HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022/03/28 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Study SessionAGENDA
MARCH 28, 2022
The St. Louis Park City Council is meeting in person at St. Louis Park City Hall, 5005 Minnetonka
Blvd. Members of the public can attend in person or watch on local cable (Comcast SD channel
17 and HD channel 859) or via webstream at bit.ly/watchslpcouncil. Visit bit.ly/slpccagendas to
view the agenda and reports.
6:30 p.m. STUDY SESSION – council chambers
Discussion items
1. 60 min. 2022 Market Value Overview
2. 45 min. Boards and commissions – structure, function, role, authority
5 m in. Communications/updates (verbal)
W ritten reports
3. Application for TIF Assistance – Wooddale Avenue Apartments (Ward 2)
4. Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use
5. Diversity, equity and inclusion policy in development projects receiving public
financial assistance
6. February 2022 monthly financial report
7. Body worn camera annual update
8. 2021 housing activity report
The agenda is posted on Fridays on the official city bulletin board in the lobby of city hall and on the text display on
civic TV cable channel 17. The agenda and full packet are available after noon on Friday on the city’s website.
If you need special accommodations or have questions about the meeting, please call 952.924 .2525.
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: March 28, 2022
Discussion item : 1
Executive summary
Title: 2022 Market Value Overview
Recommended action: No action needed. This summary report is provided for informational
purposes to update Council on the local real estate market dynamics and preparing for the Local
Board of Appeal and Equalization process that begins in April.
Policy consideration: None at this time.
Summary: The assessed market valuation and classification for each property determines their
individual tax capacity and thus the overall tax capacity of the community. In addition to fiscal
budgeting and property tax implications, the composition of value and trending are important
for Council to understand as they focus on overall governance of the community.
This review is being made to give the Council additional information on how the community’s
real estate is reacting to the significant evolution of the housing stock (single -family, condo,
cooperatives, townhomes and apartment complexes), market performance trends for
commercial-industrial space, thoughts on the current market cycle, and the foundation to look
forward.
Pandemic guidance: This overview is reflective of the assessment as of January 2nd with a
reminder that in the equitable sense all adjustments are derived from the preceding year market
activity. Events occurring during 2021 have been decidedly uneven in terms of real estate values
and their outlook.
The St. Louis Park Local Board of Appeal and Equalization convenes its organizational meeting on
Monday April 11, 2022 with the follow -up meeting, if necessary, tentatively as April 25.
Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Prepared by: Cory Bultema, city assessor
Reviewed by: Melanie Schmitt, finance director
Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager
Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 1) Page 2
Title: 2022 Market Value Overview
Discussion
Overview of the Minnesota Property Tax System
Minnesota law establishes a specific process and timeline for the entire property tax system,
including the assessment of property. The system is summarized as follows:
1.All real property is valued annually at fee simple market value and classified according to
actual use. The owners are notified, generally in March, with informal and multiple formal
options for discussion and appeal.
2.State law defines how the value is translated into tax capacity annually via class rate
structures, programs, exclusions and credits (e.g. blind, disabled, homestead, veteran
exclusion, low -income rental, agricultural et al). These refinements are administratively
maintained.
3.Budgets for each taxing jurisdiction are set annually. Funding sources include the property
tax levy, voter approved market value referendums, bonding, special assessments, user fees,
grants and programs in a variety of operational sources which vary among jurisdictions.
4.In Minnesota, property taxes are a levied budget. The property tax budget levied in each
jurisdiction is divided by the total tax capacity of that unique area (e.g. city, county, school
district, met council et al). The result is the respective total levy extension multiplier (rate).
The multipliers are applied to each individual property in calculating the property taxes in
the year following the assessment and setting of the budget. It is essential to understand
that the property tax “rate” is simply a math equation and not a full reflection of all revenue
sources, tax base composition, service level, efficiency or performance .
The Assessing function deals primarily with the first step and portions of the second while our
work is such that we often explain the basic system outline to taxpayers/owners. As noted
above, the process begins with measurement of market activity as staff renders an opinion of
market value and classification annually for 17,000+ parcels in St. Louis Park as of January 2 each
year. The assessment must comply with standards established by the Minnesota Department of
Revenue, Minnesota law and with review/approval by the Hennepin County Assessor’s Office.
Market value is defined in Minnesota Statute 272.03 subd 8 as “the usual selling price at the
place where the property to which the term is applied shall be at the time of assessment; being
the price which could be obtained at a private sale or an auction sale, if it is determined by the
assessor that the price from the auction sale represents an arm's-length transaction. The price
obtained at a forced sale shall not be considered.”
C lassification of the property use is also defined by Minnesota statute. The rationale for this
requirement is that the Minnesota property tax system applies differing classification rates in
determining how the value is translated into tax capacity. The classification system greatly favors
residential property types (single-family, condo, townhome, apartments) versus business
property types (commercial and industrial). This differential is further affected by specific
programs and laws such as fiscal disparities and state-wide levies.
Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 1) Page 3
Title: 2022 Market Value Overview
The assessment process: The purpose of the assessment is to annually render an accurate and
equitable opinion of market value of each parcel of property. Doing so requires current
information about the properties being assessed and the local real estate market. In addition to
the economic forces at work, the individual property location, use and physical characteristics
play a major role in the valuation.
The St. Louis Park Assessing division maintains a record of every property in the city including its
size, location, physical characteristics and condition. As there are 17,000+ parcels in the city, it is
impossible to have comp lete knowledge of each property, which may or may not sell each year.
The Minnesota property tax system therefore requires periodic inspections. The current cycle of
inspection is on a five -year rotating schedule (known as the quintile) which may be altered due
to physical change of the property due to new construction, renovations, additions and damage.
The goal of the periodic and interim inspection process is to assess the characteristics and
corresponding market value of each property as closely as possible versus the property’s
competitive position. Due to the pandemic, staff did not conduct interior quintile inspection s
during the summer of 2021 although we did return to field inspections for the fall of 2021 to do
permit reviews. We will continue to be flexible to current conditions and do anticipate being
able to conduct interior inspections at a normal pace for 2022.
It is important to know that the initial valuation process for residential properties in the State of
Minnesota is based on mass appraisal. The valuations are modeled by a computer assisted mass
appraisal (CAMA) methodology. To summarize, the physical characteristics for each property are
maintained in a large database which allows recalibration of the individual valuations based
upon the location, style and physical characteristics for each property. While sometimes viewed
as a mathematical equation to be manipulated, a truly functional CAMA system allows focused
modeling on properties with similar marketability . The purpose of modeling is to fashion a
mirror image of market performance based on properties that have sold during the comparison
time period (time trended and fact-based modeling).
Minnesota requires almost all sales to be recorded in an electronic Certificate of Real Estate
Value (e -CRV) data system. The sales information is scrutinized and qualified. Initial clerical
screening occurs at the city and county level. The sale information is then frequently augmented
with more detail from a variety of professional data services and staff may follow -up with direct
buyer/seller verifications and re -inspections in cases where we may have imperfect information.
Evidence suggesting anything but an arms-length transaction (a forced sale, foreclosure, a sale
to a relative, etc.) results in the sales information being excluded from study. This is important as
the market information constitutes the measurable database for the statistical comparisons
necessary to make the property assessment.
The mass appraisal process is different from the individual appraisal system used by banks,
mortgage companies and others. Mass appraisal is a modeling exercise using groups of sales to
review competitively similar groups of properties. The individual appraisal process is comparing
one subject property with a limited number of similar competing properties. In the appeal
process , assessing staff looks to both the mass valuation and a current individual appraisal
analysis for further review.
Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 1) Page 4
Title: 2022 Market Value Overview
Big picture of the residential market – realtor perspective
Before discussion of the 2022 assessment, we want to provide a big picture overview from the
perspective of realtors. The broad spectrum of owner based re sidential real estate is often
carried in news media and the industry does comprise a significant variable in the local, regional
and national economy. The following chart is an aggregate of single -family homes, condos and
townhomes from 2013 through 2021 on an annual basis. This provides a comparative reference
for St. Louis Park and our immediate neighbors through the last decade.
Historic median sale price – aggregate of single -family homes, condos and townhomes
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
St. Louis Park 219,000 230,000 239,000 245,000 264,663 287,000 305,000 327,750 340,000
Edina 351,000 380,000 397,000 435,005 460,000 450,000 473,606 520,000 595,000
Golden Valley 247,700 248,700 264,900 290,275 312,750 309,950 343,000 367,450 388,620
Hopkins 181,500 182,000 213,500 215,000 218,650 250,000 259,950 288,000 297,450
Minnetonka 280,000 273,984 300,000 307,350 335,000 347,500 358,250 358,250 437,000
Source: Minneapolis Association of Realtors Sales Data (MAAR)
In contemplating the historical figures above, the primary owner-based housing options are
included. This aggregate price structure gives an interesting but incomplete perspective for each
community. The variation from year-to-year depends on which market segment has more sales
as well as the volume of sales with new construction /major renovations. The chart below breaks
out the dominant mix of options available and their sale performance in the past year.
Annual 2021 market performance: sale volume – median sale price – days on market
Single-Family Condominiums Townhomes
# Median Days on # Median Days on # Median Days on
Sales Sale Price Market Sales Sale Price Market Sales Sale Price Market St. Louis Park 759 375,000 9 228 188,500 24 74 259,800 13 Edina 752 775,000 13 324 210,000 28 40 418,500 22 Golden Valley 331 425,000 10 36 250,000 38 51 250,000 12 Hopkins 116 375,500 12 78 131,250 19 45 255,000 14 Minnetonka 612 545,000 9 223 212,950 21 193 315,000 17
Source: Minneapolis Association of Realtors Sales Data (MAAR)
Several facts in the above table are notable. First and often surprising to some is that our annual
transaction volume is generally high in terms of turnover rate . This is due in part to our pricing
structure , the housing options available, the mix of options available , and the balance between
single -family, condo and townhome stock. The most significant fact in the table above, however,
is timing of marke t exposure (Days on Market). All of the local communities are clearly showing
extremely short exposure times which has continued over multiple years. The move to a seller’s
market has been particularly emphasized in recent years from the realtor perspective. While
prior value appreciation has been predominantly in the lower priced brackets, market activity in
2020 was appreciating throughout the price points and has intensified for the upper brackets
during 2021. How that supply/demand equation is influenced by the general economy, local
competition, interest rates and household income is an annual question.
Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 1) Page 5
Title: 2022 Market Value Overview
Summary of the St. Louis Park 2022 Assessment Roll
The Notice of Valuation and Classification commence mailing in March of each year. Each notice
reflects the property value and classification for a two-year period with the format as required
by the MN Department of Revenue. As of Jan. 2, 2022, the total valuation of the city stands at
$9.41 billion versus $8.55 billion in 2021 and $8.13 billion for 2020. Further understanding of
the value composition and year-over-year trending is explored in the following chart.
Assessed Market Value Change for Dominant Sectors (Comparing 2022 to 2021 Assessment)
Single -Family Residential +11.4% Market Basis versus +12.1% with Improvements
Condominium + 5.4% Market Basis versus + 5.4% with Improvements
Townhomes +18.1% Market Basis versus +18.2% with Improvements
Apartments + 9.7% Market Basis versus +13.6% with Improvements
Commercial + 1.0% Market Basis versus + 4.0% with Improvements
Industrial + 9.2% Market Basis versus +10.0% with Improvements
St. Louis Park Total + 9.0% Market Bas is versus +10.6% Gross Change
Source : St. Louis Park Assessing Office. The “total” line is subject to slight refinement (0.3% to 0.5% generally)
as the state assessed rail and utility values are assumed and not available at report writing.
The market driven appreciation reflects a roughly apple-to-apple comparison. This measure is
inherently the primary focus for the mass appraisal methodology reflected by review of
transactions. There are also factors relating to use change, divisions and exemption changes.
Gross change reflects the total valuation movement which includes improvement values arising
from new construction, additions, renovations and use repositioning. This metric reflects the full
scale of economic activity as assessed and by tax capacity. Improvement values were very strong
for the 2022 assessment which partially alleviates the impact of the uneven market forces.
Each of the above categories will be explained at further length in the following summary with
reminder that that an assessment is fashioning a mirror image of the market. It has included the
traditional sales review, extensive qualification review, on -market listings multiple times per
year, income -expense relationships and quintile and renovation-based inspections.
Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 1) Page 6
Title: 2022 Market Value Overview
We begin our review of the overall residential sector by breaking it down into the three
dominant categories: low density (single -family homes); mid -to-high density ownership based
(condos and townhomes) and apartment units. Sale transactions for the owner-based stock
were as follows:
Quantile Layer Array - Single Family … Condo … Townhome
(Qualified Sales 10-01-2020 thru 09-30-2021)
Single -Family Residential (9.8% Time) Condominiums (6.3% Time) Townhomes (12.7% Time)
Low High Count Median Low High Count Median Low High Count Median
193,60
0 328,600 143
295,30
0 93,800
144,50
0 51
131,50
0
206,90
0
235,80
0 9
220,90
0
328,90
0 366,700 143
349,70
0
144,90
0
173,60
0 52
159,55
0
237,20
0
249,20
0 9
240,60
0
367,00
0 419,400 145
390,40
0
173,80
0
239,50
0 53
199,50
0
251,10
0
278,50
0 11
270,60
0
419,40
0 497,200 143
446,80
0
239,60
0
312,90
0 52
271,75
0
278,50
0
301,30
0 9
290,90
0
497,80
0
1,417,90
0 143
623,80
0
313,90
0
590,70
0 51
383,30
0
303,00
0
654,00
0 9
483,70
0
Assess 2022 City Median
371,80
0
Assess 2022 City
Median
193,50
0
Assess 2022 City
Median
272,90
0
Source: St. Louis Park Assessing Office
The preceding chart represents the sales used in setting the owned housing stock. The purpose
of presenting this array in quantile slices (each line represents roughly 1/5 of the sales) is to
provide the reader with insight as to market price niches for each use type and the dense bell
curve shape of the city’s housing stock. The sales are time adjusted per MN Department of
Revenue standards with breakout for the specific use category.
Single Family Homes: Just under one-half of the total housing units are single family homes . The
city of St. Louis Park is broken down into 35 distinct neighborhoods which are configured to local
history rather than cohesive competitive influences. Of the 32 neighborhoods with single-family
properties, the range of marke t driven adjustment was 3.9% to 17.7% with the majority in the
10-14% bracket. The city’s median market value was at 306,400 for assess 2020, at 330,250 for
assess 2021 and moving to 371,800 for the 2022 assessment. The majority of market advance
was very well spread out across all pricing brackets following multiple years where the lower end
stock was moving much more rapidly than the upper brackets. This return to a balanced market
is somewhat of a misnomer however as annual appreciation at 12% is not normally viewed as a
sustainable market movement. We will see how 2022 plays out.
Condominiums: There are 46 distinct condominium complexes in the community. The complexes
are a decidedly diverse stock in terms of structural vintage and structural design format
(apartment conversions, row-house, lo-rise, hi-rise and most everything in between).
As noted in prior years, condos tend to be considerably more volatile year-over-year. This is
generally due to four major factors: condos tend to have an in-complex sub-market which can
swing quickly ; the complexes compete locally and more readily into nearby cities ; perceptions of
Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 1) Page 7
Title: 2022 Market Value Overview
value differ between the owner-occupant buyer versus the investor/rental buyer; and sale
pricing can be affected in a significant manner by association assessments.
This complexity and variety of market options has continued with the 2022 assessment being
relatively strong in the aggregate sense. The city-wide median value was at 171,6000 for 2020,
at 173,000 for 2021 and now at 193,500 for the 2022 assessment which is an increase of 11.8%.
Townhomes: There are 19 distinct complexes in the community. Just under one -half of them are
relatively small with fewer than 20 units. The other half are predominantly in the 20-50 unit
count bracket with three larger complexes. In general, the market forces at play in this property
type are similar to that of the condos with several mitigating factors. They include a higher
average unit value which is normally more stable in terms of value consistency. It is also our
perception that the physical designs tend to be less problematic while the rate of distressed
transactions and on-market listings have tended to be less dramatic. The city -wide median
market value for this stock advanced from 211,200 in 2020 to 222,100 in 2021 and is 272,900 for
the 2022 assessment – a one year value change of 22.9%. Again, we do not expect that kind of
appreciation trending to continue, and we will see how 2022 market activity plays out.
The following charts provide additional overview for the 2022 assessment. The first page reflects
the single -family neighborhoods over the past five years. The next two pages provide the
complex based breakdown of the condos and townhomes also over five years. The charts
include a parcel count reference and median market value which allows insight and perspective
of the local housing market over a fiv e-year tracking period.
Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 1) Page 8
Title: 2022 Market Value Overview
St. Louis Park -- Single Family Residential Properties
Historical Change of Assessed Market Values (Quintile Cycle)
Year of Assessment 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
a.
Median Assessed
Value: 274,900 297,800 306,400 330,250 371,800
b. City-Wide Change: 6.9% 6.7% 1.3% 7.8% 12.6%
# Neighborhood Reference 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Parcels Median
1 Shelard Park N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
2 Kilmer 6.4% 8.2% 3.9% 6.8% 14.3% 243 325,400
3 Crestview 0.2% 4.4% 2.7% 10.7% 6.3% 68 477,550
4 Westwood Hills 11.6% 0.6% 2.0% 3.7% 13.4% 292 537,450
5 Cedar Manor 7.9% 8.5% -0.7%12.0% 13.1% 573 372,700
6 Northside (x) Willow Park 12.2% 6.1% -4.1%7.8% 17.7% 303 382,200
7 Pennsylvania Park 0.0% 4.2% 9.2% 7.8% 10.9% 304 352,150
8 Eliot 6.9% 8.2% -2.2%13.0% 12.0% 510 341,500
9 Blackstone 4.2% 9.5% 8.1% 13.9% 5.9% 95 278,300
10 Cedarhurst 4.2% 18.3% 3.8% 7.0% 14.4% 48 337,500
11 Eliot View 8.5% 7.0% 5.1% 11.1% 9.1% 165 344,600
12 Cobblecrest 7.2% 10.2% 0.9% 7.9% 12.0% 382 412,200
13 Minnehaha 4.9% 7.8% 2.2% 4.0% 14.7% 129 491,600
14 Amhurst N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
15 Aquila 10.7% 5.3% 5.0% 12.0% 15.1% 504 323,250
16 Oak Hill 6.8% 11.0% 3.5% 10.3% 10.2% 638 338,950
17 Texa Tonka 7.8% 7.4% 1.9% 5.1% 16.9% 385 322,200
18 Bronx Park 7.2% 6.9% 4.3% 7.8% 10.6% 992 340,800
19 Lenox 8.1% 7.5% 2.3% 10.0% 11.6% 831 344,700
20 Sorenson 11.5% 8.1% 2.0% 3.6% 13.9% 451 359,100
21 Birchwood 11.5% 7.0% 2.8% 6.7% 12.2% 649 369,400
22 Lake Forest 5.9% 3.3% -3.1%3.7% 3.9% 196 673,700
23 Fern Hill 5.2% 4.4% 0.9% 6.1% 12.9% 962 523,750
24 Triangle 5.7% 10.3% 4.5% 6.7% 17.9% 108 347,400
25 Wolfe Park 10.5% 3.8% 5.4% 6.1% 15.8% 16 360,600
26 Minikada Oaks 0.9% 2.3% -1.6%10.2% 10.9% 76 489,300
27 Minikada Vista 3.9% 5.1% -2.5%7.9% 12.2% 798 550,500
28 Browndale 6.2% 7.9% 1.7% 5.5% 9.2% 549 504,100
29 Brookside 7.6% 6.1% -2.9%10.7% 16.9% 328 380,900
30 Brooklawns 6.2% 2.6% -0.4%15.5% 12.4% 149 393,400
31 Elmwood 7.8% 3.7% 5.0% 3.4% 14.3% 267 400,000
32 Meadowbrook N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
33 South Oak Hill 2.9% 11.4% 8.2% 8.3% 9.4% 291 314,300
34 Westdale 7.0% 14.9% -2.8%6.0% 9.9% 106 329,400
35 Creekside 8.1% 4.4% 1.3% 2.0% 16.8% 172 413,000
Quintile Counts 1,350 2,554 2,281 2,464 2,923 11,580
Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 1) Page 9
Title: 2022 Market Value Overview
St. Louis Park -- Condominium Properties
Historical Change of Assessed Market Values Year of Assessment 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
a. Median Assessed Value: 155,100 169,900 171,600 173,000 193,500
b. City-Wide Change: 9.2% 6.5% 4.0% 0.8% 11.8%
Code Complex Reference 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Units Median
MO Monterey Coop 6.4% 6.6% 3.3% 3.8% 5.4% 8 111,700
AC Aquila Commons Coop 6.5% 6.6% 3.3% 0.7% 0.0% 106 230,500
33 3300 On The Park 13.9% 4.4% 3.6% 0.0% 15.4% 128 203,300
35 35th St Condos - Apt Convr 5.7% 0.0% 3.3% 20.0% 16.8% 11 181,200
55 55+ Condos 8.0% 21.1% 6.8% 6.9% -1.1%60 250,750
BK Brookside Lfts - 4100 Vernon 0.0% 15.5% -2.1%0.0% 20.9% 27 292,500
BK Brookside Lfts - 4132 Vernon 0.0% 15.5% -2.1%0.0% 0.0% 14 N/A
BR Bridgewalk - Conversion 9.5% 12.0% 2.4% 4.9% 1.4% 92 133,800
CA Calhoun Hill 6.5% 4.9% 3.4% 12.2% -7.1%7 376,000
CH Coach Homes 7.5% 13.7% 10.6% 1.5% 5.0% 128 167,300
CS Cedar Trails - (South TH) 6.7% 9.9% 1.7% 2.3% 9.2% 32 225,650
CT Cedar Trails - (North of CLR) 5.9% 8.6% 3.8% 7.4% 10.6% 280 170,000
CW Cedar Trails - (S-West TH) 4.4% 9.9% 13.4% 0.0% -1.0%48 228,150
EV Elmwood Village 4.5% 6.8% 1.7% 0.0% 7.8% 77 364,200
FH Fern Hill 0.0% -2.9%-7.3%-4.8%26.0% 30 208,200
GR Greensboro Condos - HIA 8.8% 2.1% 22.0% 2.8% 16.4% 164 134,000
HV Harmony Vista (Hoigaards) 6.4% 6.7% 6.9% 3.9% 0.0% 74 238,600
IB Inglewood Boutique 6.5% 3.0% -9.3%5.2% 5.5% 6 369,400
LN Lynn Ave Condos - Apt Convr 6.3% 7.4% 5.1% 3.9% -1.0%12 217,900
LY Lynwood Condos 4.5% 8.9% 8.1% 12.0% 5.5% 11 212,000
MC Monterey Pl - Apt Convers 5.0% 6.9% -0.1%-3.7%3.7% 30 262,600
MR Murphy Ridge Condo TH 5.9% -5.9%3.3% 3.8% 5.4% 4 174,500
MW Monterey West - Condo TH 0.0% -9.0%3.3% 3.9% 5.5% 7 248,800
NP Natchez Pl 0.0% 14.9% 13.7% -2.6%5.4% 27 205,900
OX Oxford Gardens - Apt Convr 0.0% 6.6% 3.3% 3.9% -4.8%12 99,700
P0 Parkside Urban Lfts - 460 Bld 9.1% 2.2% 1.8% 6.1% 1.0% 24 347,300
P2 Parkside Urban Lfts - 462 Bld 9.9% 6.4% -1.1%11.7% 2.6% 22 335,600
P4 Parkside Urban Lfts - 464 Bld 11.3% 2.2% 8.9% -1.1%4.6% 22 320,200
PP Pondview Park - Apt Conver 4.6% 6.7% 14.0% 4.1% 0.2% 30 154,100
PW Pointe West Condos 5.0% 10.3% -2.4%0.0% 5.6% 86 356,100
S1 Sungate 1 - East of Alabama(N) 17.1% 6.6% 5.3% -1.1%5.4% 20 155,600
S2 Sungate 2 - East of Alabama(S) 20.0% 14.9% 0.9% 1.3% 17.1% 26 210,500
S3 Sungate 3 - West of Alabama 2.4% 6.7% 1.4% 0.0% 1.7% 14 221,300
SR Sunset Ridge - HIA 3.2% 9.7% 3.0% 3.1% 7.1% 240 159,000
TF Twin Fountains 15.5% 10.3% 1.1% 7.2% 1.7% 88 143,200
Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 1) Page 10
Title: 2022 Market Value Overview
EL Excelsior Lofts (T Joe Site) 10.6% 8.4% -1.5%2.1% -2.2%86 268,200
GW Grand Way (NE Bldg) 9.8% 0.4% 5.6% -4.5%4.0% 124 362,600
TG The Grand NW @ Excelsior 9.8% -4.2%4.4% 0.0% 3.6% 96 451,000
VL Village Lofts 9.0% 9.7% 6.6% 7.7% 4.1% 60 244,000
WE Westmoreland - HIA 22.6% 7.1% 11.3% 2.1% 7.6% 72 122,000
WF Wooddale Flats 4.0% 1.0% 2.9% -9.1%9.1% 33 479,700
WL Wolfe Lake 31.6% 3.8% 2.3% 4.3% -2.9%131 193,450
WM Westmarke Condos 6.4% 6.6% 1.7% 8.1% 2.7% 64 235,900
WO West Oaks 21.4% 10.5% 1.0% 1.2% 3.1% 75 276,700
WV Westwood Villa - HIA 30.3% 19.5% 10.7% 0.0% 4.9% 66 131,800
WY Wynmoor 34.2% 11.2% 3.3% 0.0% 11.0% 56 139,700
Quintile Counts 546 437 693 435 440 2,830
St. Louis Park -- Townhome Properties
Historical Change of Assessed Market Values
Year of Assessment 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
a. Median Assessed Value: 174,900 190,200 211,200 222,100 272,900
b. City-Wide Static Change: 4.0% 9.5% 9.5% 5.2% 22.9%
Code Complex Reference 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Units Median
BG Brunswick Gables 7.5% 7.1% 7.9% 3.0% 14.1% 7 312,100
DB Dan-Bar Twnhme 2.7% 4.0% 8.0% 3.0% 14.1% 4 250,300
EW Excelsior Way 25.7% 26.5% 14.0% 5.0% 21.4% 38 273,600
GR Greensboro - HIA 7.0% 10.0% 15.2% 0.5% 9.0% 96 223,600
HE Hampshire Estates 4.9% 10.2% 15.2% -3.0% 16.4%8 214,900
HH Hampshire House 0.0% 8.6% 14.3% 2.9% 11.8% 13 210,900
LL Lamplighter Park 3.6% 6.9% 8.7% -2.2% 14.2%5 475,300
LA Lohmans Amhurst 6.0% 12.8% 7.0% -0.4% 22.9%276 268,800
ME Medley Row 3.4% 7.9% 11.0% 3.0% 14.2% 22 386,000
MP Montery Park 2.4% 7.0% 2.5% 6.8% 14.9% 18 478,850
PC Princeton Court 3.0% 4.8% 1.8% 3.2% 21.7% 13 545,400
QC Quentin Court 2.9% 17.5% 2.3% 3.0% 14.2% 10 503,850
SH Shamrock 2.2% 7.6% 18.8% 1.4% 15.7% 16 237,250
SK Skyehill -6.1% 11.5%9.4% -8.1% 14.2%31 299,600
SW Sungate West 6.5% -0.1% 11.5%-7.6% 21.7%48 235,300
VP Victoria Ponds 1.2% 5.2% 7.7% 1.1% 17.5% 72 464,400
WT Westwood -3.5%3.7% 19.2% 4.6% 22.1% 38 291,200
ZA Zarthan Apt Twnhomes 4.0% 8.4% 16.0% 2.3% 15.3% 18 272,700
ZP Zarthan Park 4.0% 10.3% 16.7% 2.9% 3.5% 16 257,200
Quintile Counts 276 132 293 50 276 749
a: Median assessed market values – aggregate change including improvement values.
b: Localized market driven change – does not include improvement values.
Source: Annual compilations by the St. Louis Park Assessing Office.
Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 1) Page 11
Title: 2022 Market Value Overview
Apartments: This sector is largely driven in the historic sense by tenant supply/demand, the
income stream and owner return expectations. This use category has exhibited very robust
growth for an extended period of time (effectively increasing total unit counts by 40%+ in the
last decade with many more projects under construction and in the pipeline ). Thus, we provide a
longer historical perspective on market change and improvement values:
-F or 2013 – market change at + 8.2% and +13.9% including new construction.
-For 2014 – market change at + 8.2% and +20.2% with multiple new complexes on -line.
-For 2015 – market change at +12.1% and +13.3% for the next phase of new complexes.
-For 2016 – market change at +12.0% and +17.8% including new construction.
-For 2017 – market change at + 6.4% and + 9.5% including new construction.
-For 2018 – market change at + 7.5% and +13.3% including new construction.
-For 2019 – market change at + 8.2% and +11.4% including new construction.
-For 2020 – market change at +11.4% and +15.2% including new construction.
-For 2021 – market change at + 2.3% and + 3.9% including new construction.
-For 2022 – market change at + 9.7% and + 13.6% including new construction.
Looking at the above historical pattern presents a very clear picture of both market appreciation
and very active renovations including new construction. The totals above reflect aggregate value
change which includes mixed market appreciation rates annually for the Class A-B-C stock . The
market demand for units is primarily attributed to our location with proximity to Minneapolis ,
major employers in the west metro area as well as the broader economy.
Class A projects have been the primary focus for new construction due to the inter-connected
nature of the traditional approaches to valuation… cost to build, income stream and sales. It is
important to recognize that the Class A and B stock were severely under-built dating back to the
mid -1980 to mid -1990 time periods. The new complexes are helping to diversify the housing
stock in that the total unit count is now distributed with approximately half being class C stock
(typically less than 3 stories, built circa 1960-1975) and half being Class A and B stock.
For your reference, the 2022 median unit values for the stock are: Class A at $282,000 reflecting
an increase of 7.5%; the B’s are in a range of $170,000 to $228,000 at overall increase of 9.5%;
and the median value for the Class C stock at $117,000 at an overall increase of 11.7%. Value
changes for the 2021 assessment were minimal in the Class A and B sectors while the class C
properties were left flat in anticipation of the pandemic affecting income collections. Collection
losses were minimal due to an influx of government programs implemented to offset hardships
caused by the pandemic. The pandemic and social unrest have shifted demand to suburban
locales. This, alon g with projects being built near future mass transit and superior amenities
have led to stable growth in rental rates and decreased vacancies.
Commercial and Industrial: This sector has exhibited continuous market appreciation and new
construction growth for an extended period approaching a decade. The 2021 assessment ended
the market appreciation streak due to the pandemic with the general economy limitations
continuing into the 2022 assessment . Value changes year over year are dependent on how these
uses are performing in a range of national, regional and immediately local economies.
Commercial and industrial properties are valued across jurisdictional boundaries to a significant
extent with the specific use dictating the extent of ge ographic market areas.
Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 1) Page 12
Title: 2022 Market Value Overview
The overall market adjustment for the 2022 valuation on the commercial properties was 4.0%
inclusive of new construction while the market driven adjustment of the existing stock was
limited to 1.0% year-over-year. While this group of properties saw an overall gross increase in
value due to new construction, many use niches saw no movement in value due to the effects of
the pandemic on their business which ripples down to their underlying market value in the fee
simple sense … specifically noted as the economic variables of business value, value-in-use, and
leased fee may or may not play out the same as fee simple which is the required standard for
valuation in the MN property tax system. Most sectors that saw large downward adjustments
for the 2021 assessment are now stabilizing. All sub -sectors have been adjusted as closely as
possible in relation to market evidence including sales, active usage and leasing.
The overall market adjustment for the industrial stock was 9.2% which was predominantly
market driven with nominal new construction value for the year. Looking at these figures brings
three observations to mind. The first is that value changes in this use category become tricky as
demand for buildings previously viewed as functionally obsolescent is varying due to the
economy. Whether that use extension beyond economic/physical life will continue is an annual
question. Secondly, a significant volume of the current industrial stock is located near the future
light rail station areas which are major drivers of value change in terms of use, alterations and
interim holding. The two preceding issues bring us to the economic reality of under-lying land
values. As a mature inner ring suburb – actively engaged in redevelopment – our land value can
be a limiting factor for industrial users. The reason being that industrial uses are typically land
intensive and low-rise while our location and associated land values are a self -reinforcing
premium driven by density.
To close, the commercial sector saw overall growth due to new construction. Segments of this
sector saw no movement in value due to the impact of the pandemic. The industrial market saw
overall increases in value due to location, especially those close to the future light rail stations
and those that allow for outdoor storage which is a very rare commodity in the market.
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: March 28, 2022
Discussion item : 2
Executive summary
Title: Boards and commissions – structure, function, role, authority
Recommended action: No action at this time .
Policy consideration: Does the city council want to engage a consultant to evaluate and provide
a recommendation related to the structure, role, function, and authority of the city’s boards
and commissions?
Summary: Boards and commissions provide opportunities for the city to engage people in the
democratic process and hear different perspectives that help plan and shape the future of the
community. Ideally, boards and commissions bring people together and create space for the
expression of viewpoints that might not otherwise be heard. The city currently has ten boards
and commissions made up of volunteers with wide -ranging interests and expertise who care
about the community and want to participate in public service. The charter authorizes the city
council to create commissions with advisory powers to investigate any subject of interest to the
city. The city code contains the enacting ordinances for those bodies created with the express
purpose of acting in an advisory capacity to the city council. Other boards and commissions
derive their authority to conduct specific business from state statute. Membership
requirements, composition, scope of work and authority are varied. The city council appoints
most, but not all, board and commission members.
Over time, the needs and priorities of the community and the city council have evolved. In
recent years council has discussed several recurring themes related to the structure,
membership, function, and role of the advisory bodies. Staff routinely address similar topics as
boards and commissions look to connect with council and better understand their scope of
work and ability to impact policy decisions. Given the recent discussions around community and
civic engagement, the desire from the council to further examine the ir relation ship with and
the role of the city’s boards and commissions, and the goal to recruit and retain a more diverse
membership that reflects the community, staff recommends hiring a consultant to conduct an
in -depth evaluation and provide a recommendation on how the city’s boards and commissions
could be utilized to further advance the city’s strategic priorities, with a strong focus on race
equity and inclusion and building social capital through community and civic engagement. The
consultant will be asked to conduct a stakeholder analysis, review each board/commission’s
current structure, role , and scope of work, examine the recruitment/application/appointment
process, and facilitate community conversations. The recommendation would be discussed
with council, likely in the fall of 2022, to determine next steps and implement any changes prior
to the start of the 2023 recruitment process.
Financial or budget considerations: Funds are available in the Administrative Services budget. If
council would like to move forward , staff will develop a RFP for consulting services and update
the council throughout the process.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build
social capital through community engagement.
Supporting documents: Exhibit A – boards and commissions structural overview
Prepared by: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Approve d by: Kim Keller, city manage r
Board/Commission Structure Role/Function/Authority
Bassett Creek Watershed
Management commission
•Cohort of 9 member cities
•Council appoints 1 commissioner, 1 alternate,
and (1) tech advisor
•Derives power from watershed management plan and joint powers agreement.
•Reports to BCWMC board.
•Works to identify water quality improvement and flood control projects within watershed.
•No work plan required.
Charter Commission •15 members
•Appointed by Chief Judge of District Court
•Members must be residents
•Authority derived from statute .
•Maintain city charter and make recommendations on amendments .
•No work plan required.
Community Technology
Advisory Commission
•7 regular members - (6) appointed by council,
(1) appointed by ISD #283
•(2) youth members
•(1) ex-officio member appointed by cable
company, non-voting
•Council-appointed members must be residents;
youth must be high school student at school in
city
•School board-appointed member must be
resident of school district
•Authority derived from city code.
•Advise and collaborate with the city council and boards and commissions on application and use of
technology to improve city services and quality of life.
•Work pla n required.
Environment &
Sustainability
Commission
•(11) regular members
•(2) youth members
•All members council-appointed
•Regular members must be residents
•Preference given to business owners (no
residency req.)
•Youth members must be high school student at
school in city
•Authority derived from city code.
•Advise council on environment and sustainability issues .
•Allowed to conduct community engagement to educate and/or elicit feedback.
•Allowed to establish work groups.
•Work plan required.
Fire Civil Service
Commission
•3-member commission
•Appointed by city council
•Authority derived from statute .
•Non-advisory body.
•Regulates and supervises employment, promotion, discharge, suspension of sworn fire positions
•No work plan required.
Housing Authority •5-member board
•Council appointed
•(1) member must be a program participant
•Authority derived from statute.
•Oversees administration of housing programs and policy authorized by council.
•Work plan required.
Page 2 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 2)
Title: Boards and commissions – structure, function, role, authority
Exhibit A – Boards and commissions structural overview
Exhibit A – Boards and commissions structural overview
•Members must be residents
Human Rights
Commission
•(8) regular members - (7) appointed by council,
(1)of which must be an attorney; (1) appointed
by I SD #283
•(2) youth members
•Council-appointed members must be residents;
youth must be high school student at school in
city
•School board-appointed member must be
resident of school district
•Authority derived from city code .
•Advise the city council in efforts to ensure protection of human right and equal opportunity for
participation in affairs of the community.
•Work plan required.
Parks & Recreation
Advisory Commission
•(7) regular members - (4) appointed by council,
(3) appointed by ISD #283
•(2) youth members
•Council-appointed members must be residents;
youth must be high school student at school in
city
•School board-appointed member s must be
resident of school district
•Authority derived from city code .
•Advise the city council on all matters requested by council.
•Consider matters pertaining to recreation programs.
•Study and recommend long range park & rec plans for the city.
•Evaluate parks and rec programs and community desires/needs for such services.
•Work plan required.
Planning Commission •7 regular members - (6) appointed by council,
(1) appointed by ISD #283
•1 nonvoting youth member, council-appointed
•Council-appointed members must be residents;
youth must be high school student at school in
city
•School board-appointed member must be
resident of school district
•Authority derived from city code .
•Advise council on land use, comprehensive planning, zoning, platting, changes in streets , etc.
•Prepare comp plan for implementation by council; maintain plan; recommend amendments.
•Allowed to initiate, direct and review studies of zoning code and subdivision regulations and make
recommendations to council.
•Study applications and proposals for amendments to zoning code , applications for special permits , and
make recommendations to council.
•Study preliminary and final plats and make recommendations to council.
•Work plan required.
Police Advisory
Commission
•(11) regular members
•(2) youth members
•Council-appointed
•Members must be residents; youth must be
students at school in city
•Authority derived from city code .
•Under direction of council, enhance awareness of police department capabilities and services; provide
opportunity for citizen involvement in police services and encourage exchange between police and
community; act in advisory capacity to council.
•Work plan required.
Page 3 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 2)
Title: Boards and commissions – structure, function, role, authority
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: March 28, 2022
Written report: 3
Executive summary
Title: Application for TIF Assistance – Wooddale Avenue Apartments (Ward 2)
Recommended action: None at this time. This staff report outlines Real Estate Equities’
application for financial assistance .
Policy consideration: Is the EDA willing to consider entering a redevelopment contract to
reimburse the Developer for up to $940,000 in qualified costs through TIF to enable it to
achieve financial feasibility and provide a deferred loan of $850,000 from the Affordable
Housing Trust Fund (AHTF) to secure deeper levels of affordability?
Summary: Real Estate Equities (REE and “developer”) has a purchase agreement to acquire the
Aldersgate Methodist Church property at 3801 Wooddale Avenue . REE’s plan s for the site
include removal of the existing church, and construction of a 114-unit, all affordable , workforce
housing development. The proposed $34.26 million development includes a mix of one -, two-,
and three-bedroom units, including five units at 30% AMI, five units at 50% AMI, and 104 units
at 60% AMI for 26 years, exceeding the city’s Inclusionary Housing Policy requirements.
Additionally, the development has been awarded Tax Exempt Bonds and a Low -Income Housing
Tax Credit (LIHTC) allocation, which requires four additional years of affordability at 60% AMI
for all units, for a total of 30 years of affordability.
Financial or budget considerations: Based on Ehlers finical analysis, it likely that any affordable
housing developer would request financial assistance from the City. REE has sought project
financing from a variety of public agencies for the proposed development. It was awarde d up to
$17.49 million tax exempt bonds from Minnesota Management and Budget (MMB), Low
Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) from Minnesota Housing and are applying for cleanup
grants from Hennepin County. Despite these sources, and deferring over 70% of their developer
fee, the project’s proforma exhibits a funding gap due to its considerable extraordinary costs.
Consequently, REE applied for tax increment financing (TIF) assistance to enable the
development to become financially feasible . Ehlers, the EDA’s financial consultant, examined
the project’s pro forma to determine what, if any, level of financial assistance was necessary for
the development to achieve financial feasibility . After review, Ehlers determined that up to
$940,000 in TI F assistance is warranted to enable the project to proceed. Such assistance would
be provided via a pay-as-you-go TIF Note. Given current estimates of market value, it is
estimated that the development’s TIF Note would be paid off in approximately 15 years which
means it would be back on the tax roles. Such assistance would derive from a new housing TIF
district. In addition, a deferred loan of $850,000 from the city’s AHTF is needed to “buy down”
the deeper levels of affordable housing at 30% and 50% AMI in the development.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Prepared by: Jennifer Monson, redevelopment admin., Keith Dahl, municipal advisor, Ehlers
Reviewed by: Greg Hunt, economic development manager
Karen Barton, community development director, EDA executive director
Approved by: Cindy Walsh, deputy city manager/operations and recreation director
Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 3) Page 2
Title: Application for TIF Assistance – Wooddale Avenue Apartments
Discussion
Site information: The subject redevelopment site at 3801 Wooddale Avenue is approximately
2.69 acres in size . The site is located on the west side of Highway 100, east of Wooddale
Avenue, and immediately south of the Hwy 100 on/off ramp.
Site area (acres): 2.69 acres
Current use: Surrounding land uses:
church and parking lot North: right of way, commercial
East: Fire station 1, Center Park, and
single -family residential
South: single-family residential
West: Highway 100
Current 2040 land use guidance Current zoning
CIV - civic R-3 two -family residence
Proposed 2040 land use guidance Proposed zoning
RH - high density residential PUD planned unit development
Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 3 ) Page 3
Title: Application for TIF Assistance – Wooddale Avenue Apartments
Background: The existing building at 3801 Wooddale Avenue was constructed in 1950 and used
as a place of worship and a daycare. Aldersgate Methodist Church is downsizing and merging
with another local church. Aldersgate desire s to leave behind a legacy of affordable housing for
the St. Louis Park community. The church has entered into a purchase contract with Real Estate
Equities (REE and “developer”) to redevelop the site as an all-affordable workforce housing
development. The existing building is currently occupied by Aldersgate Methodist Church and
another small congregation which has a short-term lease for the space. Both users in tend to
vacate the space in the coming months.
Real Estate Equities completed a phase I and phase II environmental assessment of the subject
site , and significant environmental remediation is necessary to remove asbestos in the existing
structure. The developer is submitting a grant application to Hennepin County to help off-set
these clean-up costs.
On Jan. 11, 2022, REE was awarded Tax Exempt revenue bonds from Minnesota Management
and Budget in the amount of $17,490,550 and was subsequently awarded Low -Income Housing
Tax Credit s (LIHTC) from Minnesota Housing. These bond allocations require the developer to
receive all financial obligations and close on the project within 180 days . REE’s deadline for the
Wooddale Avenue Apartment development is Friday, July 8, 2022.
Present considerations: Real Estate Equities has a purchase agreement with Aldersgate
Methodist Church and proposes to remove the existing building and re develop the site with an
all-affordable, three - to four-story apartment building. The development would include 114
dwelling units that would be affordable at a range of 30 to 60 percent of the area median
income (AMI). The plan proposes accessing the site from Wooddale Avenue with driveways
both north and south of the cul-de -sac. 117 parking stalls are provided underground, and 89
stalls are proposed in surface lots on the building’s west and north side s. Other proposed site
improvements include sidewalks, new landscaping, an underground stormwater management
system and a 40-53 kw rooftop solar array.
REE submitted applications for a comprehensive plan amendment to re-guide the site ’s land
use from civic to high density residential, a preliminary and final plat, and a preliminary and
final planned unit development. The planning commission held a public hearing on the
applications March 23, 2022, and city council is scheduled to consider the applications on April
4, 2022.
As proposed, the development exceeds the city’s inclusionary housing policy as amended in
October 2021 and exceeds the city’s green building policy as amended in July 2020, including a
rooftop solar array.
Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 3 ) Page 4
Title: Application for TIF Assistance – Wooddale Avenue Apartments
Rendering of proposed Wooddale Avenue Apartments
Wooddale Avenue Apartments would be a single -phase, all-affordable , residential development
marketed as workforce housing. The 114-unit building would include a combination of one -,
two-, and three-bedroom units with five units affordable at 30 percent area median income
(AMI), five units affordable at 50 percent AMI, and 104 units affordable at 60 percent AMI.
Unit Type 30% AMI 50% AMI 60% AMI Total units
1-bedroom 2 2 23 27
2-bedroom 2 2 49 53
3-bedroom 1 1 32 34
Total 5 5 104 114
Upon closing on its financing, the developer plans to commence construction in summer 2022
and complete construction by year-end 2024. Real Estate Equities would own and manage the
residential development for at least 15 years, through the required tax credit compliant period
pertaining to the LIHTC allocation. However, it has indicated that it will likely continue to own
the property beyond the required 15 years.
Inclusionary housing: As outlined above, the proposed apartment building would be an all-
affordable development with rents ranging from 30 percent to 60 percent AMI. The
development would exceed the city’s inclusionary housing policy as amended in October 2021,
which requires at least 20 percent of the units be affordable at 60 perce nt AMI. Per the
Metropolitan Council, the 60 percent AMI for a family of four is $62,940. A development of this
size is required to provide at least four three -bedroom units per the city’s inclusionary housing
policy . The developer plans to include 34 three -bedroom units in the building’s unit mix,
exceeding the policy requirements by 29 units, to further the city’s goals for family -sized
housing.
Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 3 ) Page 5
Title: Application for TIF Assistance – Wooddale Avenue Apartments
As negotiated, the above affordability levels would be maintained for 26 years, as required by
the city’s inclusionary housing policy. Given that the development has been allocated Low
Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC), all the units must remain affordable up to 60 percent AMI
for at least 30 years . In summary, the proposed development would provide 114 units of
affordable housing for 30 years.
Climate Action Plan: The development will exceed the city’s Green Building Policy as amended
in July 2020 and intends to follow Enterprise Green Communities/Energy Star Program with the
Minnesota Overlay as its design rating system. The development will also include the following
sustainable features:
• A 40-53 kw rooftop solar array
• LED lighting
• Low VOC paint and adhesives
• Energy Start appliances and windows
• High efficiency magic paks
• Recycled content in construction material
• Recycled construction waste
• Low flow water fixtures
• Soil and asbestos remediation
Additionally, the development will provide 19 level-2 charging stations for residents. There will
also be 10 exterior bicycle parking spaces near the main entrance to the building and 175
spaces will be located within the building, for a total of 185 bicycle parking spaces.
The site is within ½ mile from the future Wooddale Avenue LRT station which will provid e
reliable and efficient public transit for building occupants. This means residents will not need to
rely on a single -occupancy vehicle , resulting in reduced vehicle miles traveled and less emissions .
G iven the above, the proposed development exceeds the city’s Green Building Policy
requirements as amended July 2020.
Racial equity and inclusion: The proposed development will provide qualified families
(including households of color) with equal access to new, quality housing in proximity to area
amenities and multi-modal transportation. As an "Income Averaging" development, all 114
units would be considered affordable to households at incomes ranging from 30% to 60% AMI,
with a building average income of less than 60% AMI. Additionally, 30 percent of the proposed
units would be three bedrooms which are often appealing to multigenerational households of
color. Resultingly, the proposed development provides an opportunity for racial and economic
integration consistent with the city’s racial equity and inclusion goals.
Real Estate Equities employee base is 50% female and is 46% BIPOC /non-white . In their other
developments, their overall resident base is 65% BIPOC/non -white and is 75% female. Real
Estate Equities advertises employment positions through various forms of media, including
those that are targeted towards the Veteran, Hmong, and African American communities and
partners with local organizations that support DEI initiatives, such as Union Gospel Mission and
Best Buy Teen Tech Center.
The Developer anticipates that its construction practices, and ongoing property management
will meet the intent of the city’s diversity, equity, and inclusion policy .
Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 3 ) Page 6
Title: Application for TIF Assistance – Wooddale Avenue Apartments
In addition, REE’s general contractor, Big – D Construction, intends to bid the development to
approximately 50 women and BIPOC owned subcontractors. Big-D is also working on another
project in St. Louis Park, 9920 Wayzata Boulevard, and is aware of the city’s DEI goals for hiring
women and minority owned businesses and workforce.
The Development Team: Real Estate Equities (REE) is a 50-year-old multifamily development
and property management company based in the Twin Cities. REE’s primary focus is on the
development and management of workforce and senior affordable housing. The company is
currently developing projects in Minnesota as well as Arizona. In REE’s history, the company has
developed and managed over 12,000 multifamily housing units across the country. REE retains
long term ownership of the company’s development projects and provides full-service property
and asset management. More information on the applicant can be found at the company
website . Some similar recent Real Estate Equities developments include: Sonder House
Apartments in Brooklyn Center, Spring House Apartments in Coon Rapids, Press House
Apartments in St. Paul, The Winslow in West Saint Paul, and Eastgate Apartments in Rochester.
Application for Tax Increment Financing assistance: It is anticipated that the proposed
development will incur a number of extraordinary site development costs such as contamination
abatement, building demolition and removal, and structured parking. These extraordinary
redevelopment costs, along with the all-affordable nature of the housing development
(requiring below market rents for 30 years) as we ll as the city -requested sustainable features
create a gap in the project’s financial proforma. To mitigate the project’s estimated financial
gap, the developer applied for $1.9 million in tax increment financing (TIF) assistance.
Tax increment financing uses most of the increased future property taxes generated by a new
development to finance certain qualified development costs incurred by that project for a
limited period to enable it to achieve financial feas ibility . The EDA’s financial advisor, Ehlers,
examined the financial information provided within the developer’s TIF application based on
general industry standards for land, construction, and project costs; rents; operating expenses;
fees; underwriting and financing criteria; and project cash flow. Based on this analysis, Ehlers
and EDA staff determine d the proposed development exhibits a financial gap justifying the
provision of TIF assistance.
Extraordinary Redevelopment Expenses, Affordable
Impact, and sustainability features Amount ($)
Demolition $201,000
Asbestos Abatement Work $278,000
Solar panels $287,000
Affordable impact $16,230,906
TOTAL Extraordinary Costs $16,996,906
Construction/Extraordinary Costs: The estimated total development cost (TDC) to construct
the proposed Wooddale Avenue Apartments is over $34.2 million or $300,542 per unit which is
within industry standards under current market conditions. The $479,000 of extraordinary costs
along with the $16.2 million affordability impact* and the $287,000 in city -requested
sustainability features constitute the project’s financial gap.
Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 3 ) Page 7
Title: Application for TIF Assistance – Wooddale Avenue Apartments
*Affordability impact: The affordability impact is calculated by comparing the market rate rents
to the affordable rents for the term in which the developer is not receiving any tax increment.
Rents for affordable housing units are approximately 44% less than the rents charged for
market rate units. The difference between these rents, times the number of affordable units
each month for 26 years, significantly reduce the development’s rental income. In this case, it is
estimated that the affordability impact over 26 years will amount to $16,230,906 or $142,376
per affordable unit.
Due to decreased rental income from 100% of the units over 26 years, there is insufficient cash
flow to provide a market rate of return, pay ongoing operating expenses, and service the
outstanding debt on the property. This leaves a gap in the funding for the project and makes
this housing development financially in feasible without public financial assistance . Under MN
TIF statutes, costs to construct affordable housing are an eligible expense that may be
reimbursed through tax increment originating from a housing TIF District.
Proposed level of assistance: The recommended level of assistance for the project was
determined by analyzing the project’s extraordinary site development costs, construction costs ,
affordability impact over 26 years, city -requested sustainability features, and ensuring all
private forms of financing have been maximized. Ehlers concluded that tax increment
assistance in the amount of $940,000 and a loan in the amount of $840,000 from the city’s
Affordable Housing Trust Fund (AHTF) is necessary to enable the proposed development to
become financially feasible . This level of assistance would offset enough of the extraordinary
site costs, city -requested sustainability features, and affordability impact described above to
allow the proposed project to achieve financial feasibility an d attract private financing thereby
enabling it to proceed. The developer has indicated the recommended level of assistance is
acceptable.
Consistent with previous EDA redevelopment agreements, a "lookback" provision would be
incorporated into the redevelopment agreement with the developer.
Land Acquisition: Real Estate Equities has a purchase agreement to acquire the subject
redevelopment site from the Aldersgate Methodist church for $2.8 million or $24,561 per unit.
This land sale price is considered within market compared to other multi-family land sales
within the city.
TIF Note: The proposed development would take approximately 20 months to construct. It is
anticipated that the first increment could be paid in 2024. Given current estimates of market
value, it is estimated that a $940,000 TIF Note would be paid off in approximately 15 years (on
a net present value basis). It is projected that the Note would terminate with the final payment
on February 1, 2039. Payments on the Note would be made on a "pay-as-you-go" basis, which
means that as the developer pays the project’s property taxes, a portion of those taxes (the
“tax increment”) are paid back semi-annually to the developer under the specified terms of the
TIF Note. Thus, payments to the developer would only be made as the project’s property taxes
are received. This is the preferred financing method under the city's TIF Policy.
Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 3 ) Page 8
Title: Application for TIF Assistance – Wooddale Avenue Apartments
TIF district: It is proposed that the tax increment provided to Wooddale Avenue Apartments
derive from a new ly established housing TIF district. With 100 percent of the units affordable to
households ranging from 30 to 60 percent of area median income , the Wooddale Avenue
Apartment development would meet the statutory requirements for establishment of a
housing TIF district. Once the tax increment obligation to the developer is paid off, the council
will have the option to decertify the district or to keep it open for TIF pooling purposes.
Housing TIF Districts allow for up to 100% pooling for affordable housing purposes. Such a TIF
district would allow for up to 26 years of tax increment by state statute.
Property value and taxes: The subject redevelopment property is currently exempt from
property taxes. For tax increment financing purposes, the taxable market value of the property
is estimated at $2,616,000. This would be the proposed TIF district’s Base Value. Upon sale of
the property to Real Estate Equities, the city, county, and school district would begin receiving
property taxes from the Base Value. The estimated market value upon the proposed
development’s completion is estimated at approximately $20 million. Most of this value (minus
the Base Value) would be captured as tax increment and used to make payments on the TIF
Note to the developer until it is paid off. It is estimated that the development would generate
nearly $143,000 in annual property taxes upon completion and full occupancy. The city’s
portion would be slightly under $50,000.
Analysis of development’s conformity with the city’s TIF Policy: The following table lists the
objectives, qualifications, and guidelines for the use of tax increment financing as specified in
the city’s TIF Policy as amended in December 2021, as well as how and whether the proposed
development meets the majority of those standards.
Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 3 ) Page 9
Title: Application for TIF Assistance – Wooddale Avenue Apartments
TIF Policy Compliance Table*
Factor Requirement/Guideline Proposed Project Met?
Applicable
TIF District
Redevelopment/Renewal &
Renovation/ Housing/Economic
Development
Housing district Yes
Statutory TIF
district
requirements
Housing District
40% of the units affordable at
60% AMI
20% of the units affordable at
50% AMI: or
10% of the units affordable at
30% AMI
100% of the units will be
affordable between 30% to
60% AMI
Yes
Use of TIF Proposed costs are statutorily
eligible for reimbursement
through proposed TIF district.
Proposed use of tax increment
financing to mitigate the cost
of constructing affordable
housing is statutorily eligible
through housing TIF districts.
Yes
TIF
Objectives
TIF Policy requires projects to
meet over half of applicable
objectives for use of TIF.
Proposed project meets nearly
all the EDA’s Objectives for the
use of TIF
Yes
Minimum
Qualifications
Applicable Strategic Priorities Proposed project provides
broad range of housing and
neighborhood-oriented
development.
Yes
Meets Green Building Policy
requirements.
Development will exceed the
July 2020 Green Bldg Policy
requirements.
Yes
Meets Inclusionary Housing
Policy requirements (if
applicable).
Development will exceed the
Oct. 2021 Inclusionary Housing
Policy requirements.
Yes
Meets Diversity, Equity, and
Inclusion Policy.
The developer’s construction
practices, and ongoing
management will meet the
intent of the city’s diversity,
equity, and inclusion policy.*
Yes*
Consistent with city's
Comprehensive Plan and Zoning
Ordinance, or approvals
pending.
The developer is requesting a
comprehensive plan
amendment and a PUD zoning
district. If city council approves
these changes, the
development will be
consistent with city plans and
zoning. City council is
scheduled to consider the
applications on April 4, 2022**
Pending**
Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 3 ) Page 10
Title: Application for TIF Assistance – Wooddale Avenue Apartments
Removes contamination, blight
and/or will not generate
significant environmental
problems.
Proposed project removes a
vacant building that no longer
meets building and fire codes.
The new building will also
meet 2022 requirements for
stormwater and will be a more
efficient building exceeding
the city’s green building policy
requirements.
Yes
Helps facilitate desired
development that would not
occur without assistance.
Proposed assistance would
facilitate desired affordable
development and would not
occur without such assistance.
Yes
Developer provided necessary
documentation to evaluate TIF
need and proposed project.
Developer provided necessary
documentation to evaluate
proposed project and TIF
request.
Yes
Determined not financially
feasible "but-for" the use of tax
increment financing.
Ehlers determined the
proposed project is not
financially feasible "but-for"
the use of tax increment
financing
Yes
Developer has experience and
capability to construct proposed
project.
Developer has extensive
experience and capability to
construct the proposed
project.
Yes
Developer plans to retain
ownership of project long
enough to stabilize occupancy (if
applicable).
Real Estate Equities plans to
retain ownership of the
project through stabilization
and will continue to manage
the property.
Yes
Meets all Minimum
Qualifications.
The development meets all
Min imum Qualifications if the
city council votes to approve
an amendment to the 2040
comprehensive plan use plan
and rezone the property to a
PUD.
Pending**
/Yes
Desired
Qualifications
Incorporates Livable
Communities, New Urbanism,
TOD, Sustainable Design
principles (i.e., mixed -use, urban
design, human scale, walkable,
public spaces, and sustainable
design features).
Proposed project incorporates
Livable Communities , TOD,
and sustainable design
principles.
Yes
Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 3 ) Page 11
Title: Application for TIF Assistance – Wooddale Avenue Apartments
High quality development (sound
architectural design, quality
construction and materials).
Proposed project will
incorporate high quality
design and materials.
Yes
Provides rents at deeper
affordability levels such as 30%
or 50% AMI (if applicable).
Proposed development will
provide 5 units with rents at
30% AMI and 5 units with rents
at 50% AMI . The remaining 104
units will have rents affordable
to households at 60% AMI
Yes
Provides units for larger families
(i.e., 3- & 4-bedroom units (if
applicable )).
Thirty -four 3-bedroom units
are proposed
Yes
Complements and/or adds value
to neighborhood by providing
public elements or placemaking
features (if applicable).
The project provides economic
integration and will add value
to the neighborhood by
redeveloping a vacant church
and large parking lot , into
affordable workforce housing.
Yes
Proposed development will
likely stimulate further
investment in surrounding
area/neighborhood.
This site is being redeveloped
to replace an existing church
which no longer needs this
size of property. The majority
of the site is surrounded by
single -family residential, right
of way and older commercial
uses to the north. While the
Burlington/MicroCenter site
might redevelop in the future,
it is unlikely this development
will stimulate that investment
No
Provides new, or retained,
employment (if applicable).
Will provide 2 new FTE
employment opportunities.
Yes
The increase in market value of
the property after
redevelopment is more than 8
times the original market value.
The estimated market value of
the site after redevelopment is
7.62 times the original market
value.***
No***
Will have a positive community
impact.
Proposed project will have a
significant positive impact on
the community by providing
114 affordable housing units,
including units that are deeply
affordable and larger family -
sized units.
Yes
Will not place extraordinary
demands on city services.
City departments determined
proposed project will not
place extraordinary demands
on city services.
Yes
Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 3 ) Page 12
Title: Application for TIF Assistance – Wooddale Avenue Apartments
Will not likely generate
significant environmental
problems and/or cleans up
existing contamination.
The development will not
generate any environmental
problems and will clean up
existing contamination
includes a building filled with
asbestos.
Yes
Land price for project site is
within market range.
Land price for project site is
within market range.
Yes
Ratio of private to city
investment (TIF and grants) is
more than $5 to $1.
Proposed private to city
investment is nearly $19 to $1.
Yes
The proposed amount of TIF
assistance or term of the TIF
Note is within range of similar
developments which received
TIF assistance.
The proposed TIF assistance is
within range of similar
development that received TIF
assistance. The proposed term
of the TIF Note is at the
maximum desired but does
not exceed the 15 years
desired under the TIF Policy.
Yes
Proposed TIF assistance will be
provided on a pay-as-you-go-
basis.
Proposed TIF will be provided
on a pay-as-you-go-basis.
Yes
Meets the majority of Desired
Qualifications.
The development meets the
majority of Desired
Qualifications
Yes
*Planning applications were submitted and approved prior to the adoption of the pending
diversity equity and inclusion policy . Therefore , the development team is not required to
adhere to this policy. However, staff will work with the development team to meet the intent of
the policy during construction and ongoing management. Real Estate Equities will be working
with Big D construction to construct the building. Both companies are dedicated to helping the
city meet DEI goals and will provid e quarterly updates on women and BIPOC owned business
enterprises and workforce participation. Both companies have a proven record of furthering
DEI initiatives in their companies and in the cities they work.
**The site does not currently meet the city’s comprehensive plan or zoning requirements.
However, the applicant is requesting a comprehensive plan amendment and a PUD zoning
district. If city council approves these changes, the development will be consistent with city
plans and zoning. City council is schedule d to consider the applications on April 4, 2022
***The increase in market value of the property after redevelopment is technically less than 8
times the original market value. However, the property is currently used as a church and is tax
exempt, making the market value for taxing entities essentially $0. Taking into consideration
the increase in market value from a tax -exempt church to a multifamily development, the value
of the property is significantly higher than 8 times the original market value.
Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 3 ) Page 13
Title: Application for TIF Assistance – Wooddale Avenue Apartments
Given that the proposed development meets statutory requirements, as well as all objectives,
qualifications and guidelines as specified in the TIF Policy, staff finds Real Estate Equities’
request for TIF assistance meets the EDA’s requirements for the provision of tax increment
financing.
Affordable Housing Trust Fund (AHTF): The EDA does not need to take formal action on the
amount of funding provided through the AHTF, but will be requested to provide approval of the
terms of the contract . The loan of $850,000 would be non-interest bearing and would be repaid
upon the earlier of 1) 25 years, 2) refinancing, or 3) sale of the development. In order to qualify
for utilization of funds from the AHTF, a rental development needs to provide at least 40 percent
of the units affordable to households at 60 percent AMI or at least 20 percent of the units
affordable at 50 percent AMI. The proposed development exceeds the requirements of the AHTF
policy by providing five units at 30 percent AMI, five units at 50 percent AMI, and the remaining
104 units at 60 percent AMI. By providing additional assistance through the trust fund, this allows
the development to achieve deeper levels of affordability for 10 of the units and to incorporate
more, larger units.
Summary and recommendation: Based upon its analysis of REE’s proforma for Wooddale Avenue
Apartments, Ehlers determined that the proposed development has a verified financial gap and is
not financially feasible but-for the provision of tax increment financing and a deferred loan from
the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. To offset this gap, it is proposed that the EDA consider
reimbursing the developer up to $940,000 in pay-as-you-go tax increment generated by the
project over a 15-year term. Such assistance would derive from a newly established housing TIF
district upon completion of the proposed project and stabilization. It is also proposed that the
EDA provide a deferred loan in the amount of $840,000 from the AHTF.
Providing tax increme nt financing assistance and a deferred loan through the AHTF to the
proposed Wooddale Avenue Apartment development achieves the following:
• redevelops an under-utilized church and large parking lot which no longer meet current
building or fire codes.
• provides the city with a quality, multi-family all-affordable housing development.
consistent with many goals of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, city ’s strategic priorities and
council preferences.
• further diversifies the city’s housing stock with an additional 114 all-affordable multi-
family units , includ ing five deeply affordable units at 30 percent area median income , for
30 years exceeding the city’s Inclusionary Housing Policy requirements , and provides
larger, family -sized units.
• includes numerous sustainable features (including a solar array) exceeding the city’s
Green Building Policy requirements.
• brings the subject properties to significantly higher market value than they are currently.
• creates a potential new revenue stream to assist future affordable housing developments
and programs.
Real Estate Equities proposed Wooddale Avenue Apartments meets the city’s requirements for
the provision of Tax Increment Financing as specified in the city’s TIF Policy and the provisions to
utilize money from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. As noted above, the project meets nearly
Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 3 ) Page 14
Title: Application for TIF Assistance – Wooddale Avenue Apartments
all Objectives as well as almost all Minimum and Desired Qualifications for providing TIF
assistance. Additionally, it has been demonstrated that the proposed development is not
financially feasible but-for the provision of tax increment financing and AHTF. Lastly, the
proposed amount of assistance is comparable to other housing developments in which the EDA
previously invested. Given these findings, staff supports reimbursing the development team for
eligible costs up to $940,000 in pay-as-you-go tax increment generated by the proposed mixed
income development and a deferred loan of $840,000 from the AHTF to enable it to become
financially feasible .
Next steps: As with all TIF applications, it is at the EDA’s discretion as to whether to provide the
proposed Wooddale Avenue Apartment development with the requested tax increment
assistance at the recommended level. Provided the EDA supports providing such assistance, the
EDA will be asked to begin the formal process of establishing a new housing TIF district; the
vehicle through which the financial assistance would be provided. The first step of which is to
set a public hearing date. It is proposed that date for holding the public hearing for the
establishment of the new Aldersgate - Wooddale Avenue TIF District be tentatively scheduled
for June 6, 2022. The next steps in the TIF approval process would be as follows:
1. Negotiation of business terms for the provision of tax increment assistance.
2. Review of proposed business terms of contract for private redevelopment contract.
3. Hold public hearing on the establishment of the proposed Aldersgate - Wooddale
Avenue TIF District (a housing TIF district). – city council
4. Approval of TIF district plan and contract for private redevelopment – EDA and city
council.
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: March 28, 2022
Written report: 4
Executive summary
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use
Re commended action: No action required at this time . City council will be asked to approve the
policy following a public hearing on April 4, 2022.
Policy consideration: Does council wish to approve the proposed use and policy for the
Fotokite Unmanned Aerial System (UAS)?
Summary: The tethered Fotokite UAS was budgeted to replace an antiquated pole camera on
the emergency command vehicle during its recent remodel. The main feature of this device that
distinguishes it from other small, unmanned aircraft is its cable, or tether, which is secured onto
the device and connects it to a home base. To date, the police department has not deployed a
drone. The St. Louis Park Police Department began preparing for a UAS program in 2021 and
plans to join numerous other law enforcement agencies in Minnesota in use of the technology.
The tethered drones may be used for various police and fire operations to provide video images
of scenes to assist in public safety operations. The drones are equipped with a thermal imaging
camera that can be used for locating missing people or fugitives outdoors through heat
signatures. Other potential applications include documenting severe weather damage , and
various public displays and community events. In addition, other city departments are
interested in utilizing them for training purposes, structure inspections, engineering site
surveys, GIS mapping, and videography.
City Attorney Soren Mattick was consulted regarding current federal and state regulations and
their applicability to the Fotokite. Mr. Mattick recommended following the state statute
guidelines on implementing a UAS by receiving public comment on their use and policy to also
include a public hearing that has been scheduled for April 4, 2022 to satisfy this statutory
requirement.
Financial or budget considerations: The total cost of two Fotokite units were $50,000 and
purchased as part of the approved 2021 budget.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Discussion
St. Louis Park police department unmanned aerial system operations policy
MN Statute §626.19
Submitted public comments
Prepared by: Greg Weigel, police lieutenant
Approved by: Mike Harcey , police chief
Approve d by: Kim Keller, city manager
Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4) Page 2
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
Discussion
Background: City Attorney Soren Mattick was consulted regarding current federal and state
regulations and their applicability to the Fotokite. The following is section provides information
on the federal and state regulations on UAS and our compliance plan.
Federal regulation: Typically, drones or unmanned aircraft are subject to FAA regulation.
However, the Fotokite device does not require additional FAA approval, certification, or
certificate of authorization because it is tethered and is owned and operated by the city, a
political subdivision of the state (49 U.S. Code 44806(c)(2)).
State regulation: It is unclear whether the Fotokite device is subject to Minn. Stat. §626.19
(Effective 08-01-2020), however, we have chosen to take a conservative approach and assume
that the statute does apply. As such, the following subdivisions requiring public comment will
be satisfied prior to using the device:
Subd. 9. Public comment. A law enforcement agency must provide an opportunity for public
comment before it purchases or uses a UAV. At a minimum, the agency must accept public
comments submitted electronically or by mail. The governing body with jurisdiction over the
budget of a local law enforcement agency must provide an opportunity for public comment
at a regularly scheduled meeting.
Subd. 10. Written policies and procedures required. Prior to the operation of a UAV, the
chief officer of every state and local law enforcement agency that uses or proposes to use a
UAV must establish and enforce a written policy governing its use, including requests for use
from government entities. In developing and adopting the policy, the law enforcement
agency must provide for public comment and input as described in subdivision 9. The written
policy must be posted on the agency's website, if the agency has a website.
Compliance plan: The state statute requires that a law enforcement agency must provide an
opportunity for public comment before it purchases or uses an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV)
and the written policy for the use of the UAV. At a minimum, the agency must accept public
comments submitted electronically or by mail. To meet this requirement, we have engaged our
Police Advisory Commission (PAC) and our Police Multi-cultural Advisory Committee (PMAC).
The PAC solicited in -person public comment on Fotokite drone use and policy at their regularly
scheduled me eting on Wednesday, March 2, 2022, as well as accepting emailed, mailed and
tele phone comments. The proposed policy was made available through the marketing on
receiving public comment and has been included as an attachment to this report. The PMAC
also discussed the policy and use of the Fotokite drone at their regularly scheduled meeting on
February 16, 2022. After a presentation from staff on the program, PMAC members were
provide information on how to submit comments through the PAC public comment process.
Results of public comment: Of the 22 submitted public comments, 17 supported, 3 opposed and
2 were neutral regarding Fotokite drone use and policy. See supporting documents for copies of
submitted public comments. In-person comments from the March 2, 2022 PAC meeting included:
“Judith Cook,” city resident: Inquired about warrant requirement; info/explanation
provided. Said concerns about privacy protections diminished by prevalence of surveillance
cameras throughout city on private residences, stores, etc.
Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4) Page 3
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
“Shelly Colvin” [sic], city resident: Inquired about cost, cost sharing; info/explanation
provided. Also inquired about obsolescence of technology; explained 10-year estimate of
product lifespan.
Comments from PAC Commissioners:
Commissioner Kinney: Recommended display of sign at public events where drone is in
use stating, “Video/drone recording in process overhead,” or similar. Question about use in
protest/demonstration situations and who would give approval; info/explanation given
about Chief’s approval requirement and risk to public/officer safety.
Commissioner Morgan: Questions about policy application and data storage,
private/public. Explained that any recordings of drone video would be tied to
case/investigation and video would be treated similarly to bodycam video before any
release, with necessary redactions applied to protect privacy.
Commissioner Christenson: Very much supports use of this technology and has confidence
in department policy and application.
Commissioner Slais: Agree d with Commission er Christenson’s comments.
Public hearing: The state statute also requires that the governing body with jurisdiction over
the budget of a local law enforcement agency must provide an opportunity for public comment
at a regularly scheduled meeting. City Attorney Mattick recommends that a public hearing be
held to satisfy the statutory requirement. A public hearing has been scheduled for April 4, 2022.
Council will be asked to approve the proposed use and policy for the Fotokite UAS system at
the April 18 city council meeting.
St. Louis Park Police Department
Policy Manual
Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) Operations
706.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for the use of an unmanned aerial system
(UAS) and for the storage, retrieval, and dissemination of images and data captured by the
UAS (Minn. Stat. § 626.19). Minnesota Statutes refer to these systems as "Unmanned Aerial
Vehicles" (UAVs), and for purposes of this policy, and any related policies, these terms are
understood to be interchangeable.
706.1.1 DEFINITIONS
Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) -An unmanned aircraft of any type that is capable of
sustaining directed flight, possibly tethered to a control unit supplying power and controls, whether
preprogrammed or remotely controlled without the possibility of direct human intervention from
within or on the aircraft (commonly referred to as an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)), and all of the
supporting or attached systems designed for gathering information through imaging, recording, or
any other means (Minn. Stat. § 626.19).
706.2 POLICY
Unmanned aerial systems may be utilized to enhance the department's mission of protecting lives
and property when other means and resources are not available or are less effective. Any use
of a UAS will be in strict accordance with constitutional and privacy rights and Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) regulations.
706.3 PRIVACY
The use of the UAS potentially involves privacy considerations. Absent a warrant or exigent
circumstances, operators and observers shall adhere to FM altitude regulations and shall not
intentionally record or transmit images of any location where a person would have a reasonable
expectation of privacy (e.g., residence, yard, enclosure). Operators and observers shall take
reasonable precautions to avoid inadvertently recording or transmitting images of areas where
there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. Reasonable precautions can include, for example,
deactivating or turning imaging devices away from such areas or persons during UAS operations.
706.4 PROGRAM COORDINATOR
The Chief of Police will appoint a program coordinator who will be responsible for the management
of the UAS program, if one is in operation. The program coordinator will ensure that policies and
procedures conform to current laws, regulations, and best practices and will have the following
additional responsibilities:
•Coordinating the FM Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) application process
and ensuring that the COA is current.
•Ensuring that all authorized operators and required observers have completed all
required FM and department-approved training in the operation, applicable laws,
policies, and procedures regarding use of the UAS.
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2022/01/24, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by St. Louis Park Police
Department
Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) Operations -
1
Page 4 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
j
St.Louis Park Police Department
Policy Manual
Unmanned Aerial System (UAS)Operations
•Developing uniform protocol for submission and evaluation of requests to deploy
a UAS,including urgent requests made during ongoing or emerging incidents.
Deployment of a UAS shall require authorization of the Chief of Police or the authorized
designee,depending on the type of mission.
•Developing protocol for conducting criminal investigations involving a UAS,including
documentation of time spent monitoring a subject.
•Implementing a system for public notification of UAS deployment.
•Developing an operational protocol governing the deployment and operation of a UAS,
including but not limited to safety oversight,use of visual observers,establishment of
lost link procedures,and secure communication with air traffic control facilities.
•Developing a protocol for fully documenting all missions.
•Developing a UAS inspection,maintenance,and record-keeping protocol to ensure
continuing airworthiness of a UAS,up to and including its overhaul or life limits.
•Developing protocols to ensure that all data intended to be used as evidence are
accessed,maintained,stored,and retrieved in a manner that ensures its integrity as
evidence,including strict adherence to chain of custody requirements.Electronic trails,
including encryption,authenticity certificates,and date and time stamping,shall be
used as appropriate to preserve individual rights and to ensure the authenticity and
maintenance of a secure evidentiary chain of custody.
•Developing protocols that ensure retention and purge periods are maintained in
accordance with established records retention schedules.
•Facilitating law enforcement access to images and data captured by the UAS.
•Recommending program enhancements,particularly regarding safety and information
security.
•Ensuring that established protocols are followed by monitoring and providing annual
reports on the program to the Chief of Police.
•Developing protocols for reviewing and approving requests for use of the department
UAS by government entities (Minn.Stat.§626.19).
•Preparing and submitting the required annual report to the Commissioner of Public
Safety (Minn.Stat.§626.19).
•Posting the department policies and procedures regarding the use of UAV on the
department website,as applicable (Minn.Stat. §626.19).
•Reviewing the program and UAS use for compliance with Minn.Stat.§626.19.
706.5 USE OF UAS
Only authorized operators who have completed the required training shall be permitted to operate
the UAS.
Use of vision enhancement technology (e.g.,thermal and other imaging equipment not generally
available to the public)is permissible in viewing areas only where there is no protected privacy
Copyright Lexipol,LLC 2022/01/24,AII Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by St.Louis Park Police
Department
Unmanned Aerial System (UAS)Operations -
2
Page 5 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
St. Louis Park Police Department
Policy Manual
Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) Operations
interest or when in compliance with a search warrant or court order. In all other instances, legal
counsel should be consulted and/or a search warrant obtained.
UAS operations should only be conducted when lighting and weather conditions do not affect
safety, and a UAS should not be flown over populated areas without FAA approval, if required for
the type of UAS equipment deployed.
Members shall not use a UAS without a search warrant, except (Minn. Stat. § 626.19):
(a) During or in the aftermath of an emergency situation or disaster that involves the risk
of death or bodily harm to a person.
(b) Over a public event where there is a heightened risk to the safety of participants or
bystanders.
(c) To counter the risk of a terrorist attack by a specific individual or organization if the
agency determines that credible intelligence indicates a risk.
(d) To prevent the loss of life or property in natural or man-made disasters and to facilitate
operation planning, rescue, and recovery operations.
(e) To conduct a threat assessment in anticipation of a specific event.
(f) To collect information from a public area if there is reasonable suspicion of criminal
activity.
(g) To collect information for crash reconstruction purposes after a serious or deadly
collision occurring on a public road.
(h) Over a public area for officer training or public relations purposes.
(i) For purposes unrelated to law enforcement at the request of a government entity,
provided the request is in writing and specifies the reason for the request and a
proposed period of use._
706.5.1 DOCUMENTATION REQUIRED
Each use of a UAS should be properly documented by providing the following (Minn. Stat. §
626.19):
(a)
(b)
A unique case number (or documentation in a form attached to a unique case number)
A factual basis for the use of a UAS
(c) The applicable exception, unless a warrant was obtained
706.6 PROHIBITED USE
The UAS video surveillance equipment shall not be used:
•To conduct random surveillance activities.
•To target a person based solely on actual or perceived characteristics such as
race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or
expression, economic status, age, cultural group, or disability.
•To harass, intimidate, or discriminate against any individual or group.
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2022/01/24, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by St. Louis Park Police
Department
Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) Operations -
3
Page 6 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
St. Louis Park Police Department
Policy Manual
Unmanned Aerial System (VAS) Operations
•To conduct personal business of any type.
The UAS shall not be weaponized (Minn. Stat. § 626.19).
706.6.1 ADDITIONAL PROHIBITIONS
Unless authorized by a warrant, a UAS shall not be deployed with facial recognition or biometric
matching technology (Minn. Stat. § 626.19).
Unless authorized by a warrant or for purposes of a permitted use outlined in this policy, a UAS
shall not be used to collect data on public protests or demonstrations (Minn. Stat. § 626.19).
706.7 RETENTION OF UAS DATA
The Records Section supervisor shall ensure that data collected by the UAS is disclosed or deleted
as required by Minn. Stat. § 626.19, including the deletion of collected data as soon as possible,
and in no event later than seven days after collection, unless the data is part of an active criminal
investigation (Minn. Stat. § 626.19).
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2022/01/24, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by St. Louis Park Police
Department
Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) Operations -
4
Page 7 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
626.19 USE OF UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLES.
Subdivision 1.Application; definitions.(a) This section applies to unmanned aerial vehicle data
collected, created, or maintained by a law enforcement agency and to law enforcement agencies that maintain,
use, or plan to use an unmanned aerial vehicle in investigations, training, or in response to emergencies,
incidents, and requests for service. Unmanned aerial vehicle data collected, created, or maintained by a
government entity is classified under chapter 13.
(b) For purposes of this section, the following terms have the meanings given:
(1) "government entity" has the meaning given in section 13.02, subdivision 7a, except that it does not
include a law enforcement agency;
(2) "law enforcement agency" has the meaning given in section 626.84, subdivision 1;
(3) "unmanned aerial vehicle" or "UAV" means an aircraft that is operated without the possibility of
direct human intervention from within or on the aircraft; and
(4) "terrorist attack" means a crime that furthers terrorism as defined in section 609.714, subdivision 1.
Subd. 2.Use of unmanned aerial vehicles limited.Except as provided in subdivision 3, a law
enforcement agency must not use a UAV without a search warrant issued under this chapter.
Subd. 3.Authorized use.A law enforcement agency may use a UAV:
(1) during or in the aftermath of an emergency situation that involves the risk of death or bodily harm
to a person;
(2) over a public event where there is a heightened risk to the safety of participants or bystanders;
(3)to counter the risk of a terrorist attack by a specific individual or organization if the agency determines
that credible intelligence indicates a risk;
(4) to prevent the loss of life and property in natural or man-made disasters and to facilitate operational
planning, rescue, and recovery operations in the aftermath of these disasters;
(5) to conduct a threat assessment in anticipation of a specific event;
(6) to collect information from a public area if there is reasonable suspicion of criminal activity;
(7) to collect information for crash reconstruction purposes after a serious or deadly collision occurring
on a public road;
(8) over a public area for officer training or public relations purposes; and
(9) for purposes unrelated to law enforcement at the request of a government entity provided that the
government entity makes the request in writing to the law enforcement agency and specifies the reason for
the request and proposed period of use.
Subd. 4.Limitations on use.(a) A law enforcement agency using a UAV must comply with all Federal
Aviation Administration requirements and guidelines.
(b)A law enforcement agency must not deploy a UAV with facial recognition or other biometric-matching
technology unless expressly authorized by a warrant.
Official Publication of the State of Minnesota
Revisor of Statutes
626.19MINNESOTA STATUTES 20201
Page 8 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
(c) A law enforcement agency must not equip a UAV with weapons.
(d) A law enforcement agency must not use a UAV to collect data on public protests or demonstrations
unless expressly authorized by a warrant or an exception applies under subdivision 3.
Subd. 5.Documentation required.A law enforcement agency must document each use of a UAV,
connect each deployment to a unique case number, provide a factual basis for the use of a UAV, and identify
the applicable exception under subdivision 3 unless a warrant was obtained.
Subd. 6.Data classification; retention.(a) Data collected by a UAV are private data on individuals or
nonpublic data, subject to the following:
(1) if the individual requests a copy of the recording, data on other individuals who do not consent to
its release must be redacted from the copy;
(2) UAV data may be disclosed as necessary in an emergency situation under subdivision 3, clause (1);
(3)UAV data may be disclosed to the government entity making a request for UAV use under subdivision
3, clause (9);
(4) UAV data that are criminal investigative data are governed by section 13.82, subdivision 7; and
(5) UAV data that are not public data under other provisions of chapter 13 retain that classification.
(b) Section 13.04, subdivision 2, does not apply to data collected by a UAV.
(c) Notwithstanding section 138.17, a law enforcement agency must delete data collected by a UAV as
soon as possible, and in no event later than seven days after collection unless the data is part of an active
criminal investigation.
Subd. 7.Evidence.Information obtained or collected by a law enforcement agency in violation of this
section is not admissible as evidence in a criminal, administrative, or civil proceeding against the data subject.
Subd. 8.Remedies.In addition to any other remedies provided by law, including remedies available
under chapter 13, an aggrieved party may bring a civil action against a law enforcement agency to prevent
or remedy a violation of this section.
Subd. 9.Public comment.A law enforcement agency must provide an opportunity for public comment
before it purchases or uses a UAV. At a minimum, the agency must accept public comments submitted
electronically or by mail. The governing body with jurisdiction over the budget of a local law enforcement
agency must provide an opportunity for public comment at a regularly scheduled meeting.
Subd. 10.Written policies and procedures required.Prior to the operation of a UAV, the chief officer
of every state and local law enforcement agency that uses or proposes to use a UAV must establish and
enforce a written policy governing its use, including requests for use from government entities. In developing
and adopting the policy, the law enforcement agency must provide for public comment and input as described
in subdivision 9. The written policy must be posted on the agency's website, if the agency has a website.
Subd. 11.Notice; disclosure of warrant.(a) Within a reasonable time but not later than 90 days after
the court unseals a warrant under this subdivision, the issuing or denying judge shall cause to be served on
the persons named in the warrant and the application an inventory that shall include notice of:
(1) the issuance of the warrant or application;
Official Publication of the State of Minnesota
Revisor of Statutes
2MINNESOTA STATUTES 2020626.19
Page 9 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
(2)the date of issuance and the period of authorized, approved, or disapproved collection of information,
or the denial of the application; and
(3) whether information was or was not collected during the period.
(b) A warrant authorizing collection of information with a UAV must direct that:
(1) the warrant be sealed for a period of 90 days or until the objective of the warrant has been
accomplished, whichever is shorter; and
(2) the warrant be filed with the court administrator within ten days of the expiration of the warrant.
(c)The prosecutor may request that the warrant, supporting affidavits, and any order granting the request
not be filed. An order must be issued granting the request in whole or in part if, from affidavits, sworn
testimony, or other evidence, the court finds reasonable grounds exist to believe that filing the warrant may
cause the search or a related search to be unsuccessful, create a substantial risk of injury to an innocent
person, or severely hamper an ongoing investigation.
(d)The warrant must direct that, following the commencement of any criminal proceeding using evidence
obtained in or as a result of the search, the supporting application or affidavit must be filed either immediately
or at any other time as the court directs. Until the filing, the documents and materials ordered withheld from
filing must be retained by the judge or the judge's designee.
Subd. 12.Reporting.(a) By January 15 of each year, each law enforcement agency that maintains or
uses a UAV shall report to the commissioner of public safety the following information for the preceding
calendar year:
(1) the number of times a UAV was deployed without a search warrant issued under this chapter,
identifying the date of deployment and the authorized use of the UAV under subdivision 3; and
(2) the total cost of the agency's UAV program.
(b) By June 15 of each year, the commissioner of public safety shall compile the reports submitted to
the commissioner under paragraph (a), organize the reports by law enforcement agency, submit the compiled
report to the chairs and ranking minority members of the senate and house of representatives committees
having jurisdiction over data practices and public safety, and make the compiled report public on the
department's website.
(c)By January 15 of each year, a judge who has issued or denied approval of a warrant under this section
that expired during the preceding year shall report to the state court administrator:
(1) that a warrant or extension was applied for;
(2) the type of warrant or extension applied for;
(3) whether the warrant or extension was granted as applied for, modified, or denied;
(4) the period of UAV use authorized by the warrant and the number and duration of any extensions of
the warrant;
(5) the offense specified in the warrant or application or extension of a warrant; and
(6) the identity of the law enforcement agency making the application and the person authorizing the
application.
Official Publication of the State of Minnesota
Revisor of Statutes
626.19MINNESOTA STATUTES 20203
Page 10 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
(d) By June 15 of each year, the state court administrator shall submit to the chairs and ranking minority
members of the senate and house of representatives committees or divisions having jurisdiction over data
practices and public safety and post on the supreme court's website a full and complete report concerning
the number of applications for warrants authorizing or approving use of UAVs or disclosure of information
from the use of UAVs under this section and the number of warrants and extensions granted or denied under
this section during the preceding calendar year. The report must include a summary and analysis of the data
required to be filed with the state court administrator under paragraph (c).
History: 2020 c 82 s 5
NOTE: This section, as added by Laws 2020, chapter 82, section 5, is effective August 1, 2020, provided
that the chief law enforcement officers adopt the written policy required under subdivision 10 no later than
February 15, 2021. Laws 2020, chapter 82, section 5, the effective date.
Official Publication of the State of Minnesota
Revisor of Statutes
4MINNESOTA STATUTES 2020626.19
Page 11 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
Mikael Garland
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject
Seamus Duffy <seaduffy11@gmail.com>
Thursday, February 24, 2022 12:07 PM
SLP Police Department
In regard to tethered drones
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
Hello,
Is there a write up of all uses for tethered drones as well as restricted use for this technology?
Thank you,
Seamus
20
Page 12 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
Mikael Garland
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject
lauren rowe <rowlen4057@gmail.com>
Thursday, February 24, 2022 12:09 PM
SLP Police Department
Tethered drones
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe .
. As a citizen of SLP, the use of tethered drones sounds like a helpful tool to assist the police in the jobs and search
incidences described in you email.
Sincerely,
Lauren Rowe
19
Page 13 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
Mikael Garland
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject
Brenda Wiggins <brenda.w.wiggins@gmail.com>
Thursday, February 24, 2022 12:43 PM
SLP Police Department
Use of Drone Comments
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
Yes, I'm impressed these may be used. I would hope drones could be used to monitor for crimes such as the frequent
catalyst converted thief s happening all over the area. There are others.
Events with large numbers of people may be opportunities to monitor traffic, for disruption of events. The ideas are
unlimited. I understand with only 2 drones and being tethered really shorten the list. Policy or ordinance should cover
future use or number of drones. I know SLP Police and Fire can find useful opportunities beyond 2 units.
Thanks for the opportunity to comment.
Electronically Signed. Brenda W Wiggins, 7201 Walker Street Apt 100, 55426. 612-333-2814 m1
18
Page 14 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
Mikael Garland
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject
Laurie Herman <laurie.herman@aol.com>
Thursday, February 24, 2022 12:58 PM
SLP Police Department
Tethered Drones
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
Sounds like a great idea to me!!
Laurie Herman
17
Page 15 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
Mikael Garland
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Leanna Kristoff <leannakristoff@gmail.com>
Thursday, February 24, 2022 1 :13 PM
SLP Police Department
Support for drone use
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not dick links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
Good afternoon,
I am writing in support of the St. Louis Park Police Department utilizing tethered drones when deemed necessary. While
all technology has the potential for misuse, my opinion is that the capability to quickly locate a missing person or to
provide information on a dangerous situation outweigh the possible downsides.
Sincerely,
Leanna Kemp Kristoff
16
Page 16 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
Mikael Garland
From;
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Pamela Margolis <pammargo1is1953@gmail.com>
Thursday, February 24, 2022 1 :52 PM
SLP Police Department
Drones
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
I do not live in St. Louis Park as I am on the west side of 169, but have family that live in St. Louis Park and just want to
say I think Drones are a great idea to help locate and protect the citizens in the community.
Also a thank you to both the Police and Fire department for helping to keep the city safe.
Pamela Margolis
Cell 612-581-4411
15
Page 17 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
Mikael Garland
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Rick Q <rqualy@outlook.com>
Thursday, February 24, 2022 1 :59 PM
SLP Police Department
Drone use
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
Good afternoon,
While I am now a resident of Eden Prairie, I grew up in St Louis Park in the 1960's and 1970's. I would like to
see the Police Department use drones to the maximum extent there is. Using them for heat signatures would
help locate lost persons as well as anyone hiding from the police after bailouts. They are a great asset to any
organization.
Thank you for keeping us safe and stay safe,
Rick Qualy
14
Page 18 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
Mikael Garland
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Lynette Engebretson <mengebretson1@comcast.net>
Thursday, February 24, 2022 2:43 PM
SLP Police Department
drone usage
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not dick links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
two words: Big Brother
Is that even legal?
13
Page 19 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
Mikael Garland
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Claudia Oxley <csox1ey60@gmail.com>
Thursday, February 24, 2022 3:15 PM
SLP Police Department
Drones Feedback
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
Hello
First I want to say how much I appreciate the invitation for feedback to the proposed use of tethered drones. I
respect that city staff have researched this idea fully and are offering it to us based on their view of how to
service the community best.
At this time, I am adamantly opposed to the use of these drones. In general, such technology seems the
antithesis to me of community-based policing. It is in no way relational; it interacts with the community as if
we were all just data points. Especially in the metro-wide {and national) ongoing conversation about policing
methods and community distrust, a movement toward this technology appears to exacerbate every concern
community members have.
I appreciate the desire to use tax dollars efficiently and can see that this technology might be a nifty way to do
that. However, the unintended harm I believe this would cause is enough to kill the idea immediately. Please
do not implement this technology.
Thank you very much for the opportunity to voice my view.
Regards,
Claudia Oxley
12
Page 20 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
Mikael Garland
From:
Sent:
To:
Catherine Bergerson <bergerson39@gmail.com>
Thursday, February 24, 2022 3:46 PM
SLP Police Department
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not dick links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
I'm ALL for the use of drones! Any technology that can help the police catch criminals is just fine with me.
Thanks,
Catherine Bergerson
11
Page 21 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
Mikael Garland
From:
Sent:
To:
Marcus Petrik <marcuspetrik@gmail.com>
Thursday, February 24, 2022 4:18 PM
SLP Police Department
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
I'm a St Louis Park resident and I totally support this technology being used to help curb criminal activity as well as
search and rescue situations.
Thanks,
Marcus
10
Page 22 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
Mikael Garland
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Jim Remlin <jim.romlin@gmail.com>
Thursday, February 24, 2022 9:30 PM
SLP Police Department
Tethered drones
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
I am in total support of the use of tethered drones for all the reasons spelled out in the email.
Staying in the forefront of new/emerging technology makes all the sense in the world.
Go for it!
Jim Romlin
9
Page 23 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
Mikael Garland
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject
Jane Ahrens <jmoose58@gmail.com>
Thursday, February 24, 2022 9:53 PM
SLP Police Department
Drone Usage Comment
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
I am in favor of any tool that will help SLP police conduct their duties to keep the citizens of SLP safer, including drones.
Jane Ahrens
8
Page 24 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
Mikael Garland
From: Jim EII-Egermeier <JimEII-Eg@outlook.com>
Thursday, February 24, 2022 10:56 PM
Mikael Garland; SLP Police Department
Sent:
To:
Subject: My comments on the potential use of tethered drones by the St. Louis Park Police
Department
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
After giving this some deep consideration, I think it is a great idea for the SLP Police Department to use these tethered
drones. I feel this is an efficient and effective use of technology.
Initially my immediate concern was of, "Big Brother", watching us. However after further thought I don't see these
tethered drones as being an intrusion on personal privacy.
Currently one must assume that anything done outdoors, and especially in a public place, is being recorded.
•Fixed surveillance cameras are practically everywhere, including home door bells with Ring.
•Google maps our streets and provides aerial views.
•Current high resolution satellite images are commercially available.
•Certainly the government has real time access to infrared satellite images as well.
Also allaying my concerns, these are tethered human controlled drones under discussion. I would feel differently if
these were non-tethered drones, or if they were controlled by an Artificial Intelligence application. I feel reassured
knowing that a real live Police Officer will physically be present and in control at the other end of each tether.
In summary, I feel the benefits of using these tethered drones outweighs potential privacy concerns.
Please feel free to share my views with others, including those attending the Police Advisory Commission meeting on
March 2n d • I would be glad to attend the Commission meeting remotely, but I'm not comfortable attending in person
due to Covid concerns.
Jim EII-Egermeier, SLP Resident at 2218 Flag Avenue South
P.S., if you would like to speak with me directly, please feel free to call or text my cell at 612-708-2888. Leave a message
if I don't pick up, as I may be in a meeting and I generally don't answer calls when I don't recognize the caller ID.
7
Page 25 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
3350 Yosemite Ave S
St Louis Park, MN 55416
612-757-0761
I. bottge@comcast.net
February 24, 2022
St. Louis Park Police Department
ATTN: UAS Public Comments (Lt. Garland)
3015Raleigh-Ave. & ----
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
Dear Lt. Garland,
I really don't want our air space filled with drones. However, if these tethered drones can
assist the police, firefighters, and other first responders, I will respond with a "yes".
Thank you.
Sincerely,
'---· 0---:-r((
0)--go y
Lynn Bottge
Page 26 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
Mikael Garland
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject
dwight fellman <fellmad@gmail.com>
Friday, February 25, 2022 8:46 AM
SLP Police Department
YES to tethered drones
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
long-time SLP resident. 66-years old.
The tethered drones are new to me but sound very good for law enforcement and fire safety.
seems like really good value -as they can observe a lot -and would be really quiet compared to
helicopters.
I have a non-beginner drone I purchased in 2021 but have not used it yet. I wanted to view
gutters and fencing at our townhome association. Will need to register the drone and then learn
to fly it.
dwight fellman
7909 Victoria Curve,
St Louis Park, MN 55426
6
Page 27 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
Mikael Garland
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
dgslp@comcast.net
Friday, February 25, 2022 8:17 PM
SLP Police Department
Tethered drone program -yes!
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
I think the idea of using drones for police and fire work is excellent. It will allow you to gather information without
risking human life. I can think of many cases where a drone would be helpful in search and rescue, fire, and patrol
situations. let's be safe out there!
5
Page 28 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
Mikael Garland
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
KIMBERLY ANDERSON <NZALLEN@msn.com>
Saturday, February 26, 2022 8:15 AM
SLP Police Department
I support the use of unmanned aerial systems (UAS) in SLP
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not dick links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
Kimberly Anderson
3248 Yosemite Avenue South
SLP 55416
4
Page 29 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
Mikael Garland
From:
Sent
To:
Subject:
Linda Trummer <lindatrummer@msn.com>
Tuesday, March 1, 2022 2:28 AM
SLP Police Department
PAC's request for input regarding Drone
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not dick links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
I am in favor of adding a Drone to the PD' s arsenal of tools. However, there must be very well-crafted criteria in place as
to when and under what circumstances it can be used. That criteria should be developed with community input. I realize
the use of drones is likely more commonplace than I even care to know by government and private entities. However,
we are living in a time of general mistrust between the public and police. We don't want to provoke those fragile
relationships by anyone perceiving that our constitutional rights are being violated by the police.
Thanks for the opportunity to give input.
Linda Trummer
Sent from Mail for Windows
3
Page 30 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
Mikael Garland
From:
Sent
To:
Subject
tawsif mahmud <tawsifmahmud89@gmail.com>
Tuesday, March 1, 2022 9:38 AM
SLP Police Department
Comments on Drone Program
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
Hello,
I am a citizen of the city of Saint Louis Park and a member of the PMAC as well. I personally think and strongly support
the use of technology to help and make life better for the community.
But I do have some concern as technology used in the wrong way or by being in the hands of the wrong person can have
a significantly dangerous impact.
•There must be sufficient sustainable cause. Any tendency for the secret world to encroach into areas
unjustified by the scale of potential harm to national interests has to be checked.
•There must be integrity of motive. No hidden agendas: the integrity of the whole system throughout the
intelligence process must be assured, from collection to analysis and presentation.
•There must be right and lawful authority. There must be the right level of sign-off on sensitive operations,
with accountability up a recognized chain of command to permit effective oversight.
•There should be significant efforts and oversight to ensure non-discrimination.
How is the city or the Police planning to address some of these concerns?
Thanks,
Tawsif Mahmud
507-351-4098
2
Page 31 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
Mikael Garland
From:
Sent
To:
Subject:
Hanna W <naege026@umn.edu>
Tuesday, March 1, 2022 9:1 O PM
SLP Police Department
Drones Opinion
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
Good evening,
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the use of drones by the St.Louis Park police department. I am a citizen
of the city, and I cannot support this idea.
The use of drones is an infringement on personal privacy, and their use does not benefit our community. We already
have an overabundance of police officers -confirmed by the staffing notes in the policy advisory commission meetings.
Additionally, the majority of crimes committed in our city are not dangerous crimes, but crimes against property. These
sorts of crimes do not incur the need to use a privacy-reducing measure like using drones.
It is a dangerous step to take, and one that does not encourage community building or transparency. If your goals are to
better serve the community, this is not the way.
Thank you,
Hanna Williams
Ward4
1
Page 32 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 4)
Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use.
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: March 28, 2022
Written report: 5
Executive summary
Title: Diversity, equity and inclusion policy in development projects receiving public financial
assistance
Recommended action: None at this time. EDA/city council will discuss and provide feedback on
the policy later this year as part of the systems approach to study session discussions.
Policy consideration: Does the proposed policy meet the intent of the EDA/council?
Summary: In an effort to advance the city’s strategic priorit y of being a leader in racial equity
and inclusion, the EDA/city council directed staff to develop a diversity, equity, and inclusion
policy to promote the inclusion of historically under-represented persons and businesses in
development projects receiving public financial assistance through the Economic Development
Authority (EDA) or other city funds.
The city recognizes the importance of creating opportunities for women, communities of color,
and indigenous people to participate more equitably in the workforce and benefit from wealth
building opportunities. It is recognized that historical and institutional discrimination and racism
has disproportionately created challenges for women and BIPOC/non-white individuals an d
businesses in employment and business opportunities which have resulted in significant
disparities in wealth building opportunities.
The goal of this policy is to address these disparities and to promote inclusive and equitable
opportunities for women and BIPOC/non-white individuals and businesses to build wealth.
The policy provides specific goals for the hiring of women and BIPOC/non-white business
organizations, business enterprises, workforce, and peripheral enterprises for all new and
renovated commercial and multifamily residential buildings receiving EDA /city financial
assistance, as outlined in the policy.
Financial or budget considerations: The cost of implementing and tracking race, equity, and
inclusion goal requirements adds increased overhead expenses to project costs. While DEI
policies are becoming more commonplace in the development market, the EDA/city’s policy
includes the tracking of women and BIPOC/non-white w orkforce, which is above and beyond
what most other jurisdictions currently require . This metric will likely add some additional project
costs which will be included in any financial analysis performed by the city’s financial consultant.
Additionally, tracking and monitoring of this policy will involve increased EDA staff time.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in racial equity
and inclusion in order to create a more just and inclusive community for all.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Policy
Prepared by: Jennifer Monson, redevelopment administrator
Reviewed by: Greg Hunt, economic development manager
Karen Barton, community development director/EDA executive director
Approve d by: Kim Keller, city manager
City council meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 5) Page 2
Title: Diversity, equity and inclusion policy in development projects receiving public financial assistance
Discussion
Background: Based on a request from the EDA /city council, staff drafted a Diversity Equity and
Inclusion (DEI) Policy which promotes the inclusion of under-represented persons and
businesses in development projects to meet the city council’s strategic priority of being a leader
in racial equity and inclusion in order to create a more just and inclusive community for all.
The DEI Policy was reviewed by the city attorney and EDA legal counsel. Based on their legal
advice, the DEI Policy is not able to include policy requirements, but rather establishes policy
goals to create more opportunities in the development community for historically under-
represented women and BIPOC/non-white individuals and businesses. Similar to other EDA/city
policies, the development must comply with the DEI Policy in effect at the time of the application
date of planning and zoning applications and/or signed preliminary development agreements.
EDA staff worked with the local development community, including market rate and non-profit
developers currently working on projects in St. Louis Park, to develop the DEI Policy .
Specifically, input on the policy was obtained from Sherman Associates and their contractor
Frana, which is developing the Beltline Station Development ; Opus Development Group which
is developing and building Beltline Residences; Saturday Properties and Anderson Companies
which are jointly developing the Wooddale Station development; Project for Pride in Living and
their contractor for the Union Park Flats development; and Common Bond which is developing
the Rise on 7 project.
Present considerations: The policy sets goals for the hiring of women and BIPOC/non-white
business organizations, business enterprises, workforce, and peripheral enterprises for all new
and renovated commercial and multifamily residential buildings receiving $200,000 or more in
EDA /city financial assistance. This threshold was determined so as not to curtail smaller fixup
loans and grants provided by the EDA/city to small businesses and homeowners which typically
involve few vendors and tight time schedules.
The goals for business organizations and business enterprises are similar to th e goals
established in Minnesota Housing’s Minority or Women Business Enterprises Compliance Guide.
These goals are increasingly becoming well known and more widely implemented by Twin Cities
area developers and contractors. As a result, area companies have developed systems for
tracking and reporting these metrics for metro cities and state agencies.
The policy includes goals for workforce and peripheral enterprises to include opportunities for
women and BIPOC/non-white construction workers and other businesses hired by the
developer in connection with the development (attorneys, financial consultants, accountants,
etc.). The workforce and peripheral enterprise goals are unique to developments in St. Louis
Park . The above developers reviewed and provided input on these goals and expressed
willingness to track and report on these metrics . They also indicated that implementation of
these goals would likely add to the overall costs of projects in the city. Developers will be made
aware of the policy goals in the initial contact stages so that they can factor these costs into
their proposed project proformas.
City council meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 5) Page 3
Title: Diversity, equity and inclusion policy in development projects receiving public financial assistance
Participation Goals Women BIPOC/non-white
Business Organization 10% 13%
Business Enterprises 6% 13%
Workforce 6% 32%
Peripheral Enterprises 6% 13%
The above goals for business organization and business enterprises were established to be
consistent with those set by Minnesota Housing. The goals for workforce and peripheral
enterprises are recommended based on staff’s conversations with the local development
community. These goals, particularly for the percentage of women in the workforce category,
are aspirational.
The developer will be required to use reasonable efforts to meet these business enterprise,
workforce, and peripheral enterprise participation goals in conjunction with the development
and will be required to track those efforts. Participatio n goals will be applied to the developer’s
project as a whole and pertain to the total amount of construction and related contracts.
A development agreement will be executed between the EDA and the developer which will
formally set forth the requirements related to DEI Policy and achieving diversity, equity, and
inclusion goals.
Approved Businesses: The policy itself does not specif y the lists of verified women and
BIPOC/Non-white businesses to which developers will be referred but will be included in the
policy’s user guide. Two lists have been identified and have been requested to be included by
developers. These lists include the Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE) list found on the
Minnesota Unified Certification Program we bsite (https://mnucp.org/), and businesses approved
by the Central (Cert) Certification Program, which is a small business certification program
recognized by Hennepin County, Ramsey County, the City of Minneapolis, and the City of St.
Paul. The Cert list is found online at www.cert.smwbe.com. Although other lists are available, it
was determined that these two lists are considered more reliable as they provide the names of
businesses that have been vetted and certified by other agencies and are consistently updated.
The MNUCP DBE program is for “business owners that are socially and economically
disadvantaged. Women and African Americans, Hispanics, Native Americans, Asian -Pacific and
Subcontinent Asian Americans are presumed to be socially and economically disadvantaged.”
This program also may qualify other individuals as socially and economically disadvantaged on a
case -by-case basis. Per the website, “to be regarded as economically disadvantaged, an
individual must have a personal net worth that does not exceed $1.32 million. To be seen as a
small business, a firm must meet Small Business Administration size criteria and have average
annual gross receipts not to exceed $23.98 million when averaged over a three -year period.
The owner must have technical competence and experience directly related to the type of work
in which certification is being sought and must be a United States citizen or a lawfully admitted
permanent resident of the United States.”
To be considered an eligible wom e n or BIPOC/non-white owned business in the CERT program,
the business must be at least 51% owned by one or more women or BIPOC/Non-white persons
City council meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 5) Page 4
Title: Diversity, equity and inclusion policy in development projects receiving public financial assistance
and has its management and daily business operations controlled by one or more women or
BIPOC/Non-white persons who own it. Additionally, the business must be at least 51% owned
by one or more native or naturalized U.S. citizens , or lawfully admitted permanent residents of
the United Stations; is not a broker or manufacturer’s representative , does not operate as a
franchisee or under a franchise agreement, and is not a business in which the owner is also
owner or part owner of one or more businesses that dominate the same field of operation;
performs a commercially useful function; and has been in operation for at least one year, or in
operation for less than one year and is able to provide documentation showing that it has an
established record of generating revenue .
Reporting: The policy establishes a quarterly reporting period, which commences at the date a
development agreement is entered into until six months following the city-issued certificate of
occupancy. The policy lists the minimum reporting categories including: total number of
construction -related business enterprises and the percentage of those that are women and/or
BIPOC/non-white owned, and the percentage of total development dollars paid to those
business enterprises; total number of construction workforce employees and the percentage of
total women and/or BIPOC/non-white employees and the percentage of total construction
hours women and BIPOC/non-white workforce employees worked; the list of peripheral
enterprises and the percent of women and BIPOC/non-white employees; and a summary of
efforts made to reach the participation goals if the goals were not met.
Next steps: The policy will take effect March 29, 2022, for all new ly submitted projects
requesting financial assistance from the EDA/city. The policy does not apply to applications
previously submitted or projects not requesting financial assistance.
A presentation on this including an implementation update will take place in our regular cycle
through our system discussions later this year. If, during implementation, we have unforeseen
impacts, we’ll bring this to the EDA/Council more quickly. Dates on the Housing and Race Equity
Systems are yet to be set.
Effective March 29, 2022
SA285\3\761965.v2
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Policy
This policy promotes the inclusion of under-represented persons and businesses in
development projects receiving public financing through the Economic Development Authority
(“EDA”) and City of St. Louis Park to meet the city council’s strategic priority of being a leader in
racial equity and inclusion in order to create a more just and inclusive community for all.
The city recognizes the importance of creating opportunities for communities of color and
indigenous people to participate more equitably in the workforce and benefit from wealth
building opportunities. It is recognized that historical and institutional discrimination and
racism has disproportionately created challenges for women and Black, Indigenous, and People
of Color (BIPOC)/non-white communities. Women and BIPOC/non-white individuals and
businesses have faced discrimination and disadvantages in employment and business
opportunities which have resulted in significant disparities in wealth building opportunities.
The goal of this policy is to address these disparities and to promote inclusive and equitable
opportunities for women and BIPOC/non-white individuals and businesses to build wealth.
The goals set forth in this policy further the city’s racial equity priorities. These goals are
intended to provide an incentive for developers to seek greater participation by women and the
BIPOC community in development projects funded with EDA /city financial assistance.
These goals are included in the list of minimum qualifications for projects seeking tax increment
financing (TIF) assistance from the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority.
This policy shall be used in conjunction with the established Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
Policy User Guide which provides further guidance on reporting requirements and EDA/city
expectations.
Page 5 City council meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 5)
Title: Diversity, equity and inclusion policy in development projects receiving public financial assistance
SA285\3\761965.v2
Effective March 29, 2022
1.Applicability and minimum project size
New construction, renovation or reconstruction projects receiving EDA/city financial
assistance
This policy applies to development projects that receive $200,000 or more in financial
assistance from the EDA/city and includes:
a)New construction, renovation, or reconstruction of commercial developments
b)New construction, renovation, or reconstruction of Industrial developments
c)New construction, renovation, or reconstruction of multi-family rental or for-sale
housing developments
d)New construction, renovation, or reconstruction of mixed -use developments
The development must comply with the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Policy in effect at the
time of the application date of planning and zoning applications and/or a signed preliminary
development agreement. If building permits have not been issued within two years of application
approvals or the building permits have expired or been canceled, the project must comply with
updates to this policy. The EDA/city council may grant an extension of time beyond two years if
a written request for a time extension is submitted to staff and approved by the economic
development authority and/or city council. Requests for extension of time must be submitted to
staff before the termination date.
2.Definitions
A)Financial Assistance: The Diversity, Equity & Inclusion Policy applies to all new and
renovated commercial and multifamily residential buildings receiving EDA/city financial
assistance.
Financial Assistance is defined as funds derived from EDA/city and includes, but is not
limited to, the following:
1)Tax Increment Financing (TIF) and/or Tax Abatement
2)Land write-downs
3)EDA grants and loans
4)Affordable Housing Trust Fund (AHTF) grants and loans
5)Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds
6)Housing Rehabilitation funds
7)Revenue Bonds (private activity bonds are negotiable)
8)Housing Authority (HA) Funds
9)City of St. Louis Park funds
Page 6 City council meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 5)
Title: Diversity, equity and inclusion policy in development projects receiving public financial assistance
SA285\3\761965.v2
Effective March 29, 2022
B)Business Organization: the developer’s business organization, including subsidiaries and
parent company.
C)Business Enterprises: the contractor(s) and sub-contractor(s) hired by or on behalf of the
developer for the project.
D)Workforce: Employees of contractor(s) and sub-contractor(s) working on the Project
E)Peripheral Enterprise(s): consultants and other businesses hired by the developer, or with
whom the developer has a relationship, in conjunction with the project. This includes, but
is not limited to, attorneys, financial consultants, financial institutions, suppliers,
accountants, etc.
F)Project: The development project as defined in the development agreement between the
EDA and the developer.
3.Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion participation goals
General requirements
A development that is subject to this policy shall comply with the following diversity, equity,
and inclusion participation business and workforce participation goals:
Participation Goals Women BIPOC/non-white
Business Organization 10% 13%
Business Enterprises 6% 13%
Workforce 6% 32%
Peripheral Enterprises 6% 13%
The developer will be required to use reasonable efforts to meet these business enterprise,
workforce, and peripheral enterprise participation goals for women and Black, Indigenous and
People of Color (BIPOC)/non-white in conjunction with construction, renovation, or
reconstruction of the development.
Participation goals will be applied to the developer’s project as a whole and pertain to the total
amount of construction and related contracts. Developer must provide and use reasonable
efforts to cause its contractors/subcontractors to provide certain information and resources to
prospective contractors/subcontractors before bidding; to implement procedures designed to
notify women and BIPOC/non-white about contracting opportunities; to document steps taken
to comply with participation goals and the results of actions taken; and to provide compliance
report(s). Refer to the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Policy User Guide for more information
regarding performance and compliance.
Page 7 City council meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 5)
Title: Diversity, equity and inclusion policy in development projects receiving public financial assistance
SA285\3\761965.v2
Effective March 29, 2022
4.Agreements
A development agreement shall be executed between the EDA and the developer, in a form
approved by the EDA legal counsel, which formally sets forth development approval and
requirements to achieve diversity, equity, and inclusion goals in accordance with this policy.
5.Reporting Requirements
The developer will be required to provide written reports to the EDA on a quarterly basis from
the date the development agreement is entered into until six months after the project receives
its certificate of occupancy from the city. The established Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Policy
User Guide provides further guidance on reporting requirements. At a minimum, the reports
must include the following information:
1)Total number of construction-related business enterprises (e.g. general contractor,
subcontractors) with
a)percentage of women-owned enterprises
b)percentage of BIPOC/non-white-owned enterprises
c)percentage of total development dollars paid to women-owned enterprises
d)percentage of total development dollars paid to BIPOC/non-white -owned enterprises
2)Total number of construction workforce employees with
a)percentage of women construction workforce employees
b)percentage of BIPOC/non-white construction workforce employees
c)percentage of total construction hours women constructio n workforce employees
worked
d)percentage of total construction hours BIPOC/non-white construction workforce
employees worked
3)List of peripheral enterprises with self-reported total number of employees, percentage of
women and percentage of BIPOC/non-white employees
4)Summary of efforts made to reach participation goals and ongoing efforts to reach and/or
maintain participation goals
Page 8 City council meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 5)
Title: Diversity, equity and inclusion policy in development projects receiving public financial assistance
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: March 28, 2022
Written report: 6
Executive summary
Title: February 2022 monthly financial report
Recommended action: No action is required.
Policy consideration: Monthly financial reporting is part of our financial management policies.
Summary: The monthly financial report provides an overview of general fund revenues and
departmental expenditures comparing them to budget throughout the year.
Financial or budget considerations: Actual e xpenditures should generally be at about 17% of
the annual budget at the end of February . G eneral f und expenditures are running
approximately 3% under the adopted annual budget through February at about 14%. The only
departmental expenditure variance is organized recreation at 23%, which is a temporary
overage due to payment of the annual community education contribution of $187,400 to the
school district in February. This payment is consistent with prior years.
Revenues are harder to measure in the same way since they aren’t spread as evenly during the
year, examples of which include property taxes and State aid payments. License and permit
revenue s are already at 42% of budget because the majority of the business and liquor license
fees have been received and there have been several larger commercial permits issued,
including the permit for Beltline Residences in February. The other income of 32% of budget is
private activity revenue bond fees from Park Nicollet.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Summary of revenues and departmental expenditures – general fund
Prepared by: Darla Monson, accountant
Reviewed by: Melanie Schmitt, chief financial officer
Approve d by: Kim Keller, city manager
Summary of Revenues & Departmental Expenditures - General Fund As of February 28, 202220222022202020202021202120222022Balance YTD Budget Budget Audited Budget Unaudited Budget YTD Feb Remaining to Actual %General Fund Revenues: General Property Taxes28,393,728$ 28,635,694$ 29,601,811$ 29,446,907$ 30,532,470$ 30,532,470$ 0.00% Licenses and Permits4,660,811 5,294,310 4,621,829 5,005,440 4,750,604 1,975,072 2,775,532 41.58% Fines & Forfeits280,000 126,192 231,000 154,665 231,000 8,342 222,658 3.61% Intergovernmental1,760,082 2,061,267 1,661,549 1,772,115 1,748,770 427,596 1,321,174 24.45% Charges for Services2,273,824 1,600,806 2,013,834 2,285,919 2,284,483 136,064 2,148,419 5.96% Rents & Other Miscellaneous1,456,102 1,201,119 1,499,091 1,476,440 1,589,934 311,681 1,278,253 19.60% Transfers In2,038,338 2,049,976 2,055,017 2,032,017 2,198,477 348,830 1,849,647 15.87% Investment Earnings 210,000 486,468 200,000 (506,561) 200,000 200,000 0.00% Other Income621,280 3,442,900 593,300 606,695 526,829 170,707 356,122 32.40% Use of Fund Balance25,000 250,000 250,000 Total General Fund Revenues41,694,165$ 44,898,732$ 42,502,431$ 42,273,637$ 44,312,567$ 3,378,292$ 40,934,275$ 7.62%General Fund Expenditures: General Government: Administration1,868,599$ 1,472,421$ 1,617,882$ 1,364,823$ 2,010,605$ 156,831$ 1,853,774$ 7.80% Finance1,124,045 1,194,828 1,129,591 1,189,759 1,178,516 163,758 1,014,758 13.90% Assessing808,171 792,277 798,244 767,705 821,530 127,043 694,487 15.46% Human Resources823,209 796,088 837,736 762,448 882,849 97,588 785,261 11.05% Community Development1,571,894 1,536,657 1,576,323 1,443,087 1,606,474 229,280 1,377,194 14.27% Facilities Maintenance1,265,337 1,246,439 1,349,365 1,405,236 1,407,116 206,492 1,200,624 14.67% Information Resources1,709,255 1,596,487 1,683,216 1,650,478 1,622,619 188,356 1,434,263 11.61% Communications & Marketing828,004 710,334 970,934 801,034 974,064 144,397 829,667 14.82%Total General Government9,998,514$ 9,345,531$ 9,963,291$ 9,384,570$ 10,503,773$ 1,313,746$ 9,190,027$ 12.51% Public Safety: Police10,853,821$ 10,611,141$ 11,307,863$ 11,347,501$ 11,846,760$ 1,751,434$ 10,095,326$ 14.78% Fire Protection5,040,703 4,764,337 4,998,636 5,066,748 5,364,179 779,623 4,584,556 14.53% Building 2,696,585 2,321,664 2,571,968 2,493,832 2,712,400 403,557 2,308,843 14.88%Total Public Safety18,591,109$ 17,697,142$ 18,878,467$ 18,908,081$ 19,923,339$ 2,934,614$ 16,988,725$ 14.73% Operations: Public Works Administration273,318$ 216,899$ 249,256$ 239,769$ 255,766$ 35,735$ 220,031$ 13.97% Public Works Operations3,331,966 3,168,538 3,285,820 2,955,669 3,523,669 400,633 3,123,036 11.37% Vehicle Maintenance1,278,827 1,207,998 1,303,159 1,223,164 1,368,929 205,472 1,163,457 15.01% Engineering551,285 531,801 523,547 655,867 556,115 80,765 475,350 14.52%Total Operations5,435,396$ 5,125,236$ 5,361,782$ 5,074,469$ 5,704,479$ 722,605$ 4,981,874$ 12.67% Parks and Recreation: Organized Recreation1,637,002 1,369,309 1,639,358 1,520,420 1,769,060 410,465 1,358,595 23.20% Recreation Center2,061,394 1,864,459 2,082,697 2,198,272 2,274,043 257,016 2,017,027 11.30% Park Maintenance1,906,363 1,802,534 1,916,643 1,856,421 2,034,509 285,234 1,749,275 14.02% Westwood Nature Center748,683 606,378 736,515 652,505 794,170 108,313 685,857 13.64% Natural Resources504,143 433,362 496,497 412,015 612,110 15,175 596,935 2.48%Total Parks and Recreation6,857,585$ 6,076,042$ 6,871,710$ 6,639,633$ 7,483,892$ 1,076,204$ 6,407,688$ 14.38% Other Depts and Non-Departmental: Racial Equity and Inclusion 314,077$ 272,994$ 341,293$ 185,280$ 292,194$ 16,797$ 275,397$ 5.75% Sustainability497,484 244,655 432,043 297,217 404,890 45,080 359,810 11.13% Transfers Out4,878,845 4,450,000 Contingency and Other144,860 225,000 67,183 Total Other Depts and Non-Departmental811,561$ 662,509$ 5,877,181$ 4,999,680$ 697,084$ 61,877$ 635,207$ 8.88%Total General Fund Expenditures41,694,165$ 38,906,460$ 46,952,431$ 45,006,433$ 44,312,567$ 6,109,045$ 38,203,522$ 13.79%Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 6) Title: February 2022 monthly financial reportPage 2
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: March 28, 2022
Written report: 7
Executive summary
Title: Body worn camera annual update
Re commended action: Review the body worn camera program and revisions to policy .
Policy consideration: Does council approve of the direction of the body worn camera program?
Summary: Council affirmed the police department body worn camera (BWC) policy on Sept. 4,
2018, and passed Resolution 18-134 directing Chief Harcey to report back to council in six
months and annually thereafter regarding:
1.General reflections and learnings from the police department on the implementation
and use of BWC’s
2.Criteria tracked to include, at a minimum, hours of utilization, officer compliance, how
often reports are filed to document when cameras are not turned on, how often and
under what circumstances officers review footage prior to writing reports, requests to
view footage and police department response
3.Any police department proposed changes or updates to the use of BWC's policy
4.Other information that would be useful to the city council and the public to help
understand and evaluate this initial trial and implementation
The report includes information requested by council in Resolution 18-134, based upon the use
of the body worn came ras from Jan. 1, 2021, through Dec. 31, 2021.
Financial or budget considerations: None at this time.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build
social capital through community engagement.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Resolution 18-134
Body-worn camera policy
In-car camera policy
Prepared by: Greg Weigel, police lieutenant
Approved by: Mike Harcey , police chief
Approve d by: Kim Keller, city manager
Page 2 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
Discussion
Background: The police department researched and sought community input to develop a
Body Worn Camera (BWC) policy that reflects the needs of the community. Council affirmed
the BWC policy on Sept. 4, 2018, and passed Resolution 18- 134 directing Chief Harcey to report
back to Council in six months and annually thereafter. The police department BWC program
went live on April 10, 2019, utilizing 60 body worn cameras and 19 fleet cameras. The
information provided in the following section is based upon the use of the BWCs in calendar
year 2021 and corresponds to the information requested by council in Resolution 18-134.
1.General reflections and learnings from the police department on the implementation
and use of BWC’s.
Sin ce implementation , police department staff noted the following reflections and
learnings while utilizing the body worn and fleet cameras:
•Use – Officers are continuing to err on the side of caution and using BWCs more
often than required by policy.
•Records management – The current records management system on e vidence.com
has simplified our information sharing between partner agencies, city and county
prosecutors. There has been no significant impact to date from public data requests.
•Internal compliance audits – The trimester supervisory audits have proven to be an
effective tool to ensure compliance with policy as well as comprehension of training.
2.Criteria tracked to include, at a minimum, hours of utilization, officer compliance, how
often reports are filed to document when cameras are not turned on, how often and
under what circumstances officers review footage prior to writing reports, requests to
view footage and police department response.
Since implementation in 2019, officers utilized the body worn and fle et cameras for
32,535 hours, collecting 127,198 evidence items - equaling 58 terabytes of data. In 2021,
officers utilized the body worn and fleet cameras for 12,944 hours, collecting 47,925
evidence items - equaling 23 terabytes of data. Officers responded to 51,620 calls for
service in 2021 and wrote 7,894 reports during that same time period. Officers self -
reported their failures to activate their body worn cameras when required 14 times by
completing the report required by policy. In 2021, supervisors conducted 73 individual
audits covering 730 random videos and found one additional, unreported time that an
officer failed to activate their body worn camera when required by policy (0.13% audit
failure rate). In total, when compared to the number of body-worn and fleet videos for
2021, officers complied with policy 99.97% of the time. In addition, officers reported
they reviewed their video 193 times (0.4%) prior to completing their police reports . The
police department received six public requests for video in 2021. Two req uests were
fulfilled by viewing on site and four were sent digital copies.
3.Any police department proposed changes or updates to the use of BWC's policy.
The police department completed the first audit of its BWC program in March 2021.
LOGIS was contracted to perform the audit.
Page 3 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
Minnesota Statute §13.825 requires law enforcement agencies that use body-
worn cameras to conduct biennial independent audits of the data to determine
whether data are appropriately classified according to this section, how the data
are used, whether the data are destroyed as required under this section, and to
verify compliance with the law. Law enforcement must forward a report
summarizing the results of the audit to the governing body within the
jurisdiction and to the Legislative Commission on Data Practices and Personal
Data Privacy.
LOGIS completed their audit and found the police department to be compliant with
statute and reported their results as required. LOGIS’ only recommendation was the
following addition to policy:
Notification will be made to the MN Bureau of Criminal Apprehension within ten
days of obtaining new surveillance technology that expands the type or scope of
the agency's portable recording system.
The recommended addition was made to the BWC policy on page 13.
Resolution No. 18-134
Resolution prescribing the reporting requirements of the city manager to the
city council regarding the St. Louis Park police departments use of body worn
cameras
Whereas, on September 4, 2018 the city council affirmed the body worn camera (BWC)
policy and directed staff to continue to move forward with the implementation of the BWC
initiative; and
Whereas, transparency and accountability regarding the police departments use of BWC's
is important in order to help maintain the public's trust in the department; and
Whereas, the city of St. Louis Park values continuous learning and improvement as it goes
about providing services to the community.
Now therefore be it resolved by the city council of the city of St. Louis Park that in
addition to the audit and reporting requirements required by state statute for an agencies use
of BWC's, the city manager, with the assistance of the police chief, is directed to provide a
report to the city council within six months of the city council's affirmation of the BWC policy
and annually thereafter that includes, but is not limited to, the following:
•General reflections and learnings from the police department on the implementation
and use of BWC's;
•Criteria tracked to include, at a minimum, hours of utilization, officer compliance, how
often reports are filed to document when cameras are not turned on, how often and
under what circumstances officers review footage prior to writing reports, requests to
view footage and police department response;
•Any police department proposed changes or updates to the "Use of BWC's Policy";
•Other information that would be useful to the city council and the public to help
understand and evaluate this initial trial and implementation."
administration: ted by the City Council September 4, 2018
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager
Attest:
Page 4 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
3/30/2021
Body-Worn Cameras Policy Page 1
City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
Use of Body‐Worn Cameras Policy
Purpose
The primary purpose of using body‐worn‐cameras (BWCs) is to:
A.Capture evidence arising from a police‐citizen contact.
B.Assist with accurate report writing.
C.Allow for transparency and accountability in policing and protect the civil rights of
the community.
This policy sets forth guidelines governing the use of BWCs and administering the data that
results. Compliance with these guidelines is mandatory, but it is recognized that officers must
also attend to other primary duties and the safety of all concerned, sometimes in circumstances
that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving.
Objectives
The St. Louis Park Police Department has adopted the use of portable audio/video recorders to
accomplish the following objectives:
A.To enhance officer safety.
B.To document statements and events during the course of an incident.
C.To enhance the officer’s ability to document and review statements and actions for
both internal reporting requirements and for courtroom preparation/presentation.
D.To preserve audio and visual information for use in current and future
investigations.
E.To enhance the public trust by preserving factual representations of officer‐citizen
interactions in the form of audio‐video recording.
F.To promote the civility of police‐civilian encounters
G.To provide objective evidence to help resolve civilian complaints against police
officers and the City of St. Louis Park.
H.To protect the civil rights of the community.
I.To assist with training and evaluation of officers.
Policy
It is the policy of this department to authorize and require the use of department‐issued BWCs
as set forth below, and to administer BWC data as provided by law.
Page 5 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
3/30/2021
Body-Worn Cameras Policy Page 2
Scope
This policy governs the use of BWCs in the course of official duties. It does not apply to the use
of squad‐based (dash‐cam) recording systems. The Chief of Police or the chief’s designee may
supersede this policy by providing specific instructions for BWC use to individual officers, or
providing specific instructions pertaining to particular events or classes of events, including but
not limited to political rallies and demonstrations where their use might be perceived as a form
of political or viewpoint‐based surveillance. The chief or designee may also provide specific
instructions or standard operating procedures for BWC use to officers assigned to specialized
details, such as carrying out duties in courts or guarding prisoners or patients in hospitals and
mental health facilities. In the event the chief does supersede policy by providing specific
instructions for use, a written report will be submitted to the City Manager.
Definitions
The following phrases have special meanings as used in this policy:
A.MGDPA or Data Practices Act refers to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act,
Minn. Stat. § 13.01, et seq.
B.Records Retention Schedule refers to the General Records Retention Schedule for
Minnesota Cities.
C.Law enforcement‐related information means information captured or available for
capture by use of a BWC that has evidentiary value because it documents events with
respect to a stop, arrest, search, citation, or charging decision.
D.Evidentiary Value means that the information may be useful as proof in a prosecution
or defense of a criminal action, related civil or administrative proceeding, further
investigation of an actual or suspected criminal act, or in considering an allegation
against a law enforcement agency or officer.
E.General Citizen Contact means an informal encounter with a citizen that is not and does
not become law enforcement‐related or adversarial, and a recording of the event would
not yield information relevant to an ongoing investigation. Examples include, but are not
limited to, assisting a motorist with directions, summoning a tow truck, or receiving
generalized concerns from a citizen about crime trends in his or her neighborhood.
F.Adversarial means a law enforcement encounter with a person that becomes
confrontational, during which at least one person expresses anger, resentment, or
hostility toward the other, or at least one person directs toward the other verbal
conduct consisting of arguing, threatening, challenging, swearing, yelling, or shouting.
Encounters in which a citizen demands to be recorded or initiates recording on his or
her own are deemed adversarial.
Page 6 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
3/30/2021
Body-Worn Cameras Policy Page 3
G.Unintentionally recorded footage is a video recording that results from an officer’s
inadvertence or neglect in operating the officer’s BWC, provided that no portion of the
resulting recording has evidentiary value. Examples of unintentionally recorded footage
include, but are not limited to, recordings made in station house locker rooms,
restrooms, and recordings made while officers were engaged in conversations of a non‐
business, personal nature with the expectation that the conversation was not being
recorded.
H.Official duties, for purposes of this policy, means that the officer is on duty and
performing authorized law enforcement services on behalf of this agency.
Training
All users of a BWC will be trained on the cameras operation and this policy prior to deploying
one.
Use and Documentation
A.Officers may use only department‐issued BWCs in the performance of official duties for
this agency or when otherwise performing authorized law enforcement services as an
employee of this department.
B.All officers working uniform patrol, uniform special details, traffic duties, and uniform
school resource officer duties shall use a BWC unless permission has been granted by a
supervisor to deviate from this clause. Plain clothes investigators/officers and
administrators are allowed to use BWC when interacting with citizens, when
appropriate.
C.Officers who have deployed a BWC shall operate and use them consistent with this
policy. Officers shall conduct a function test of their issued BWCs at the beginning of
each shift to make sure the devices are operating properly. Officers noting a
malfunction during testing or at any other time shall promptly report the malfunction to
the officer’s supervisor. As soon as is practical, the malfunctioning BWC shall be put
down for service and the officer should deploy a working BWC. If a BWC malfunctions
while recording, is lost, or damaged the circumstances shall be documented in a police
report and a supervisor shall be notified. Supervisors shall take prompt action to
address malfunctions and document the steps taken in writing.
D.Officers should wear their BWC in a conspicuous manner at the location on their body
and manner specified in training.
E.Officers must document BWC use and non‐use as follows:
Page 7 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
3/30/2021
Body-Worn Cameras Policy Page 4
1.Whenever an officer makes a recording, the existence of the recording shall be
documented in the records management system, an incident report, or a citation if
completed.
2.Whenever an officer fails to record an activity that is required to be recorded under
this policy or captures only a part of the activity, the officer must document the
circumstances and reasons for not recording in the records management system or
incident report. Supervisors shall review these reports and initiate any corrective
action deemed necessary.
F.The department will maintain the following records and documents relating to BWC use,
which are classified as public data:
1.The total number of BWCs owned or maintained by the agency;
2.A daily record of the total number of BWCs actually deployed and used by officers
and, if applicable, the precincts in which they were used;
3.The total amount of recorded BWC data collected and maintained; and
4.This policy, together with the Records Retention Schedule.
General Guidelines for Recording
A.This policy is not intended to describe every possible situation in which the BWC should
be activated, although there are many situations where use of the BWC is appropriate.
Officers should activate the BWC any time the user believes it would be appropriate or
valuable to record an incident.
B.Officers shall activate their BWCs when anticipating that they will be involved in,
become involved in, or witness other officers of this agency involved in a pursuit, Terry
frisks, a traffic stop of a motorist, an investigative stop of a pedestrian, searches,
seizures, arrests, response to resistance incidents, any encounter that becomes in any
way hostile, confrontational, or adversarial, and during other activities likely to yield
information having evidentiary value. However, officers need not activate their cameras
when it would be unsafe, impossible, or impractical to do so, but such instances of not
recording when otherwise required must be documented as specified in the Use and
Documentation guidelines, part (E)(2) (above).
C.Officers have discretion to record or not record general citizen contacts.
D.Officers will wear their camera in a conspicuous manner as specified in training. Officers
have no affirmative duty to inform people that a BWC is being operated or that the
Page 8 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
3/30/2021
Body-Worn Cameras Policy Page 5
individuals are being recorded. Officers may make an announcement that BWCs are
being used.
E.Once activated, the BWC should continue recording until the conclusion of the incident
or encounter, or until it becomes apparent that additional recording is unlikely to
capture information having evidentiary value. The supervisor having charge of a scene
shall likewise direct the discontinuance of recording when further recording is unlikely
to capture additional information having evidentiary value. If the recording is
discontinued while an investigation, response, or incident is ongoing, officers shall state
the reasons for ceasing the recording on camera before deactivating their BWC. If
circumstances change, officers shall reactivate their cameras as required by this policy
to capture information having evidentiary value. Any decision to discontinue recording
shall be made with respect to the nine policy objectives.
F.Officers shall not intentionally block the BWC’s audio or visual recording functionality to
defeat the purposes of this policy. This does not prevent an officer from temporarily
blocking the visual recording while ensuring audio data is collected during an encounter
with persons who are nude or when sensitive human areas are exposed.
G.Notwithstanding any other provision in this policy, officers shall not use their BWCs or
any other device to record other agency personnel during non‐enforcement related
activities, such as during pre‐ and post‐shift time in locker rooms, during meal breaks, or
during other private conversations, unless recording is authorized as part of a criminal
investigation.
Special Guidelines for Recording
Officers may, in the exercise of sound discretion, determine:
A.To use their BWCs to record any police‐citizen encounter if there is reason to believe the
recording would potentially yield information having evidentiary value, unless such
recording is otherwise expressly prohibited.
B.To use their BWCs to take recorded statements from persons believed to be victims of
and witnesses to crimes, and persons suspected of committing crimes, considering the
needs of the investigation and the circumstances pertaining to the victim, witness, or
suspect. The preferred method of recording a formal statement from a victim, witness
or suspect is using currently approved audio recording devices/software compatible
with records management dictation software.
In addition,
Page 9 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
3/30/2021
Body-Worn Cameras Policy Page 6
C.Officers need not record persons being provided medical care unless there is reason to
believe the recording would document information having evidentiary value. When
responding to an apparent mental health crisis or event, BWCs shall be activated as
necessary to document any response to resistance and the basis for it, and any other
information having evidentiary value, but need not be activated when doing so would
serve only to record symptoms or behaviors believed to be attributable to the mental
health issue.
D. Officers should use their BWC and/or squad‐based audio/video systems to record their
transportation and the physical transfer of persons in their custody to hospitals, detox
and mental health care facilities, juvenile detention centers, and jails, but otherwise
should not record in these facilities unless the officer anticipates witnessing a criminal
event or being involved in or witnessing an adversarial encounter or response to
resistance incident.
School Resource Officers
The St. Louis Park Police Department recognizes that the duties and working environment for
School Resource Officers (SRO) are unique within policing. It recognizes the SROs are required
to maintain school safety while keeping the sanctity of the learning environment that the
school provides. SROs are expected to continuously build trusting relationships with students
and staff. SROs often have impromptu interventions with students to deescalate arguments
and/or conflicts. It is with this understanding that the St. Louis Park Police Department provide
special guidelines for SROs and their BWC.
The BWC should be activated in any of the following situations:
(a)When summoned by any individual to respond to an incident where it is likely that law
enforcement action will occur when you arrive.
(b)Any self‐initiated activity where it is previously known that you will make a custodial
arrest.
(c)Any self‐initiated activity where it is previously known that you’re questioning /
investigation will be used later in a criminal charge.
(d)When feasible an SRO shall activate the BWC when the contact becomes adversarial or
the subject exhibits unusual behaviors.
Nothing in the policy undermines the fact that in many instances SROs are suddenly forced to
take law enforcement action and have no opportunity to activate the BWC. It is also recognized
that SROs have private (confidential) conversations with juveniles. It is not always appropriate
to record these conversations as it diminishes the trust between the individual and the SRO.
Page 10 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
3/30/2021
Body-Worn Cameras Policy Page 7
Downloading and Categorizing Data
A.Each officer using a BWC is responsible for transferring or assuring the proper transfer
of the data from their camera to the BWC server by the end of that officer’s shift.
However, if the officer is involved in a shooting, in‐custody death, or other law
enforcement activity resulting in death or great bodily harm, a supervisor or investigator
shall take custody of the officer’s BWC and consult with their supervisor.
B.Officers shall categorize the BWC data files of each video capture and should consult
with a supervisor if in doubt as to the appropriate category. The selected category(ies)
shall determine the retention times per the general records retention schedule
established by the Minnesota Clerks and Finance Officers Association (MCFOA).
C.In addition, officers shall categorize each file appropriately, in the manner specified in
training, with the appropriate category to indicate the information it contains. Some
data subjects may have rights under the MGDPA limiting disclosure of information
about them. These individuals include:
1.Victims and alleged victims of criminal sexual conduct and sex trafficking.
2.Victims of child abuse or neglect.
3.Vulnerable adults who are victims of maltreatment.
4.Undercover officers.
5.Informants.
6.When the video is clearly offensive to common sensitivities.
7.Victims of and witnesses to crimes, if the victim or witness has requested not to be
identified publicly.
8.Individuals who called 911, and services subscribers whose lines were used to place
a call to the 911 system.
9.Mandated reporters.
10.Juvenile witnesses, if the nature of the event or activity justifies protecting the
identity of the witness.
11.Juveniles who are or may be delinquent or engaged in criminal acts.
Page 11 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
3/30/2021
Body-Worn Cameras Policy Page 8
12.Individuals who make complaints about violations with respect to the use of real
property.
13.Officers and employees who are the subject of a complaint related to the events
captured on video.
14.Other individuals whose identities the officer believes may be legally protected from
public disclosure.
D.Category and flag designations may be corrected or amended based on additional
information.
Administering Access to BWC Data
A.Data subjects. Under Minnesota law, the following are considered data subjects for
purposes of administering access to BWC data:
1.Any person or entity whose image or voice is documented in the data.
2.The officer who collected the data.
3.Any other officer whose voice or image is documented in the data, regardless of
whether that officer is or can be identified by the recording.
B.BWC data is presumptively private. BWC recordings are classified as private data about
the data subjects unless there is a specific law that provides differently. As a result:
1.BWC data pertaining to people is presumed private, as is BWC data pertaining to
businesses or other entities.
2.Some BWC data is classified as confidential (see C. below).
3.Some BWC data is classified as public (see D. below).
C.Confidential data. BWC data that is collected or created as part of an active criminal
investigation is confidential. This classification takes precedence over the “private”
classification listed above and the “public” classifications listed below.
D.Public data. The following BWC data is public:
Page 12 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
3/30/2021
Body-Worn Cameras Policy Page 9
1.Data documenting the discharge of a firearm by a peace officer in the course of
duty, other than for training or the killing of an animal that is sick, injured, or
dangerous.
2.Data that documents the use of force by a peace officer that results in substantial
bodily harm.
3.Data that a data subject requests to be made accessible to the public, subject to
redaction. Data on any data subject (other than a peace officer) who has not
consented to the public release must be redacted [if practicable]. In addition, any
data on undercover officers must be redacted.
4.Data that documents the final disposition of a disciplinary action against a public
employee.
However, if another provision of the Data Practices Act classifies data as private or
otherwise not public, the data retains that other classification. For instance, data that
reveals protected identities under Minn. Stat. § 13.82, subd. 17 (e.g., certain victims,
witnesses, and others) should not be released even if it would otherwise fit into one of
the public categories listed above.
E.Access to BWC data by non‐employees. Officers shall refer members of the media or
public seeking access to BWC data to the administrative lieutenant or their designee,
who shall process the request in accordance with the St. Louis Park Police Department’s
applicable processes and policies and other governing laws. In particular:
1.An individual shall be allowed to review recorded BWC data about themselves and
other data subjects in the recording, but access shall not be granted:
a.If the data was collected or created as part of an active investigation.
b.To portions of the data that the agency would otherwise be prohibited by
law from disclosing to the person seeking access, such as portions that would
reveal identities protected by Minn. Stat. § 13.82, subd. 17.
2.Unless the data is part of an active investigation, an individual data subject shall be
provided with a copy of the recording upon request, but subject to the following
guidelines on redaction:
a.Data on other individuals in the recording who do not consent to the release
must be redacted.
b.Data that would identify undercover officers must be redacted.
Page 13 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
3/30/2021
Body-Worn Cameras Policy Page 10
c.Data on other officers who are not undercover, and who are on duty and
engaged in the performance of official duties, may not be redacted.
F.Access by peace officers and law enforcement employees. No employee may have
access to the department’s BWC data except for legitimate law enforcement or data
administration purposes:
1.Officers may access, share, view and download stored BWC video only when there is
a business need for doing so, including the need to defend against an allegation of
misconduct or substandard performance. Officers may review video footage of an
incident in which they were involved prior to preparing a report, giving a statement,
or providing testimony about the incident. Officers shall not use the fact that a
recording was made as a reason to write a less detailed report.
2.Personal devices shall not be used to capture, record, transfer, store or view any
BWC videos, photos or other evidence.
3.Supervisors may view recordings at any time they are making inquiry into an alleged
complaint, performance issue, or policy violation.
4.Agency personnel are prohibited from accessing BWC data for non‐business reasons
and from sharing the data for non‐law enforcement related purposes, including but
not limited to uploading BWC data recorded or maintained by this agency to public
and social media websites. All incidents of access to BWC data are digitally logged.
Allegations of inappropriate access to BWC data will be investigated and based on
the finding, discipline may result.
5.Employees seeking access to BWC data for non‐business reasons may make a
request for it in the same manner as any member of the public.
G.Other authorized disclosures of data. Officers may display portions of BWC footage to
witnesses as necessary for purposes of investigation as allowed by Minn. Stat. § 13.82,
subd. 15, as may be amended from time to time. These displays will generally be limited
in order to protect against the incidental disclosure of individuals whose identities are
not public. Any displays will take place at the St. Louis Park Police Department with the
approval of a supervisor. Protecting against incidental disclosure could involve, for
instance, showing only a portion of the video, showing only screen shots, muting the
audio, or playing the audio but not displaying video. In addition,
1.An officer may request a supervisor respond to the scene and request approval for a
display to take place outside the St. Louis Park Police Department.
Page 14 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
3/30/2021
Body-Worn Cameras Policy Page 11
2.BWC data may be shared with other law enforcement agencies only for legitimate
law enforcement purposes that are documented in writing at the time of the
disclosure.
3.BWC data shall be made available to prosecutors, courts, and other criminal justice
entities as provided by law.
Data Security Safeguards
A.Department members shall not intentionally edit, alter, or erase any BWC recording
unless otherwise expressly authorized by the Chief of Police or the Chief’s designee.
B.As required by Minn. Stat. § 13.825, subd. 9, as may be amended from time to time, this
agency shall obtain an independent biennial audit of its BWC program.
Agency Use of Data
A.To ensure compliance with this policy and to identify any performance areas in which
additional training or guidance is required supervisors will review each officer’s BWC
recordings during each officer’s trimester evaluation or more frequently if there is
reason to do so.
B.In addition, supervisors and other assigned personnel may access BWC data for the
purposes of reviewing or investigating a specific incident that has given rise to a
complaint or concern about officer misconduct or performance.
C.When a video is accessed or reviewed via Evidence.com, a notation shall be entered
into the “Notes” section of the screen stating the reason for access.
D.Nothing in this policy limits or prohibits the use of BWC data as evidence of
misconduct or as a basis for discipline.
E.Officers should contact their supervisors to discuss retaining and using BWC footage
for training purposes. Officer objections to preserving or using certain footage for
training will be considered by the chief of Police on a case‐by‐case basis. Field training
officers may utilize BWC data with trainees for the purpose of providing coaching and
feedback on the trainees’ performance.
Page 15 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
3/30/2021
Body-Worn Cameras Policy Page 12
Data Retention
A.All BWC data shall be retained for a minimum period of 90 days. There are no
exceptions for erroneously recorded or non‐evidentiary data.
B.Data documenting the following incidents must be maintained for a minimum period of
one year:
1.Discharge of a firearm by a peace officer in the course of duty, other than for
training or the killing of an animal that is sick, injured or dangerous.
2.The use of deadly force by a peace officer, or force of a sufficient type or degree to
require a response to resistance report or supervisory review.
3.Circumstances that have given rise to a formal complaint against an officer.
C.Other data having evidentiary value shall be retained for the period specified in the
Records Retention Schedule. When a particular recording is subject to multiple
retention periods, it shall be maintained for the longest applicable period.
D.Subject to Part F (below), all other BWC footage that is classified as non‐evidentiary,
becomes classified as non‐evidentiary, or is not maintained for training shall be
destroyed after 90 days.
E.Upon written request by a BWC data subject, the agency shall retain a recording
pertaining to that subject for an additional time period requested by the subject of up to
1 year. The agency will notify the requestor at the time of the request that the data will
then be destroyed unless a new written request is received.
F.The department shall maintain an inventory of BWC recordings having evidentiary value.
G.The department will post this policy, together with a link to its Records Retention
Schedule, on its website.
H.In the event that a BWC data file is inaccurately categorized by an officer, or additional
information is gained that suggests a data file category should be changed, the officer
shall notify their immediate supervisor of the required change(s).
Page 16 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
3/30/2021
Body-Worn Cameras Policy Page 13
Compliance
Supervisors shall monitor for compliance with this policy. Depending on the circumstances,
violations of the policy may result in coaching and counseling, oral reprimand, written
reprimand, suspension or termination. The unauthorized access to or disclosure of BWC data
may constitute misconduct and subject individuals to disciplinary action and criminal penalties
pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 13.09.
BCA Notification
Notification will be made to the MN Bureau of Criminal Apprehension within ten days of
obtaining new surveillance technology that expands the type or scope of the agency's portable
recording system.
Page17 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
9/15/2020
In-Car Camera Policy Page 1
City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
In-Car Camera Policy
Purpose
The primary purpose of using body-worn-cameras (ICCs) is to:
A. Capture evidence arising from a police-citizen contact.
B. Assist with accurate report writing.
C. Allow for transparency and accountability in policing and protect the civil rights of
the community.
This policy sets forth guidelines governing the use of ICCs and administering the data that
results. Compliance with these guidelines is mandatory, but it is recognized that officers must
also attend to other primary duties and the safety of all concerned, sometimes in circumstances
that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving.
Objectives
The St. Louis Park Police Department has adopted the use of portable audio/video recorders to
accomplish the following objectives:
A. To enhance officer safety.
B. To document statements and events during the course of an incident.
C. To enhance the officer’s ability to document and review statements and actions for
both internal reporting requirements and for courtroom preparation/presentation.
D. To preserve audio and visual information for use in current and future investigations.
E. To enhance the public trust by preserving factual representations of officer-citizen
interactions in the form of audio-video recording.
F. To promote the civility of police-civilian encounters
G. To provide objective evidence to help resolve civilian complaints against police
officers and the City of St. Louis Park.
H. To protect the civil rights of the community.
I. To assist with training and evaluation of officers.
Policy
It is the policy of this department to authorize and require the use of department-issued ICCs as
set forth below, and to administer ICC data as provided by law.
Scope
This policy governs the use of ICCs in the course of official duties. The Chief of Police or the
chief’s designee may supersede this policy by providing specific instructions for ICC use to
Page 18 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
9/15/2020
In-Car Camera Policy Page 2
individual officers, or providing specific instructions pertaining to particular events or classes of
events, including but not limited to political rallies and demonstrations where their use might be
perceived as a form of political or viewpoint-based surveillance. The chief or designee may also
provide specific instructions or standard operating procedures for ICC use to officers assigned to
specialized details, such as carrying out duties in courts or guarding prisoners or patients in
hospitals and mental health facilities. In the event the chief does supersede policy by providing
specific instructions for use, a written report will be submitted to the City Manager.
Definitions
The following phrases have special meanings as used in this policy:
A.MGDPA or Data Practices Act refers to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act,
Minn. Stat. § 13.01, et seq.
B.Records Retention Schedule refers to the General Records Retention Schedule for
Minnesota Cities.
C.Law enforcement-related information means information captured or available for
capture by use of an ICC that has evidentiary value because it documents events with
respect to a stop, arrest, search, citation, or charging decision.
D.Evidentiary Value means that the information may be useful as proof in a prosecution or
defense of a criminal action, related civil or administrative proceeding, further
investigation of an actual or suspected criminal act, or in considering an allegation
against a law enforcement agency or officer.
E.General Citizen Contact means an informal encounter with a citizen that is not and does
not become law enforcement-related or adversarial, and a recording of the event would
not yield information relevant to an ongoing investigation. Examples include, but are not
limited to, assisting a motorist with directions, summoning a tow truck, or receiving
generalized concerns from a citizen about crime trends in his or her neighborhood.
F.Adversarial means a law enforcement encounter with a person that becomes
confrontational, during which at least one person expresses anger, resentment, or hostility
toward the other, or at least one person directs toward the other verbal conduct consisting
of arguing, threatening, challenging, swearing, yelling, or shouting. Encounters in which
a citizen demands to be recorded or initiates recording on his or her own are deemed
adversarial.
G.Unintentionally recorded footage is a video recording that results from an officer’s
inadvertence or neglect in operating the officer’s ICC, provided that no portion of the
resulting recording has evidentiary value. Examples of unintentionally recorded footage
include, but are not limited to, recordings made in station house locker rooms, restrooms,
and recordings made while officers were engaged in conversations of a non-business,
personal nature with the expectation that the conversation was not being recorded.
Page 19 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
9/15/2020
In-Car Camera Policy Page 3
H.Official duties, for purposes of this policy, means that the officer is on duty and
performing authorized law enforcement services on behalf of this agency.
Training
All users of an ICC will be trained on the cameras operation and this policy prior to deploying
one.
Use and Documentation
A. Officers may use only department-issued ICCs in the performance of official duties for
this agency or when otherwise performing authorized law enforcement services as an
employee of this department.
B. All officers working uniform patrol, uniform special details, traffic duties, and uniform
school resource officer duties shall use an ICC unless permission has been granted by a
supervisor to deviate from this clause. Plain clothes investigators/officers and
administrators are allowed to use ICC when interacting with citizens, when appropriate.
C. Officers who have deployed an ICC shall operate and use them consistent with this
policy. Officers shall conduct a function test of their ICCs at the beginning of each shift
to make sure the devices are operating properly. Officers noting a malfunction during
testing or at any other time shall promptly report the malfunction to the officer’s
supervisor. As soon as is practical, the malfunctioning ICC shall be put down for service
and the officer should deploy a vehicle with a working ICC. If an ICC malfunctions while
recording or is damaged the circumstances shall be documented in a police report and a
supervisor shall be notified. Supervisors shall take prompt action to address malfunctions
and document the steps taken in writing.
D. Officers must document ICC use and non-use as follows:
1. Whenever an officer makes a recording, the existence of the recording shall be
documented in the records management system, an incident report, or a citation if
completed.
2. Whenever an officer fails to record an activity that is required to be recorded under
this policy or captures only a part of the activity, the officer must document the
circumstances and reasons for not recording in the records management system or
incident report. Supervisors shall review these reports and initiate any corrective
action deemed necessary.
Page 20 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
9/15/2020
In-Car Camera Policy Page 4
General Guidelines for Recording
A. This policy is not intended to describe every possible situation in which the ICC should
be activated, although there are many situations where use of the ICC is appropriate.
Officers should activate the ICC any time the user believes it would be appropriate or
valuable to record an incident.
B. Officers shall activate their ICCs when anticipating that they will be involved in, become
involved in, or witness other officers of this agency involved in a pursuit, Terry frisks, a
traffic stop of a motorist, an investigative stop of a pedestrian, searches, seizures, arrests,
response to resistance incidents, any encounter that becomes in any way hostile,
confrontational, or adversarial , and during other activities likely to yield information
having evidentiary value. However, officers need not activate their cameras when it
would be unsafe, impossible, or impractical to do so, but such instances of not recording
when otherwise required must be documented as specified in the Use and Documentation
guidelines, part (D)(2) (above).
C. When it is reasonable to expect that the citizen contact will occur outside the camera’s
field of view, such as in a home or building or other location distant from the patrol car,
officers need not activate their ICCs if the officer is using a BWC to document the event.
D. Officers have discretion to record or not record general citizen contacts.
E. Officers have no affirmative duty to inform people that an ICC is being operated or that
the individuals are being recorded. Officers may make an announcement that ICCs are
being used.
F. Once activated, the ICC should continue recording until the conclusion of the incident or
encounter, or until it becomes apparent that additional recording is unlikely to capture
information having evidentiary value. The supervisor having charge of a scene shall
likewise direct the discontinuance of recording when further recording is unlikely to
capture additional information having evidentiary value. If the recording is discontinued
while an investigation, response, or incident is ongoing, officers shall state the reasons for
ceasing the recording on camera before deactivating their ICC. If circumstances change,
officers shall reactivate their cameras as required by this policy to capture information
having evidentiary value. Any decision to discontinue recording shall be made with
respect to the nine policy objectives.
G. Officers shall not intentionally block the ICC’s visual recording functionality to defeat
the purposes of this policy. This does not prevent an officer from temporarily blocking
the visual recording during an encounter with persons who are nude or when sensitive
human areas are exposed.
H. Notwithstanding any other provision in this policy, officers shall not use their ICCs or
any other device to record other agency personnel during non-enforcement related
activities, such as during pre- and post-shift time in locker rooms, during meal breaks, or
Page 21 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
9/15/2020
In-Car Camera Policy Page 5
during other private conversations, unless recording is authorized as part of a criminal
investigation.
Special Guidelines for Recording
Officers may, in the exercise of sound discretion, determine:
A. To use their ICCs to record any police-citizen encounter if there is reason to believe the
recording would potentially yield information having evidentiary value, unless such
recording is otherwise expressly prohibited.
In addition,
B. Officers need not record persons being provided medical care unless there is reason to
believe the recording would document information having evidentiary value. When
responding to an apparent mental health crisis or event, ICCs shall be activated as
necessary to document any response to resistance and the basis for it, and any other
information having evidentiary value, but need not be activated when doing so would
serve only to record symptoms or behaviors believed to be attributable to the mental
health issue.
C. Officers should use their BWC and ICC to record their transportation and the physical
transfer of persons in their custody to hospitals, detox and mental health care facilities,
juvenile detention centers, and jails, but otherwise should not record in these facilities
unless the officer anticipates witnessing a criminal event or being involved in or
witnessing an adversarial encounter or response to resistance incident.
Downloading and Categorizing Data
A. Each officer using an ICC is responsible for transferring or assuring the proper transfer of
the data from their camera to the ICC server by the end of that officer’s shift. However, if
the officer is involved in a shooting, in-custody death, or other law enforcement activity
resulting in death or great bodily harm, a supervisor or investigator shall take custody of
the officer’s ICC system and consult with their supervisor.
B. Officers shall categorize the ICC data files of each video capture and should consult with
a supervisor if in doubt as to the appropriate category. The selected category(ies) shall
determine the retention times per the general records retention schedule established by
the Minnesota Clerks and Finance Officers Association (MCFOA).
C. In addition, officers shall categorize each file appropriately, in the manner specified in
training, with the appropriate category to indicate the information it contains. Some data
Page 22 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
9/15/2020
In-Car Camera Policy Page 6
subjects may have rights under the MGDPA limiting disclosure of information about
them. These individuals include:
1. Victims and alleged victims of criminal sexual conduct and sex trafficking.
2. Victims of child abuse or neglect.
3. Vulnerable adults who are victims of maltreatment.
4. Undercover officers.
5. Informants.
6. When the video is clearly offensive to common sensitivities.
7. Victims of and witnesses to crimes, if the victim or witness has requested not to be
identified publicly.
8. Individuals who called 911, and services subscribers whose lines were used to place a
call to the 911 system.
9. Mandated reporters.
10. Juvenile witnesses, if the nature of the event or activity justifies protecting the
identity of the witness.
11. Juveniles who are or may be delinquent or engaged in criminal acts.
12. Individuals who make complaints about violations with respect to the use of real
property.
13. Officers and employees who are the subject of a complaint related to the events
captured on video.
14. Other individuals whose identities the officer believes may be legally protected from
public disclosure.
D. Category and flag designations may be corrected or amended based on additional
information.
Administering Access to ICC Data
A.Data subjects. Under Minnesota law, the following are considered data subjects for
purposes of administering access to ICC data:
Page 23 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
9/15/2020
In-Car Camera Policy Page 7
1. Any person or entity whose image or voice is documented in the data.
2. The officer who collected the data.
3. Any other officer whose voice or image is documented in the data, regardless of
whether that officer is or can be identified by the recording.
B.ICC data is presumptively private. ICC recordings are classified as private data about
the data subjects unless there is a specific law that provides differently. As a result:
1. ICC data pertaining to people is presumed private, as is ICC data pertaining to
businesses or other entities.
2. Some ICC data is classified as confidential (see C. below).
3. Some ICC data is classified as public (see D. below).
C.Confidential data. ICC data that is collected or created as part of an active criminal
investigation is confidential. This classification takes precedence over the “private”
classification listed above and the “public” classifications listed below.
D.Public data. The following ICC data is public:
1. Data documenting the discharge of a firearm by a peace officer in the course of duty,
other than for training or the killing of an animal that is sick, injured, or dangerous.
2. Data that documents the use of force by a peace officer that results in substantial
bodily harm.
3. Data that a data subject requests to be made accessible to the public, subject to
redaction. Data on any data subject (other than a peace officer) who has not consented
to the public release must be redacted [if practicable]. In addition, any data on
undercover officers must be redacted.
4. Data that documents the final disposition of a disciplinary action against a public
employee.
However, if another provision of the Data Practices Act classifies data as private or
otherwise not public, the data retains that other classification. For instance, data that
reveals protected identities under Minn. Stat. § 13.82, subd. 17 (e.g., certain victims,
witnesses, and others) should not be released even if it would otherwise fit into one of the
public categories listed above.
E.Access to ICC data by non-employees. Officers shall refer members of the media or
public seeking access to ICC data to the administrative lieutenant or their designee, who
Page 24 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
9/15/2020
In-Car Camera Policy Page 8
shall process the request in accordance with the St. Louis Park Police Department’s
applicable processes and policies and other governing laws. In particular:
1. An individual shall be allowed to review recorded ICC data about themselves and
other data subjects in the recording, but access shall not be granted:
a. If the data was collected or created as part of an active investigation.
b. To portions of the data that the agency would otherwise be prohibited by law
from disclosing to the person seeking access, such as portions that would
reveal identities protected by Minn. Stat. § 13.82, subd. 17.
2. Unless the data is part of an active investigation, an individual data subject shall be
provided with a copy of the recording upon request, but subject to the following
guidelines on redaction:
a. Data on other individuals in the recording who do not consent to the release
must be redacted.
b. Data that would identify undercover officers must be redacted.
c. Data on other officers who are not undercover, and who are on duty and
engaged in the performance of official duties, may not be redacted.
F.Access by peace officers and law enforcement employees. No employee may have
access to the department’s ICC data except for legitimate law enforcement or data
administration purposes:
1. Officers may access, share, view and download stored ICC video only when there is a
business need for doing so, including the need to defend against an allegation of
misconduct or substandard performance. Officers may review video footage of an
incident in which they were involved prior to preparing a report, giving a statement,
or providing testimony about the incident. Officers shall not use the fact that a
recording was made as a reason to write a less detailed report.
2. Personal devices shall not be used to capture, record, transfer, store or view any ICC
videos, photos or other evidence.
3. Supervisors may view recordings at any time they are making inquiry into an alleged
complaint, performance issue, or policy violation.
4. Agency personnel are prohibited from accessing ICC data for non-business reasons
and from sharing the data for non-law enforcement related purposes, including but
not limited to uploading ICC data recorded or maintained by this agency to public and
social media websites. All incidents of access to ICC data are digitally logged.
Page 25 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
9/15/2020
In-Car Camera Policy Page 9
Allegations of inappropriate access to ICC data will be investigated and based on the
finding, discipline may result.
5. Employees seeking access to ICC data for non-business reasons may make a request
for it in the same manner as any member of the public.
G.Other authorized disclosures of data. Officers may display portions of ICC footage to
witnesses as necessary for purposes of investigation as allowed by Minn. Stat. § 13.82,
subd. 15, as may be amended from time to time. These displays will generally be limited
in order to protect against the incidental disclosure of individuals whose identities are not
public. Any displays will take place at the St. Louis Park Police Department with the
approval of a supervisor. Protecting against incidental disclosure could involve, for
instance, showing only a portion of the video, showing only screen shots, muting the
audio, or playing the audio but not displaying video. In addition,
1. An officer may request a supervisor respond to the scene and request approval for a
display to take place outside the St. Louis Park Police Department.
2. ICC data may be shared with other law enforcement agencies only for legitimate law
enforcement purposes that are documented in writing at the time of the disclosure.
3. ICC data shall be made available to prosecutors, courts, and other criminal justice
entities as provided by law.
Data Security Safeguards
A. Department members shall not intentionally edit, alter, or erase any BWC recording
unless otherwise expressly authorized by the Chief of Police or the Chief’s designee.
B. As required by Minn. Stat. § 13.825, subd. 9, as may be amended from time to time, this
agency shall obtain an independent biennial audit of its ICC program.
Agency Use of Data
A. To ensure compliance with this policy and to identify any performance areas in which
additional training or guidance is required supervisors will review each officer’s ICC
recordings during each officer’s trimester evaluation or more frequently if there is
reason to do so.
B. In addition, supervisors and other assigned personnel may access ICC data for the
purposes of reviewing or investigating a specific incident that has given rise to a
complaint or concern about officer misconduct or performance.
Page 26 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
9/15/2020
In-Car Camera Policy Page 10
C. When a video is accessed or reviewed via Evidence.com, a notation shall be entered
into the “Notes” section of the screen stating the reason for access.
D. Nothing in this policy limits or prohibits the use of ICC data as evidence of misconduct
or as a basis for discipline.
E. Officers should contact their supervisors to discuss retaining and using ICC footage for
training purposes. Officer objections to preserving or using certain footage for training
will be considered by the chief of Police on a case-by-case basis. Field training officers
may utilize ICC data with trainees for the purpose of providing coaching and feedback
on the trainees’ performance.
Data Retention
A. All ICC data shall be retained for a minimum period of 90 days. There are no exceptions
for erroneously recorded or non-evidentiary data.
B. Data documenting the following incidents must be maintained for a minimum period of
one year:
1. Discharge of a firearm by a peace officer in the course of duty, other than for training
or the killing of an animal that is sick, injured or dangerous.
2. The use of deadly force by a peace officer, or force of a sufficient type or degree to
require a response to resistance report or supervisory review.
3. Circumstances that have given rise to a formal complaint against an officer.
C. Other data having evidentiary value shall be retained for the period specified in the
Records Retention Schedule. When a particular recording is subject to multiple retention
periods, it shall be maintained for the longest applicable period.
D. Subject to Part F (below), all other ICC footage that is classified as non-evidentiary,
becomes classified as non-evidentiary, or is not maintained for training shall be destroyed
after 90 days.
E. Upon written request by a ICC data subject, the agency shall retain a recording pertaining
to that subject for an additional time period requested by the subject of up to 1 year. The
agency will notify the requestor at the time of the request that the data will then be
destroyed unless a new written request is received.
F. The department shall maintain an inventory of ICC recordings having evidentiary value.
Page 27 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
9/15/2020
In-Car Camera Policy Page 11
G. In the event that a ICC data file is inaccurately categorized by an officer, or additional
information is gained that suggests a data file category should be changed, the officer
shall notify their immediate supervisor of the required change(s).
Compliance
Supervisors shall monitor for compliance with this policy. Depending on the circumstances,
violations of the policy may result in coaching and counseling, oral reprimand, written
reprimand, suspension or termination. The unauthorized access to or disclosure of ICC data may
constitute misconduct and subject individuals to disciplinary action and criminal penalties
pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 13.09.
Page 28 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 7)
Title: Body worn camera annual update
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: March 28, 2022
Written report: 8
Executive summary
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Recommended action: The purpose of this report is to update council on city housing programs
and activity. This report is informational. No action is required.
Policy consideration: None at this time
Summary: The housing activity report has been presented to council annually since 2005. The
executive summary provides a brief overview of the detailed report. The report provides
information on new housing policies and initiatives, historical trends, program descriptions,
affordable housing data and information on housing programs in St. Louis Park.
The policies and programs in the housing activity report can be found on the St. Louis Park city
website .
Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: 2021 housing activity report
Prepared by: Marney Olson, housing supervisor
Reviewed by: Karen Barton, community development director
Approve d by: Kim Keller, city manager
Page 1 2021 Housing Activity Report
2021 Housing Activity Report
Executive summary
The purpose of this report is to provide city policy makers with an overview of housing program activity during
2021. The report provides information on new initiatives and updates as well as historical trends, program
descriptions, and data on city and federally funded housing programs and activity that are in line with the city’s
housing goals.
1.New initiatives and updates in 2021
a. First Generation Homeownership Program
b.Housing dashboard
2.City housing policies
a.Inclusionary Housing (30%, 50% and 60% AMI)
b.Tenant Protection Ordinance (60% AMI and below)
c.Housing Trust Fund
d. NOAH preservation strategies:
i.4D tax incentive program (60% AMI and below)
ii.Multifamily rental rehab program (60% AMI and below)
iii.Legacy program (60% AMI and below)
3.Remodeling activity
a.Housing rehab projects (general remodeling) remained steady in 2021, but the permit valuation was
up considerably. Most projects were financed without using city loans.
b.The city’s Architect Design Services and Remodeling Advisor Services continued to be great tools for
residents, and usage is in line with previous years.
c.Major remodeling projects continue to be strong in 2021 with increases in additions and major
remodels. There were 63 additions and 104 major remodels in 2021 with average valuations at
$163,458 and $63,527 respectively.
d.The Construction Management Plan program has been in place since November 2014. In 2021, 43
neighborhood notification letters were sent for Construction Management (CMP) plan projects: 37
major additions, four demo/rebuilds, two new builds only and one demo only. A map is included in
the report showing the location of these projects. This is an increase in the number of CMP projects.
4.Affordable home ownership, Community Development Block Grants and emergency rental assistance
a.There were 24 buyers under the Live Where You Work (LWYW) program during its 10-year run. In
2019, the new Down Payment Assistance (DPA) program provided loans to eight first-time
homebuyers in St. Louis Park (120% AMI), 10 loans in 2020 (100%/115% AMI) and 10 in 2021.
b.West Hennepin Affordable Housing Land Trust added two homes in St. Louis Park in 2021 and now
have 21 affordable homes in the community.
c.CDBG funds were used to fund the Deferred Loan Program for low-income residents in St. Louis Park
and the West Hennepin Affordable Housing Land Trust (WHAHLT) dba Homes Within Reach. (80%
AMI)
d.The city provides an emergency repair grant for low-income homeowners in St. Louis Park. There
were seven emergency repair grants issued in 2021 (50% AMI).
e.Annually, the city provides funds to STEP for emergency rental assistance. In 2021, STEP received
$65,000 in rental assistance, in addition to administrative and program-specific funding.
Page 2 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 2 2021 Housing Activity Report
5.Housing Matrix
a.Owner occupied (no rental license) properties comprise 55% of the housing market with rental
properties (units with a rental license) at 46%.
b.The single-family home ownership rate is 93%.
c.There are nearly 1200 units of senior housing in St. Louis Park.
d.Maxfield Research completed their rental study in the end of 2017 and of the 7,000 rental units
surveyed 49.3% are affordable at 60% AMI or below. Funds have been budgeted to update the study
in 2022.
e.The 2021 affordable ownership purchase price was $316,000 and 52% of homes in St. Louis Park are
assessed at or below this affordability limit. These homes are comprised of single family,
condominiums, and townhomes.
6.Foreclosures
a.The foreclosure rate remains extremely low with only four residential foreclosures in 2021.
7. Federally Funded Housing Programs
a.The St. Louis Park Housing Authority affordable rental housing and rental assistance programs served
approximately 500 households with rental assistance in 2021. Income eligibility limits are 50% AMI for
the housing choice voucher (HCV) program and 80% for public housing, although the majority of
households served in public housing and the HCV program are below 30% AMI. 79% of households
served by the HCV and public housing programs (housing authority rental assistance programs) are at
or below 30% AMI and 19% are between 31-50% AMI.
b.Family Unification Program and Mainstream Vouchers (50% AMI and below).
c.The St. Louis Park Housing Authority, in partnership with Hennepin County, has continued
administering the Stable HOME rental assistance program which provides housing assistance to
homeless or previously homeless individuals and families in Suburban Hennepin County. 41
households were served in 2021. (50% AMI)
d.Kids in the Park program – increased funding and is currently serving 20 families (50% AMI and
below).
e.Lou Park Apartments – 21 tenants residing at Lou Park with project-based vouchers were transitioned
to tenant-based vouchers administered by the Housing Authority (50% and below AMI).
Households served by housing authority rental assistance programs as of 12/31/2021
30% AMI 50% AMI 60% AMI 80% AMI Over 80% AMI
Number of
Households
349 71 11 6 5
Percentage of
Households
79% 17% 2% 1% 1%
8.Program Descriptions: This section gives detailed descriptions of the various housing programs.
Page 3 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 3 2021 Housing Activity Report
2021 Housing Activity Report
1.New initiative and updates in 2021
First generation program
It’s recognized that historical and institutional racism has disproportionately created housing challenges and
disparities for Black communities, as well as members of communities who do not identify as white, and other
underserved low-income communities. Additionally, the income and education gap between households of color
and white households has resulted in difficulty for Black and African American people and households of color to
obtain mortgages, leading to ongoing wealth accumulation equity issues.
The first-generation homeownership program is designed to address these historic injustices and inequities and to
support inclusive and equitable communities by facilitating affordable homeownership and providing a means for
wealth-building. The goal is to address housing disparities; build power in communities most impacted by housing
challenges and disparities; pilot an innovative program to address housing challenges for Black communities as
well as members of communities who don’t identify as white, and other underserved low-income communities.
To be considered for the program, a buyer must be a first-generation homeowner meaning they have never
owned a home and parents must have never owned a home. The program is available to homebuyers with a
maximum household income at or below 80% of area median income. The maximum loan amount is based on the
household’s income and purchase price of the homes with a maximum of $75,000. The loan is forgiven at 5% per
year over a 20-year owner occupancy period. Housing staff have partnered with several non-profits on the
development of the program as well as outreach to first generation homeowners. These non-profits work with
first time home buyers and are also dedicated to advancing homeownership equity in Minnesota.
The program was launched in November 2021. There have been several inquiries on this program, but no loans
were closed in 2021.
Housing Dashboard
The City of St. Louis Park is committed to promoting quality multifamily development and affordable housing
options for low- and moderate-income households.
In 2015, the City of St. Louis Park adopted an inclusionary housing policy with the goal of increasing the number of
affordable rental units in the city. The multifamily housing dashboard shows the total number of rental units and
the number of affordable units created since the inclusionary housing policy was adopted. Note that it does not
reflect the total number of affordable rental units in the city, nor does it reflect affordable units that have been
approved but have not yet been completed. The dashboard also includes a second tab, affordable housing goals,
that shows the progress the city is making towards the affordable housing goals set by the Metropolitan Council.
Page 4 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 4 2021 Housing Activity Report
2.City housing policies
The City of St. Louis Park has undertaken new initiatives and updates to current policies to address affordable
housing needs in the community.
Inclusionary housing
In June 2015, the city council adopted an Inclusionary Housing Policy that requires the inclusion of affordable
housing units for lower income households in new market rate multi-unit residential developments receiving
financial assistance from the city. The goal of the Inclusionary Housing Policy is to increase the supply of
affordable housing and promote economic and social integration.
Updates to the inclusionary housing policy since the adoption of the policy include:
•2017; increased the percentage of required affordable units and added a requirement that developments
covered by the policy must not discriminate against tenants who pay their rent with government provided
Housing Choice Vouchers or other public rent subsidies.
•2018; increased the percentage of required affordable units at 60% AMI, added a 30% AMI option, and
changed the ownership to require a payment in lieu. Payment in lieu provides the city the opportunity to
create long-term affordable homeownership housing, as opposed to the home only being affordable to
the initial buyer. The income limit eligibility for existing tenants was amended in 2018 to be consistent
with the tax credit income limits.
•2019; in an effort to expand the eligibility of developments obligated to comply with the policy
requirements and ensure that any NOAH units lost due to multi-family residential development are
replaced, the policy was again updated to apply to market rate multi-unit residential developments that
receive financial assistance from the city, seek PUD land use approvals or request a comprehensive plan
amendment, and includes:
a)new developments that create at least 10 multi-family dwelling units; or
b)any mixed-use building that creates at least 10 multi-family dwelling units; or
Page 5 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 5 2021 Housing Activity Report
c)renovation or reconstruction of an existing building that contains multi-family dwelling
units that includes at least 10 dwelling units; or
d)any change in use of all or part of an existing building from a non-residential use to a
residential use that includes at least 10 dwelling units.
•2021; based on the council’s interest in creating rental opportunities for larger size families and the need
to clarify language related to parking requirements, the policy was updated to require developments with
50 or more units to include a minimum number of family size units (three bedroom or larger) in the
development. Parking requirements were also updated in situations where underground or enclosed
parking is the only on-site parking option available for residents and requires a discount from the market
rate fee.
Table 1: Inclusionary housing policy requirements
Initial Policy Current Policy
Rental Projects •10 % of units at 60% AMI
•8% of units at 50% AMI
•20% of units at 60% AMI
•10% of units at 50% AMI
•5% of units at 30% AMI
Ownership Projects 10% of units at 80% AMI Payment in lieu
Page 6 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 6 2021 Housing Activity Report
Table 2: Affordable units created and approved
Development Total
Num
ber of
Units
Total Number
of Affordable
Units
Affordability
Level
O-bedroom
Affordable
Units
1-bedroom
Affordable
Units
2-bedroom
Affordable
Units
3-bedroom
Affordable
Units
Completed projects
Shoreham 148 30** 50% 4 13 13
4800 Excelsior 164 18 60% 1 10 7
Central Park
West Phase 1
119
in SLP
(199
total
6* 60% 1 2 2 1
Elan
Central Park
West Phase 2
164 5* 50% 1 1 2 1
The Quentin 79 8 50% 3 4 1 0
Elmwood 70 17 60% 5 12
Urban Park
Apartments
61 0
Parkway 25 112
Totals 917 84 N/A 10 35 37 2
Under construction
Via Sol (PLACE) 217 22
130
50%
80%
66 53 17 16
Parkway
Residences
235 24
6
50%
60%
1 15 8
6
Totals 452 182 N/A 67 68 31 16
Approved
Luxe
Residential
(approved in
2018)
207 8* 60% 2 3 2 1
Volo at Texa
Tonka
(approved
2020)
112 23 50% 7 12 4 0
Rise on 7
(approved
2021)
120 19
82
19
30%
60%
80%
57 39 24
Union
Congregational
Church (2021)
60 10
40
10
30%
60%
80%
3 12 30 15
Risor - 3510
Beltline (2021)
177 18 50% 1 11 5 1
Page 7 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 7 2021 Housing Activity Report
Beltline
Residences
(2021)
250 25 50% 5 15 3 2
9920 Wayzata 233 47 50% 10 19 16 2
Totals 1159 301 N/A 28 129 99 45
*Central Park West Phase 1 and Phase 2 and Luxe were not subject to the Inclusionary Housing Policy but
voluntarily included affordable units
**Shoreham is a tax credit property resulting in 20% of units affordable at 50% AMI
Tenant Protection Ordinance
The city council adopted a tenant protection ordinance in 2018. The tenant protection ordinance requires a three-
month period following the ownership transfer of a NOAH multifamily residential property during which the new
owner would be required to pay relocation benefits to tenants if the rent is increased, existing residents are
rescreened, or non-renewals are implemented without cause. NOAH properties are defined as buildings where at
least 18% of the units have rents affordable to households with incomes at or below 60% Area Medium Income
(AMI) to match the inclusionary housing policy affordability requirements at the time the policy was adopted.
The ordinance does not prohibit a new owner from taking the management actions listed above; however, the
owner would be required to provide resident relocation benefits if they do take any of those actions during the
tenant protection period and a tenant decides to move as a result. The three-month protection period provides a
period for residents to work with housing support resources and seek alternative housing if they are facing
unaffordable rent increases, new screening criteria requirements that would be problematic for them, or a thirty-
day non-renewal without cause notice to vacate. The ordinance requires the new owner of a NOAH building to
provide notice of the ordinance protections to tenants of affordable housing units within 30 days of the sale of
the building. The three-month tenant protection period begins once the notice has been given to the tenants.
NOAH properties required to comply with the tenant protection ordinance:
•9 in 2018
•3 in 2019
•3 in 2020
•0 in 2021
Local housing trust fund
The city council approved establishing a local affordable housing trust fund in 2018. Housing trust funds are
distinct funds established by city, county or state governments that receive ongoing dedicated sources of public
funding to support the preservation and production of affordable housing. Housing trust funds can also be a
repository for private donations.
The Minnesota Legislature passed a bill in 2017 that allows local communities to establish housing trust funds.
The housing trust fund may be established by ordinance and administered by the city. Money in a housing trust
fund may only be used to:
•pay for administrative expenses not to exceed 10% of the balance of the fund;
•make grants, loans, and loan guarantees for the development, rehabilitation, or financing of housing;
•match other funds from federal, state, or private resources for housing projects; or
•provide down-payment assistance, rental assistance, and homebuyer counseling services.
The city may finance the fund with any money available to a local government, unless expressly prohibited by
state law. The proposed primary source of funding for the city’s trust fund is an annual budgeted allocation of
HRA Levy funds, which was available beginning in 2020. The local housing trust fund guide was approved in 2019.
Page 8 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 8 2021 Housing Activity Report
Land banking
Land banking is the practice of aggregating parcels of land for future sale or development. The Economic
Development Authority (EDA) has purchased parcels near the Beltline and Wooddale stations to facilitate future
redevelopment which will include housing. The EDA also purchased one single-family home on Minnetonka Blvd in
2018, one in 2019 and two additional homes in 2020 for future redevelopment purposes.
NOAH Preservation (Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing)
Housing staff continued to participate in a Regional Housing Workgroup to review and discuss strategies for
preservation of NOAH. Additional preservation strategies including the multifamily rental rehab program, Legacy
program and 4D were approved in 2018 and implemented in 2019 to preserve NOAH properties.
Legacy program – 60% AMI and below
Investors are buying NOAH apartment properties across the Twin Cities, often renovating the properties and
increasing the rents. The City of St. Louis Park created the legacy program to encourage multifamily NOAH property
owners in our community who are thinking about selling their property to consider connecting with a socially driven
investor who will preserve the affordability of their development.
The city created a legacy program brochure outlining how an owner can make a difference by providing a legacy of
affordable housing in St. Louis Park. The brochure was mailed to all class B and C multifamily rental properties.
In 2021, the city expanded the Legacy program to include single family homes to connect potential sellers with
Homes Within Reach to expand the land trust program in St. Louis Park and preserve affordable homeownership in
the community. Homes Within Reach has communicated with homeowners about the program and are working
with one homeowner currently.
4d - 60% AMI and below
St. Louis Park’s 4d affordable housing incentive program helps preserve affordable homes in the city by providing
financial incentive to qualified apartment owners for state property tax reductions if they agree to keep 20 percent
or more of their rental units affordable. The program also offers grants to help owners make energy efficiency and
safety improvements to their properties.
This program was developed, approved, and marketed in 2018 to preserve affordable housing in St. Louis Park. One
apartment building applied for 4d in 2019. No additional 4d properties applied in 2020 or 2021.
Multifamily rental rehab program - 60% AMI and below
The multifamily rental rehab program provides moderate rehabilitation assistance to eligible owners of St. Louis
Park multifamily residential rental properties with three or more units. The targeted properties are NOAH
properties that have been maintained, are in good standing, and wish to make improvements to their properties.
Buildings must be at least 30 years old and meet the St. Louis Park definition of a NOAH property. The maximum
loan amount per qualified rent restricted unit is $5,000 with a maximum loan per building/development of $50,000.
Loans have 0% interest and are due upon the sale of the property. Owners must restrict the rents for a 10-year term
or until the sale or transfer of the ownership of the property.
The goal of this program is to provide a rehab incentive for NOAH properties to improve their property without
raising rents above the 60% AMI rent level. No properties participated in this program in 2019. Staff began
evaluating the program in 2020 and modifying the program in 2021. In 2022, housing staff will work with the city’s
environment and sustainability staff on a grant to evaluate housing and energy efficiency programs for multifamily
properties to identify barriers to the use of the current programs and identify what changes would make the
programs more beneficial to both property owners and tenants.
Page 9 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 9 2021 Housing Activity Report
3.REMODELING ACTIVITY
Residential permitted activity measures remodeling and maintenance activity. This section shows historical trends
of remodeling activity. Residential properties include apartments.
Permit Trends
•“Alteration Residential” or General Remodeling
General remodeling work includes residential projects with permit valuations less than $37,500. The average
value per job in 2021 is just over $10,000, an increase of $1,100 over 2020. Permits include a wide range of
projects including remodeling of existing spaces, window and door replacement, drain tile, insulation,
foundation work, etc.
Chart 1: Trend of General Remodeling Permits valued under $37,500
•Roofing and Siding Activity
Reroofing and residing permits are tracked separately. Almost 60% of the homes in the city had roofs replaced
between 2008 and 2011 due to storm damage, and we are starting to see increases in roofing and siding
permits.
Chart 2: Reroofing and Residing Permits
1129 1011 1091 1084 1074 1203 1170
983 996 1044 1001
0
500
1000
1500
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021Number of Permits IssuedYear
Maintenance & Minor Remodeling Permits
Alteration Residential (Minor)
761
140 161
131 104 80 107 163 162 296
591
11773 83 70 47 86 62 85 63 122
205
0
500
1000
1500
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021Number of Permits IssuedYear
Reroofing and Residing Permits
Reroof Reside
Page 10 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 10 2021 Housing Activity Report
•Additions and Major Remodeling
The number of major remodeling permits (valued at more than $37,500) and additions increased in 2021. The
average permit valuation for additions during 2021 is $163,500, consistent with the 2020 permit valuation.
The 2021 average valuation for major remodels is $63,500 which is a decrease in value, but an increase in the
number of permits.
Chart 3: Number of Addition and Major Remodeling Permits
•Permit Valuation
The following chart shows historical remodeling permit valuation for additions, major remodels, remodeling
and maintenance, garages/decks, reroofs, and siding. Permits with additional valuations were issued for
plumbing, heating, and electrical work (not shown here).
Chart 4: Permitted Residential Remodeling
48
71 67
73 70 59
67 59 49 49
6346
44 53
69 70 65
69 77 82 85
104
0
40
80
120
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021Number of Permits IssuedYear
Addition and Major Remodel Permit Activity
Addition Residential Major Remodels
26.6
$16.8
$21
$25 $23 $25 $26 $28 $25
$31.4
$40.3
0
20
40
60
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021Permit Valuation -Million $Year
Residential Remodeling Permit Valuation
Page 11 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 11 2021 Housing Activity Report
City Housing Improvement Services, Loans Trends and Program Descriptions
Home Improvement Services.
The city’s architectural design service, remodeling advisor and Home Energy Squad Visits are great programs for
residents who are considering a remodel or energy improvements to take advantage of. Despite COVID-19, there
was an increase in Home Energy Squad visits in 2020, in part due to promotion by the Environment and
Sustainability division and the CEE Home Energy Squad intercity challenge that St. Louis Park won in 2020 and
were second in 2021 on a per capita basis.
Chart 5: Technical, Design and Home Energy Visits
Construction Management Plan
Major additions (second story additions or additions of 500 square feet or more), demolitions and new
construction projects need to comply with the Construction Management Plan (CMP). In 2021, the following
neighborhood notifications were sent: 37 major additions, four demo/rebuilds, and two new builds on vacant
land. One of the new builds on vacant land was a property that was listed as a demo only in 2020. The total permit
valuation for CMP projects in 2021 was $10,603,357.
Chart 6: CMP Activity
29 29 37 41 22 31 33
39
52 47 36
82 69 69
95
69 76 76
83
51 45
30
122
153 173
125
170
109
85
130
166
128
020406080100120140160180200
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021Number of VisitsYear
Technical Home Improvement Services
Architect Services Remodeling Advisor Home Energy Visits
32
37
33 33
17 19
37
18
10 9 7 8 11
43
6 3 2
0
2 2
3 1 0 1
2 1 00
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021Number of CMP ProjectsYear
Construction Management Plan Activity
Additions Demo/New Build New Build Demo only
Page 12 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 12 2021 Housing Activity Report
Page 13 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 13 2021 Housing Activity Report
•Home Remodeling Fair and Tour
Both the Home Remodeling Fair and Tour were cancelled in 2020 and 2021 due to the pandemic. In 2021,
West Metro Home Remodeling Fair formalized the partnerships between the cities of Golden Valley,
Minnetonka, and St. Louis Park along with the Hopkins and St. Louis Park school districts through a Joint
Powers Agreement in preparation for the 2022 and future fairs.
•City Loans and Rebates
The following chart shows the number of Move Up Loans, Discount Loans, and Energy Rebates issued in
recent years. The city buys down the interest rate on the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency’s community fix
up loan for the discount loan with a maximum loan amount of $35,000. In 2020, interest rates dropped below
the rate of the city’s buydown rate, so midway through the year no loans needed the city to buy down the
rate. This continued in 2021, so there were no discount loans in 2021. The number of discount loans has
remained low the past several years partially due to other loan options that do not have income limits or
require a mortgage on the property, and the MHFA fix up loan offers a loan up to $75,000, but the city buy
down was only for loans less than $35,000.
Due to a change in funding sources for 2021, the 50% energy efficient rebate match added an income limit of
115% AMI ($120,650) which reduced the number of rebates in 2021.
Chart 7: Use of City Financial Incentives
Move-Up in the Park loans are deferred until the sale of the home or forgiven after thirty years.
Table 3: Move-Up Transformation Loans Paid off between 2014 and 2017
Year Number of Loans Paid Off Amount of Loans
2014 2 $23,957
2015 4 $78,246
2016 4 $97,970
2017 3 $80,909
2018 3 $66,432
2019 1 $16,250
2020 5 $114,327
2021 4 $77,876
Total paid off 2014-2021 $555,967
10 6 6 6 7 10 6 3 6 1 22226221713116565
0
83 73
113
166
143
108 101
125
94
112
63
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021Number Loans -RebatesYear
Loans and Rebates
Move up loans Discount loans Energy Rebates
Page 14 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 14 2021 Housing Activity Report
Table 4: Move-Up Participation and Costs
YEAR
Move-Up
Loans
Discount
Loans
Architectural
Design
Services
Remodeling
Advisor
Services
Energy
Efficient
Rebates
Home Energy
Squad
Down Payment
Assistance Loan Total City Cost
2006 27 $591,264 88 $186,205 102 $22,950 157 $20,410 $820,829
2007 27 $620,000 50 $74,000 62 $12,400 179 $23,270 $729,670
2008 18 $330,937 55 $114,129 49 $11,025 130 $16,900 $472,991
2009 17 $329,650 52 $106,000 12 $7,200 126 $16,380 22 $4,095 $463,322
2010 9 $209,769 64 $86,263 30 $6,750 89 $11,510 42 $7,820 $322,112
2011 10 $226,877 22 $29,213 29 $6,525 82 $10,250 83 $15,465 $288,330
2012* 6 $106,232 26 $31,276 29 $6,525 69 $8,970 73 $13,748 112 $7,320 $174,071
2013 6 $145,071 22 $33,063 37 $8,325 69 $8,970 113 $26,000 153 $10,650 $232,079
2014 6 $138,740 17 $26,079 41 $9,225 95 $12,350 166 $37,575 173 $11,390 $234,223
2015 7 $173,000 13 $17,577 22 $4,950 69 $15,525 143 $37,610 125 $6,250 $254,912
2016 10 $231,057 11 $27,001 31 $6,975 76 $17,100 108 $29,304 170 $8,510 $319,947
2017 6 $137,950 6 $5,907 33 $7,425 76 $17,100 101 $22,951 109 $5,450 $266,173
2018 3 $75,000 5 $12,904 39 $8,775 83 $18,865 125 $30,112 85 $4,250 $149,906
2019 6 $142,350 6 $16,577 52 $11,700 51 $11,475 94 $25,631 130 $6,500 8 $87,621 $301,584
2020 1 $25,000 5 $7,506 47 $10.575 45 $10,125 112 $27,491 166 $8,300 10 $135,428 $224,425
2021 2 $50,000 0 0 36 $8,125 30 $7,500 63 $16,662 128 $6,370 10 $127,900 $216,557
Detailed descriptions of each Move-Up Program are listed at the end of the report.
Page 15 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 15 2021 Housing Activity Report
4.AFFORDABLE HOME OWNERSHIP, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS AND EMERGENCY
RENTAL ASSISTANCE
Home ownership - down payment assistance program – 100%/115% AMI and below
The city reviewed and evaluated the Live Where You Work (LWYW) program and determined that it was
not meeting the goal of the program. 24 LWYW loans were issued in the 10 years the program was
offered.
The new down payment assistance program (DPA) provides down payment/closing cost assistance to
first-time homebuyers, or those that have not owned a home in the last three years, for purchasing a
home in St. Louis Park. Employees of St. Louis Park businesses may be eligible for additional funds to
encourage them to live where they work. The loan is a zero percent interest deferred loan up to
$15,000, not to exceed five percent of the purchase price. An additional $5,000 is available for
employees of St. Louis Park businesses and St. Louis Park renters. Income restrictions apply. 10 DPA
loans were administered in 2020 and another 10 in 2021.
Housing Improvement Area (HIA)
The HIA is a finance tool to assist with the preservation of the city’s existing townhome and
condominium housing stock. An HIA is a defined area within a city where housing improvements are
made, and the cost of the improvements are paid in whole or in part from fees imposed on the
properties within the area. The Association borrows low interest money from the city, improvements
are completed, and unit owners repay the loan through fees imposed on their properties and collected
with property tax payments. To date, eight HIA’s have been established and nearly fourteen million
dollars of improvements have been made to 1218 units.
Bridgewalk Condominium Homeowners’ Association submitted an application in 2021 and was approved
by the city council in February 2022. The veto period for the Bridgewalk HIA ends in April 2022.
Bridgewalk would be the city’s ninth HIA.
Emergency Repair Grant (50% AMI)
The emergency repair grant that had previously been funded using CDBG funds is now funded with
housing rehab dollars. Seven emergency grants were issued in 2021. The maximum grant amount is
$4,000.
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) (80% AMI)
The CDBG calendar year runs from July 1 – June 30th. FY2021 CDBG allocations included:
•$137,562 for the Low-Income Deferred Loan Program administered by Hennepin County
•$30,000 for West Hennepin Affordable Housing Land Trust
Low-income deferred loan program
Hennepin County administers the low-income deferred loan program for St. Louis Park and other
suburban cities in Hennepin County. This program is a 15-year deferred loan for low-income
homeowners that is forgiven after 15 years if the homeowner remains in the home.
West Hennepin Affordable Housing Land Trust, dba Homes Within Reach (HWR) - Two purchased in
2021 (80% AMI)
Homes Within Reach is a program of West Hennepin Affordable Housing Land Trust that purchases
properties, rehabilitates, and then sells the home to qualified low to moderate income
households. Buyers pay for the cost of the home only and lease the land for 99 years. City funds are
leveraged with CDBG, Hennepin County Affordable Housing Incentive Fund (AHIF), HOME Partnership,
Metropolitan Council, Minnesota Housing, and other funds.
Page 16 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 16
2021 Housing Activity Report
Homes Within Reach uses the community land trust model to create and preserve affordable
homeownership for families in suburban Hennepin County. To date, Homes Within Reach has purchased
21 homes in St. Louis Park. 19 of the homes have been rehabbed and sold to eligible homebuyers. The
two homes purchased in 2021 will be sold in 2022.
Twin Cities Habitat for Humanity (80% AMI)
The city has partnered with Habitat over the years to acquire nine blighted properties for rehab or tear-
down for new construction. The city last assisted Habitat with the purchase of a property in 2011. Twin
Cities is expanding their services to include financing which may serve more St. Louis Park residents than
their traditional program.
EMERGENCY RENTAL ASSISTANCE
Annually, the City of St. Louis Park provides funding to the St. Louis Park Emergency Program (STEP) for
emergency rental assistance (not COVID related). STEP provides rental assistance for residents of St.
Louis Park who have an unexpected crisis and cannot pay rent. The crisis mut be resolvable with the
ability to pay next month’s rent. Documentation is requested at the time of application. Priority is given
to those with gross incomes at or below 50% AMI. STEP also receives Community Development Block
Grant funds through the Hennepin County Consolidated RFP for emergency assistance.
The City of St. Louis Park provided additional $65,000 in funding to STEP for emergency rental assistance
in 2021.
Information about STEP, county and state emergency rental assistance programs was shared with
property owners and managers utilizing the SPARC e-newsletter. The information was also shared on
the city’s website and via social media for residents of St. Louis Park.
Page 17 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 17 2021 Housing Activity Report
5.HOUSING MATRIX AND DEVELOPMENT
The housing matrix shows the numbers and percentages of housing types, tenure (owner or rental),
affordable units, senior-designated units, and large single-family homes. The matrix is a guide to
evaluate future housing development proposals.
•11,569 units (45% of units) in St. Louis Park have a rental license.
•The chart shows percentages of rental vs. owner-occupied units over time. Prior to 2017, the chart
reflects homestead vs. non-homesteaded properties. Starting in 2017, the chart uses rental licenses
to count the number of rental properties in St. Louis Park since not all non-homesteaded properties
are rental.
•93% of single-family detached homes were owner-occupied (did not have a rental license), and 80%
of condos/townhomes were owner-occupied (no rental license)
•The city hired Maxfield Research to update the city’s comprehensive housing analysis. The report
was completed and presented to council in 2018. The city entered into an agreement with Maxfield
to update the study in 2022.
Chart 8: Percentage of Owner Occupied Units
*Rental license data used beginning in 2017
Family-size single-family homes
One of the city’s housing goals is to increase the number of family-size homes available in the city.
“Family-size single-family homes” are being defined as exceeding 1,500 square feet of living space,
having 3 or more bedrooms, 2 or more baths, and at minimum a 2-car garage. According to the
Assessing Department, 2,441 – or 21% – of SLP single family homes meet this threshold. This is an
increase of 40 homes since 2020 (due to additions, demo/rebuilds, and remodels). Although this size
home is not considered large when compared to newly constructed housing, in St. Louis Park 74% of
single-family homes have a foundation size less than 1,200 square feet and 46% of single-family homes
have less than 1,200 square feet above ground.
93 91 89 89 90 89 93 94 94 93 93
75 70 67 66 67 67
78 79 81 83 80
0
50
100
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017*2018*2019 2020 2021Percentage
YEAR
% Owner Occupied Units
Single Family Detached Homes Condos & Townhomes
Page 18 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 18 2021 Housing Activity Report
Senior housing
•Ten senior (including senior preference) housing rental developments, for a total of 1,028 units.
•Hamilton House offers a preference for seniors, but disability is another preference so not all
residents are seniors.
•Three developments are “affordable.” Hamilton House is Public Housing; Menorah West and
Menorah Plaza are multi-family subsidized.
•One development has a percentage affordable. The Elmwood has 17 affordable housing units
required by the inclusionary housing policy.
•Two senior ownership developments, for a total of 166 units.
•Total rental and home ownership units is 1,194.
Table 5: Senior housing table
RENTAL
Project name Address No. of
Units
Occp. Date Type of Senior
Hamilton House 2400 Nevada Ave S 108 1976 Public Housing (Senior
Preference)
Menorah West Apts 3600 Phillips Parkway 45 1986 Affordable/Subsidized
Menorah Plaza 4925 Minnetonka
Blvd
151 1981 Affordable/Subsidized,
Assisted Living Offered
Parkshore Place 3663 Park Center Blvd 207 1988 Senior
Knollwood Place 3630 Phillips Parkway 153 1987 Senior
TowerLight 3601 Wooddale Ave 43
29
33
2012 Senior
Assisted Living
Memory Care
Roitenberg Family 3610 Phillips Parkway 52/24 2002 Assisted Living/Memory
Care
Parkwood Shores 3633 Park Center Blvd 68
23
2001 Assisted Living
Memory Care
Comfort Residence
at St. Louis Park
7115 Wayzata Blvd 12
10
2014 Assisted Living
Memory Care
The Elmwood 5605 W 36th St 53
17
2021 Market rate senior
17 affordable senior @
60% AMI
TOTAL RENTAL UNITS: 1028 units
HOME OWNERSHIP
Project name Address No. of
Units
Occp. Date Type of Senior
Aquila Commons 8200 W 33rd St 106 2012 Coop
Village in the Park 3600 Wooddale 60 2007 Senior Living
TOTAL OWNER UNITS 166 units
Page 19 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 19 2021 Housing Activity Report
Affordable Housing
The Metropolitan Council sets the affordability limits for at 80% of the area median income for both
rental and ownership housing. In 2020, the metro area median income (AMI) for a household of four
was $103,400. Under these limits, a family of four can earn up to $78,500 (80% AMI) to qualify for
affordable housing. Below is a chart showing the number of market-rate affordable (naturally occurring
affordable housing) multifamily rental units in St. Louis Park with affordable levels from 30% AMI to 80%
AMI based on the Maxfield Research update from 2017. Funding has been allocated to update the study
and housing staff are currently working with Maxfield Research on a contract to begin updating the
study in late 2022.
Among the 7,000+ market-rate units that were inventoried by Maxfield Research by unit mix and
monthly rents, 7.9% of the units are considered naturally occurring affordable housing to households at
50% AMI, and an additional 41.4% of the naturally occurring units are affordable at 60% AMI. These
combined represent 49.3% of the market-rate rental housing inventory as naturally occurring affordable
at 50% to 60% AMI.
The St. Louis Park Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program has 342 vouchers that can be utilized in
market-rate rentals reducing the rents to 30% of a voucher holder’s income, and the average HCV
client’s income is below 30% AMI.
Table 6: Multifamily market-rate rental units by AMI from 2017
# of bedrooms 30% AMI 50% AMI 60% AMI 80% AMI
Efficiency 0 106 204 123
1 bedroom 20 370 2466 807
2 bedroom 19 198 879 929
3 bedroom 6 20 48
Total 39 680 3559 1906
Source: Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC (2017)
Affordable housing rental projects
The multifamily housing dashboard shows the total number of rental units and the number of affordable
units created since the inclusionary housing policy was adopted.
Affordable homeownership
•The 2021 affordable ownership purchase price is at or below $316,000, which is the affordable
homeownership purchase price for households at 80% AMI. The matrix also shows the data for
single-family homes, condos, and townhomes valued at $245,300 or less, which is the 60% AMI
affordable ownership purchase price.
•In 2021, 52% (7,947) of the single-family homes, condos, and townhomes in St. Louis Park were
considered affordable at or below 80% AMI based on valuation data from assessing. The affordable
ownership purchase price increased by $22,500 over 2020. The Metropolitan Council includes the
following assumptions in determining the affordable ownership price:
o Fixed-interest, 30-year home loan
o Interest rate of 3%
o A 29% housing debt-to-household income ratio
o A 3.5% down payment
o A property tax rate of 1.25% of the property sales price
o Mortgage insurance at 0.85% of unpaid principal
o $100/month for hazard insurance
Page 20 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 20 2021 Housing Activity Report
Table 7: St. Louis Park Housing Matrix
December 31, 2021
Housing Units by Type Large Single Family Homes, Affordable, and Senior Housing
Housing
Type Housing Units
Owner
Occupied (No
Rental
License)
Rental
Licenses
Family sized
single family
homes over
1500 square
feet
2021
Affordable
Market Rate
(NOAH) SF,
Condo and
TH Units
60% | 80%
2017 Maxfield
Research
Affordable
Market Rate
(NOAH)
Rental Units
60% | 80%
Rent
restricted
units *Does
not include
tenant based
vouchers
Senior
Designated
Single
Family
Detached 11,698 46% 10,827 871 2,441 803 4989 37
Duplex 436 2% 88 348
Condos
and
townhomes 3,558 14% 2,835 723 2958 2551 60
Apartments 9,627 38% 9627 4278 6184 546 1028
COOPs 114
<1%
114 106
Totals 25,433 13,864 55% 11,569 45% 2,441 21%
3354
22%
7947
52%
4278
46%
6184
67% 579 5% 1194 5%
% of SF
Homes
% of SF,
Condo & TH
% of
Multifamily % of Rental
% of Total
Housing Units
The rental unit numbers are coming directly from the rental licenses through the building and energy department. The percentage of owner occupied (no rental license)
units to rental (units with a rental license) units is 55% owner (no rental license) and 45% of units with a rental license.
Met Council revised the affordable housing income standards and now considers both rental and owner occupied housing units affordable at 80% AMI. This chart shows
all single family homes, condos and townhomes with an assessed value based on 60% and 80% AMI. The chart also shows multifamily rental units affordable at 60%
AMI and 80% AMI based on Maxfield Research data. More data is on the previous page related to affordable rents based on the number of bedrooms in a unit.
Rent restricted units include project based vouchers, public housing, and inclusionary housing units. This does not include the tenant based vouchers (Section 8), Kids
in the Park, or Stable HOME vouchers which are not tied to a specific unit.
Data source: St. Louis Park Community Development, Building and Energy, and Assessing departments and Maxfield Research & Consulting.
Page 21 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 21 2021 Housing Activity Report
6.FORECLOSURES
Foreclosures are measured by the number of sheriff sales. The number of residential foreclosures in St.
Louis Park and throughout Hennepin County has been declining since 2010.
Chart 9: St. Louis Park Residential Foreclosures by Year
The trend chart below shows foreclosure by housing type over time.
Chart 10: Residential Foreclosures by Housing Type
*Townhome & DB = Townhome and Double Bungalow/Duplex
163
122
59 54 47
31 36
19 15 4 40
40
80
120
160
200
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021Number of Sherrif Sales Year
Residential Foreclosures by Year
109
82
45 39
28 21
25
16 11 3 2
40 30
9 14 15
6
9
2 4 1 18
10 5 1 4 4 2 1 0 0 10
40
80
120
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021Number Sherrif SalesYear
Residential Foreclosures by Housing Type
Single Family Detached Condos Townhome & DB
Page 22 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 22 2021 Housing Activity Report
7.ST. LOUIS PARK HUD FEDERALLY FUNDED HOUSING PROGRAMS and rental assistance
The St. Louis Park Housing Authority (HA) administers programs that ensure the availability of safe and
desirable affordable housing options in the St. Louis Park community. These programs include the Public
Housing program, Housing Choice Voucher rental assistance program, the family self-sufficiency
program, Stable HOME, and Kids in the Park programs. The HA currently serves over 560 eligible, low-
income households through their housing programs.
Public Housing – Restricted to households at or below 80% AMI; however, the majority of public
housing residents have incomes below 50% AMI, with a significant number below 30% AMI
The Housing Authority (HA) owns Hamilton House, a low-rise apartment building (108 one-bedroom
units and two two-bedroom caretaker units) built in 1975, and 37 scattered site single-family units
(three to five bedrooms) acquired or constructed between 1974 and 1996. Hamilton House is
designated for general occupancy; however, priority is given to elderly and disabled applicants. The
single-family scattered units house families with children. The HA also holds the HUD Annual
Contributions Contract (ACC) and maintains a waiting list for 12 two-bedroom Public Housing apartment
units located at Louisiana Court.
The average annual income for households at Hamilton House is $15,982 which is below 30% AMI. The
average income for the scattered site single-family homes and Louisiana Court public housing units is
$47,140. Family sizes in Louisiana Court and the scattered site houses range from two to 11 people per
home. 73% of public housing households have incomes below 30% AMI, and 16% have incomes
between 31 and 50% AMI. 4% of public housing households have incomes at 60% AMI, 4% at 80% AMI,
and 3% above 80% AMI. If a household’s income rises above the limit, on the second anniversary of
being over income (100% AMI), households are given notice that they are no longer eligible for public
housing and need to move on from the program. Public housing residents pay 30% of their income
towards rent. The 2021 annual budget for Public Housing was $1,493,738 and an award of $281,449 for
the 2021 Capital Fund Program (CFP).
Table 8: Public Housing
Public Housing Total
Units
1-BR 2-BR 3-BR 4-BR 5-BR
Hamilton House 108 108
Scattered Site Single Family 37 17 17 3
Louisiana Court,
Metropolitan Housing
Opportunity (MHOP) Units 12 12
Total (bedroom size) 108 12 17 17 3
Total 157
COVID response
The CARES Act was signed into Law March 27, 2020, providing the Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) with broad authority to waive statutes and regulations for the Public Housing (PH)
and Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) programs. These waivers provide administrative flexibility and relief
to Housing Authorities (HA) in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Use of these waivers for the PH and
HCV programs is at the discretion of the HA. However, HUD strongly encouraged housing authorities to
utilize any and all waivers and alternative requirements as necessary to keep PH and HCV programs
operational in both 2020 and 2021. In addition to HUD waivers, the HA is complying with the state and
federal eviction moratorium.
Page 23 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 23 2021 Housing Activity Report
Public Housing waivers
•Family income and composition: annual examination, income verification requirements — HA
will allow self-certification of income and family composition and conduct recertifications
remotely.
•Family income and composition: interim examinations — HA will allow self-certification of
income and family composition and conduct interim certifications remotely.
•Family self-sufficiency (FSS) contract of participation; contract extension — HA will allow
extension of FSS contracts for COVID-19 related circumstances.
•Community service and self-sufficiency requirement (CSSR) — HA will suspend the community
service requirement until December 31, 2021.
•Review and revision of utility allowance — The St. Louis Park HA utilizes metro HA’s utility
allowance. Waiver will be implemented if needed.
•Tenant notifications for changes to project rules and regulations — Advanced notice to tenants
of rule changes will be waived except for any changes related to tenant charges.
•The housing authority will allow families an additional opportunity to select an income-based or
flat rent.
Housing Choice Voucher waivers
•Family income and composition: annual examination, income verification requirements — HA
will allow self-certification of income and family composition and conduct recertifications
remotely.
•Family income and composition: interim examinations — HA will allow self-certification of
income and family composition and conduct interim certifications remotely.
•Family self-sufficiency (FSS) contract of participation; contract extension — HA will allow
extension of FSS contracts for COVID-19 related circumstances.
•Information when family is selected: PHA oral briefing — HCV briefings are being conducted
remotely using mail and telephone.
•Term of voucher: extensions of term — HA will allow a 30-day extension of the voucher term
beyond current adopted policy.
•Absence from unit — HA will waive current policy requirements related to a family member
being absent from the unit due to COVID-19 related circumstances.
•Utility allowance schedule: required review and revision — The St. Louis Park HA utilizes metro
HA’s utility allowance. Waiver will be implemented if needed.
•HQS inspections: initial, biennial, interim, PBV turnover and contract substitutions, inspection
requirements — HA will waive the requirement for conducting an on-site Housing Quality
Standard (HQS) inspection prior to putting a unit under or remaining under housing assistance
payments (HAP) contract and will allow owner’s certification that the owner has no reasonable
basis to have knowledge that life-threatening conditions exist in the unit.
•HQS: housing quality standards; space and security — HA will waive space requirements for a
participant that needs to add a member to the household due to a COVID-19 related
emergency.
•Extension of deadline for programmatic obligation and expenditure of capital funds — Although
the HA anticipates obligating and expending capital funds within the time period allocated by
HUD, the extension will be utilized if needed for COVID-19 related reasons.
Page 24 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 24 2021 Housing Activity Report
Housing Choice Voucher Program (HCV) – 50% AMI or below
The HA is allocated a total of 342 Housing Choice Vouchers from HUD. This rent assistance program
provides rent subsidies for low-income individuals and families in privately owned, existing market rate
housing units. The rent subsidy is paid directly to the owner of the rental property by the Housing
Authority (HA) with funds provided by HUD. The HA administers tenant-based, project-based and newly
awarded special program vouchers as noted below. 54 vouchers of the HA’s allocation are designated
for use in four privately owned developments (Excelsior & Grand, Vail Place, Wayside, and Perspectives)
and are referred to as project-based vouchers. The average income of voucher holder households in St.
Louis Park is $16,441 which is below 30% AMI. HCV participants pay 30% of their income towards rent
and can choose to pay up to 40%. The 2021 annual budget for HCV was $3,778,980. Despite the number
of HCV units allocated to a Housing Authority by HUD, HAs are limited in the number of vouchers that
can be administered by the budget authority allocated by HUD.
Family Unification Vouchers (FUP)
The Housing Authority (HA) was awarded 12 Family Unification Vouchers (FUP) at the end of 2019 and
an additional 15 units in 2020. FUP is a program in which Housing Choice Vouchers (HCVs) are provided
in order to lease decent, safe, and sanitary housing in the private housing market to:
•Families for whom the lack of adequate housing is a primary factor in either: the imminent
placement of the family’s child(ren) in out of home care or the delay in the discharge of the
child(ren) to the family from out of home care. There is no time limitation on family FUP
vouchers, or
•Youth who are at least 18 years or and not more than 24 years old who: left foster care at age
16 or older to will leave foster care within 90 days and are homeless or at risk of homelessness.
FUP vouchers used by youth were previously limited by statute to 36 months of housing
assistance. The CARES Act has changed the limit to 60 months
The HA is partnering with Hennepin County on this program. Applicants are provided through the
Coordinated Entry process. 24 FUP vouchers were utilized in 2021.
Foster Youth to Independence (FYI) – New vouchers awarded – 50% AMI and below
The Foster Youth to Independence (FYI) initiative was announced in 2019. The FYI initiative allows Housing
Authority’s (HA) who partner with a Public Child Welfare Agency (PCWA) to request targeted Housing
Choice Vouchers (HCVs) to serve eligible youth with a history of child welfare involvement that are
homeless or at risk of being homeless. Rental assistance and supportive services are provided to qualified
youth for a period of up to 36 months.
Hennepin County contacted the HA with a request to partner in the administration of the FYI program.
The HA will administer the rental assistance vouchers for the participants, while the county is responsible
for providing or engaging service agencies to provide the required support services. In addition to St. Louis
Park, Hennepin County has entered into agreements with three additional metro area HAs and is seeking
to issue up to 100 vouchers. The regulations overseeing the issuance and administration of the FYI rental
vouchers are the same as those for Housing Choice Vouchers (HCV) with the exception of the 36-month
limit on assistance. HUD is the funding source for both the housing assistance and the administration fees
for the program, similar to the HCV program.
The program was initially only available to HAs that did not administer FUP vouchers, but it has since been
expanded to all HAs with an HCV Annual Contributions Contract (ACC). Funding is available either
competitively though an FYI Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) or noncompetitively on a rolling basis.
Hennepin County is receiving vouchers through the noncompetitive process. HAs are limited to 25
vouchers in a fiscal year with the ability to request an additional 25 vouchers for those HAs with 90 percent
Page 25 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 25 2021 Housing Activity Report
or greater utilization of these vouchers. The City of St. Louis Park was offered 25 vouchers. The first referral
will come in spring 2022.
Mainstream
The Housing Authority (HA) was awarded seven additional Mainstream vouchers via the CARES Act in
2020, adding to the eight mainstream vouchers awarded previously. These Mainstream vouchers
provide vouchers to assist non-elderly persons with disabilities who are transitioning out of institutional
or other segregated settings, at serious risk of institutionalization, homeless, or at serious risk of
homelessness. It was designed to further to the goals of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by
helping persons with disabilities live in the most integrated setting. Families or individuals with a
Mainstream voucher must have a household member at least 18 years of age and less than 62 years of
age with a disability at the time of eligibility determination. 15 mainstream vouchers were utilized in
2021.
The HA is partnering with Hennepin County for referrals for the seven additional vouchers that were
awarded. The population being served by this partnership includes those that meet eligibility
requirements and were not able to stay in shelter due to COVID 19 concerns and had to be placed in
hotels.
Lou Park Apartments
Lou Park is an apartment complex in St. Louis Park owned and managed by Bigos Management. Bigos
notified tenants that in 2018 they would be completing a contract transfer of their 32 project-based
units to another property. As of July 1, 2019, tenants were eligible to request to move to the new
property or remain at Lou Park using an enhanced voucher administered by the St. Louis Park Housing
Authority. This added 32 additional vouchers to the Housing Authority’s allocation. Initially, 31 tenants
chose to utilize the tenant protection voucher at Lou Park. As of December 31, 2021, 21 remained at Lou
Park, the remainder have chosen to use their voucher to move to a different complex.
Perspectives
Perspectives is a community non-profit organization located in St. Louis Park that provides supportive
housing to low-income families that are homeless and are dual diagnosed (chemical and mental health
diagnosis). Perspectives is one of the largest therapeutic supportive housing programs for women and
children in Minnesota, housing approximately 75 women and 130 children and has been operational in
St. Louis Park for 28 years.
HUD notified Perspectives in 2020 that their recent application for funding renewal of the rental subsidy
was not selected for funding and their funding would expire 9/30/2020.
Perspectives, Inc. made a request to the Housing Authority (HA) for an allocation of twelve (12) project-
based units (PBV); two one-bedroom and 10 two-bedroom units. These PBV units would replace current
income-based rent subsidies funded through HUD’s Continuum of Care Permanent Rental Assistance
program. The HA board approved the additional project-based vouchers and the approval of the contract
at the September 2020 meeting. The effective date of the contract for the PBV funding is October 1, 2020,
and the initial term of the contract will be 5 years. As of December 31, 2021, all 12 of the units had been
filled by Perspectives.
Wayside
The Housing Authority (HA) has provided project based assistance (PBA) to Wayside House properties
located at 1341 and 1349 Jersey Avenue South since 2003. Wayside provides supportive housing and
programming for women in recovery. Wayside currently has 16 project based vouchers and they self-
subsidize rents on four of their units.
Page 26 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 26 2021 Housing Activity Report
Table 9: HCV Lease-Up Report
Housing Choice Voucher – Lease Up Report
December 31, 2021
Units
HUD Allocated Vouchers 342
Vouchers Issued (Executed, Pending, Outstanding and
Leased Project Based, excludes Port-outs)
267
Unleased Project-Based (PB) 2
Vouchers Outstanding 4
Executed St. Louis Park Contracts:
Housing Choice Vouchers 156
Tenant Protection Vouchers 21
(Lou Park)
Excelsior & Grand 18
Vail Place 8
Wayside Supportive Housing 12
Perspectives 11
Mainstream 13
FUP 23
263
Port-Ins 30
Port-Outs 69
Pending Port-Outs 4
Executed and Pending 336
Total Administered 332
Summary:
% Utilized, Pending, Outstanding & Unleased PB 98%
Stable HOME Rental Assistance Program – 50% AMI
The Stable HOME program provides rent assistance to low-income singles and families who were
homeless or would otherwise be at risk of homelessness. Rent assistance is limited to three years.
During the three years, participants must establish good rental histories. They must also work to
improve their earnings enough to where they do not need rental assistance. The program is
administered by the Housing Authority, but participants are free to choose a rental unit anywhere in
Hennepin County except Minneapolis. Participants are referred to the program by Hennepin County.
This program is funded with federal HOME funds allocated to the county. 41 families throughout
suburban Hennepin County were served by this program 2021.
Kids in the Park Rent Assistance Program – 50% AMI and below – city funded
Kids in the Park provides rent assistance to households with school-age children for up to four years.
Participants receive a flat, monthly rental assistance subsidy that decreases annually over the four-year
period. Eligible households must have an income at or below 50% of the area median income, a child
attending school in St. Louis Park, one parent or guardian that works a minimum of 28 hours per week,
live in rental housing in St. Louis Park, and comply with their lease. Families with disabled and elderly
heads of household do not need to comply with the work requirement and due to COVID 19 the Housing
Authority temporarily waived the 28 hour per week work requirement for all households. The program
was developed in partnership with the St. Louis Park Emergency Program (STEP) and the St. Louis Park
School District. The Kids in the Park program began serving 9 families in December 2017. Funding was
increased for 2018 to serve 14, 2019 served 17 families and in 2020 that number increased to 20
families. In 2021, the Kids in the Park program remained at 20 families.
Page 27 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 27 2021 Housing Activity Report
8. PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS
Technical, Design, and Conservation Services
Architectural Design Service – no income restrictions
This service provides an architectural consultation for residents to assist with brainstorming remodeling
possibilities and to raise the awareness of design possibilities for expansions. Residents select an
approved architect from a pool developed in conjunction with the MN Chapter of the American Institute
of Architects. All homeowners considering renovations are eligible for this service; however, to ensure
committed participants, residents make a $25 co-pay.
Remodeling/Rehab Advisor – no income restrictions
The intention of this service is to help residents improve their homes (either maintenance or value-
added improvements) by providing technical help before and during the construction process. All
homeowners are eligible for this service regardless of income. Resident surveys indicated that
homeowners valued the service and would recommend it to others. The city contracts with the Center
for Energy and Environment (CEE) for this free service to homeowners.
Home Energy Squad Enhanced Visit – no income restrictions
Home Energy Squad Enhanced program is a comprehensive residential energy program designed to help
residents save money and energy and stay comfortable in their homes. The program, which began in
March 2012, is administered by the Center for Energy and Environment (CEE). The city pays $50 per
resident visit which is leveraged with funds from Xcel Energy, Center Point Energy, and CEE. The cost per
resident is $50 per enhanced visit. Free home energy visits are available to low-income households.
The home energy squad consultant evaluates energy saving opportunities and installs the energy-
efficiency materials the homeowner choses including door weather stripping, water heater blanket,
programmable thermostat, compact fluorescent light bulbs, high efficiency shower heads, and faucet
aerators. They will also perform diagnostic tests including a blower door test to measure the home for
air leaks, complete an insulation inspection, safety check the home’s heating system and water heater
and help with next steps such as finding insulation contractors. All single family and duplex homeowners
are eligible. Renters qualify for the installed visit ($30) without diagnostic tests. The Home Energy Squad
Enhanced visits qualified residents for CEE’s low interest financing and utility rebates, and they also
notify residents of the city loan and rebate opportunities.
Annual Home Remodeling Fair
The cities and school district community education departments of St. Louis Park, Hopkins, Minnetonka,
and Golden Valley co-sponsor the annual home remodeling fair. The fair provides residents an
opportunity to attend seminars, talk with vendors and city staff about permits, zoning, home
improvement loans, and environmental issues related to remodeling. The fair is a self-sustaining event
and vendor registration fees cover the costs.
Home Remodeling Tour
The annual tour is designed to meet the housing goal to remodel and expand single-family owner-
occupied homes. The self-guided tour of six homes provides a showcase of a variety of home remodeling
projects to provide ideas, information, and inspiration to other residents considering remodeling.
Page 28 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report
Page 28 2021 Housing Activity Report
Construction Management Plan
The city recognizes that many households are looking for larger homes and supports keeping families in
the city. As a result, significant additions and/or tearing down of existing homes and rebuilding larger
homes is becoming more common. Because St. Louis Park is a fully built community, these major
additions and construction of new homes impacts the surrounding neighbors.
Effective November 15, 2014, major additions (second story additions or additions of 500 square feet or
more), demolitions and new construction need to comply with a Construction Management Plan (CMP)
per City Code 6-71. Major additions, tear downs and new construction are required to send a written
neighborhood notification to neighbors within 200 feet of the property. Demolitions and/or new
construction also require a neighborhood meeting and signage.
Financial Programs
In an effort to encourage growing families to stay in St. Louis Park, the city has developed and
implemented a number of programs toward this effort.
Discount Loan Program – serves households with incomes at or below $156,000
This program encourages residents to improve their homes by “discounting” the interest rate on the
Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MN Housing) home improvement loans for income eligible
residents. Eligible improvements include most home improvement projects with the exception of luxury
items such as pools. Implementation of discounting of MHFA loans began in late 1999 as a pilot project.
In the past the city would buy down the interest rate for income eligible households. Since 2000 the
interest rate has been below the buy down rates, so the city has not had to buy down the interest rate
for this program in 2020 or 2021. Residents can apply through CEE to utilize this loan.
Move – Up Transformation Loan – 100/115% AMI
The purpose of this loan is to encourage residents with incomes at or below 100/115% of median area
income ($120,600 for a family of one - four) to expand their homes. The program provides deferred
loans for 25% of the applicant’s home expansion project cost, with a maximum loan of $25,000. The
revolving loan pool will continue to fund future expansions.
This loan requires significant upfront work by the residents, from deciding on the scope of the project to
selecting contractors. Loan guidelines are:
•Only residents making significant expansions are eligible. The minimum project cost must exceed
$35,000.
•The maximum loan amount is $25,000.
•The loan has 0% interest with a carrying cost fee of 3% paid by the borrower which covers the
lender’s administrative fee.
•Loan is forgiven after 30 years if homeowner continues to live in the home.
Green Remodeling Program & Energy Rebates – 115% AMI $120,600
The Green Remodeling Program includes the Home Energy Squad Enhanced home visit program, use of
energy rebates, and access to CEE’s Home Energy Loan. The city provides a match of 50% of gas and
electric utility rebates for energy efficient furnaces, water heaters, air conditioners and qualifying air
sealing and insulation. CEE also provided low interest loans to residents making qualifying energy
improvements and St. Louis Park residents can take advantage of this loan. This energy improvement
loan has no income restrictions and there is no cost to the city.
Emergency Repair Grant
The city offers emergency repair grants for households below 50% area median income to make immediate
emergency repairs such as furnace replacement, roof repair, plumbing or electrical emergencies, etc. This
program is administered by Sustainable Resources Center (SRC).
Page 29 Study session meeting of March 28, 2022 (Item No. 8)
Title: 2021 housing activity report