or program guidelines as a condition of eligibility for the service
sought. City employees may require evidence of a person's identity and may ask to see a person's
personal identifying documents only when specifically authorized and required to do so by the
employee's work duties. City employees shall not discriminate against any current or potential service
users on the basis of any of the protected categories listed in the city's civil rights ordinance (139.40),
or on the basis of immigration status.
(3)
Other than complying with lawful subpoenas, city employees and representatives shall not use city
resources or personnel solely for the purpose of detecting or apprehending persons whose only
violation of law is or may be being undocumented, being out of status, or illegally residing in the United
States (collectively "undocumented").
(4)
Where presentation of a Minnesota driver's license is customarily accepted as adequate evidence of
identity, presentation of a photo identity document issued by the person's nation of origin, such as a
driver's license, passport, or matricula consular (consulate-issued document) shall be accepted and
shall not subject the person to a higher level of scrutiny or different treatment than if the person had
provided a Minnesota driver's license. This paragraph does not apply to I-9 forms.
(b)
General city services defined. General city services shall mean all city services excepting those services
specifically listed as public safety services in section 19.30.
(c)
City attorney's office - civil division employees may investigate and inquire about immigration status when
relevant to potential or actual litigation or an administrative proceeding. (2003-Or-092, § 1, 7-11-03)
x 19.30. - Public safety services.
103 of 206
(a) To the extent permitted by law, in providing public safety services, employees of the police and fire
departments, and the city attorney's office - criminal division, (collectively, public safety officials), shall be
governed by the following requirements:
(1)
Public safety officials shall not undertake any law enforcement action for the purpose of detecting the
presence of undocumented persons, or to verify immigration status, including but not limited to
questioning any person or persons about their immigration status.
(2)
City attorney's office - criminal division employees shall be permitted to:
a.
Inform persons of the possible immigration consequences of a guilty plea.
b.
Question and conduct cross-examination of a witness or defendant regarding immigration status.
c.
Inquire about immigration status for purposes of bail or conditional release.
d.
Investigate and inquire about immigration status when relevant to the potential or actual
prosecution of the case or when immigration status is an element of the crime.
e.
Take immigration status and collateral effects of possible deportation into consideration during
discussions held for the purpose of case resolution.
(3)
Public safety officials shall not question, arrest or detain any person for violations of federal civil
immigration laws except when immigration status is an element of the crime or when enforcing 8 U.S.C.
1324(c).
(4)
Nothing in this chapter shall prohibit public safety personnel from assisting federal law enforcement
officers in the investigation of criminal activity involving individuals present in the United States who
may also be in violation of federal civil immigration laws.
(b)
All such use of city public safety personnel under 19.30(a)(3) and (a)(4) shall be documented, including any
applicable Department of Homeland Security mission statement and operational guidelines, the reason for
the dispatch of personnel, the name of the homeland security agent in charge, and the name of the officer
authorizing the use of city personnel. (2003-Or-092, § 1, 7-11-03)
x 19.40 - Complaints and discipline.
Complaints of a violation of this chapter shall be shall be subject to disciplinary action under the appropriate union
contract, civil service commission rules, or department work rules. It shall not be a violation of this chapter to
require the completion of I-9 forms or to inquire into or disclose the immigration status of the complainant or
witnesses if necessary as part of the investigation of a complaint of a violation of this chapter, or if deemed
necessary by the appointing authority in order to administer discipline for such violations. (2003-Or-092, § 1, 7-11-
03)
x 19.50. - Subpoena.
Nothing in this chapter prohibits city employees from responding to a properly issued subpoena. (2003-Or-092, §
1, 7-11-03)
104 of 206
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Families, Fields and Fair __________________________
The City That Soars!
Item Noise Control Ordinance
Description
Many communities have stipulations around noise control, including Falcon
Heights. However, our noise ordinance details are somewhat thin compared to
other cities and do not cover items that staff receive complaints about. The most
noted section of City Code dealing with noise pertains to refuse haulers and their
approved hours in residential areas. Other existing regulations on noise are in the
first attachment (dogs, drive-thru, and home occupations to note a few).
Staff receive three or four complaints about noise each year, usually surrounding
construction projects. When complaints are received, staff will reach out to the
owner or contractor and request that they do their work during the refuse hauler
hours (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on weekdays and 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. on weekends).
While this request is usually honored, there is little enforcement if projects continue
outside this window. In addition to construction hours, other communities regulate
noise as it pertains to power tools, vehicles, loudspeakers and horns, and schools.
There is a section in the public nuisance area of City Code that specifies noise. Upon
consultation with the City Attorney, it was felt that this section is too vague and
nearly unenforceable and should be changed or deleted.
Section 22-47 – Public place defined; nuisances
(e) Unnecessary noise. No person, in any public or private place, shall make, or assist
in making, by any manner or means, any loud, unpleasant or raucous noise
disturbing to others, unless the same is reasonably necessary to the preservation of
life, health, safety or property.
Budget Impact N/A
Attachment(s) • Current Falcon Heights Code language pertaining to noise
• Sample Noise Ordinances from surrounding communities
Action(s)
Requested
Staff request discussion and direction on possible additions or changes to the City
Code as it relates to noise.
Meeting Date July 1, 2020
Agenda Item Policy D6
Attachment See Below
Submitted By Justin Markon, Community
Development Coordinator
105 of 206
BLANK PAGE
106 of 206
City Code of Falcon Heights, Minnesota
Selection of sections pertaining to noise
Sec. 10-21 - Dogs that are public nuisances
Any dog that exhibits any of the following behaviors are hereby declared to be a public
nuisance:
(1) Causes noise, disturbance or annoyance to persons residing in the vicinity by loud
and frequent barking, howling or yelping.
Sec. 22-47 - Public place defined; nuisances
(e) Unnecessary noise. No person, in any public or private place, shall make, or assist in
making, by any manner or means, any loud, unpleasant or raucous noise disturbing to others,
unless the same is reasonably necessary to the preservation of life, health, safety or property.
(f) Disruptive parties.
(1) Participation. No person shall congregate because of participation in any party or
gathering of people from which noise emanates of a sufficient volume so as to disturb
the peace, quiet or repose of any other person.
Sec. 14-277 - Requirements for haulers (Refuse Haulers)
(6) Not collect or remove garbage or refuse within 500 feet of any residential district,
except between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on any weekday or between the
hours of 9:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. on any weekend or legal holiday.
Sec. 113-252 - Drive-through facilities
Drive-through facilities are prohibited except when specifically allowed by a conditional use
permit in a zoning district. When allowed, all drive-through facilities must comply with the
following requirements:
(6) No speaker noise may be audible from adjacent residential property.
Sec. 113-391 - Home occupations
(d) Requirements. The following requirements shall apply to home occupations within the
city:
(14) No home occupation shall produce light, glare, noise, odor or vibration that has
an objectionable effect on a nearby property.
107 of 206
Noise Ordinance prepared by Campbell Knutson
(A) Prohibited noises.
The following are declared to be nuisances affecting public health, safety, peace, or welfare:
(1) Any distinctly and loudly audible noise that unreasonably annoys, disturbs, injures, or
endangers the comfort, repose, health, peace, safety, or welfare of any person, or precludes their
enjoyment of property, or affects their property’s value in such a manner as to be plainly audible
at the boundary of the real property, building, structure, or residence from which the noise
originates, or at a distance of 50 feet from the source of the noise. (this general prohibition is not
limited by any specific restrictions provided in this ordinance). “Plainly audible” is defined as
sound that can be detected by a person using their unaided hearing faculties.
(2) All obnoxious noises, motor vehicle or otherwise, in violation of Minn. R. ch. 7030, as they
may be amended from time to time, are hereby incorporated into this ordinance by reference.
(3) The use of any vehicle so out of repair or so loaded as to create loud and unnecessary grating,
grinding, rattling, or other noise.
(4) Any loud or excessive noise in the loading, unloading, or unpacking of any vehicle.
(5) The use or operation, or permitting the use or operation, of any radio receiving set, television
set, musical instrument, music device, paging system, machine, or other device for producing or
reproduction of sound in a distinctly and loudly audible manner so as to disturb the peace, quiet,
and comfort of any person nearby.
(B) Hourly restriction of certain operations.
(1) Domestic power equipment. No person shall operate a power lawn mower, power hedge
clipper, chain saw, mulcher, garden tiller, edger, drill, or other similar domestic power equipment,
except between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on any weekday or between the hours of
9:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. on any weekend or holiday. Snow removal equipment is exempt from
this provision.
(2) Refuse hauling. No person shall collect or remove garbage or refuse in any residential
district, except between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on any weekday or between the
hours of 9:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. on any weekend or holiday.
(3) Construction activities. No person shall engage in or permit construction activities involving
the use of any kind of electric, diesel, or gas-powered machine or other power equipment, except
between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on any weekday or between the hours of 9:00 a.m.
and 9:00 p.m. on any weekend or holiday.
(4) Radios, music devices, paging systems, and the like. The operation of any device referred to
in subdivision (A) (6) between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. in a manner so as to be
plainly audible at the property line of the structure or building in which it is located, or at a
distance of 50 feet if the source is located outside a structure or building shall be prima facie
evidence of a violation of this section.
(C) Noise impact statements. The Council may require any person applying for a change in zoning
classification or a permit or license for any structure, operation, process, installation, alteration, or project
that may be considered a potential noise source to submit a noise impact statement on a form prescribed
by the Council. The Council shall evaluate each such statement and take its evaluation into account in
approving or disapproving the license or permit applied for or the zoning changes requested.
108 of 206
CHAPTER 405
NOISE CONTROL
SECTION:
405.01: General Prohibition
405.02: Specific Restrictions
405.03: Hourly Restrictions of Certain Operations
405.04: Noise Variances
405.05: Enforcement and Impact Statements
405.01: GENERAL PROHIBITION:
No person shall make or cause to be made any distinctly and loudly audible noise that
unreasonably annoys, disturbs, injures or endangers the comfort, repose, health, peace,
safety or welfare of any person, or precludes their enjoyment of property or affects their
property's value. This general prohibition is not limited by the specific restrictions contained
in Section 405.02 below. (Ord. 927, 6-30-1983)
405.02: SPECIFIC RESTRICTIONS:
A.Horns, Audible Signaling Devices, Etc.: No person shall sound any audible signaling
device on any vehicle except as a warning of danger.
B.Exhaust: No person shall discharge the exhaust or permit the discharge of exhaust of
any steam engine, stationary internal combustion engine, motor boat, motor vehicle or
snowmobile except through a muffler or other device that effectively prevents loud or
explosive noises, and complies with all applicable State laws and regulations.
C.Defective Vehicles or Loads: No person shall use any vehicle so out of repair or so
loaded as to create loud and unnecessary grating, grinding, rattling or other noise.
D.Loading, Unloading, Unpacking: No person shall create loud and excessive noise in
loading, unloading or unpacking any vehicle.
E.Radios, Phonographs, Paging Systems, Etc.: No person shall use, operate or permit the
use or operation of any radio receiving set, musical instrument, phonograph, paging
system, machine or other device for the production or reproduction of sound in a
distinct and loudly audible manner as to disturb the peace, quiet and comfort of any
person nearby. Operation of any such set, instrument, phonograph, machine or other
device between the hours of 10:00 P.M. and 7:00A.M., in such a manner as to be
plainly audible at the property line of the structure or building in which it is located, in
the hallway or apartment adjacent or at a distance of 50 feet if the source is located in a
structure or building, shall be prima facie evidence of a violation of this Chapter.
F.Participation In Noisy Parties Or Gatherings: No person shall participate in any party or
other gathering of people giving rise to noise disturbing the peace, quiet or repose of
another person. When a police officer determines that a gathering is creating such a
noise disturbance, the officer may order all persons present, other than the owner or
tenant of the premises where the disturbance is occurring, to disperse immediately. No
person shall refuse to leave after being ordered by a police officer to do so. Every owner
or tenant of such premises who has knowledge of the disturbance shall make every
reasonable effort to see that the disturbance is stopped.
G.Loudspeakers, Amplifiers for Advertising, Etc.: No person shall operate or permit the
use or operation of any loudspeaker, sound amplifier or other device for the production
City of Roseville
109 of 206
or reproduction of sound on a street or other public place for the purpose of commercial
advertising or attracting the attention of the public to any commercial establishment.
H. Amplified sound from motor vehicles: It shall be a violation of this Chapter to play,
operate or permit the playing, use of operation of any radio, tape player, disc player,
loud speaker or other electronic device used for the amplification of music or other
entertainment, which is located within a motor vehicle on a public street or alley, which
is audible by any person from a distance of 50 feet or more from the motor vehicle.
When sound violating this section is produced or reproduced by any such device that is
located in a motor vehicle, the motor vehicle’s owner, if present when the violation
occurs, is guilty of the violation. If the motor vehicle’s owner is not present at the time
of the violation, the person who has dominion, care or control of the motor vehicle at
the time of the violation is guilty of the violation. In addition to an owner or a driver,
any person who controls or assists with the production, reproduction, or amplification of
sound in violation of this section is guilty of the violation. (Ord. 1315, 02-14-2005)
I. Animals: The provisions of Chapter 501 of this Code shall govern unreasonable noises
created by animals.
J. Schools, Churches, Etc.: No person shall create any excessive noise on a street, alley or
public grounds adjacent to any school, institution of learning or church when the noise
unreasonably interferes with the working of the institution or disturbs or unduly annoys
its occupants or residents.
K. Air Conditioning Units: No person shall place, maintain or operate an air conditioning
unit in such a manner so as to unreasonably disturb the peace, quiet and comfort of
persons using adjacent properties. (Ord. 927, 6-30-1983)
405.03: HOURLY RESTRICTIONS OF CERTAIN OPERATIONS:
A. Recreational Vehicles: No persons shall, between the hours of 9:00 P.M. and 7:00
A.M., drive or operate any minibike or other recreational vehicle not licensed for travel
on public highways. (Ord. 1553, 6-4-2018)
B. Domestic Power Equipment: No person shall operate a power lawn mower, power
hedge clipper, chain saw, mulcher, garden tiller, edger, drill or other similar domestic
power maintenance equipment, except between the hours of 7:00 A.M. and 9:00 P.M.
on any weekday, or between the hours of 9:00A.M. and 9:00 P.M. on any weekend or
legal holiday. Snow removal equipment is exempt from this provision. (Ord. 1553, 6-4-
2018)
C. Refuse Handling: No person shall collect or remove garbage or refuse in any residential
district except between the hours of 7:00 A.M. and 9:00P.M. on any weekday or
between the hours of 9:00 A.M. and 9:00 P.M. on any weekend or legal holiday. (Ord.
1553, 6-4-2018)
D. Construction Activities: No person shall engage in or permit construction activities
involving the use of any kind of electric, diesel or gas powered machine or other power
equipment except between the hours of 7:00 A.M. and 9:00) P.M. on any weekday, or
between the hours of 9:00A.M. and 9:00 P.M. on any weekend or legal holiday. (Ord.
1553, 6-4-2018)
E. Snowmobiles: Snowmobiles shall be operated only at times allowed by Section 604.03
of this Code. (Ord. 927, 6-30-1983)
405.035: EXEMPTIONS:
A. Any construction or maintenance activity in which the City of Roseville is considered
the owner and/or the project engineer on the project, is exempt from Chapter 405 of the
110 of 206
City Code regarding Noise Control subject to the following:
1. All work shall be done during normal working hours as described in 405.03 of the
Roseville City Code unless circumstances or conditions require work be done outside
of these hours or if it is determined that there is significant benefit to surrounding
properties and/or the general public by performing work outside of these hours. Only
projects listed below are exempt;
a. Sewer Lining projects which take more than 12 hours per segment
b. Water main or valve replacement work which would impact significant
amount of residents or business during normal working hours.
c. High traffic areas where a lane closure or full road closure is required, but
doing so during normal working hours would create a significant impact on the
general public, residents and businesses surrounding the work area.
2. Work outside of normal working hours as described in 405.03 is limited to a
maximum of two days per project segment as notified in subpart B.
B. If work will be performed outside of normal working hours as described in 405.03 the
City shall notify the residents/businesses within 500 feet of the project as far in advance
as practical. At minimum residents shall be notified seven days in advance of the work
via a mailed letter. The City Manager, Mayor and Council shall also be notified. The
letter, at minimum, shall indicate the necessity of the work, schedule of the work, the
scope of the work, the impacts and the mitigation techniques that will be used to
minimize impacts.
(Ord. 1548, 4-9-2018)
405.04: NOISE VARIANCES:
Any person may apply to the City Council for a variance from the requirements of this
Chapter prior to doing those acts. The applicant shall provide a certified list of property
owners within 350 feet of the site(s) where the activity is to occur. The Council procedure
for public hearings shall be as set forth in Chapter 108 of this Code. For good cause shown,
the City Council may, in its sole discretion, either grant or deny the variance. If the variance
is granted, the Council may impose reasonable conditions to it. (Ord. 1175A, 11-25-1996)
405.05: ENFORCEMENT AND IMPACT STATEMENTS:
A. Civil Remedies: In addition to criminal penalties, this Chapter may be enforced by
injunction, action for abatement or other appropriate civil remedies.
B. Noise Impact Statements: The City Council may require any person applying for a
change in zoning classification, permit or license for any structure, operation, process,
installation, alteration or project that may be considered a potential noise source to
submit a noise impact statement. The City Council shall evaluate each such statement
and take its evaluation into account in approving or disapproving the license or permit
applied for or the zoning change requested. (Ord. 927, 6-30-1983; 1995 Code)
111 of 206
Chapter 293. - Noise Regulations[7] City of Saint Paul
Footnotes:
--- (7) ---
Administrative Code reference—Procedure for public hearing regarding public nuisances, Ch. 91.
Sec. 293.01. - Definitions.
As used in this chapter, the following terms shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section.
(1) PCA definitions adopted. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.62, the definitions contained in the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Air Quality Division Noise Pollution Control Rules, Section 7030.0020, are hereby adopted by reference.
(2) Construction. Any site preparation, assembly, erection, substantial repair, alteration or similar action, but excluding demolition.
(3) Demolition. Dismantling or intentional removal of structures, utilities, public or private right-of-way surfaces or similar property.
(4) Department. The city department of safety and inspections.
(5) Domestic power tools. Any mechanically powered saw, drill, sander, grinder, lawn or garden tool, lawn mower, or powered snow removal equipment, or other similar device commonly used outdoors, except for the manufacture, commercial repair or prolonged testing of such tools.
(6) Sound level (or noise level). The A-weighted sound pressure level, expressed in dBA, obtained by the use of a sound level meter having characteristics as specified in the ANSI Standard S1.4-1983.
(Ord. No. 16915, 5-20-82; Ord. No. 17448, § 1, 4-28-87; Ord. No. 17586, § 1, 9-1-88; C.F. No. 02-653, § 1, 8-14-02; C.F. No. 07-149, § 68, 3-28-07)
Sec. 293.02. - Noise as a public nuisance.
(a) Generally.
(1) It shall be unlawful for any person to make, continue, permit or cause to be made, continued or permitted within the city, any loud, disturbing or excessive noise which would be likely to cause significant discomfort or annoyance to a reasonable person of ordinary sensitivities in the area.
(2) The characteristics and conditions which shall be considered in determining whether a noise is loud, disturbing or excessive for the purposes of paragraph (a) of this section, shall include, without limitation, the following:
a. The time of day or night when the noise occurs.
b. The duration of the noise.
c. The proximity of the noise to a sleeping facility and/or a residential area.
d. The land use, nature and zoning of the area from which the noise emanates and the area where it is perceived.
112 of 206
e. The number of people and their activities that are affected or are likely to be affected by
the noise.
f. The sound peak pressure level of the noise, in comparison to the level of ambient noise.
(b) Noisy assembly.
(1) Defined. The term "noisy assembly" shall mean a gathering of more than one person in a residentially zoned or used area or building that would be likely to cause significant discomfort or annoyance to a reasonable person of ordinary sensitivities present in the area, considering the
time of day and the residential character of the area, due to loud, disturbing or excessive noise.
(2) Permitting noisy assembly. It shall be a violation of this section for any person having dominion, care or control of a residentially zoned or used area or building knowingly to permit a noisy assembly.
(3) Remaining at a noisy assembly. It shall be a violation of this section to participate in, visit or remain at a gathering knowing or having reason to know that the gathering is a noisy assembly, except any person(s) who has/have come to the gathering for the sole purpose of abating the noisy assembly.
(c) Animals. It shall be a violation of this section to own, keep, have in possession or harbor any animal or animals which make any noise to the reasonable annoyance of another person or persons. The phrase "to the reasonable annoyance of another person or persons" shall include, but is not limited to,
the creation of any noise by any animal or animals which can be heard by any person, including the animal control officer or a law enforcement officer, from a location outside of the building or premises where the animal or animals are located and which animal noise occurs repeatedly over at
least a five-minute period of time with no more than a one-minute lapse of time between each animal noise during the five-minute period.
(d) Amplified sound. It shall be a violation of this section to play, operate or permit the playing, use or
operation of a radio, loud speaker, or other device used for the amplification of sound, unless otherwise permitted by law, located inside or outside, the sound of which carries to points of habitation or adjacent properties, and is audible above the level of conversational speech at a distance of fifty (50) feet or more from the point of origin of the amplified sound.
(e) Motor vehicles.
(1) Generally. It shall be a violation of this section to use any automobile, truck, motorcycle or other vehicle which causes or would be likely to cause significant discomfort or annoyance to a reasonable person of ordinary sensitivities present in the area due to loud, disturbing or excessive noise.
(2) Amplified sound from motor vehicles. It shall be a violation of this section to play, operate or permit the playing, use or operation of any radio, tape player, disc player, loud speaker or other electronic device used for the amplification of music or other entertainment, which is located within a motor vehicle on a public street or alley, or in a commercial or residential parking facility, which is audible by any person from a distance of fifty (50) feet or more from the motor
vehicle. When sound violating this section is produced or reproduced by any such device that is located in a motor vehicle, the motor vehicle's owner, if present when the violation occurs, is guilty of the violation. If the motor vehicle's owner is not present at the time of the violation, the
person who has dominion, care or control of the motor vehicle at the time of the violation is guilty of the violation. In addition to an owner or a driver, any person who controls or assists with the production, reproduction, or amplification of sound in violation of this section is guilty of the violation.
113 of 206
(3) Horns and other signals. It shall be a violation of this section to sound any horn or signal
device on an automobile, motorcycle, bus or other vehicle, except as a danger signal or traffic warning, which would be likely to cause significant discomfort or annoyance to a reasonable person of ordinary sensitivities in the area.
(4) Application of the MPCA rules. No person shall operate a motor vehicle in the city in violation of the motor vehicle noise limits of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Rules, Sections 7030.1000 through 7030.1600.
(f) Penalties.
(1) A violation of any section of this chapter is a misdemeanor, and a sentence of not more than ninety (90) days in jail, or a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000.00), or both, may be imposed.
a. Each day a violation of this ordinance is committed or permitted to continue shall constitute a separate offense and may be punished separately.
(C.F. No. 02-653, § 1, 8-14-02; C.F. No. 05-264, § 2, 4-27-05; Ord 15-67, 12-2-15; Ord 15-70, 12-9-15)
Editor's note— C.F. No. 02-653, § 1, adopted August 14, 2002, amended the Code by repealing former §§ 293.02—293.04, and adding a new § 293.02. Former §§ 293.02—293.04 pertained to noisy assembly; motor vehicles; and horns and audible signaling, respectively; and derived from Ord. No. 16915, adopted May 20, 1982; and Ord. No. 17448, adopted April 28, 1987.
Sec. 293.03. - Reserved.
Note— See editor's note, § 293.02.
Sec. 293.04. - Railroad locomotives, sounding whistles.
(a) Statement of legislative finding intent and purpose. The council finds that the sounding of railroad locomotive whistles at grade crossings is on the increase. The increased use of railroad locomotive
whistles at grade crossings throughout the city and especially in residential neighborhoods near railroad grade crossings has created an atmosphere that is conducive neither to the quiet enjoyment of property nor to the peace and dignity of the city. For the purposes of protecting and promoting the
safety, welfare and convenience of the public, and the safety, welfare and convenience of the railroad employees operating locomotives in the city, and in conformance with Minn. Stat. §§ 219.567, the council finds it necessary to establish the following noise regulation pertaining to railroad
locomotive whistles.
(b) Unnecessarily sounding whistles. No person shall sound or blow any whistle of any locomotive within the city limits, except as a warning of imminent and immediate danger to life or property. The sounding of any locomotive whistle shall be prima facie evidence that it was sounded by the engineer operating the locomotive.
(C.F. No. 98-522, § 1, 7-8-98; C.F. No. 02-653, § 1, 8-14-02)
Editor's note— C.F. No. 02-653, § 1, adopted August 14, 2002, amended the Code by renumbering former § 293.04.1 as a new § 293.04.
114 of 206
Sec. 293.05. - Exhaust.
No person shall discharge or permit the discharge of any steam engine, stationary internal combustion engine, motor boat, motor vehicle or snowmobile except through a muffler or other device that effectively prevents loud or explosive noises therefrom and complies with any applicable state laws and regulations.
(Ord. No. 16915, 5-20-82; Ord. No. 17448, § 1, 4-28-87)
Sec. 293.06. - Domestic power tools.
No person shall operate any domestic power tool between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. in a distinctly and loudly audible manner as to unreasonably disturb the peace, quiet and comfort of any
person nearby. Operation of a domestic power tool during those hours in such a manner as to be plainly audible at the property line of a structure or building in which it is located, in the hallway or apartment adjacent, or at a distance of fifty (50) feet if the source is located outside a structure or building, shall be
prima facie evidence of a violation of this section.
(Ord. No. 16915, 5-20-82; Ord. No. 17448, § 1, 4-28-87; C.F. No. 02-653, § 1, 8-14-02)
Editor's note— C.F. No. 02-653, § 1, adopted August 14, 2002, amended the Code by repealing former §§ 293.06 and 293.07, and renumbering former §§ 293.08—293.11 as new §§ 293.06—293.09. Former §§ 293.06 and 293.07 pertained to defective vehicles, loads; and radios, paging systems, etc.; and derived from Ord. No. 16915, adopted May 20, 1982; Ord. No. 17448, adopted April 28, 1987; and C.F. No. 96-642, adopted July 3, 1996.
Sec. 293.07. - Noise source limitations.
(a) No person shall operate or cause to be operated on any property or properties any source of noise or sound in such manner as to create a sound level outdoors which exceeds the limits set forth for the receiving land use classification in Table 1 below when measured at the point of human activity
which is nearest the noise source.
Table 1. Sound Level Restrictions for Receiving Land Use Classifications As Determined by the Location of the Receiver
Noise
Receptor
Land Use
Classification Time
Sound Level
Limit
(One hour
L10 dBA)
_____
Class I I-1, I-2 and I-3 At all times 80 dBA
Class II R-1 through R-4,
RT-1, RT-2 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 65 dBA
115 of 206
RM-1 through
RM-3, P-1 and PD 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 55 dBA
Class III B-1 through B-5,
B-2C and OS-1 At all times 70 DBA
(b) Reserved.
(c) Construction and demolition noise limitations shall be as follows:
(1) No person shall operate or cause to be operated construction or demolition equipment at any construction site in such a manner that the operation exceeds a L10 noise level of eighty-five (85) dBA at a distance of fifty (50) feet measured from the source.
(2) If the construction site is within or abuts residentially zoned property within Class II, the construction or demolition equipment shall observe the noise limits specified in paragraph (b) of this section.
(d) The following noise sources are exempted from the provisions of this section:
(1) Fire, civil defense or other emergency signaling devices.
(2) Authorized emergency vehicles, including police vehicles, fire vehicles and ambulances, and city snowplowing vehicles.
(3) Noise created exclusively in the performance of emergency work to preserve the public health, safety or welfare, or in the performance of emergency work necessary to restore a public service or eliminate a public hazard shall be exempt for a period of twenty-four (24) hours after the work has begun.
(4) Domestic power tools, when used between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.
(5) Parades and one-day festivals.
(6) Any festival or exhibition of no more than three (3) days in duration and sponsored or
conducted by a neighborhood-based nonprofit organization from the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m., providing that sound from any stationary electronically powered equipment used in conjunction with the festival or exhibition does not exceed ninety (90) decibels as measured
from a distance of fifty (50) feet from the source.
(7) a. The playing and exhibition of any home game or league event within a municipal stadium operated pursuant to a playing and use agreement in effect between the city and a team.
b. Other events, activities, and operations conducted in connection with home games, league events, or other sporting events sponsored by a team or the city are also exempt within the municipal stadium or stadium site excluding, however, the following:
1. Musical performances and fireworks displays of any type; and
2. Any other commercial and entertainment events not related to home games, league events or not sponsored by the city.
c. For the purposes of this subdivision, the following terms shall have the following meanings:
116 of 206
1. "Team" means the major league soccer team that is a party to a playing and use
agreement with the city for the municipal stadium then in effect, a copy of which shall be available for review upon reasonable request in the office of the city clerk.
2. "Home games" means the team's MLS's professional soccer league games scheduled
to be played at the stadium, including all pre-season, regular season, playoff, championship home games and any international soccer games in which the team participates or controls.
3. "League events," means any home games and any other league soccer related events scheduled by the team or the MLS professional soccer league to be held in the municipal stadium, including all-star games.
4. "Municipal stadium" shall have the meaning as defined under Minn. Stat. § 272.01, Subd.2(b)(1).
5. "Stadium site" means the area adjacent to the municipal stadium that the team has possessory rights to use as conveyed by the city.
(Ord. No. 16915, 5-20-82; Ord. No. 17448, § 1, 4-28-87; Ord. No. 17572, § 1, 7-5-88; Ord. No. 17766, §§ 1, 2, 9-4-90; C.F. No. 02-653, § 1, 8-14-02; Ord. No. 17-64, § 1, 2-14-18)
Note— Former § 293.09. See editor's note, § 293.06.
Sec. 293.08. - Administration.
(a) Responsibility of enforcement. The primary responsibility of enforcing the provisions of sections 293.02 through 293.08 shall be with the police department. The primary responsibility of enforcing the provisions of section 293.09 shall be with the department.
(b) Noise impact statements. Any city department or agency may require a noise impact statement in association with any change in zoning classification, in planning of a structure, or in any operation, process, installation or alteration which may be considered as a potential noise source, or in reviewing a request for a variance under this chapter.
(c) Performances of deparatment. The department shall also perform the following:
(1) Prepare for city council approval and keep on file guidelines establishing the test procedures and instrumentation to be utilized.
(2) Conduct inspections as required to determine whether violations exist.
(3) Review all variance requests and make recommendations to the city council. There is hereby established within the department a dedicated activity to which all receipts and disbursements for noise level variance requests will be recorded.
(4) Issue orders for abatement of noises which constitute a violation.
(5) Conduct such research, monitoring and other studies related to sound as are necessary or useful in enforcing this chapter.
(Ord. No. 16915, 5-20-82; Ord. No. 17448, § 1, 4-28-87; C.F. No. 02-653, § 1, 8-14-02; C.F. No. 07-149, § 69, 3-28-07)
Note— Former § 293.10. See editor's note, § 293.06.
117 of 206
Sec. 293.09. - Variances.
(a) Authority. The city council shall have authority, consistent with this section, to grant variances from the sound level restrictions contained in section 293.07 and section 293.02(d).
(b) Application. Any person seeking a permit shall file an application with the department on a form
prescribed by it. The application shall include the following information:
(1) Name of responsible person.
(2) Dates during which the variance is requested.
(3) Location of all particular noise sources and times of operation.
(4) Nature of noise sources and equipment involved.
(5) Reasons why a variance is sought.
(6) Steps taken to minimize the noise level.
(7) A noise impact statement, if required by the department.
(c) Fee. The application shall be accompanied by the payment of a fee, which fee shall be listed in chapter 310 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code.
(d) Notice:
(1) The department shall notify by mail all property owners within three hundred (300) feet of the sources of noise for which a variance is requested, measured from the property lines of particular noise sources. If the department finds, however, that more than one hundred fifty
(150) property owners are within three hundred (300) feet of noise sources included in a variance application, it may, in its discretion, notify the management company or president of a common interest community for any multifamily dwelling units. The department may notify a
management company or president of a common interest community by electronic mail if notice is actually received and the department obtains confirmation of delivery.
(2) The notice shall include a statement describing the variance request, the date of the public hearing before the city council on the variance request, and a statement that written comments or objections may be filed with the department within fifteen (15) days of the notice.
(3) No sound level variance may be granted that would locate the source of any amplified music, announcements, or cheer stations on Spring Street or Chestnut Plaza.
(4) Additional notice will be provided following the provisions for early notification in Administrative Code Appendix A-11 within two (2) business days of receipt of a completed application.
(e) Action on application:
(1) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of the application, the city council shall hold a public hearing on the application.
(2) After a public hearing, the council may by resolution grant, deny, modify or revoke the
variance request.
(3) The variance may be granted or modified only if the council finds that full compliance with the requirements of this chapter would constitute an unreasonable hardship on the applicant, on
other persons, or on the community. The council shall balance the hardship to the applicant against the adverse impact on the health, safety and welfare of the persons affected, the adverse impact on property affected, and any other adverse effects of granting the variance.
118 of 206
(4) The variance may be granted subject to conditions, including restricting the hours of operation
of the noise source, a time limit for duration of the variance, or attempts the applicant shall make to bring the noise source into compliance with this chapter.
(5) If a variance is granted, the applicant may be required to pay the city's cost of monitoring
sound levels and compliance with other conditions.
(6) Emergency variances, in which immediate work is necessary to restore property to a safe condition or when immediate work is required to protect persons or property from imminent
exposure to danger, may not be restricted in hours of operation, and may supply the information stated in the application in paragraph (b) after the work has begun.
(Ord. No. 16915, 5-20-82; Ord. No. 17448, § 1, 4-28-87; Ord. No. 17614, § 1, 11-22-88; C.F. No. 02-653, § 1, 8-14-02; C.F. No. 07-149, § 70, 3-28-07; C.F. No. 08-213, § 1, 3-26-08; Ord 12-61, § 1, 11-7-12; Ord 15-67, 12-2-15; Ord 15-70, 12-9-15)
Note— Former § 293.11. See editor's note, § 293.06.
119 of 206
City of Shoreview Municipal Code Chapter 200. Development Regulations
Section 209. Environmental Standards 209-2
(B) Air Quality. Solid or liquid particulates shall not be emitted atany point in concentrations or amounts exceeding limitations
established and adopted by the Minnesota Pollution ControlAgency.
(C) Vibration. No development activity or operation shall at anytime cause earth vibrations perceptible beyond the limits of
the site on which the operation is located.
(D) Wastes.
(1) PCA Regulations. All regulations developed for the controlof hazardous wastes by the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency shall apply to activities taking place within the City.
(2) Sewer. Any premises used for human occupancy shall beprovided with a method of sewage disposal acceptable toand maintained in accordance with City requirements.
(3) Solid Waste. All solid waste material, debris, refuse orgarbage shall be kept within a completely enclosed
building or properly stored in a closed container designedfor such purpose and properly screened.
209.020 Noise.
(A) Definitions. Except as provided in Section 202, words orphrases used in this section and defined in the MinnesotaPollution Control Agency Noise Pollution Control regulations
shall have the meaning given in those regulations.
(B) Prohibited Noise. No person shall make or cause to be made
any distinctly and loudly audible noise that unreasonablyannoys, disturbs, injures or endangers the comfort, repose,
health, peace, safety or welfare of any person or precludeshis/her enjoyment of property or affects his/her property'svalue. This general prohibition is not limited by the specific
restrictions of the following subdivisions.
(1) Motor Vehicles. No person shall operate a motor vehicle in
the City in violation of the motor vehicle noise limits of theMinnesota Pollution Control Agency.
120 of 206
City of Shoreview Municipal Code Chapter 200. Development Regulations
Section 209. Environmental Standards 209-3
(2) Horns and Audible Signaling Devices. No person shall sound any signaling device on any vehicle except as a warning of danger.
(3) Engine Exhausts. No person shall discharge the exhaust or permit the discharge of exhaust of any steam engine,
stationary internal combustion engine, motor boat, motor vehicle or snowmobile except through a muffler or other
device that effectively prevents loud or explosive noises therefrom and complies with all applicable State laws and regulations.
(4) Defective Vehicles or Loads. No person shall use any vehicle so out of repair or so loaded as to create loud and
unnecessary grating, grinding, rattling or other noise.
(5) Sound Amplification Devices. No person shall use or operate or permit the use or operation of any radio receiving set, musical instrument, phonograph, paging
system, machine or other device for the production or reproduction of sound in a distinctly and loudly audible manner as to disturb the peace, quiet and comfort of any
person nearby. Operation of any such set, instrument, phonograph, machine or other device between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. in such a manner as to be plainly audible at the property line of the structure or building in which it is located, in the hallway or apartment adjacent, or
at a distance of 50 feet if the source is located outside a structure or building shall be prima facie evidence of a violation of this section.
(6) Social Gatherings. No person shall participate in any party or other gathering of people giving rise to noise which
disturbs the peace, quiet or repose of the occupants of adjoining or other property. When a police officer
determines that a gathering is creating such a noise disturbance, the officer shall order all persons present, other than the owner or tenant of the premises where the
disturbance is occurring, to disperse immediately. No person shall refuse to leave after being ordered by a police officer to do so. Every owner or tenants of such premises
who has knowledge of the disturbance shall cooperate with police officers and shall make every reasonable effort to see that the disturbance is abated.
121 of 206
City of Shoreview Municipal Code Chapter 200. Development Regulations
Section 209. Environmental Standards 209-4
(7) Loudspeakers. No person shall operate or permit the use or operation of any loudspeaker, sound amplifier or other
device for the production or reproduction of sound on a street or other public place for the purpose of commercial advertising or attracting the attention of the public to any
commercial establishment.
(8) Animals. No person shall keep any animal that disturbs the comfort or repose of persons in the vicinity by its frequent or continued noise.
(9) Schools, Churches and Hospitals. No person shall create any excessive noise on a street, alley or public grounds
adjacent to any school, institution of learning, church or hospital when the noise unreasonably interferes with the
working of the institution or disturbs or unduly annoys its occupants or residents and when conspicuous signs indicate the presence of such institution.
(C) Hourly Restriction of Certain Operations.
(1) Recreational Vehicles. Except for emergency purposes, no person shall drive or operate any minibike, snowmobile or other recreational vehicle not licensed for travel on public highways between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m.
(2) Domestic Power Equipment. No person shall operate a power lawnmower, power hedge clipper, chain saw, mulcher, garden tiller, edger, power device for bug
eradication, drill or other similar domestic power maintenance equipment except between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. Snow removal equipment is exempt
from this provision.
(3) Refuse Hauling. No person shall collect or remove garbage or refuse in any residential district except between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Monday through
Saturday. (4) Construction Activities. No person shall engage in or
permit construction activities involving the use of any kind of electric, diesel or gas-powered machine or other power equipment except between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 9:00
122 of 206
City of Shoreview Municipal Code Chapter 200. Development Regulations
Section 209. Environmental Standards 209-5
p.m. on any weekday or between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. on any weekend or holiday.
(5) Consumer Fireworks. No person shall discharge any consumer firework except between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.
(D) Receiving Land Use Standards.
(1) Maximum Noise Levels by Receiving Land Use Districts. No person shall operate or cause or permit to be operated any
source of noise in such a manner as to create a noise level exceeding the limit set in Table 1 for the receiving land use category specified when measured at or within the
property line of the receiving land use. The limits of the most restrictive district shall apply at the boundaries
between different land use categories. The determination of land use shall be by its zoned designation.
TABLE 1 - Sound Levels by Receiving Land Use Districts Day Night (7:00 a.m.-10:00 p.m.) (10:00 p.m.-7:00 a.m.)
Land Use Districts L10 L50 L10 L50 Residential 65 60 55 50 Commercial 70 65 70 65 Industrial 80 85 80 75
(2) Exemptions. The levels prescribed in Section 209.020(D)(1) do not apply to noise originating on public streets and
alleys but such noise shall be subject to other applicable sections of this ordinance.
(E) Air Circulation Devices.
(1) No person shall permanently install or place any air circulation device, except a window air conditioning unit, in any outdoor location until the City Manager or his/her
designee determines that the device in that location will comply with the noise level standards prescribed in this section and issues a permit for the installation. Air
circulation devices, except a window air conditioning unit, shall comply with the following setback and sound buffering requirements:
123 of 206
City of Shoreview Municipal Code Chapter 200. Development Regulations
Section 209. Environmental Standards 209-6
(a) Air circulation devices shall be located at least 10 feet from all property lines.
(b) Air circulation devices shall be located at least 30 feet from an adjoining residence, except a separation of as
little as 20 feet may be permitted if a sound buffer is provided as approved by the City Manager or his/her
designee. (c) Sound buffers shall consist of evergreen plantings, a
retaining wall, fence, and/or on-site structure such as a garage or a portion of the dwelling.
(2) The noise produced by any window unit and by any existing air circulation device shall be attenuated by means
deemed appropriate by the City Manager or his/her designee, including but not limited to, relocation of such device if the noise results in or contributes to a violation of
this section. (F) Exception for Emergency Work. Noise created exclusively in
the performance of emergency work to preserve the public health, safety or welfare, or in the performance of emergency work necessary to restore a public service or eliminate a public hazard shall be exempt from the provisions of this ordinance for a period not to exceed 24 hours after the work is
commenced. Persons responsible for such work shall inform the City Manager or his/her designee of the need to initiate such work or, if the work is commenced during non-business
hours of the City, at the beginning of business hours of the first business day thereafter. Any person responsible for such emergency work shall take all reasonable actions to minimize
the amount of noise.
(G) Enforcement. (1) Testing Procedures. The City Manager or his/her designee
shall adopt guidelines establishing the test procedures and instrumentation to be used in enforcing the provisions of this section imposing noise standards. A copy of such
guidelines shall be kept on file in the office of the City Manager or his/her designee and shall be available to the public for reference during office hours. Noise shall be
124 of 206
City of Shoreview Municipal Code Chapter 200. Development Regulations
Section 209. Environmental Standards 209-7
measured on any property line of the tract on which the operation is located.
(2) Studies. The City Manager or his/her designee shall conduct such research, monitoring and other studies related to sound as are necessary or useful in enforcing this
ordinance and reducing noise in the City. He/she shall make such investigations and inspections in accordance
with law as required in applying the provisions of this chapter.
(3) Noise Impact Statements. The City Manager or his/her designee may require any person applying to the City for a change in zoning classification or a permit or license for any
structure, operation, process, installation, or alteration or project that may be considered a potential noise source to
submit a noise impact statement in a form acceptable to the Officer. He/she shall evaluate each such statement and make appropriate recommendations to the City Council or
other agency or officer authorized to take the action or approve the license or permit applied for.
(4) Notice of Certain Violations. When the City Manager or his/her designee or the City's law enforcement agency determines that a noise exceeds the maximum sound level permitted under this section, he shall give written notice of the violation to the owner or occupant of the premises
where the noise originates and shall order such person to correct or remove each specified violation.
209.030 Energy Use. (A) Energy Efficiency. Builders and developers have the
responsibility of designing and constructing new buildings which are energy efficient. They should demonstrate their
programs for incorporating active and passive solar energy systems in new buildings, installing energy-efficient appliances and lighting systems, and using exterior
landscaping to reduce the energy demands of new construction.
125 of 206
2801-1
2801. NOISE ORDINANCE
2801.010. DEFINITIONS. The following words and terms when used in this Ordinance
shall have the following meanings unless the context clearly indicates otherwise:
City Official - Any duly authorized representative of the City as designated by the City
Council.
Highway - Any street, road or public way in the City.
L10 Level - The noise level, expressed in dBA, which is exceeded ten percent (10%) of
the time for a one (1) hour survey, as measured by test procedures approved by the City Official.
Motor Vehicle - Any self-propelled vehicle not operated exclusively upon railroad tracks
and any vehicle propelled or drawn by a self-propelled vehicle except snowmobiles.
Noise - Any sound which annoys or disturbs humans or which causes or tends to cause an
adverse psychological or physiological effect on humans.
Noise Level - See sound level.
Person - An individual, firm, partnership, corporation, trustee, association, the state and
its agencies and subdivisions, or any body of persons whether incorporated or not. And with
respect to act prohibited or required herein, person shall include employees and licensees.
Sound Level (Noise Level) - The A-weighted sound pressure level, expressed in dBA,
obtained by use of a sound-level meter having characteristics as specified in the American
National Standards Institutes (ANSI) Standard SI-4-1961.
Sound Pressure Level (SPL) - Expressed in decibels (dB), is twenty (20) times the
logarithm to the base ten of the ratio of the observed sound pressure to a reference pressure of
twenty (20) micropascals.
2801.020. FEDERAL OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ACT. The
following regulation is hereby adopted by reference and incorporated herein: Federal
Occupational Safety and Health Act, Title 29 - Labor, Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter
XVII (Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Department of Labor). Part 1910
(Occupational Safety and Health Standards). Subpart G (Occupational Health and
Environmental Control). Section 1910.95 (Occupational Noise Exposure) June 27, 1974.
2801.030. MOTOR VEHICLE NOISE LIMITS. The Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency, Noise Pollution Control Section, NPC-4, Motor Vehicle Noise Limits, are hereby
adopted by reference and incorporated herein.
2801.040. NOISE SOURCE REQUIREMENTS.
City of Little Canada
126 of 206
2801-2
(A)A noise source (excluding motor vehicles operating on public highways,
locomotives and railroad cars, snowmobiles, construction equipment at construction sites,
maintenance of utility easements, and snow plowing) within the following zoning districts (as
defined in this Code), shall not exceed the L10 noise levels set forth below.
1.Industrial Zoning Districts (which may include but are not necessarily limited to
foundries, plastics extrusion, heavy-equipment repair, metal treating, cement
handling, concrete products, excavation processes, junk-car disposal, or any other
manufacturing concern) -- 70 dBA as measured on the property line of the source.
2.Business, Commercial Zoning Districts (which may include but are not
necessarily limited to service stations, motels, restaurants, blue printers, lumber
yards, dry cleaners, experimental laboratories, schools, car washes, and open sales
lots) -- 65 dBA as measured on the property line of the source.
3.Residential Zoning District (which may include but is not limited to single-family
dwellings, private schools, day-care centers, private garages, permitted home
occupations, churches, public stables, multiple dwellings, and retail shops) -- 60
dBA in the daytime (7 a.m. to 10 p.m.) and 50 dBA in the nighttime (10 p.m. to 7
a.m.) as measured on the property line of the source.
(B)In the event that the property on which an industrial, business or commercial
noise source is located abuts residential property, the noise source in question shall not exceed an
L10 noise level of 60 dBA in the daytime (7 a.m. to 10 p.m.) and an L10 noise level of 50 dBA
in the nighttime (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.) as measured on the property line abutting the source.
(C)Construction equipment, which may include but is not necessarily limited to front
loaders, graders, cranes, pumps, saws, and generators, being operated at a construction site shall
not exceed an L10 noise level of 85 dBA at a distance of 50 feet. See Section 2801.090 of this
Chapter for hours of operation.
2801.050. GENERAL TESTING AND MEASUREMENT PROCEDURES. The City
Official shall adopt guidelines establishing the test procedures and instrumentation to be utilized,
and a copy of such guidelines shall be kept on file in the office of the City Administrator.
2801.060. NOISE IMPACT STATEMENTS. The City Official may require noise
impact statements in association with, but not limited to, changes in zoning classifications; and
planning of a structure or any operation, process, installation or alteration which may be
considered as a potential noise source.
2801.070. CENTRAL AIR CONDITIONING EQUIPMENT. The City Official must
approve the location of new installations of central air conditioning plants or equipment which
are exterior to a building. If the City Official determines that it is impossible to position a central
air conditioning unit an acceptable distance from adjacent properties, then an alternate method of
127 of 206
2801-3
compliance shall be approved screening or buffering which will meet the requirements of
Section 2801.040 of this Chapter.
2801.080. SNOWMOBILE REQUIREMENTS.
(A)Every snowmobile shall be equipped with a muffler in good working order, good
repair, and in constant operation to prevent excessive or unnecessary noise.
(B)No snowmobile manufactured on or after June 30, 1970, and before February 1,
1972, shall be sold or offered for sale unless it is equipped with a muffler which limits engine
noise to not more than 86 decibels on the A-scale (dBA) at 50 feet.
(C)No snowmobile manufactured on or after February 1, 1972, shall be sold or
offered for sale unless it is equipped with a muffler which limits engine noise to not more than
82 decibels on the A-scale (dBA) at 50 feet.
(D)No snowmobile manufactured on or after April 1, 1975, for sale in Minnesota,
except a snowmobile designed for competition purposes only, shall be sold or offered for sale
unless it is so equipped that overall noise emission does not exceed 78 decibels on the A-scale at
50 feet.
(E)No snowmobile manufactured on or after July 1, 1976, for sale in Minnesota,
except a snowmobile designed for competition purpose only, shall be sold or offered for sale
unless it is so equipped that overall noise emission does not exceed 73 decibels on the A-scale at
50 feet.
(F)At a time when the state of the art of noise control technology permits and after
promulgation of a regulation in the manner prescribed by law, the standard for snowmobile noise
shall not exceed 60 decibels on the A-scale at 50 feet.
(G)No person shall modify, alter, or repair a snowmobile or its exhaust system in any
manner that shall amplify or otherwise increase total engine noise above that emitted by the
snowmobile as originally equipped regardless of date of manufacture.
2801.090. OPERATIONAL LIMITS.
(A)Recreational Motor Vehicles. No person shall operate any recreational motor
vehicles at any time other than between the hours of 9 a.m. and 10 p.m. Sundays through
Thursdays and between the hours of 9 a.m. and 1 a.m. Fridays and Saturdays and evenings
before holidays.
(B)Outdoor Power Implements. No person shall operate any outdoor power
implement, including but not limited to power lawn mowers, snowblowers, power hedge
clippers, or such other implements designed primarily for outdoor use, at any time other than
between the hours of 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. on weekdays and 9 a.m. on weekends and holidays.
128 of 206
2801-4
(C)Construction Activities. No person shall engage in, permit, or allow construction
activities involving the use of power equipment, including but not limited to any kind of electric,
diesel, or gas powered machine, on Sundays or at any time other than between the hours of 7
a.m. and 10 p.m. on weekdays and 9 a.m. and 9 p.m. on Saturdays. Construction activities which
can meet the requirements outlined in Section 2801.040 are exempt from the operating limits of
this paragraph.
(D)Refuse Hauling. All vehicles licensed in the City for hauling refuse shall limit
their hours of operation as follows:
1.In residential zones, or any property in any zoning district that immediately abuts
a residential zone, from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. on weekdays and from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m.
on weekends.
2.In all other zones, the hours of operation for the hauling of refuse shall be
unrestricted unless a public nuisance is declared as defined in Section 2801.100 of
this Code.
3.In the event that a nuisance is declared, the hours of pick-up in all zones other
than residential shall be limited to those allowed in residential zones.
(E)Emergency Exceptions. Situations wherein immediate work is necessary to
restore property to a safe condition or when immediate work is required to protect persons or
property from eminent exposure to danger are exempt from operational limits.
2801.100. PUBLIC NUISANCE NOISES PROHIBITED. It shall be unlawful for any
person to make, continue, or cause to be made or continued any loud, unnecessary, or unusual
noise or any noise which either annoys, disturbs, injures, or endangers the comfort, repose,
health, peace, or safety of others within the limits of the City. The following acts, among others,
are declared to be nuisance noises in violation of this Article but said enumeration shall not be
deemed to be exclusive.
(1)Horns, Signaling Devices, Etc.
a.The intentional sounding of any horn or signaling device on any automobile,
motorcycle, or other vehicle on any street, public place or private property within
the City except as a danger warning;
b.The creation by means of any such signaling device of any unreasonably loud or
harsh sound;
c.The intentional sounding of any such device for an unnecessary and unreasonable
period of time;
129 of 206
2801-5
d.The use of any signaling device except one operated by hand or electricity;
e.The use of any horn, whistle, or other device operated by engine exhaust.
(2)Radios, Phonographs, Etc. The use, operation or permitting the playing, use or
operation of any radio receiving set, musical instrument, sound in such manner as to disturb the
peace, quiet and comfort of the neighboring inhabitants or at any time at a louder volume than is
necessary for convenient hearing for the person or persons who are in the room, vehicle or
chamber in which such machine or device is operated and who are voluntary listeners thereto.
(3)Loud Speakers, Amplifiers for Advertising, Etc. The use, operation or permitting
the playing, use or operation of any radio receiving set, musical instrument, phonograph, loud
speaker, sound amplifier, or other machine or device for the production or reproduction of sound
which is cast upon the public streets for the purpose of commercial advertising or attracting the
attention of the public to any building or structure, except as may be licensed by the City.
(4)Yelling, Shouting, Etc. Shouting, hooting, whistling or singing on the public
streets particularly between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. or at any time or place so as to annoy
or disturb the quiet, comfort, or repose of persons in any office, dwelling, hotel, or other type of
residence, or of any persons in the vicinity.
(5)Animals, Birds, Etc. The keeping of any animal or bird which by emitting
frequent or long continued noise shall disturb the comfort or repose of any persons in the
vicinity.
(6)Whistles. The blowing of any locomotive whistle or whistle attached to any
stationary boiler except:
a.To give notice of the time to begin or stop work;
b.To give warning of fire or danger; or
c.Upon request of proper City Authorities.
(7)Exhaust.
a.The discharge into the open air of the exhaust of any steam engine, stationary
internal combustion engine, motor boat, or motor vehicle except through a
muffler or other device which will effectively prevent loud or explosive noises
therefrom.
b.Mufflers of the type commonly known as "Hollywood Mufflers" shall not be
permitted.
(8)Defective Vehicles or Loads. The use of any automobile, motorcycle, or vehicle
130 of 206
2801-6
so out of repair or so loaded in such manner as to create loud and unnecessary grating, grinding,
rattling or other noise.
(9)Loading, Unloading, Unpacking, Etc. The creation of a loud and excessive noise
in connection with loading, unloading, or unpacking of any vehicle.
(10)Noises Near Schools, Courts, Churches or Hospitals. The creation of any
excessive noise on any streets adjacent to any school, institution of learning, church, court or
hospital while the same is in use which unreasonably interferes with the workings of such
institution, or which disturbs or unduly annoys patients in the hospital, provided that conspicuous
signs are displayed in such streets indicating that the same is a school, hospital, church or court
street.
2801.110. EXCEPTIONS. It is recognized that under certain circumstances it would be
impossible for a noise source to comply with the provisions of Section 2801.040 of this Chapter
due to economic or technological reasons. In cases such as this, application for an exception
may be made in writing to the City Official. The application shall contain the following
pertinent information:
a.Dates for exception requested;
b.Location of particular noise source and times of operation;
c.Equipment involved;
d.Necessity for request of exception;
e.Steps taken to minimize noise level from source; and
f.Names of responsible persons.
The City shall notify by mail all property owners within five hundred (500) feet of the
source in question of the requested exception. Applications will be reviewed by the City
Official, and a decision to approve or deny the exception will be made in writing to the
responsible persons within twenty (20) days of receipt.
2801.120. APPEAL OF EXCEPTION PROCESS. The decision made by the City
Official concerning the exception request may be appealed to the City Council within ten (10)
days after receiving the City Official's written decision. The appeal shall be filed in writing with
the City Administrator who shall schedule a hearing before the City Council as soon as possible.
A written report shall accompany the request for appeal. The report shall contain pertinent
information which would adequately justify the request for an exception.
(Source: Ord. 171, 732)
131 of 206
ARTICLE II. - NOISE CONTROL City of Vadnais Heights
Sec. 22-33. - Definitions.
The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this article, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning:
Air circulation device means a mechanism designed and used for the controlled flow of air used in ventilation, cooling or conditioning, including, but not limited to, central and window air conditioning.
L+10 means the sound level expressed in decibels (DBA) which is exceeded ten percent of the time for a one-hour period, as measured by a sound level meter having characteristics as specified in the latest standards, S1.4, of the American National Standards Institute and using test procedures approved by the
noise control officer.
L+50 means the sound level expressed in decibels (DBA) which is exceeded 50 percent of the time for a one-hour period, as measured by a sound level meter having characteristics as specified in the latest
standards, Sl.4, of the American National Standards Institute and using test procedures approved by the noise control officer.
Noise control officer means the law enforcement agency or person designated by the city council.
(Code 1999, § 186.010; Ord. No. 300, 7-19-1983)
Sec. 22-34. - Noises prohibited.
No person shall make, or cause to be made, any distinctly and loudly audible noise that unreasonably annoys, disturbs, injures or endangers the comfort, repose, health, peace, safety or welfare of any person or precludes their enjoyment of property or affects their property value. This general prohibition is not limited by the specific restrictions of the following subdivisions:
(1) Motor vehicles. No person shall operate a motor vehicle in the city in violation of the motor vehicle noise limits of the state pollution control agency.
(2) Horns, signaling devices, etc. No person shall sound any signaling device on any vehicle except as a warning of danger.
(3) Exhaust discharge. No person shall discharge the exhaust or permit the discharge of the exhaust of any steam engine, stationery internal combustion engine, motor boat, motor vehicle or snowmobile except through a muffler or other device that effectively prevents loud or explosive noises therefrom and complies with all applicable state laws and regulations.
(4) Social gatherings. No person shall participate in any party or other gatherings of people giving rise to noise which disturbs the peace, quiet or repose of the occupants of adjoining or other property. When a police officer determines that a gathering is creating such a noise disturbance, the officer shall order all persons present, other than the owner or tenant of the premises where the disturbance is occurring, to disperse immediately. Every owner or tenant of such premises shall cooperate with the police officer and shall make every reasonable effort to abate the disturbance.
(5) Loudspeakers, amplifiers for advertising, etc. No person shall operate or permit the use or
operation of any loudspeaker, sound amplifier or other device for the production or reproduction of sound which is cast upon the public streets for the purpose of commercial advertising or attracting the attention of the public to any building or structure, except as may be licensed by
the city.
132 of 206
(6) Animals. No person shall keep any animal that disturbs the comfort or repose of persons in the
vicinity by its frequent or continual noise.
(7) Schools, churches, hospitals, etc. No person shall create any excessive noise on a street, alley or public grounds adjacent to any school, institution of learning or church or hospital when it
unreasonably interferes with the working of the institution or disturbs or unduly annoys its occupants or residents and when conspicuous signs indicate the presence of such institution.
(Code 1999, § 186.020; Ord. No. 300, 7-19-1983)
Sec. 22-35. - Hourly restrictions on certain operations.
(a) Refuse hauling. No person shall collect or remove garbage or refuse in any residential district except between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday of each week. The date may vary during a week with a holiday.
(b) Domestic power equipment. No person shall operate a power mower, edger, power device for bug
eradication, drill or other similar domestic power equipment except between the weekday hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on weekends and holidays unless the noise level of equipment is within the sound level set forth in section 22-36(a).
(c) Construction activities. No person shall engage, permit or allow construction activities involving the use of electric, gas or diesel powered machines or other power equipment except between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on any weekday or between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. on
weekends or holidays unless the noise level of equipment is within the sound level set forth in section 22-36(a).
(d) Recreational vehicles. No person shall, between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m., drive or operate any mini bike or other recreational vehicle not licensed for travel on public highways.
(e) Snow removal equipment. Snow removal equipment is exempt from the above hourly restrictions.
(Code 1999, § 186.030; Ord. No. 300, 7-19-1983)
Sec. 22-36. - Land use standards.
(a) Maximum noise levels by land use districts. No person shall operate or cause or permit to be
operated any source of noise in such manner as to create a noise level exceeding the limit set in Table I for the land use category specified when measured at or within the property line of the land use.
Table I Sound Levels by Land Use District
Day (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.) Night (7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.)
Zoning districts L10—L50 L10—L50
Residential/wetlands 65—60 55—50
Commercial/office 70—65 70—65
133 of 206
Industrial 80—75 80—75
The limits of the most restrictive district shall apply at the boundaries between different land use categories.
(b) Exemptions. The levels prescribed in Table I do not apply to noise originating on public streets and
alleys, but such noise shall be subject to other applicable sections of this chapter.
(Code 1999, § 186.040; Ord. No. 300, 7-19-1983)
Sec. 22-37. - Air circulation devices.
No person shall permanently install or place any air circulation device, except a window air conditioning unit, in any outdoor location until the noise control officer determines that the device in that location will comply with the noise level standards prescribed in Table I and issues a permit for the installation.
(Code 1999, § 186.050; Ord. No. 300, 7-19-1983)
Sec. 22-38. - Exception for emergency work.
Noise created exclusively in the performance of emergency work to preserve the public health, safety or welfare, or in the performance of emergency work necessary to restore public service or eliminate a
public hazard shall be exempt from the provisions of this chapter for a period not to exceed 24 hours after the work has commenced. Persons responsible for such work shall inform the noise control officer of the need to initiate such work. All persons responsible for such emergency work shall take all caution to minimize the amount of noise.
(Code 1999, § 186.060; Ord. No. 300, 7-19-1983)
Sec. 22-39. - Testing procedures.
(a) Guidelines. The noise control officer shall adopt guidelines establishing the test procedures and instrumentation to be used in enforcing the provisions of Table I of the land use districts imposing
noise standards. A copy of such guidelines shall be kept on file in the office of the noise control officer and shall be available to the public for reference during office hours.
(b) Research. The noise control officer shall conduct such research, monitoring and other studies
related to sound as necessary to properly enforce this chapter and to reduce noise in the city.
(Code 1999, § 186.070; Ord. No. 300, 7-19-1983)
Sec. 22-40. - Variance procedures.
(a) Application. Any person seeking a variance shall file an application with the city clerk on a form prescribed by him.
134 of 206
(b) Noise control officer. The noise control officer shall have the authority consistent with this chapter
to grant variances from the requirements of any section of this chapter.
(c) Appeals. Either the applicant or any party aggrieved may, within 20 days of the decisions of the noise control officer, appeal to the city council for a review and public hearing of the decision. The
city clerk shall give a seven-day notice to all affected property owners within 150 feet of the proposed variance. Within 30 days of the receipt of the proposed variance application, the city council shall approve or deny the application.
(Code 1999, § 186.080; Ord. No. 300, 7-19-1983)
Sec. 22-41. - Enforcement.
When the noise control officer determines that a violation of this chapter has occurred, he shall give written notice of the violation, ordering the owner or occupant or persons of the premises where the noise originates to correct or remove each specified violation within a reasonable time as prescribed in the
notice.
(Code 1999, § 186.090; Ord. No. 300, 7-19-1983)
Sec. 22-42. - Criminal penalties.
Any violation of this chapter involving a motor vehicle is a petty misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed $200.00. All other violations are subject to section 1-14.
(Code 1999, § 186.100; Ord. No. 300, 7-19-1983)
Secs. 22-43—22-72. - Reserved.
135 of 206
BLANK PAGE
136 of 206
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Families, Fields and Fair __________________________
The City That Soars!
Item Community Park Building Inspection Report
Description
The City Administrator will provide an update on the use of the Community Park
Building and results of the inspection report conducted by Bolton and Menk.
Budget Impact N/A
Attachment(s) • Bolton Menk Inspection Report
Action(s)
Requested
Staff is looking for direction on how to proceed.
Meeting Date July 1, 2020
Agenda Item Policy D7
Attachment See Below
Submitted By Sack Thongvanh, City Administrator
137 of 206
BLANK PAGE
138 of 206
City of Falcon Heights
2020 Inspection Report
Community Park Building
Submitted by:
Bolton & Menk, Inc.
12224 Nicollet Ave
Burnsville, MN 55337
P: (952) 890-0509
139 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. Certification Page
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Certification
Structural Inspection Report
For
Community Park Building
City of Falcon Heights
2050 Roselawn Ave, Falcon Heights, MN 55113
T46.121430
6-10-2020
I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was
prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I
am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of
the State of Minnesota.
By:
David J. Stark, P.E.
License No. 52632
Date: June 10, 2020
140 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. Table of Contents
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Table of Contents
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................... 1
II. BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................. 2
III. PURPOSE ......................................................................................................................................... 2
IV. SCOPE OF INSPECTION ..................................................................................................................... 2
V. DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS................................................................................................................ 2
VI. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................................... 9
VII. DISCLAIMER AND QUALIFICATIONS................................................................................................ 10
Appendix
Appendix A: Photographs
Appendix B: Budgetary Cost Estimate
141 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430 Page 1
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
General Information
Owner: City of Falcon Heights
Name: Community Park Building
Description: CMU and Wood Framed Park Shelter
Status: In Service
Inspection Information
Inspection Date: 05-13-2020
Previous Inspection Date: N/A
Inspected by: Gideon Bode, EIT, and David Stark, PE
BMI Project No.: T46.121430
Recommended Course(s) of Action
☐ No Action Required
☒ Implement Maintenance Repairs
☐ Perform Additional Inspections
☐ Perform Engineering Analysis
☐ Develop Remedial Design & Details
☐ Further Investigation Required
Contact Information
Bolton & Menk, Inc.
David Stark
Structural Project Engineer
(952) 890-0509
david.stark@bolton-menk.com
142 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430 Page 2
II. BACKGROUND
Bolton & Menk, Inc. (BMI) was retained by the City of Falcon Heights to perform a structural
inspection of the existing community park building.
The site location is 2050 Roselawn Ave, Falcon Heights, MN 55113. Access to the property was
granted by Tim Pittman, Public Works & Parks Director. The inspection was documented on May
13, 2020 by Gideon Bode, EIT and David Stark, PE of BMI.
III. PURPOSE
At the request of the City of Falcon Heights, a detailed inspection was conducted to assess the
structure to identify structural deficiencies and maintenances requirements as needed.
IV. SCOPE OF INSPECTION
The inspection of the structure consisted of visual observations during a single site visit. The
foundation below grade was not visible and therefore not included in the scope of investigation. No
material testing was conducted to determine the mechanical properties of the materials used in
construction of the structure.
V. DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS
The following provides commentary on the general observations throughout the structure and
structural findings and recommendations. An overall visual of the site can be found on the Cover
Page and Appendix A. Each picture in Appendix A has an assigned number that reflects the
Structural Findings and Non-Structural Observations. S1 indicates Structural Finding 1 and N1
indicates Non-Structural Observation 1.
General Observations
The wood siding all had paint flaking on the exterior of the building. The base of the wood siding
at the interface of the masonry had water damage throughout the building exterior. The exterior
masonry was discolored throughout the building. Weep holes at the base of the masonry exterior
were plugged throughout the building. Step cracking was observed at the corners of the building.
In addition, several exterior doors would not close without force indicating the building has shifted.
Also, the exterior slabs near the South and West corners of the building were cracked and uplifted.
Structural Findings and Recommendations
Exterior – Northwest Side
1) The caulking above the entry door was deteriorating.
• Recommendation: Remove all hard, loose, cracked, and deteriorating caulk
and fill with caulk.
2) The left corner wood siding appeared to be bowing from water damage.
• Recommendation: Replace the wood siding.
3) Masonry mortar was broken up in various locations.
• Recommendation: Repair mortar via tuckpointing. Refer to Conclusions and
Recommendations section.
4) The wood siding at the masonry interface appeared to have water damage.
143 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430 Page 3
• Recommendation: Replace damaged wood siding.
5) The weep holes at the base of the masonry were plugged at various locations along
the wall.
• Recommendation: Unplug the weep holes. Replace damaged or missing
weep wicks.
6) The upper half of the wood siding with windows had ceiling panels deflecting.
• Recommendation: Replace the ceiling panels.
7) The upper half of the wood siding appeared to have cracked and broken up caulking
along the windows.
• Recommendation: Remove all hard, loose, and cracked caulk and fill with
caulk.
8) The wood trim boards above the right of the entrance had cracked and broken up
caulking creating a gap between the trim and masonry.
• Recommendation: Remove all hard, loose, and cracked caulk and fill with
caulk.
9) Paint flaking was visible on the entire wood siding.
• Recommendation: Clean and paint the wood siding.
10) Deflection of the soffit was visible standing underneath the overhang.
• Recommendation: Replace the soffit panels.
11) The West corner had masonry broken out at the base.
• Recommendation: Remove loose and broken masonry. Refer to
Conclusions and Recommendation section for masonry repair/replacement.
12) The West corner had an 1/8-inch wide, 5-ft long crack along the foundation.
• Recommendation: Fill cracks with Sikadur Crack Fix. Follow manufacturer
instructions for application.
13) The West corner had an 1/8-inch wide, 14-inch long crack at the top of the masonry
wall.
• Recommendation: Repair crack via tuckpointing.
14) The caulking was cracked under the window frames at the west corner.
• Recommendation: Remove all hard, loose, and cracked caulk and fill with
caulk.
Exterior – Southwest Side
15) The windows had cracked caulking.
• Recommendation: Remove all hard, loose, and cracked caulk and fill with
caulk.
16) Masonry mortar was broken up and had step cracking in various locations.
• Recommendation: Repair mortar and step cracking via tuckpointing. Refer
to Conclusions and Recommendations section.
144 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430 Page 4
17) The expansion joints had cracking underneath the windows.
• Recommendation: Remove all hard, loose, and cracked caulk and fill with
caulk.
18) A gap was visible between the corner wood trim boards.
• Recommendation: Fasten trim boards and remove all hard, loose, and
cracked caulk and fill with caulk.
19) The dormer appeared to have water damage and siding deflection.
• Recommendation: Clean and replace damaged and/or deflected siding.
20) Paint flaking was visible on the entire wood siding.
• Recommendation: Paint the wood siding.
21) The West corner top of masonry had a breakout with an exposed anchor. The anchor
had moderate corrosion.
• Recommendation: Refer to Conclusions and Recommendations section
below.
22) The West corner had a 1/8-inch wide step crack at the location of the breakout with
exposed anchor.
• Recommendation: Repair step cracking via tuckpointing. Refer to
Conclusions and Recommendations section.
23) The West corner masonry foundation had multiple mortar breakouts.
• Recommendation: Repair mortar via tuckpointing.
24) The West corner masonry at the base had spalling.
• Recommendation: Remove loose and broken masonry and fill with grout.
25) The West corner had a 1/8-inch wide, 8-inch long crack at the base and top of the
masonry.
• Recommendation: Repair crack via tuckpointing.
26) The expansion joint under the window was cracked.
• Recommendation: Remove all hard, loose, and cracked caulk and fill with
caulk.
27) There was cracked caulking along the masonry.
• Recommendation: Remove all hard, loose, and cracked caulk and fill with
caulk.
28) There was cracked caulking of the wood paneling under the overhang.
• Recommendation: Remove all hard, loose, and cracked caulk and fill with
caulk.
29) The masonry foundation had cracks along the length of the wall.
• Recommendation: Fill cracks with Sikadur Crack Fix. Follow manufacturer
instructions for application.
30) There appeared to be water damage on the soffit wood panels.
• Recommendation: Replace the soffit.
145 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430 Page 5
31) The South corner foundation had masonry breakout.
• Recommendation: Remove loose and broken masonry and fill with grout.
32) The South corner had damage to the concrete slab at the foundation.
• Recommendation: Remove loose, broken concrete slab and replace.
33) The South corner had step cracking throughout the wall. Multiple cracks went
through the masonry unit while others followed the mortar joint. The cracks ranged
from 1/8-inch – 1/4-inch wide. The lengths of the cracks varied from 5-inch – 15-
inch.
• Recommendation: Repair step cracking via tuckpointing. For cracks
through the masonry unit refer to Conclusions and Recommendations section
below.
Exterior – Southeast Side
34) The wood siding and wood trim boards had a 1/4-inch gap.
• Recommendation: Fill with caulk.
35) The wood siding and masonry interface had caulking cracked throughout the wall.
• Recommendation: Remove all hard, loose, and cracked caulk and fill with
caulk.
36) The wood trim boards had holes throughout the wall.
• Recommendation: Replace the trim boards.
37) The wood trim board over the entryway was cracked.
• Recommendation: Replace the cracked trim board.
38) The roof area appeared to have ceiling panel deflection.
• Recommendation: Replace the ceiling panel.
39) The concrete slab at the bottom left of the door was spalling.
• Recommendation: Patch the slab with QUIKRETE Vinyl Concrete Patcher.
Follow manufacturer instructions for application.
40) The wall to the right of the door had an 1/8-inch wide, 8-inch long crack. The
foundation at this location also had spalling.
• Recommendation: Repair crack via tuckpointing.
41) The wood trim board over the entry had a missing board and the trim boards
appeared to be rotten.
• Recommendation: Replace the trim boards.
42) The foundation had mortar breakout.
• Recommendation: Repair mortar via tuckpointing.
43) Weep holes were plugged at various locations along the wall.
• Recommendation: Unplug the weep holes. Replace damaged or missing
weep wicks.
44) The right side of the wall had step cracking of 1/8-inch – 1/4-inch wide, and varying
lengths of 8-inches – 24-inches.
146 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430 Page 6
• Recommendation: Repair step cracking via tuckpointing. Refer to
Conclusions and Recommendations section.
45) The East corner masonry at the foundation was cracked.
• Recommendation: Fill crack with Sikadur Crack Fix. Follow manufacturer
instructions for application.
Exterior – Northeast Side
46) The bottom left corner had step cracking from the sliding window to the foundation
corner. The cracks ranged from 1/8-inch – 1/4-inch wide and varied in lengths of 8-
inches – 30-inches.
• Recommendation: Repair step cracking via tuckpointing. Refer to
Conclusions and Recommendations section.
47) The soffit of the overhang was missing.
• Recommendation: Install missing soffit boards.
48) The truss ends resting on the top of the masonry all had bearing splits.
• Recommendation: Apply wood glue in the bearing split and install a board
on each side of the bearing split with nails 4-inches on-center.
49) A wood joist was missing in the overhang.
• Recommendation: Install new wood joist.
50) Above the women’s restroom was a 1/16-inch wide, 8-inch long crack.
• Recommendation: Repair crack via tuckpointing.
51) The wood trim boards had holes throughout the wall.
• Recommendation: Replace the trim boards.
52) A wood joist above the water foundation was cracked.
• Recommendation: Replace the wood joist.
53) Above the men’s restroom entrance were multiple cracks with a 1/8-inch – 1/4-inch
width, 8-inch length.
• Recommendation: Repair cracks via tuckpointing. Refer to Conclusions and
Recommendations section.
54) The garage door opening had step cracking 1/16-inch wide on the left side of the
opening.
• Recommendation: Repair step cracking via tuckpointing. Refer to
Conclusions and Recommendations section.
55) The garage door opening had caulking cracks throughout.
• Recommendation: Remove all hard, loose, and cracked caulk and fill with
caulk.
56) The underside of the lintel over the garage door opening has mortar missing.
• Recommendation: Repair/install mortar via tuckpointing. Refer to
Conclusions and Recommendations section.
57) A wood joist above the garage door had a saw cut.
• Recommendation: Replace the wood joist.
147 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430 Page 7
58) The North corner had masonry breakout.
• Recommendation: Remove loose and broken masonry and fill with grout.
59) The north corner had a loose wood joist in the overhang.
• Recommendation: Fasten the wood joist to its supporting member.
60) The north corner had a cracked board connecting to the loose wood joist.
• Recommendation: Replace the cracked board.
61) Roof window flashing deflections throughout.
• Recommendation: Replace roof window flashing.
62) Step cracking at top of masonry.
• Recommendation: Repair step cracking via tuckpointing.
Interior – Storage Room
63) A ceiling panel had a slight deflection.
• Recommendation: Add additional fasteners to fasten panel tight to
supporting member.
64) The wall between the storage room and men’s restroom had an 1/8-inch gap in the
masonry wall joint.
• Recommendation: Fill with caulk.
Interior – Main Room
65) The North vestibule had masonry cracks 1/16-inch – 1/8-inch wide, 8-inches long.
• Recommendation: Repair cracks via tuckpointing. Refer to Conclusions and
Recommendations section.
66) The north and south vestibule door had gaps around the frame and the side panels
were deflected.
• Recommendation: Seal gap with weather stripping and/or sealant.
67) The caulking was cracked throughout the vestibule corners.
• Recommendation: Remove all hard, loose, and cracked caulk and fill with
caulk.
68) The south vestibule had a masonry crack 1/8-inch wide, 8-inch long.
• Recommendation: Repair crack via tuckpointing. Refer to Conclusions and
Recommendations section.
69) The lintel on the east wall had a masonry crack 1/16-inch wide.
• Recommendation: Fill crack with Sikadur Crack Fix. Follow manufacturer
instructions for application.
70) A ceiling panel was deflected in the middle of the room.
• Recommendation: Add additional fasteners to fasten panel tight to
supporting member.
148 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430 Page 8
Interior – Restrooms
71) Women’s restroom had an 1/8-inch wide crack throughout height of the wall in the
corner.
• Recommendation: Repair crack via tuckpointing. Refer to Conclusions and
Recommendations section.
Interior – Kitchen
72) The ceiling panel had a slight deflection.
• Recommendation: Add additional fasteners to fasten panel tight to
supporting member.
Non-Structural Observations – Northwest Side
1) The light cover was missing above the door entry.
2) The concrete slab left of the door was spalled.
3) A window frame under the West corner was broken.
4) The storage shed had water damage on the sides.
5) The masonry was discolored at various locations along the wall.
Non-Structural Observations – Southwest Side
6) Door would not shut without force.
7) The windows had light corrosion on the inside tracks.
8) A window had a missing seal around the glass.
9) A window was broken and boarded up.
10) Pipe protruding from masonry had moderate corrosion.
11) The door hinge was broken off.
12) The bottom of the door was bent.
13) The roof area had two windows shattered.
14) The masonry was discolored at various locations along the wall.
Non-Structural Observations – Northeast Side
15) The men’s restroom door does not close and has moderate to heavy corrosion on the
frame.
16) The door to the storage room had moderate corrosion on the framing and a 1/4-inch
gap on the bottom.
Non-Structural Observations – Interior Storage Room
17) The concrete slab had 1/16-inch – 1/8-inch wide cracks throughout the slab
Non-Structural Observations – Interior Attic
18) Mouse droppings were seen in various locations.
Non-Structural Observations – Interior Main Room
19) Windows were shattered on north side.
20) The bench on the northwest wall had two loose bolts.
149 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430 Page 9
21) The west corner had a lump in the flooring.
22) All air vents had deflections.
23) The southwest wall bench had a loose bolt on the 4th bracket from the left.
24) All windows near the ceiling had moisture in the windowpanes.
25) A trim board on the center column was deflected.
Non-Structural Observations - Kitchen
26) The sliding exterior window had a broken lock.
27) The cabinet in the east corner was pulled from the wall.
VI. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on our field observations the community park building appeared to have varying degrees of
damage from foundation and slab movement. The damage corresponding to foundation and slab
movement includes but is not limited to step cracking, masonry breakout, concrete slab uplift, and
shattered windows.
Recommendations
It is recommended to tuckpoint all missing, cracked, and broken mortar. To repair the cracks along
the masonry joint and through the masonry; clean with a wire brush, fill with a stained vinyl
concrete patcher to match the color of the masonry, and follow the manufacturer’s instructions for
application.
There are three options to consider for repairing the masonry unit breakouts.
1) If the masonry unit appears to have minor breakouts, then remove any loose material and
clean the masonry. After cleaning the masonry, patch with mortar or grout.
2) If the masonry unit has major breakout or is deteriorated, replace the masonry unit and
any masonry units affected from the breakout. Clean the masonry and patch with mortar
or grout.
3) If the masonry contains vertical reinforcement or is grouted, only the face shell of the unit
may be able to be replaced. It is recommended to fill mortar on the back of the face shell
to bond with the grout and surrounding masonry units.
It is recommended to replace the cracked and rotten wood trim boards on the exterior of the
building to prevent further water damage. In addition, the base of the wood siding should be
replaced due to water damage. The wood siding should be repainted throughout the building
exterior to help protect and seal the wood against moisture.
Note that structural finding 41, the southeast siding trim board observed to be eaten/rotten away
was only one board. The remaining trim boards were not removed. Based on the observed
discoloration and distress on the remaining trim boards along the exterior perimeter of the building
are assumed to be in a similar condition. Additional removal and investigation are recommended to
verify the extent required to replace.
Remove all hard, loose, and cracked caulk and fill with caulk. If the areas requiring caulk are not
repaired, air and water may cause structural issues. In addition, pests may deteriorate parts of the
structure.
150 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430 Page 10
VII. DISCLAIMER AND QUALIFICATIONS
The opinions stated in this report are based on limited visual observations and no physical testing or
investigations. No warranty is made, expressed or implied, that deficiencies, though not addressed in this
report, may not exist.
151 of 206
Appendix A: Photographs
152 of 206
Figure 1 – Overview: Site
Figure 2 – Overview: North Corner
153 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 3 – Overview: Northeast Side
Figure 4 – Overview: Southeast Side
154 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 5 – Overview: Southwest Side
Figure 6 – Overview: Northwest Side
155 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 7 – Overview: Northwest Side
Figure 8 – S1: NW Side (Caulking)
156 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 9 – S2: NW Side (Siding Bowing)
Figure 10 – S3: NW Side (Broken Mortar)
157 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 11 – S3: NW Side (Broken Mortar)
Figure 12 – S4: NW Side (Damaged Siding)
158 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 13 - S5: NW Side (Weep Hole Plugged)
Figure 14 – S6 & S7: NW Side (Panel Deflection & Caulking)
159 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 15 – S8 & S9: NW Side (Caulking & Paint)
Figure 16 – S10: NW Side (Soffit Deflection)
160 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 17 – S11: NW Side (Broken Masonry)
Figure 18 – S12: NW Side (Foundation Crack)
161 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 19 – S13: NW Side (Masonry Crack)
Figure 20 - S14 & S15: NW Side (Caulking)
162 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 21 – S16: SW Side (Broken Mortar & Step Crack)
Figure 22 – S17: SW Side (Expansion Joint Caulking)
163 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 23 - S18: SW Side (Trim Board Gap)
Figure 24 – S19 & S20: SW Side (Water Damage & Paint Flaking)
164 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 25 – S21: SW Side (Exposed Anchor)
Figure 26 – S21 & S22: SW Side (Exposed Anchor & Masonry Breakout)
165 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 27 - S23: SW Side (Masonry Breakout)
Figure 28 - S24: SW Side (Masonry Spalling)
166 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 29 - S25: SW Side (Cracks)
Figure 30 - S26: SW Side (Caulking)
167 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 31 – S27: SW Side (Caulking)
Figure 32 – S28: SW Side (Caulking)
168 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 33 - S29: SW Side (Foundation Cracks)
Figure 34 – S30: SW Side (Soffit Water Damage)
169 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 35 – S31: SW Side (Masonry Breakout)
Figure 36 – S32: SW Side (Corner Damage)
170 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 37 – S33: SW Side (Step Cracking)
Figure 38 – S33: SW Side (Step Cracking)
171 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 39 – S33: SW Side (Step Cracking)
Figure 40 – S34, S35, & S36: SE Side (Gap, Caulking, & Holes)
172 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 41 – S37: SE Side (Cracked Trim Board)
Figure 42 - S38: SE Side (Ceiling Panel Deflection)
173 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 43 - S39: SE Side (Spalling Left of Door)
Figure 44 - S40: SE Side (Crack at Foundation)
174 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 45 – S41: SE Side (Missing Board & Rotten)
Figure 46 – S41: SE Side (Missing Board & Rotten)
175 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 47 - S42: SE Side (Mortar Breakout)
Figure 48 – S43: SE Side (Weep Holes Plugged)
176 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 49 – S44: SE Side (Step Cracking)
Figure 50 – S44: SE Side (Step Cracking)
177 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 51 – S45: SE Side (Foundation Crack)
Figure 52 – S46: NE Side (Step Cracking)
178 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 53 – S47: NE Side (Soffit Missing)
Figure 54 - S48: NE Side (Bearing Splits)
179 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 55 - S49: NE Side (Missing Joist)
Figure 56 - S50: NE Side (Crack Above Women's Restroom)
180 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 57 - S51: NE Side (Holes in Trim Boards)
Figure 58 - S52: NE Side (Cracked Joist)
181 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 59 – S53: NE Side (Crack)
Figure 60 - S54 & S55: NE Side (Garage Door Step Cracking & Caulking)
182 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 61 – S56: NE Side (Mortar Breakout)
Figure 62 - S57: NE Side (Saw Cut)
183 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 63 – S58: NE Side (Corner Breakout)
Figure 64 - S59 & S60: NE Side (Loose Joist & Cracked Board)
184 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 65 – S61: NE Side (Flashing Deflections)
Figure 66 - S62: NE Side (Step Cracking)
185 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 67 – S63: Storage Room (Ceiling Panel Deflection)
Figure 68 - S64: Storage Room (Wall Gap)
186 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 69 – S65: Main Room (Vestibule Cracks)
Figure 70 – S66: Main Room (Door Frame Gaps)
187 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 71 – S66: Main Room (Door Frame Gaps)
Figure 72 - S67 & S68: Main Room (Caulking & Crack)
188 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 73 – S69: Main Room (Lintel Crack)
Figure 74 - S70: Main Room (Ceiling Panel Deflection)
189 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 75 – S71: Restrooms (Women’s Restroom Crack)
Figure 76 – S72: Kitchen (Ceiling Panel Deflection)
190 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 77 – N1: NW Side (Light Cover Missing)
Figure 78 – N2: NW Side (Concrete Spalling)
191 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 79 - N3: NW Side (Window Frame Broken)
Figure 80 - N4: NW Side (Shed Water Damage)
192 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 81 - N5: NW Side (Discolored Masonry)
Figure 82 – N6: SW Side (Door Does Not Shut)
193 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 83 - N7: SW Side (Corrosion on Tracks)
Figure 84 - N8: SW Side (Missing Seal)
194 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 85 - N9: SW Side (Boarded Up Window)
Figure 86 - N10: SW Side (Pipe Corrosion)
195 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 87 – N11: SW Side (Door Hinge Broken)
Figure 88 - N12: SW Side (Door Bent)
196 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 89 - N13: SW Side (Shattered Windows)
Figure 90 - N14: SW Side (Discolored Masonry)
197 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 91 – N15: NE Side (Door Frame Corrosion)
Figure 92 – N16: NE Side (Storage Room Door Corrosion)
198 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 93 – N17: Storage Room (Concrete Slab Crack)
Figure 94 - N18: Interior Attic (Mouse Droppings)
199 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 95 – N19: Interior Main Room (Shattered Windows)
Figure 96 – N20: Interior Main Room (Bench Loose Bolts)
200 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 97 - N21: Interior Main Room (Floor Lump)
Figure 98 – N22: Interior Main Room (Air Vent Deflections)
201 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 99 - N23: Interior Main Room (Loose Bolts)
Figure 100 – N24: Interior Main Room (Windowpane Moisture)
202 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 101 - N25: Interior Main Room (Column Trim Board Deflection)
Figure 102 - N26: Kitchen (Window Lock Broken)
203 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Figure 103 - N27: Kitchen (Cabinet Pulled From Wall)
204 of 206
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2020 Inspection Report ǀ T46.121430
Appendix B: Budgetary Cost Estimate
205 of 206
Item Category QTY Unit Cost per Unit Subtotal
Paint Structure 1 ea 9,800$ 9,800$
Caulking Structure 1 ea 900$ 900$
Unplug Weep Holes 25 ea 15$ 375$
Structural Crack Repair 5 ea 250$ 1,250$
Tuckpoint/Repoint Masonry Cracks & Mortar Breakout 150 sq ft 40$ 6,000$
Masonry Replacement 45 sq ft 100$ 4,500$
Trim (Facia) Board Replacement 16 ea 125$ 2,000$
Wood Siding Replacement 150 sq ft 35$ 5,250$
Ceiling Panel Replacement 10 ea 65$ 650$
Soffit Panel Replacement/Install 12 ea 75$ 900$
Soffit Wood Joist Replacement/Repair 4 ea 105$ 420$
Truss Bearing Split Repair 25 ea 100$ 2,500$
Budgetary Cost Estimate Subtotal 34,545.00$
Assumed Costs
Mobilization (5%)1,727.25$
Estimate Notes:General Conditions (7%)2,418.15$
Each Tuckpoint = approximately 10 sq ft Contingency (15%)3,454.50$
Estimate does not inclulde non-structural items
Budgetary Cost Total 42,144.90$
Budgetary Cost Estimate
The estimate below is an opinion of probably costs to undertake the recommendations discussed in the report and is intended
to give the general order of megnitude of the work.
206 of 206