07-13-21 Council-Manager Agenda Packet
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
City Council/Manager meetings are being conducted in a hybrid format with in-person and remote
options for attending.
Remote Attendance: Members of the public may attend this meeting by streaming via Webex (click
here) or by calling 1-415-655-0001 and entering access code 133 140 7599. Additional information
about attending electronic meetings is available on the City website.
Pages
1. Prosecution Report and Discussion 2-29
2. Police Commission Task Force Final Report and Discussion 30-160
3. Section 8 Anti-Discrimination Ordinance 161-163
4. Safe Tenant and Renter (STAR) Program Discussion 164-166
5. Remote Meeting Attendance Policy 167-169
6. Council Review of Future Draft Agendas: 170-172
07-20-21: Special City Council Meeting (Closed Session)
07-20-21: City Council Meeting
08-04-21: City Council Meeting
08-10-21: Special City Council Meeting (Commission Interviews)
08-10-21: HRA Work Session
08-10-21: Council/Manager Meeting
08-17-21: Special City Council Meeting (Commission Interviews)
08-17-21: City Council Meeting
Council/Manager meetings have an informal, discussion-style format and are designed for the
Council to obtain background information, consider policy alternatives, and provide general
directions to staff. No formal actions are taken at these meetings. The public is invited to attend
Council/Manager meetings and listen to the discussion; public participation is allowed by
invitation of the City Council.
July 13, 2021 – 6:30 pm
Hybrid Meeting
Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting
July 13, 2021
Agenda Item
1. Prosecution Report and Discussion
Prepared By
Maria Cisneros, City Attorney
Kiarra Zackery, Equity and Inclusion Manager
Summary
Each year, the City invites its contract City Prosecutor, Chestnut Cambronne, to meet with the City
Council to discuss its work and answer questions. This year, staff asked the prosecutor to prepare a
report for the Council covering the following topics:
1. Prosecutorial Approach
2. Equity
3. Strategic Plan
The purpose of the initial report is to provide information to inform the 2022 prosecution goals and
provide background information as the City researches diversion and restorative justice programs. The
Prosecutor’s report is attached to this summary.
Equity Review
The City is developing the practice of equity review and assessment across all City departments and
functions. Although Chestnut Cambronne is not a department of the City, as a service provider that
represents the City in the criminal justice system, the firm should also be included in the City’s equity
work. Staff appreciates the firm’s willingness to engage in this discussion and process. Staff also
recognizes that analyzing prosecution activity through this lens is a new process for the City and the
firm. With this in mind, an equity review of the firm’s report resulted in the following observations.
1) Prosecutorial approach: The prosecutorial approach does not define justice or provide
examples of how justice can differ amongst all impacted parties. In addition, the approach does
not express a relationship between City administration and prosecution and conflates individual
racism with systemic racism as means of providing “justice.”
2) Equity: The responses to the equity questionnaire lack systemic awareness and demonstrate a
need for deeper reflection in the participation of institutions that perpetuate racial disparities.
Moreover, the equity responses mentioned issues related to socioeconomic status but this
Council Manager Meeting Executive Summary
City of Golden Valley
July 13, 2021
2
information was not provided in the data analysis. This confluence demonstrates an over
reliance on the relationship between socioeconomic status and race.
3) Strategic Plan: The prosecution office did not provide measurable, data-based goals. The goals
provided are not specific to the firm or the City’s equity plan.
4) Data: More data is needed to understand the context and impact of the outcomes on Black,
Indigenous and Latino/a/x community members (these groups were overrepresented in every
category). There are clear disparities in city of residence, race and gender that we should seek
to better understand through root cause analysis and strategic planning.
Data
Inspired by the data requested by the Police Commission Task Force members and the Pohlad Grant
application process, the City’s legal and equity staff requested data from Hennepin County Courts to
better understand the City’s prosecution activities. The City is in the early stages of collecting and
analyzing prosecution data. The data collected to date is attached to this memo. While we don’t have
complete data, the data we have shows racial disparities. As more information is collected and
analyzed, the legal department will use that data to inform its 2022 prosecution action items.
Policy Implementation
The prosecution team has a long history of working closely with the Police Department. That
collaboration will continue. At the direction of the City Manager, responsibility for managing the
contract with the City Prosecutor has shifted to the City Manager’s office under the supervision of the
City Attorney. The City Manager’s office will continue to work with the Police Department and the
Prosecutor to implement the policy directives of the City Council.
Supporting Documents
• Prosecution Report (6 pages)
• Prosecution Data from Hennepin County (6 pages)
• 2020 Suburban Statistical Overview (Minnesota Judicial Branch) (14 pages)
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Maria Cisneros, Golden Valley City Attorney, and Tim Cruikshank,
Golden Valley City Manager, and Golden Valley City Council.
FROM: Nicole Appelbaum, Esq. and Francis J. Rondoni, Esq.
DATE: July 9, 2021
RE: Prosecution Overview: Summary of Prosecutorial Approach; Equity; and
Strategic Planning
Introduction:
Chestnut Cambronne was asked to present their prosecutorial approach to Golden Valley
City (hereinafter “City”) Staff for review and analysis in light of larger City goals. Below
is a comprehensive analysis to how we prosecute cases.
SECTION I: Prosecutorial Approach
Chestnut Cambronne:
Our office has been prosecuting for the City of Golden Valley for over three decades. Our
firm is comprised of a diverse group of attorneys committed to providing high quality
legal service, serving our clients in a manner that is socially responsible with the highest
regard for moral and ethical standards.
Francis Rondoni has been the lead attorney on this contract for over 33 years provi ding
criminal prosecution representation to the City. As Mr. Rondoni transitions to a more
supportive secondary role, the intention is for Nicole Appelbaum, who has almost 20
years of legal experience primarily in the area of prosecution and criminal law, to assume
primary responsibility for this contract. Ms. Appelbaum is one of a small number of
BIPOC female prosecutors in the metro area. Ms. Appelbaum will continue to be the
primary prosecutor assigned to the day-to-day execution of the work.
Overall Philosophy:
Our goal is to be Ministers of Justice, first and foremost, by prosecuting cases is a fair,
equitable, consistent, unbiased and just manner, taking into consideration the need for
public safety as well as the individual and nuanced facts of each case, victim, and
defendant. This focus on justice rather than on a winning “record” is consistent with
ABA Minnesota ethical guidelines for prosecutors. Our job is to seek justice, not just win
cases.
We treat every individual we encounter in the legal process ranging from defendants,
victims, witnesses, justice partners, attorneys, judges and juries with professionalism and
respect regardless of their age, race, gender identity, disability, immigration status or
economic background.
In each encounter, we strive to make sure each person is offered the opportunity to be
heard and express their perspective on the matter. While both sides may not always
agree, we aim to leave the opposing side with the feeling that their position was heard
and genuinely considered.
We are also mindful of the consequences that criminal charges and convictions have on
collateral issues such as housing and employment as well as the physical, emotional, and
financial impact on victims and society.
Equally important, we strive to maintain open and positive relationships with law
enforcement officers and command staff by providing excellent and supportive legal
advice and guidance. We recognize the extraordinarily difficult and dangerous job law
enforcement has and the exemplary professionalism Golden Valley Police Officers
display during the performance of their duties.
Case Charging and Dispositions:
Our office is responsible for the prosecution of gross misdemeanor 1, misdemeanor2 and
petty misdemeanor3 offenses that occur within the City of Golden Valley regardless of
1 Offense which is punishable by up to 365 days in jail and/or a $3000 fine.
2 Offense which is punishable by up to 90 days in jail and/or a $1000 fine.
3 Offense which is punishable by up to a $300 fine.
the arresting agency which may include the Golden Valley Police Department, the
Minnesota State Patrol, the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office and other law enforcement
officers working specialized details such as Toward Zero Death (TZD)4. We have no
jurisdiction over felony offenses or cases involving juvenile offenders, except in a very
limited number of scenarios.
Historically, we have taken our direction in terms of goals and dispositions from the City,
primarily as communicated through the Police Department. Based upon the general
philosophical direction from the City, we have created a general matrix over the years for
various criminal offenses and general plea offers considering objective factors and
statutory requirements to assure that factually similar cases are treated similarly
regardless of the identity of the defendant. While there is a general matrix, due to the
specific individualized facts of each case, there may be margins of difference in each
category of cases depending on number of prior offenses; whether any other cases were
dismissed as a part of the resolution; levels of alcohol/drugs involved;
presence/involvement of minors; victim wishes; physical, emotional and financial impact
on victims; societal harm of a particular offense; efforts of rehabilitation or restitution by
the defendant, acceptance of responsibility by the defendant; proof issues; and public
safety.
There are several broad categories cases that we charge and prosecute for the City which
generally fall into the following categories: (1) Driving While Impaired; (2) Domestic
Assaults/Assaults; (3) Guns and Weapons Offenses; (4) Theft-Related Offenses; (5)
Disorderly Conduct/Obstruct Legal Process/Damage to Property; (6) Livability Offenses:
Indecent Exposure, Consuming in Public, etc.; (7) Drug Offenses; (8) Driver’s License,
Insurance Violations and Minor Traffic Offenses; and (9) Regulatory and Zoning
violations.
There are a broad range of options available for disposition of cases:
▪ Continuance for Dismissal (CFD): the case is stayed for a period of time (usually
one year) under certain conditions, including that the defendant no be charged
with or arrested for a criminal or petty misdemeano r offense identical to charges
in the instant case as well as other conditions which may include restitution,
community service or Sentence to Service (STS)5, limitations of contact with
individuals or locations/businesses, and prosecution costs. If the defendant
successfully completes/complies with the conditions, at the end of the specified
period the case is dismissed. If the defendant fails to successfully
4 https://www.minnesotatzd.org/
5 https://www.hennepin.us/residents/public-safety/sentencing-service
complete/comply with the conditions, the case is reinitiated and the case proceeds
either to a difference disposition or trial.
▪ Stay of Adjudication: the defendant enters a plea of guilty, but the court will not
officially accept the plea on the condition that the defendant comply with certain
conditions as determined by the parties. Conditions may include those as
referenced in above for CFDs, but may be more extensive to include chemical
dependency assessments (CD eval) and following the recommendations, anger
management classes, Domestic Violence programming, complying with other
treatment or therapeutic conditions imposed under other cases/matters, no use of
alcohol or non-prescribed drugs, letters of apologies, etc. If the defendant
complies with the terms and conditions of probation, at the end of the pre -
determined time period, the charges are dismissed. If the defendant does not
comply with the terms and conditions of probation, the plea can be accepted by
the court and a sentence imposed.
▪ Stay of Imposition: the defendant enters a plea of guilty, which is accepted by the
court. Instead of imposing a permanent sentence, the court places the defendant
on probation for a period of time (usually 1-2 years depending on the offense)
under certain terms and conditions. See previous disposition conditions6. If the
defendant successfully completes/complies with the terms and conditions, the
plea is vacated and the charges dismissed. If the defendant does not successfully
comply/complete the terms of conditions, the court may impose sentence.
▪ Stay of Execution: the defendant enters a guilty plea and the court imposes
sentence. Jail time is imposed but stayed for a period of time on certain
conditions.
▪ Executed Sentence: the defendant enters a guilty plea and the court imposes a jail
sentence that the defendant serves in some fashion, either in the workhouse, on
STS, or on electronic home monitoring (EHM).
▪ Dismissal: self-explanatory.
Conclusion:
We use general guidelines to strike the balance between assuring that individuals receive
fair and impartial treatment while taking into consideration case -specific factors and
public safety. Prosecutors have the responsibility of being a minister of justice and not
simply that of an advocate. This responsibility carries with it specific obligations to see
that defendants are accorded procedural justice, that guilt is decided upon the basis of
sufficient evidence, and that special precautions are taken to prevent and to rectify the
6 Theoretically, a defendant could be required to serve some jail time as a condition, however that rarely
occurs.
conviction of innocent persons. We take our obligation as ministers of justice extremely
seriously.
SECTION II: Equity
1. What policies or plans does your office have in place to review your work through
a race equity lens?
The way our office addresses this is by having objection standards for our
prosecutorial approach which is outlined above. A focus on balanced treatment
of all individuals regardless of race, sex, and other prohibited criteria are the basis
for our prosecutorial approach. Furthermore, we take a very active approach in
addressing poverty issues, since poverty issues along with chemical dependency
and substance use issues are a driver of crime and many status offenses.
2. What infrastructure do you have in place to ensure you deliver impartial services?
As stated above, having a well thought out objective set of standards for
prosecuting is precisely the way to ensure impartial delivery of services. The
prosecution overview goes through routine annual review in conjunction with the
police department and is a constant reference source for cases handled in our
office.
3. What diversion programs do you utilize? Are they available to and easily
accessible to non-represented individuals? What is the cost and do they offer
payment plans? What are the eligibility criteria? What is the completion rate?
What case outcome is available to people who successfully complete diversion?
Our office has for many years been utilizing deferral and treatment programs for
first-time drug offenders, repeat driver’s license status offenders, chronic theft,
domestic abuse and individuals with mental health issues. These programs are
available and can be directed from the court to both represented and
unrepresented individuals. The cost, if any, is usually on a sliding fee schedule.
The eligibility requirements differ for each program, the severity of the offender,
and the scope of the program. As to the completion rate, we do not have any of
that data although it may be complied by the individual organization or perhaps
Hennepin County. The outcome differs based on the program, but typically if you
are successful in the drug diversion program, the charges are either reduced or
dismissed. In the Driver’s Diversion Program, the driver’s fees are usually
dropped or eliminated, and the goal ultimately is to put the individual in a
position where the individual would qualify for reinstatement of his/her license.
Domestic Abuse programs focus on the causes and triggers of domestic vio lence
and teaches strategies for the offender to respond differently instead of resorting
to physical or verbal violence.
SECTION III: Strategic Plan
1. What are your goals for the next calendar year?
Our goals for the next calendar year are to work closely with City and police staff
to implement enhanced race and equity standards and protocols, and sure the
tracking of necessary data relative to the same.
2. How do you measure success?
Our office measures success by having a quiet, peaceful, and crime-free
community. Historically, the City police departments, as well as our office, have
working in conjunction to make Golden Valley a safe, peaceful, and livable city.
That success includes treating all of its citizens and non-citizens who find
themselves in the criminal courts to be treated with respect, fairness, uniformity,
and to be sure that any resolutions are crafter to be fair for the particular
circumstances in question.
3. What are your desired outcomes for the next calendar year?
To work with City staff and the police department to continue to refine and
enhance current prosecutorial approaches and protocols to work with the City
police department to ensure fairness and equity in all aspects of our job, and to
foster the achievement of the City of Golden Valley equity plan.
Partial Hennepin County Prosecution Statistics
January 2020—June 2021
Low Level Driving Offenses
In total, there were 1105 cases prosecuted by the Golden Valley City Attorney that resulted in a conviction on charges of
No driver’s license; no proof of insurance; no insurance; driving after suspension, revocation, or cancellation; expired
tabs; expired driver’s license; window tint; rear view mirror obstruction; and unsafe equipment between January 2020
and June 2021.
Of these 1105 cases, 36% of the individuals identify as Black/African American, 15% identify as White, 6% identify as
Hispanic/Latino, 2% identify as Multiracial, 1% identify as Native American, 1% identify as some other race, 1% identify
as Asian, while we do not have race data for 38% (many of these cases are payables and will not have a court
appearance, which is where race data is collected by the courts). The race/disposition breakdown of individuals charged
on these cases is:
Race/Ethnicity
Disposition
Total Convicted
Interim
Disposition Dismissed
No Disposition
Yet
White Count 64 1 29 73 167
Row % 38.3% 0.6% 17.4% 43.7% 100.0%
Black Count 73 3 43 276 395
Row % 18.5% 0.8% 10.9% 69.9% 100.0%
Multiracial Count 2 1 0 17 20
Row % 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% 85.0% 100.0%
Asian Count 3 1 1 7 12
Row % 25.0% 8.3% 8.3% 58.3% 100.0%
Indian Alaskan Native Count 2 0 1 7 10
Row % 20.0% 0.0% 10.0% 70.0% 100.0%
Some Other Race Count 3 1 5 7 16
Row % 18.8% 6.3% 31.3% 43.8% 100.0%
Hispanic Count 25 3 9 32 69
Row % 36.2% 4.3% 13.0% 46.4% 100.0%
Unavailable Count 196 1 29 190 416
Row % 47.1% 0.2% 7.0% 45.7% 100.0%
Total Count 368 11 117 609 1105
Row % 33.3% 1.0% 10.6% 55.1% 100.0%
Of these 1105 cases, 67% identify as male, 32% identify as female, while no gender information is available for 1%.The
gender/disposition breakdown of the individuals charged on these cases is:
Gender
disposition
Total Convicted
Interim
Disposition Dismissed
No Disposition
Yet
Unavailable Count 14 0 1 3 18
Row % 77.8% 0.0% 5.6% 16.7% 100.0%
Male Count 237 5 74 419 735
Row % 32.2% 0.7% 10.1% 57.0% 100.0%
Female Count 117 6 42 187 352
Row % 33.2% 1.7% 11.9% 53.1% 100.0%
Total Count 368 11 117 609 1105
Row % 33.3% 1.0% 10.6% 55.1% 100.0%
Of these 1105 cases, 97% are not residents of Golden Valley while 3% are Golden Valley residents. The
resident/disposition breakdown of the individuals charged on these cases is:
Golden Valley Resident?
disposition
Total Convicted
Interim
Disposition Dismissed
No Disposition
Yet
Non-Golden
Valley Resident
Count 349 10 112 599 1070
Row % 32.6% 0.9% 10.5% 56.0% 100.0%
Golden Valley
Resident
Count 19 1 5 10 35
Row % 54.3% 2.9% 14.3% 28.6% 100.0%
Total Count 368 11 117 609 1105
Row % 33.3% 1.0% 10.6% 55.1% 100.0%
Of these 1105 cases, the main law enforcement agency on 49% of the cases was the Golden Valley Police Department,
the State Patrol on 44% of these cases, the Hennepin County Sheriff on 2% of the cases, while several other law
enforcement agencies from proximate cities take up the remainder of the cases. The law enforcement
agency/disposition breakdown of the individuals charged on these cases is:
Law Enforcement Agency
disposition
Total Convicted
Interim
Disposition Dismissed
No Disposition
Yet
Champlin Police Department Count 1 0 0 1 2
Row % 50.0% 0.0% 0.0% 50.0% 100.0%
Crystal Police Department Count 1 0 0 2 3
Row % 33.3% 0.0% 0.0% 66.7% 100.0%
Deephaven Police Department Count 0 0 0 1 1
Row % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Eden Prairie Police Department Count 4 0 2 4 10
Row % 40.0% 0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 100.0%
Golden Valley Police Department Count 191 7 48 299 545
Row % 35.0% 1.3% 8.8% 54.9% 100.0%
Hennepin County Sheriff's Office Count 4 0 3 17 24
Row % 16.7% 0.0% 12.5% 70.8% 100.0%
Medina Police Department Count 0 0 0 3 3
Row % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Metro Transit Commission Police
Department
Count 1 0 0 0 1
Row % 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0%
MN State Patrol - Golden Valley Count 159 4 61 267 491
Row % 32.4% 0.8% 12.4% 54.4% 100.0%
MN State Patrol - Oakdale Count 2 0 1 5 8
Row % 25.0% 0.0% 12.5% 62.5% 100.0%
New Hope Police Department Count 4 0 0 4 8
Row % 50.0% 0.0% 0.0% 50.0% 100.0%
Plymouth Police Department Count 0 0 0 1 1
Row % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Robbinsdale Police Department Count 0 0 0 2 2
Row % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% 100.0%
South Lake Minnetonka Police
Department
Count 0 0 1 2 3
Row % 0.0% 0.0% 33.3% 66.7% 100.0%
St. Louis Park Police Department Count 1 0 1 1 3
Row % 33.3% 0.0% 33.3% 33.3% 100.0%
Total Count 368 11 117 609 1105
Row % 33.3% 1.0% 10.6% 55.1% 100.0%
Shoplifting, Marijuana offenses, obstructing legal process, and disorderly conduct
There were 166 cases charged by the Golden Valley City Prosecutor that resulted in a conviction on charges of
Shoplifting, Marijuana offenses (possession of small amount, paraphernalia, MJ in motor vehicle), obstructing legal
process, or disorderly conduct.
Of these 166 cases, 43% of the individuals identify as Black/African American, 23% identify as White, 3% identify as
Multiracial, 3% identify as Native American, 2% identify as Hispanic/Latino, 1.8% identify as some other race, 1.2%
identify as Asian, while we do not have race data for 18%. The race and disposition breakdown of the individuals
charged on these cases is:
Race/Ethnicity
disposition
Total Convicted
Interim
Disposition Dismissed
No Disposition
Yet
White Count 9 4 9 25 47
Row % 19.1% 8.5% 19.1% 53.2% 100.0%
Black Count 12 1 8 50 71
Row % 16.9% 1.4% 11.3% 70.4% 100.0%
Multiracial Count 1 0 1 3 5
Row % 20.0% 0.0% 20.0% 60.0% 100.0%
Asian Count 0 0 0 2 2
Row % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Indian Alaskan Native Count 0 0 1 4 5
Row % 0.0% 0.0% 20.0% 80.0% 100.0%
Some Other Race Count 2 0 1 0 3
Row % 66.7% 0.0% 33.3% 0.0% 100.0%
Hispanic Count 0 0 1 3 4
Row % 0.0% 0.0% 25.0% 75.0% 100.0%
Unavailable Count 8 3 2 16 29
Row % 27.6% 10.3% 6.9% 55.2% 100.0%
Total Count 32 8 23 103 166
Row % 19.3% 4.8% 13.9% 62.0% 100.0%
Of these 166 cases, 63% identify as male, 36% identify as female, while no gender information is available for 1%.The
gender/disposition breakdown of the individuals charged on these cases is:
Gender
disposition
Total Convicted
Interim
Disposition Dismissed
No Disposition
Yet
Unavailable Count 1 0 0 1 2
Row % 50.0% 0.0% 0.0% 50.0% 100.0%
Male Count 20 5 15 65 105
Row % 19.0% 4.8% 14.3% 61.9% 100.0%
Female Count 11 3 8 37 59
Row % 18.6% 5.1% 13.6% 62.7% 100.0%
Total Count 32 8 23 103 166
Row % 19.3% 4.8% 13.9% 62.0% 100.0%
2020 Suburban Statistical Overview
- 2 -
Table of Contents
Filings Heard by a Judge by Type of Offense – 2020
Arranged by Prosecuting Agency........................... Pages 3-4
Dispositions Heard by a Judge by Type– 2020
Arranged by Prosecuting Agency........................... Pages 5-6
Filings Not Heard by a Judge by Type of Offense– 2020
Arranged by Prosecuting Agency........................... Pages 7-8
Dispositions Not Heard by a Judge by Type– 2020
Arranged by Prosecuting Agency........................... Pages 9-10
Fines – 2020 ................................................................... Pages 11-12
Prosecution Costs – 2020 ............................................... Pages 13-14
Data Provided by:
Marcy Podkopacz, Ph.D.
Director of Research
Statistical Booklet Compiled by:
Shannon Cooper
Criminal Court Operations Manager, Suburban Divisions 612.596.1499
shannon.cooper@courts.state.mn.us
- 3 -
Filings Heard by a Judge by Type of Offense – 2020
Misdemeanor and Gross Misdemeanor Filings listed by Prosecuting Agency. Offenses prosecuted by the Hennepin County
Attorney’s Office have been removed as they were not administered at the Suburban Divisions.
Prosecuting Agency
Type of Offense
Total Domestics DWI Criminal Traffic Parking
Bloomington 165 262 778 128 3 1336
Brooklyn Center 124 172 595 157 5 1053
Brooklyn Park 200 140 678 158 2 1178
Champlin 71 53 145 112 0 381
Corcoran 14 10 16 9 0 49
Crystal 48 110 208 59 3 428
Dayton 7 22 6 22 0 57
Deephaven 1 14 9 7 0 31
Eden Prairie 40 213 274 148 0 675
Edina 46 209 282 288 0 825
Excelsior 8 18 7 19 1 53
Golden Valley 33 188 139 209 0 569
Greenfield 5 6 7 0 0 18
Greenwood 1 6 4 1 0 12
Hanover 1 0 0 0 0 1
Hopkins 68 102 137 85 1 393
Independence 4 23 22 13 0 62
LMCD 0 35 14 0 0 49
Long Lake 4 2 9 11 0 26
Loretto 0 0 0 3 0 3
Maple Grove 71 179 352 177 0 779
Maple Plain 7 10 16 12 1 46
Medicine Lake 0 0 0 0 0 0
Medina 4 19 30 42 0 95
- 4 -
Filings Heard by a Judge by Type of Offense – 2020
(continued)
Misdemeanor and Gross Misdemeanor Filings listed by Prosecuting Agency. Offenses prosecuted by the Hennepin
County Attorney’s Office have been removed as they were not administered at the Suburban Divisions.
Prosecuting Agency Type of Offense Total Domestics DWI Criminal Traffic Parking
Metropolitan Airports
Commission 8 60 200 94 2 364
Minnetonka 44 80 174 156 0 454
Minnetonka Beach 0 5 1 1 0 7
Minnetrista 4 23 8 21 0 56
Mound 8 17 20 9 1 55
New Hope 54 47 136 105 1 343
Orono 7 21 24 26 0 78
Osseo 11 25 44 30 0 110
Plymouth 106 149 258 163 2 678
Richfield 83 192 291 232 2 800
Robbinsdale 36 153 261 115 0 565
Rockford 4 0 1 1 0 6
Rogers 16 62 93 33 0 204
Shorewood 12 37 15 39 0 103
Spring Park 6 7 10 3 0 26
St. Anthony 13 29 77 46 0 165
St. Bonifacius 4 4 2 4 0 14
St. Louis Park 116 98 264 133 2 613
Tonka Bay 3 6 3 2 0 14
Wayzata 7 24 25 40 0 96
Woodland 1 1 0 2 0 4
Total 1465 2833 5635 2915 26 12,874
- 5 -
Dispositions Heard by a Judge by Type – 2020
Prosecuting Agency
Non-Felony Dispositions
Total Found or
Pled Guilty Continued Acquittal /
Dismissed
Bloomington 743 271 1062 2076
Brooklyn Center 458 142 301 901
Brooklyn Park 378 324 277 979
Champlin 183 61 97 341
Corcoran 20 7 5 32
Crystal 187 54 80 321
Dayton 21 8 6 35
Deephaven 26 6 8 40
Eden Prairie 323 176 153 652
Edina 643 333 114 1090
Excelsior 24 14 9 47
Golden Valley 419 41 110 570
Greenfield 7 2 4 13
Greenwood 6 5 1 12
Hanover 2 0 0 2
Hopkins 168 63 76 307
Independence 32 6 10 48
LMCD 44 2 7 53
Long Lake 17 6 2 25
Loretto 1 0 0 1
Maple Grove 440 111 111 662
Maple Plain 15 4 4 23
Medicine Lake 0 0 0 0
- 6 -
Dispositions Heard by a Judge by Type – 2020
(continued)
Prosecuting Agency
Non-Felony Dispositions
Total Found or
Pled Guilty Continued Acquitted/
Dismissed
Medina 61 14 5 80
Metropolitan Airports Commission 252 158 125 535
Minnetonka 351 33 54 438
Minnetonka Beach 4 1 2 7
Minnetrista 32 14 11 57
Mound 28 22 10 60
New Hope 129 128 62 319
Orono 29 15 10 54
Osseo 67 12 24 103
Plymouth 437 182 134 753
Richfield 408 130 105 643
Robbinsdale 306 74 167 547
Rockford 2 1 0 3
Rogers 111 25 11 147
Shorewood 47 26 7 80
Spring Park 12 7 3 22
St. Anthony 58 49 34 141
St. Bonifacius 6 7 3 16
St. Louis Park 264 136 117 517
Tonka Bay 6 7 0 13
Wayzata 50 41 8 99
Woodland 2 2 0 4
Total 6819 2720 3329 12,868
- 7 -
Filings Not Heard a Judge by Type of Offense – 2020
(Cases Heard by a Hearing Officer or Paid Outright)
Community of Offense Criminal Parking Traffic Total
Bloomington 1264 3659 370 5293
Brooklyn Center 414 2514 2732 5660
Brooklyn Park 364 2255 3087 5706
Champlin 101 2067 217 2385
Corcoran 14 165 0 179
Crystal 102 1266 956 2324
Dayton 24 518 15 557
Deephaven 35 177 505 724
Eden Prairie 164 3480 197 3841
Edina 111 4821 374 5306
Excelsior 12 0 0 12
Golden Valley 55 1875 449 2379
Greenfield 8 24 11 43
Greenwood 2 45 1 48
Hanover 3 10 0 13
Hopkins 35 1002 256 1293
Independence 34 318 9 361
LMCD 22 2 0 24
Long Lake 14 165 127 306
Loretto 0 14 38 52
Maple Grove 210 2274 447 2931
Maple Plain 18 186 4 208
Medicine Lake 0 1 1 2
- 8 -
Filings Not Heard a Judge by Type of Offense – 2020
(Cases Heard by a Hearing Officer or Paid Outright)
(continued)
Community of Offense Criminal Parking Traffic Total
Medina 12 830 114 956
Metropolitan Airports Commission 176 1158 868 2202
Minnetonka 65 3161 237 3463
Minnetonka Beach 2 16 7 25
Minnetristra 31 213 105 349
Mound 22 119 137 278
New Hope 69 1146 1244 2459
Orono 37 363 130 530
Osseo 117 501 69 687
Plymouth 193 3448 386 4027
Richfield 224 2813 864 3901
Robbinsdale 146 2111 686 2943
Rockford 1 8 0 9
Rogers 61 833 10 904
Shorewood 25 514 41 580
Spring Park 7 53 7 67
St. Anthony 57 1019 170 1246
St. Bonifacius 9 66 22 100
St. Louis Park 71 1649 851 2571
Tonka Bay 8 26 2 36
Wayzata 48 693 246 987
Woodland 2 2 2 6
Total 4389 47,580 15,994 67,973
- 9 -
Dispositions Not Heard by a Judge by Type – 2020
(Cases Heard by a Hearing Officer or Paid Outright)
Community
Type of Disposition
Found or Pled
Guilty Continued Acquitted/Dismissed Total
Bloomington 3229 217 468 3914
Brooklyn Center 3385 61 210 3656
Brooklyn Park 3632 98 255 3985
Champlin 1655 136 56 1847
Corcoran 132 14 2 148
Crystal 1468 48 119 1635
Dayton 434 39 11 484
Deephaven 584 10 33 627
Eden Prairie 2535 194 332 3061
Edina 4549 169 93 4811
Excelsior 1645 13 77 1735
Golden Valley 1733 47 66 1846
Greenfield 34 1 2 37
Greenwood 33 1 1 35
Hanover 9 2 0 11
Hopkins 923 31 57 1011
Independence 273 20 8 301
LMCD 18 0 0 18
Long Lake 281 12 13 306
Loretto 50 0 1 51
Maple Grove 2108 59 110 2277
Maple Plain 164 15 3 182
Medicine Lake 2 0 0 2
- 10 -
Dispositions Not Heard by a Judge by Type – 2020
(Cases Heard by a Hearing Officer or Paid Outright)
(continued)
Community
Type of Disposition
Found or
Pled Guilty Continued Acquitted/Dismissed Total
Medina 805 24 27 856
Metropolitan Airports
Commission 1498 61 153 1712
Minnetonka 2741 166 132 3039
Minnetonka Beach 16 0 1 17
Minnetristra 248 2 18 268
Mound 217 1 9 227
New Hope 1683 30 54 1767
Orono 407 15 33 455
Osseo 337 12 42 391
Plymouth 2796 136 163 3095
Richfield 2836 111 96 3043
Robbinsdale 1740 42 119 1901
Rockford 7 0 0 7
Rogers 651 39 25 715
Shorewood 466 11 14 491
Spring Park 52 0 4 56
St. Anthony 705 67 11 783
St. Bonifacius 70 1 7 80
St. Louis Park 1724 37 40 1801
Tonka Bay 26 3 4 33
Wayzata 753 23 32 826
Woodland 3 0 0 3
Total 48,657 1968 2901 53,546
- 11 -
Fines – 2020
Community Imposed Collected Uncollected
Bloomington $231,507.80 $198,416.26 $33,091.54
Brooklyn Center $96,198.80 $64,532.26 $31,666.54
Brooklyn Park $139,392.00 $99,176.34 $40,215.66
Champlin $111,280.40 $102,812.60 $8,467.80
Corcoran $9,997.40 $9,330.80 $666.60
Crystal $89,239.00 $68,447.20 $20,791.80
Dayton $27,262.60 $26,289.00 $973.60
Deephaven $29,396.60 $26,936.60 $2,460.00
Eden Prairie $175,127.20 $147,738.40 $27,388.80
Edina $329,364.60 $284,153.60 $45,211.00
Excelsior $49,596.60 $47,355.00 $2,241.60
Golden Valley $102,442.60 $75,255.00 $27,187.60
Greenfield $2,584.00 $2,304.00 $280.00
Greenwood $3,928.00 $3,508.00 $420.00
Hanover $512.00 $512.00 $0.00
Hassan $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Hopkins $84,586.40 $64,338.20 $20,248.20
Independence $22,009.00 $19,219.40 $2,789.60
LMCD $23,632.00 $23,232.00 $400.00
Long Lake $13,597.00 $12,881.00 $716.00
Loretto $1,720.00 $1,633.60 $86.40
Maple Grove $150,992.20 $111,117.80 $39,874.40
Maple Plain $12,388.60 $11,546.89 $841.71
Medicine Lake $60.00 $60.00 $0.00
- 12 -
Fines – 2020
(continued)
Community Imposed Collected Uncollected
Medina $48,648.80 $44,877.20 $3,771.60
Metropolitan Airports
Commission
$130,927.60 $108,910.00 $22,017.60
Minnetonka $138,049.00 $119,411.80 $18,637.20
Minnetonka Beach $3,409.20 $2,609.20 $800.00
Minnetrista $20,864.60 $18,240.20 $2,624.40
Mound $16,646.80 $13,156.40 $3,490.40
New Hope $88,058.80 $70,772.46 $17,286.34
Orono $28,642.80 $23,877.20 $4,765.60
Osseo $31,061.40 $23,266.20 $7,795.20
Plymouth $213,953.60 $170,934.66 $43,018.94
Richfield $140,089.00 $116,004.00 $24,085.00
Robbinsdale $108,902.60 $81,292.00 $27,610.60
Rockford $856.00 $816.00 $40.00
Rogers $40,856.00 $36,601.15 $4,254.85
Shorewood $34,195.00 $30,527.00 $3,668.00
Spring Park $6,869.60 $6,109.60 $760.00
St. Anthony $54,528.00 $46,819.40 $7,708.60
St. Bonifacius $6,037.60 $5,215.20 $822.40
St. Louis Park $77,634.59 $63,667.00 $13,967.59
Tonka Bay $3,729.60 $2,704.00 $1,025.60
Wayzata $42,630.20 $37,125.40 $5,504.80
Woodland $856.00 $856.00 $0.00
- 13 -
Prosecution Costs – 2020
Community Imposed Collected Uncollected
Bloomington $73,065.00 $68,718.00 $4,347.00
Brooklyn Center $18,432.00 $16,782.00 $1,650.00
Brooklyn Park $37,440.00 $32,087.00 $5,353.00
Champlin $26,654.00 $25,379.00 $1,275.00
Corcoran $2,703.00 $2,653.00 $50.00
Crystal $14,675.00 $12,222.00 $2,453.00
Dayton $6,823.00 $6,623.00 $200.00
Deephaven $7,200.00 $7,200.00 $0.00
Eden Prairie $50,415.00 $41,933.00 $8,482.00
Edina $116,418.00 $105,629.00 $10,789.00
Excelsior $6,800.00 $6,600.00 $200.00
Golden Valley $19,705.00 $18,605.00 $1,100.00
Greenfield $350.00 $350.00 $0.00
Greenwood $1,850.00 $1,850.00 $0.00
Hanover $300.00 $300.00 $0.00
Hopkins $24,611.00 $18,205.00 $6,406.00
Independence $3,833.00 $3,833.00 $0.00
LMCD $10,828.00 $10,828.00 $0.00
Long Lake $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Loretto $2,543.00 $2,493.00 $50.00
Maple Grove $48,660.00 $41,710.00 $6,950.00
Maple Plain $2,782.00 $2,732.00 $50.00
- 14 -
Prosecution Costs – 2020
(continued)
Community Imposed Collected Uncollected
Medina $16,638.00 $13,338.00 $3,300.00
Metropolitan Airports Commission $49,385.00 $44,177.00 $5,208.00
Minnetonka $39,525.00 $38,398.00 $1,127.00
Minnetonka Beach $200.00 $200.00 $0.00
Minnetrista $4,100.00 $3,150.00 $950.00
Mound $3,078.00 $2,078.00 $1,000.00
New Hope $20,579.00 $17,476.00 $3,103.00
Orono $11,125.00 $7,825.00 $3,300.00
Osseo $6,325.00 $5,728.00 $597.00
Plymouth $77,781.00 $68,346.00 $9,435.00
Richfield $27,466.00 $25,649.00 $1,817.00
Robbinsdale $11,962.00 $10,112.00 $1,850.00
Rockford $300.00 $300.00 $0.00
Rogers $8,392.00 $7,870.00 $522.00
Shorewood $8,600.00 $8,000.00 $600.00
Spring Park $725.00 $725.00 $0.00
St. Anthony $12,286.00 $11,236.00 $1,050.00
St. Bonifacius $1,575.00 $1,150.00 $425.00
St. Louis Park $21,753.00 $15,906.00 $5,847.00
Tonka Bay $5,300.00 $4,000.00 $1,300.00
Wayzata $14,156.00 $12,906.00 $1,250.00
Woodland $850.00 $850.00 $0.00
Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting
July 13, 2021
Agenda Item
2. Police Commission Task Force Final Report and Discussion
Prepared By
Kiarra Zackery, Equity and Inclusion Manager
Maria Cisneros, City Attorney
Summary
At its September 15, 2020 meeting, the City Council approved the creation of a Police Commission Task
Force to begin the process of studying how the City might replace the existing Civil Service Commission
with a new Police Commission. The purpose of the Task Force was to:
1. Develop a recommendation regarding the name, membership composition, and duties of a new
commission on policing; and
2. Draft a proposed mission statement and bylaws for the new Commission which defines its role.
The Task Force met twice per month beginning on November 19, 2020. Councilmember Gillian
Rosenquist served as the Task Force Chair. Kiarra Zackery, Equity and Inclusion Manager, and Chief of
Police Jason Sturgis served as the staff liaisons. City Attorney Maria Cisneros also attended Task Force
meetings and supported its work. All Task Force meetings were open to the public and were advertised
on the City’s website and social media. The work of the Task Force would was presented to the public
via social media, an online survey, two podcasts, and two live community engagement events. The Task
Force invited the public to contribute to its work through a variety of means, which are summarized in
the attached Community Input Report.
Task Force Recommendations
The Task Force recommends the City Council create a new commission called the Police Employment
Accountability and Community Engagement (PEACE) Commission. The complete recommendations of
the Task Force are described in the following attached documents:
1. Task Force Final Recommendations Report
2. Proposed Ordinance establishing the PEACE Commission
3. Proposed PEACE Commission Bylaws
4. Community Input Report
Council/Manager Meeting Executive Summary
City of Golden Valley
July 13, 2021
2
Staff Recommendations
Staff supported the Task Force over the last seven months to create the ordinance, bylaws, and final
report. Other than to make recommendations and help the Task Force understand the legal and
institutional parameters that apply to policing and commissions in Minnesota and the City of Golden
Valley, staff did not direct the Task Force’s work or recommendations.1 As observers and supporters of
the work of the Task Force, staff also conducted research regarding best practices and trends in
community involvement in policing. At the same time, staff worked with the City Council to apply for
the Reimagining Public Safety Grant through the Pohlad Foundation. Based on this research, learning,
and listening, staff wishes to share the following observations and professional advice with the Council:
1. Mission Statement & Historical Context
As a part of its assignment from the Council, the Task Force developed a proposed mission for the
PEACE Commission. The Task Force had several conversations about what the mission should be and
through introspection and reflection, determined that the current and past sociopolitical context is
relevant and important to the mission. Therefore, the Task Force included a statement about the
historical context in which the Commission was conceived in section C of the proposed bylaws. Staff
was impressed with the care and effort the Task Force put into developing both the mission and
historical context statement and supports their inclusion in the proposed ordinance and bylaws.
a. Process
Both the Mission Statement and Historical Context Statements were created through an intentional
process of sharing each Task Force member’s hopes and hurdles for the Commission. As a part of the
community building process, the Task Force created a list of Hopes for the proposed commission. Each
Task Force member developed a list of individual “hopes” (functions of the commission) and shared
them with the group. This activity provided an opportunity for the Task Force to identify their
commonalities and build a foundation of understanding. From this list, staff identified three common
themes that were later incorporated into the mission. During the sharing process, Task Force members
provided context and reasoning for their hopes which sparked a conversation about their purposes for
joining the Task Force. The various reasons, both historical and present, for joining affirmed the
Council’s intentional recruitment of Task Force members with diversified lived experiences. This
impactful conversation led to the addition of a statement of historical context in the proposed Bylaws.
b. Historical Context Statement
City leadership initiated the process of replacing the Civil Service Commission in early 2020 to increase
hiring efficiency and eliminate barriers to the diversification of the Police Department. Shortly before
presenting the item to Council, Minneapolis Police officers murdered George Floyd, which resulted in
the urgent and expressed need for a community body to advise the City and the Police Department on
matters of policing. Many Task Force members expressed that these events motivated them to take
action and create change in their community. Task Force members sought the opportunity to create a
commission that would carry on the spirit of social justice in policing through relationship building,
education, and healing. Moreover, Task Force members reckoned with the history of police brutality
and the overrepresentation of Black, Brown, and Indigenous people as victims of systemic racism
perpetuated by police departments across the country. For the aforementioned reasons, staff
1 There were two police officers on the Task Force that participated in the Task Force’s decisions and votes. Those two staff
members did not participate in the preparation of this executive summary.
Council/Manager Meeting Executive Summary
City of Golden Valley
July 13, 2021
3
suggested a statement of historical context and sentiments in the ordinance so all commissioners
would understand the mindset of the community, Council, and Task Force members while drafting the
mission.
c. Other Ideas around Mission Statement
In the discussion between Task Force members about the mission, Task Force members expressed a
desire to connect the proposed mission to the existing Police Department mission. Conversations
suggested that the mission more explicitly express a desire to encourage power sharing with the
community by the Police Department. However, express power sharing language was not included in
the proposed mission statement due to state statutes limiting City commissions to advisory
commissions.
2. Duties and Responsibilities
Staff supports the Task Force recommendations regarding duties and responsibilities, including the
recommendation to incorporate a mix of research and study, community engagement, and policy
advice. Furthermore, staff supports the recommendation to take an evidence based approach that
uses both qualitative data (for example, department, county, and state data) and qualitative data
(narratives and community input), as well as the incorporation of regular reporting to the City Council.
Staff believes this hybrid approach will create additional accountability tools, increase community
confidence, and improve communication between City leadership, the City prosecutor, the Police
Department, and the community.
3. Terminology
The Task Force recommends including a glossary of terms in the proposed bylaws. The following
section outlines staff recommendations for the terms listed in the glossary and other language
considerations.
a. Purpose of Glossary
Staff recommended the Task Force include of a glossary of terms in the bylaws to:
1) Create common vocabulary for conversations regarding social identities and lived
experiences; and
2) Understand sentiments regarding the historic and present sociopolitical context of policing
and persistently harmed communities.
In staff’s experience, facilitating narrative-based conversations across social identities and lived
experiences can lead to confusion regarding appropriate language. Therefore, staff recommended
using a glossary to equip all community members, regardless of their individual understanding of
racism and racial justice, with one of the tools they will need to ameliorate potential tension and avoid
social faux pas.
The use of a common vocabulary makes clear the need and expectation to have conversations and
share narratives about social identities and lived experiences. It will also provide a resource to refer
back to when there is confusion, or when staff or community members misconstrue, misrepresent or
misunderstand terms regarding social identity and social justice. The terms and definitions listed in the
Council/Manager Meeting Executive Summary
City of Golden Valley
July 13, 2021
4
glossary were researched and developed by the Equity and Inclusion Manager and align with language
and definitions produced and accepted in the City’s Equity Plan and Welcome Statement. Staff
received recommendations and considered additional terms for the glossary through community and
Task Force input. Staff recommends the glossary live in the bylaws instead of the ordinance because
the editing process will be easier should future commissioners or Councils wish to change, update, or
add to the glossary.
b. Adoption of term Public Safety
The Council may wish to consider replacing the words Police Department with Public Safety throughout
the ordinance and bylaws in light of its recent decision to discuss creating a traffic enforcement team
of non-sworn employees outside of the Police Department. While making structural changes to City
departments would require additional action by the Council and the City Manager, these two
documents could be written with language sufficiently broad to accommodate any such changes in the
future.
Moreover, the Task Force acknowledged that the City’s officers do more than law enforcement, they
also work to maintain and create public safety and community wellness. Adopting the term Public
Safety in lieu of Police Department reflects the community desire to have a department that works in
tandem with the community to maintain and create safe spaces where everyone can not only survive
but also thrive. Should the current department develop other roles or relationships with organizations
that broaden and diversify the services the City provides to community members, the term public
safety better describes the work of the various services (i.e. traffic enforcement, embedded social
workers, community health workers, etc.).
c. Definition of Community
Staff recommended the Task Force include a definition of community in the glossary and that the
definition be broad enough to include all people that interact with the Golden Valley Police
Department. This recommendation overlaps with the City’s proposals in the Pohlad grant application,
which called for the City to begin the process of intentionally building relationships with residents of
neighboring communities that have regular interaction with GVPD. The need for this kind of inclusive
definition of community is becoming clearer as staff begins to look at data. For example, according to
prosecution data from Hennepin County, a high percentage of people prosecuted by the City of Golden
Valley for certain low level driving offenses live outside of the City.2 While this is only one data set, it
indicates that as the PEACE Commission begins its work, the City will likely need to better understand
the impact its policing practices have on surrounding communities and build relationships with
impacted people. Therefore, staff believes incorporating a more inclusive definition of community is
essential to the work of the PEACE Commission.
4. Commission Membership: Composition
The Task Force spent significant time discussing what attributes, backgrounds, lived experiences, and
technical knowledge should be required to join the PEACE Commission. The Task Force reviewed the
2 Between January 2020 and June 2021 there were 1105 cases prosecuted by the Golden Valley City Attorney that resulted
in a conviction on charges of no driver’s license; no proof of insurance; no insurance; driving after suspension, revocation,
or cancellation; expired tabs; expired DL; window tint; rear view mirror obstruction; and unsafe equipment. Of those cases
97% of defendants were not residents of Golden Valley.
Council/Manager Meeting Executive Summary
City of Golden Valley
July 13, 2021
5
Environmental Commission ordinance (City Code § 3-131, subd. a) and the Council Resolution creating
the Task Force as examples of how the City has imposed similar requirements in the past. The Task
Force also sought community input on this issue. After consideration of the examples provided and
community input, the Task Force decided on a 13 member commission made up of:
(1) Three individuals that represent populations historically and presently harmed by
policing;
(2) Two staff people (one sworn and one sworn or non-sworn) employed by the Golden
Valley Police Department;
(3) At least one and no more than two youth, 21 years old or younger, who live, work, or
attend school in the City of Golden Valley;
(4) One individual with professional human resources or recruitment experience;
(5) One individual or social service provider with knowledge or experience of mental health,
substance misuse, or homelessness;
(6) One individual or caregiver with knowledge of or experience working or living with the
senior population in Golden Valley;
(7) One parent, teacher, or administrator at a school that serves Golden Valley residents;
(8) One individual who is a renter or lives in multi-family housing or group housing in
Golden Valley; and
(9) At least one individual that has been impacted by the criminal justice system for
example, a criminal defendant or criminal defense attorney.
Staff supports the Task Force recommendation to implement a structured set of recruitment criteria to
maximize the likelihood of creating a commission that reflects the community it polices, including
community members who may not be residents of Golden Valley. However, building in two voting
seats for Police Department employees should be carefully considered. While staff plays an integral
role in all commission work across the City, no other City staff has the authority to vote on commission
recommendations to the City Council. Allowing staff members to vote on commission
recommendations could change the power dynamic in commission discussions and cause the
commission’s decision making process to be less community-driven. Additionally, staff has other
means of making recommendations to the City Council and therefore, do not require voting power to
make their voices heard.
The Task Force recommendation also requires at least one of the staff Commissioners to be a sworn
police officer. In light of Council discussions about continuing to expand non-sworn public safety and
community health roles, including adding a fellowship program (see Pohlad grant application),
incorporating social workers and community health interns, continuing to invest in community service
officers, and exploring the creation of a non-sworn traffic control division outside of the Police
Department, staff recommends the Council consider broadening the staff seat(s) to include any public
safety staff.
Council/Manager Meeting Executive Summary
City of Golden Valley
July 13, 2021
6
Finally, the Council should note that the Task Force recommendation deviates from the community
input it received, which recommended one member from the Police Department, not two.
5. Term Limits
The Task Force recommends the City Council limit the number of terms commissioners may serve on
the PEACE Commission to two terms (six years). Historically, the City of Golden Valley has not had term
limits for board or commission participation and there are many commissioners across the City that
have served well over six years. If the Council adopts the proposal, this would be the only Golden
Valley Commission with term limits.
During discussion, Task Force members pointed out that term limits help bring fresh ideas and
perspectives to the commission and make it more difficult for individual members to unilaterally steer
the work of the body. Additionally, because there would be open seats more frequently, it may
encourage involvement and interest from a more diverse group of community members.
On the other hand, there are some benefits of not imposing term limits that the Council may wish to
consider. First, without term limits, commissioners have the opportunity to learn by experience while
they serve. As a commission that will engage in technical work designed to inform policy and practices,
experience and understanding of the system of local government and policing in Golden Valley will be
essential for PEACE Commission members. Second, those members with many years of experience can
guide and train newer members, increasing the overall productivity of the group and creating greater
continuity in its work. Finally, without term limits, there are likely to be fewer vacancies on the
commission and the staff time required to recruit and train commissioners is less.
The Task Force’s recommendation to institute a two-term limit but allow past members to reapply
after at least one year of separation represents a compromise based on the above considerations.
6. Staff Liaison
The Task Force recommended that the City hire an Equity and Inclusion Outreach Specialist (EIO
Specialist) to serve as the staff liaison to the PEACE Commission. Given the nature of the duties and
responsibilities of the proposed commission, staff agrees with this recommendation and provides the
following additional detailed information regarding this proposed position for the Council’s
consideration
a. Proposed Equity and Inclusion Outreach Specialist Job Description
The EIO Specialist will use strategic community building and organizing techniques to engage residents,
property and business owners, and regional and non-profit organizations across the City of Golden
Valley on policing and other topics. The individual in this role will work cooperatively with residents on
the development and execution of community programs, activities, and events. Under the direction of
the Equity and Inclusion Manager and in close collaboration with the Police Department, the Outreach
Specialist will support City-wide efforts to achieve racial equity by involving the community, especially
BIPOC and underserved populations, attend special events, collect data and feedback, connect and
collaborate with various stakeholder groups, and serve as ambassador of the City at community
functions.
Council/Manager Meeting Executive Summary
City of Golden Valley
July 13, 2021
7
The essential duties and responsibilities of the proposed position include:
a. Coordinate community outreach efforts within the City and foster connected and engaged
neighborhoods
b. Assist with ongoing City outreach in neighborhoods and attend community events to build
partnerships and increase participation in community events
c. Build knowledge of appropriate community services and resources to make appropriate
referrals for residents
d. Educate in target communities
e. Improve outreach and engagement to build relationships with underrepresented communities
and establish trust
f. Provide support with developing and implementing a civic engagement strategy to increase
general participation in local government among diverse populations
g. Solicit and collect feedback and data from various stakeholder groups
h. Assist with special projects or miscellaneous tasks
i. Support building community engagement by attending civic group meetings, City events, and
public gatherings as a representative of the City
j. Partner with external organizations enabling the City to better collaborate with similar
programs of peer institutions
k. Assist City departments to enhance community engagement
l. Communicate effectively with supervisory, employees, and other individuals to answer
questions and to disseminate or explain information
Proposed 2021 Salary Range: $63,128-$84,115 plus benefits
Next Steps and Process
The next steps to abolish the Civil Service Commission and establish a PEACE Commission are as
follows:
Date Action
July 20, 2021
6:30 pm
Regular City
Council Meeting
First Consideration of an ordinance repealing and replacing City Code § 2-130
to terminate the police civil service commission and establish the PEACE
Commission. As with all ordinance consideration, there will be an opportunity
for public input at this meeting.
August 3, 2021
6:30 pm
Regular City
Council Meeting
Second Consideration of an ordinance repealing and replacing City Code § 2-
130 to terminate the police civil service commission and establish the PEACE
Commission. As with all ordinance consideration, there will be an opportunity
for public input at this meeting.
August 4, 2021 Begin accepting applications for PEACE Commission
August 10 –
October 5, 2021
Interviews for PEACE Commission appointment
Council/Manager Meeting Executive Summary
City of Golden Valley
July 13, 2021
8
October 5, 2021
6:30 pm
Regular Council
Meeting
Approve appointments to PEACE Commission
October 14, 2021 First PEACE Commission Meeting
Financial or Budget Considerations
Not Applicable
Recommended Action
• Provide feedback and direction to staff regarding the proposed ordinance establishing a Police
Employment Accountability and Community Engagement (PEACE) Commission.
• Provide feedback and direction to staff regarding the proposed PEACE Commission bylaws.
• Provide feedback and direction to staff regarding the proposed timeline.
Supporting Documents
• Task Force Final Report (123 pages), including the following addenda:
o Proposed Ordinance
o Proposed Bylaws
o Community Input Report
Police Commission Task Force Final Report
July, 2021
Task Force Members
Nancy Azzam
Randy Anderson
Dipanjan Chatterjee
Officer Daniel Feldman
Trey Gladney
Chris Hartzler
Mark Hastie
Thomas Huling
Julie Jonas
Gloria Kumagai
Sergeant Randy Mahlen
James Rhodes
Andrew Wold
City Council Liaison
Council Member Gillian Rosenquist
Staff Liaisons
Kiarra Zackery, Equity and Inclusion Manager
Jason Sturgis, Police Chief
Supporting Staff
Maria Cisneros, City Attorney
Kirsten Santelices, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Police Commission Task Force (PCTF)
Recommendations Report
This is the final report of the Police Commission Task Force (the “Task Force”). The Task Force is a group
of 13 community members chosen by the City Council to advise the Council on the replacement of the
existing Police Civil Service Commission with a new commission on policing. The City Council created the
Task Force in the summer of 2020 for two reasons. First, the City wants to modify its recruitment and
hiring practices to address the lack of racial diversity in its workforce. City staff identified that
cumbersome processes required by the long-standing civil service structure (Minn. Stat., ch. 419) made
it difficult for the City to recruit and hire BIPOC candidates in a competitive job market. Second, the
social context of the murder of George Floyd in the summer of 2020, the civil unrest and subsequent
trials of the involved officers highlighted community calls for greater transparency and improved
communication with the community.
The City Council asked the Task Force to study the creation of a new commission to address these goals.
The Commission met 13 times between November 19, 2020 and June 10, 2021. This report summarizes
the work and recommendations of the Task Force. Additionally, the Task Force created a proposed
mission, in ordinance form, (Exhibit A) and bylaws (Exhibit B) for the new commission. The City Council
will consider the recommendations in this report at its July Council Manager Meeting.
Context
Historic and Present-Day Harm in Policing
The City of Golden Valley is growing in its consciousness of systemic racism in policing. Over the last four
years, the City has engaged in educational and knowledge building opportunities, internally and
externally, about systemic racism and the impacts of socially constructed barriers to opportunities and
resources for Black, Indigenous and People of Color since this country’s inception. City staff, elected
officials, and appointed officials use knowledge attained through formal training, community
conversations, and organizational and personal reflection to become aware of how institutional
structures create racialized predictabilities in nearly every aspect of life and, specifically, policing. The
City of Golden Valley acknowledges as a neighbor to Minneapolis and an inner-ring suburb like Brooklyn
Center, it is a participant in policing systems that result in disproportionate interactions between BIPOC
individuals and law enforcement officials, and that this results in overrepresentation of BIPOC
individuals in the criminal justice system. This system, in conjunction with other systems, lead to
negative consequences on life outcomes for BIPOC individuals in Golden Valley and the metro area,
including poor outcomes related to housing, employment, education and health.
In the spirit of this awareness, the City of Golden Valley is committed to empowering the Golden Valley
Police Department (GVPD) to interrupt racism through examining and updating policies, creating an anti-
racist infrastructure, training and educating all officers in the present and historical context of racism in
policing, and developing deep, trusting community relationships through engagement, openness and
transparency. The City recognizes the problem of policing is not one of inadequate training and
professionalization, rather the problem arises from the very nature of policing and the legal system,
which are designed to maintain and exacerbate racial inequity. With that context in mind, the City of
Golden Valley is committed to looking at all components of its public safety system to find and address
systemic racism wherever it is encountered.
Moreover, the City of Golden Valley recognizes systemic oppression across social identities and seeks to
build relationships to address disparities in policing against members of the LGBTQ+ community and
those with mental and physical dis/abilities.
Civil Service Commission
Since the 1950s, the City of Golden Valley has operated under a Civil Service model. This is a statutory
model governed by Minnesota Statutes, chapter 419. Pursuant to statutory requirements, the Civil
Service Commission determined the hiring process and approved a candidate list for all hires and
promotions in the police department. Due to the requirements of the statute, the civil service process
created inefficiencies that resulted in a loss of candidates, including many well-qualified BIPOC
candidates. The City Council determined that abolishing the Civil Service Commission would allow City
staff to develop a more flexible and responsive hiring process and allow the City to incorporate more
community outreach into the commission’s duties.
Murder of George Floyd, Trial of Derek Chauvin and Police Killing of Daunte Wright
On May 25, 2020 a recording of the murder of George Floyd by former Minneapolis Police Officer Derek
Chauvin went viral igniting a global response and call to action for police brutality. In the United States,
Black men are two times more likely to be killed at the hands of Police than white men, even when data
controls for armed and unarmed suspects. This event begged of police departments to reflect on their
own practices and determine new methods to approaching public safety and community relationships.
During the seven-month process of developing the recommendations in this report, a jury found Derek
Chauvin, former Minneapolis Police Officer, guilty of second-degree murder unintentional murder, third-
degree murder and second-degree manslaughter, for the murder of George Floyd; and Daunte Wright –
a 20 year old, unarmed Black man was killed by a Brooklyn Center police officer during a traffic stop.
Civil unrest followed and GVPD, as a part of the Metro Mobile Task Force assisted Brooklyn Center in
quelling protests. Given the sociopolitical context of the inception of the PEACE Commission, Task Force
members felt an urgency to ensure their work resulted in a recommendation designed to instill trust,
respect and mutual understanding between GVPD and the community. Now more than ever it is
imperative that City leadership take a proactive, visible stance on the impact of systemic racism.
Hiring of Equity and Inclusion Manager
In late August 2020, the City of Golden Valley hired an Equity and Inclusion Manager as recommended
by the Rising TIDES Task Force. The Equity and Inclusion Manager directs racial equity initiatives, policy
recommendations and training internally and externally. The goals of the Task Force overlap with the
function of the Equity and Inclusion Manager. The Equity and Inclusion Manager was a co-staff liaison to
the Task Force with the Police Chief Jason Sturgis.
Process
In creating the Task Force, the City of Golden Valley sought to capitalize on the diversity of personal and
professional qualifications and lived experience among its residents. The City sought to create a Task
Force that reflects the diverse needs and wants of the community. The Council considered lived
experiences and identities when making appointments to the Task Force, including age, socioeconomic
status, gender, geographic residence and work experience. Identities and experiences considered
included: age, LGBTQ+ identity, race and ethnicity, housing status, mental health experience, substance
use disorder, involvement/knowledge of criminal justice system, social services provider and Golden
Valley corporate citizenship. The Task Force has 13 members, which include:
(1)Two members from the existing Police Civil Service Commission;
(2)One member of the Human Rights Commission, chosen by the HRC;
(3)One member of the Rising Tides Task Force, chosen by the Rising Tides Task Force
(4)Two Golden Valley Police Officers, one appointed by each of the two existing police unions;
(5)One member of the Golden Valley Crime Prevention Fund, chosen by the members of the
Crime Prevention Fund;
(6)One social service provider who serves the City of Golden Valley (i.e. individual or
organization working in the field of mental health, youth advocacy, substance use disorder
or homelessness) selected by the Council;
(7)One person who works or owns a business in the City of Golden Valley selected by the
Council;
(8)One individual, preferably a resident of Golden Valley, with knowledge or experience of the
defense side of the criminal justice system selected by the City Council (for example, a
criminal defendant or criminal defense attorney); and
(9)three residents of Golden Valley selected by the City Council.
Hopes and Hurdles
To better understand the diverse experiences and points of view of Task Force members regarding
policing, City staff engaged Task Force members in an activity called Hopes and Hurdles to determine
common goals and values. Task Force members described the desired role, duties and responsibilities of
the proposed commission and identified potential hopes and hurdles. Through this process, the Task
The individuals appointed to the Task Force were Nancy Azzam, Randy Anderson, Dipanjan
Chatterjee, Officer Daniel Feldman, Trey Gladney, Chris Hartzler, Mark Hastie, Thomas
Huling, Julie Jonas, Gloria Kumagai, Sergeant Randy Mahlen, James Rhodes, and Andrew
Wold. Council Member Gillian Rosenquist was the Chair of the Task Force.
City Staff: Co-Liaisons Police Chief Jason Sturgis and Equity and Inclusion Manager Kiarra
Zackery; City Attorney Maria Cisneros attended all meetings and supported the Task Force
through its entirety.
Force identified three areas of focus and used them to develop the framework for the mission and
bylaws.
• Hiring and Retention
• Data and Transparency
• Community Engagement
Research + Staff presentations
Throughout the duration of the Task Force, Staff made presentations to Task Force members regarding
police hiring, data practices, retention, and reporting; police civil service requirements; police
operations and training; and other topics related to the Task Force’s work. Additionally, Staff prepared a
presentation describing three distinct types of commissions used in other jurisdictions (review +
appellate, investigative + quality assurance and evaluative + performance-based) with several national
examples of each type with their functions and budgets (Appendix C). Task Force members determined
that a combination of all three types of commissions best aligned with their Hopes and Hurdles. The
Task Force asked questions regarding existing systems of hiring, policing, data retention and other
policing practices. In response to these questions, Staff from several departments gave presentations to
provide context and answers to the Task Force’s questions. Some examples of these presentations are
summarized below.
Police Department
Chief Sturgis gave a presentation called “Mini Citizen’s Academy.” The presentation provided an
overview of the functions and responsibilities of GVPD including the 2019 year in review report. The
Chief explained the current hiring process and the challenges the Civil Service process imposes on hiring
new, qualified candidates.
Legal
City Attorney Maria Cisneros educated Task Force members on the historical and legal background for
the Civil Service Commission and the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act. Data and access to data
were a common theme of Task Force conversations. City Attorney Cisneros provided boundaries as
defined by Minnesota law regarding the accessibility of information to both the Task Force and
proposed commission.
Human Resources
Deputy City Manager/Human Resources Director Kirsten Santelices gave a presentation on the
relationship between the Civil Service Commission and the Human Resources Department. Deputy City
Manager Santelices provided information regarding the City’s recruitment strategies and initiatives
specifically for the Police Department, the hiring process, attrition reports from the most recent job
postings and ways for the commission to be involved in the recruitment, hiring and onboarding
processes (including training) in the Department.
Equity
Equity and Inclusion Manager Kiarra Zackery gave a presentation on community engagement. The
presentation outlined five functions of community engagement. The Task Force chose to inform the
community of its purpose and existence, involve community in determining priorities and functions of
the commission and collaborate with the community to finalize duties and responsibilities.
Subcommittees
The Task Force created two subcommittees to work on specific projects on behalf of the group.
o Community Engagement: During its initial meeting regarding community engagement, the
Task Force split into breakout rooms to discuss the three phases of community
engagement. The three groups were inform, engage, involve. Each group nominated a
member to join the community engagement subcommittee to design the community
engagement efforts in a manner that maintained fidelity to the group’s ideas. A
subcommittee of five focused on community engagement strategies. The subcommittee
created three different methods for engagement: a podcast, a poll and an open house.
o Bylaws: City Attorney Cisneros summarized the bylaws of the Civil Service Commission,
Environmental Commission and the Human Rights Commission as examples of the final
product the Task Force would prepare for the new police commission. From there, a
subcommittee of 6 (including Council Member and Chair Rosenquist) provided feedback on
drafts prepared by City Attorney Cisneros in virtual meetings and over email.
Community Engagement
After the presentation on Community Engagement strategies, the Task Force decided on three tactics:
inform, involve and collaborate. For each tactic, the Task Force developed engagement mechanisms for
the community.
o Inform: To inform the community of its existence, purpose and ways to get involved, the
Task Force published articles in the City newsletter, posted meetings on social media and
created a 2-episode podcast.
o Involve: To involve the community in its decision-making process and to affirm the direction
of the its work, the Task Force conducted an online survey. The survey solicited input
regarding police accountability, police/community relations and the demographic
information of the survey respondents. The community engagement subcommittee
collaborated with the City’s Communications Department to post the survey on social media
sites Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and NextDoor. The Communications Department also
created a social media toolkit and dispersed to various community organizations to spread
the word about the survey.
o Collaborate: To collaborate with the community and use its input before making final
decisions, the Task Force facilitated an open house. Staff and Task Force members posed
questions to community members regarding topics of contention in Task Force meetings
using PollEverywhere to collect responses. Topics included membership, term limits and
bylaw structure. Staff used data collected from the two open house sessions to determine
the make-up of the new Commission and determine term limits. The Task Force used input
from the open houses to add inform its final decisions regarding the glossary, context
statement, and commission membership (Appendix E).
Appendices C, D and E are Community Input Reports developed by the Communications Department.
Recommendations
Commission Name
The Task Force recommends the proposed commission be called the Police Employment, Accountability
and Community Engagement (PEACE) Commission.
Mission/Ordinance
The Task Force drafted a proposed ordinance outlining the mission, duties and responsibilities of the
proposed Commission. Appendix A contains a complete copy of the proposed ordinance. This section
summarizes the proposed duties of the commission and explains the Task Force’s thought process
behind the recommendations.
Duties and Responsibilities
o Conduct Research: The proposed Commission will engage in programs of research and study
regarding current and historical policing practices, Police Department policies and
procedures, and Police data related to the Commission’s mission. Task Force members
believe that data-based decision making and access to policing data will build transparency
and therefore accountability between GVPD and the community.
o Present Results Research: The proposed Commission will present its findings to the City
Manager, Police Chief and City Council and make its data and research available to the
public. Task Force members believe that presenting research will enhance communication
and understanding between GVPD and the community.
o Make recommendations to City Leadership: The proposed Commission will make
recommendations to the City Council, City Manager, HR Director, and Police Chief based on
its research and community engagement. Task Force members believe that making
recommendations to City leadership based on research, including both qualitative and
narrative data sets from the community will assist in the transformation of GVPD into a
public safety rooted in mutual respect and trust and will enhance department
responsiveness and accountable to the community.
o Celebrate Exemplary Police Work and Positive Contributions by Community Members: The
proposed Commission will collaborate with GVPD to continue current practices and
establish new ways of recognizing staff and community members for their excellence in
maintaining public safety in the City of Golden Valley. Communicating instances of
excellence in public safety will promote community dialogue and practices that build bridges
between GVPD staff and the community.
o Educate and Learn from the Community: The proposed Commission will center the voices
of the community to learn which aspects of our current model promote trust, transparency,
accountability and equity in addition to ways our current system produces and reinforces
harm to our community members.
o Honorable Mention:
The Task Force considered adding citizen review of police complaints as a part of
the Commission’s duties and responsibilities. Due to Minnesota state statute
limiting review boards to a strictly advisory capacity, the Task Force felt the
Commission would not be able to act in an impactful way. Ultimately, the Task
Force decided focusing on policy recommendations and building a strong and deep
community relationship is the most sensible use of Commissioners time.
Composition
Task Force members discussed composition over several meetings and determined the need for
community input to finalize how the Commission will look. Since policing impacts all communities in
varying degrees, the Task Force wanted to ensure the Commission followed an inclusive model for
representation and decided that including a list of preferred qualifications, including lived-experience as
well as professional experience, was appropriate. After much discussion and community input, the Task
Force recommends the proposed commission be comprised of 13 members with the following
experience:
(1)Three individuals that represent populations historically and presently harmed by policing;
(2)Two staff people (one sworn and one sworn or non-sworn) employed by the Golden Valley
Police Department;
(3)At least one and no more than two youth, 21 years old or younger, who live, work, or attend
school in the City of Golden Valley;
(4)One individual with professional human resources or recruitment experience;
(5)One individual or social service provider with knowledge or experience of mental health,
substance use disorder, homelessness;
(6)One individual or caregiver with knowledge or experience of the senior population in Golden
Valley;
(7)One parent, teacher, or administrator at a school that serves Golden Valley residents;
(8)One individual who is a renter or lives in multi-family housing or group housing in Golden
Valley; and
(9)At least one individual that has been impacted by the criminal justice system for example, a
criminal defendant or criminal defense attorney.
Bylaws
The Task Force members recognize the need to develop structures that promote diversity, equity and
inclusion in the proposed Commission. At the same time, the Task Force acknowledges that the
proposed Commission is part of a larger system and there is significant efficiency from an operations
standpoint in incorporating standardized practices that apply to all other City commissions. Therefore,
the majority of the proposed bylaws are drawn from the City’s standard bylaws and are consistent with
the rest of the City’s commissions. The areas which deviate from the standard bylaws are the imposition
of term limits and collaboration between the chair and staff liaison/agenda building process.
Term limits
Under the proposal, Commissioners will only be allowed to serve a maximum of two consecutive terms.
(Members could serve additional terms after a one year break.) The group feels term limits are
appropriate because they provide a natural break for new candidates to become involved and create a
more regular and fluid turn over process.
Chair and Staff Liaison Collaboration/Agenda Building Process
One of the goals of the proposed Commission is to build mutually respectful and accountable
relationships between City staff and the community. In the spirit of bridge building, the Task Force felt it
was important for the Chair and Staff Liaison have clear expectations. The Task Force also felt it was
important that the processes outlined in the bylaws explicitly provide for power sharing between staff
and the community. The proposed bylaws contain a few minor changes from the City’s standard
language to accomplish these goals.
With respect to the agenda building process, the Task Force proposed some minor tweaks to the
standard bylaws language to clarify that Commission members will have the ability to add topics to
upcoming agendas provided they are consistent with the Commission’s mission and duties and related
to an item in the Commission’s annual work plan. Task Force members felt this was particularly
important to clarify because it is likely the Commission will be called on to discuss and provide advice on
current events related to policing and public safety.
Staff Liaison
The Task Force recognizes the comprehensive nature of the duties and responsibilities of the proposed
commission, including: large-scale research projects and broad scope of possible topics; building
relationships with historically underserved and harmed communities; and developing a hiring and
retention model that support diversity, equity and inclusion within the department and the community.
Accomplishing these goals will require a significant amount of staff time and expertise. Therefore, the
Task Force recommends the City hire a new position, under the supervision of the Equity and Inclusion
Manager, titled Equity and Inclusion Outreach Specialist (EIO Specialist) and that this staff member be
the staff liaison to the proposed commission.
Exhibit A: Mission/Enabling Ordinance
Police Commission Task Force
Enabling Ordinance
Golden Valley City Code Sec. 2-XXX – Police Employment, Accountability and Community
Engagement Commission
(a)Establishment. A Police Employment, Accountability, and Community Engagement
Commission (PEACE Commission) is hereby established, composed of 13 members, who
shall serve three-year staggered terms, except that youth members may elect to serve 1,
2 or 3 year terms.
(b)Term limits. Commissioners may serve up to two consecutive three year terms. Partial
terms shall not be counted toward this term limit. Former commissioners may be re-
appointed for additional terms so long as they have not been on the commission during
the twelve months prior to the effective date of any subsequent appointment.
(c)Composition. The Commission shall consist of:
(1)Three individuals that represent populations historically and presently harmed by
policing;
(2)Two staff people (one sworn and one sworn or non-sworn) employed by the
Golden Valley Police Department;
(3)At least one and no more than two youth, 21 years old or younger, who live,
work, or attend school in the City of Golden Valley;
(4)One individual with professional human resources or recruitment experience;
(5)One individual or social service provider with knowledge or experience of mental
health, substance use disorder, homelessness;
(6)One individual or caregiver with knowledge or experience of the senior
population in Golden Valley;
(7)One parent, teacher, or administrator at a school that serves Golden Valley
residents;
(8)One individual who is a renter or lives in multi-family housing or group housing
in Golden Valley; and
(9) At least one individual that has been impacted by the criminal justice system for
example, a criminal defendant or criminal defense attorney.
If the City does not receive qualified applications from one or more of the above categories,
the remaining spots may be filled with any qualified applicant with substantial ties to the
City of Golden Valley.
In making appointments to the commission, the Council shall endeavor to maintain a
membership that reflects the many different social identities represented in the City of
Golden Valley, including but not limited to race, color, creed, religion, ancestry, national
origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, age, marital status, status with
regard to a public assistance program, socioeconomic status, or familial status.
(d) Mission. It shall be the PEACE Commission’s mission to help the Golden Valley Police
Department innovate and transform its provision of public safety services based on
community input and needs, and to assure that the department provides inclusive,
community-centered service. The Commission shall carry-out this mission by:
(1) Establishing transparency and accountability to the public;
(2) Enhancing communication and understanding between the police department,
and the people it serves through community dialogue and engagement; and
(3) Ensuring the police department applies practices that promote equity and
inclusion and prioritize hiring and retaining officers with diverse backgrounds.
(e) Duties and Responsibilities. It is the duty of the PEACE Commission to advise and make
recommendations to the Council in matters relating to and affecting policing in the City
of Golden Valley for the purpose of furthering the Commission’s mission. All of the
Commission’s work shall be performed pursuant to an annual work plan approved by
the Council. Specifically the Commission may:
(1) Conduct programs of research and study, in conjunction with the Police Chief
and City Manager that analyze police department practices, internal controls,
and compliance with applicable law and regulation relating to: police policy and
procedure; community engagement and attitudes toward policing; training,
recruitment and retention initiatives; and other matters related to the mission of
the Commission. Research and study includes programs that collect, review, and
audit summary data and compile aggregate statistics relating to the
Commission’s mission.
(2) Present the results of programs of research and study on a periodic basis to the
City Manager, Police Chief, or City Council for the purpose of ensuring police
department operations are conducted in a lawful, effective, transparent, and
nondiscriminatory manner.
(3) Make recommendations to the City Council, City Manager, and Police Chief
relating to internal controls, police policy and procedure; community
engagement and attitudes toward policing; training, recruitment and retention
initiatives; and other matters contained within a program of research and study.
(4) Celebrate exemplary police work and highlight examples of positive
contributions to public safety by community members.
(5) Educate and learn from the community. Create and implement a community
engagement and outreach program for the purpose of building trust and
communication between the police and community members and facilitate
community space in response to current events related to public safety.
Community engagement includes but is not limited to: community forums to
facilitate discussions with community members about their experiences with the
Golden Valley Police Department, programs to educate the community about
policing, and informal relationship building activities.
(6) Collaborate with the Community, City Manager, Human Resources Director, and
Police Chief to develop and maintain equitable and inclusive recruitment and
hiring processes.
(7) In August of each year as part of its annual report, review and provide feedback
to the City Council on:
i. The previous year’s hiring data;
ii. The hiring and promotion processes employed by the department in the
previous year;
iii. The Commission’s previous year goals and how the goals were advanced;
iv. The police department’s previous year goals and how the goals were
advanced; and
v. The City’s prosecution philosophy, data, and goals, and how the goals
were advanced.
(f) Minimum Training Requirements. Within one year of appointment, all new members
must complete the Golden Valley Citizen’s Academy or similar training as arranged by
the Police Chief.
(g) Requirement of Cooperation by Police Department and All Other City Employees and
Officials. The PEACE Commission shall have full, free, and unrestricted access, to the
extent authorized by law, to the records of the Golden Valley Police Department and
prosecutor’s office in order to facilitate research and study projects authorized in
section (c)(1) herein and to conduct special reviews at the request of the City Council.
Exhibit B: Proposed Bylaws
BYLAWS – PEACE Commission 1
BYLAWS
POLICE EMPLOYMENT, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT (PEACE) COMMISSION
Article I: Purpose, Mission, and Duties
The Commission shall be an advisory commission to the City Council.
A. Mission. It shall be the PEACE Commission’s mission to help the Golden Valley Police Department
innovate and transform its provision of public safety services based on community input and needs, and
to assure that the department provides inclusive, community-centered service. The Commission shall
carry-out this mission by:
(1) Establishing transparency and accountability to the public;
(2) Enhancing communication and understanding between the police department, and the people it
serves through community dialogue and engagement; and
(3) Ensuring the police department applies practices that promote equity and inclusion and
prioritize hiring and retaining officers with diverse backgrounds.
B. Duties. It is the duty of the PEACE Commission to advise and make recommendations to the Council on
matters relating to and affecting policing in the City of Golden Valley for the purpose of furthering the
Commission’s mission. All of the Commission’s work shall be performed pursuant to an annual work plan
approved by the Council. Specifically the Commission may:
(1) Conduct programs of research and study, in conjunction with the Police Chief and City Manager
that analyze police department practices, internal controls, and compliance with applicable law
and regulation relating to: police policy and procedure; community engagement and attitudes
toward policing; training, recruitment and retention initiatives; and other matters related to the
mission of the Commission. Research and study includes programs that collect, review, and audit
summary data and compile aggregate statistics relating to the Commission’s mission.
(2) Present the results of programs of research and study on a periodic basis to the City Manager,
Police Chief, or City Council for the purpose of ensuring police department operations are
conducted in a lawful, effective, transparent, and nondiscriminatory manner.
(3) Make recommendations to the City Council, City Manager, and Police Chief relating to internal
controls, police policy and procedure; community engagement and attitudes toward policing;
training, recruitment and retention initiatives; and other matters contained within a program of
research and study.
(4) Celebrate exemplary police work and highlight examples of positive contributions to public
safety by community members.
(5) Educate and learn from the community. Create and implement a community engagement and
outreach program for the purpose of building trust and communication between the police and
community members and facilitate community space in response to current events related to
public safety. Community engagement includes but is not limited to: community forums to
facilitate discussions with community members about their experiences with the Golden Valley
Police Department, programs to educate the community about policing, and informal
relationship building activities.
(6) Collaborate with the Community, City Manager, Human Resources Director, and Police Chief to
develop and maintain equitable and inclusive recruitment and hiring processes.
BYLAWS – PEACE Commission 2
(7)In August of each year as part of its annual report, review and provide feedback to the City
Council on:
i.The previous year’s hiring data;
ii.The hiring and promotion processes employed by the department in the previous year;
iii.The Commission’s previous year goals and how the goals were advanced;
iv.The police department’s previous year goals and how the goals were advanced; and
v.The City’s prosecution philosophy, data, and goals, and how the goals were advanced.
Article II: Membership, Appointments, Terms, and Officers
A.Membership
The Commission shall consist of:
(1)Three individuals that represent populations historically and presently harmed by policing;
(2)Two staff people (one sworn and one sworn or non-sworn) employed by the Golden Valley
Police Department;
(3)At least one and no more than two youth, 21 years old or younger, who live, work, or attend
school in the City of Golden Valley;
(4)One individual with professional human resources or recruitment experience;
(5)One individual or social service provider with knowledge or experience of mental health,
substance use disorder, or homelessness;
(6)One individual or caregiver with knowledge of or experience working or living with the senior
population in Golden Valley;
(7)One parent, teacher, or administrator at a school that serves Golden Valley residents;
(8)One individual who is a renter or lives in multi-family housing or group housing in Golden Valley;
and
(9)At least one individual that has been impacted by the criminal justice system for example, a
criminal defendant or criminal defense attorney.
If the City does not receive qualified applications from one or more of the above categories, the remaining
spots may be filled with any qualified applicant with substantial ties to the City of Golden Valley.
In making appointments to the commission, the Council shall endeavor to maintain a membership that
reflects the many different social identities represented in the City of Golden Valley, including but not
limited to race, color, creed, religion, ancestry, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity,
disability, age, marital status, status with regard to a public assistance program, socioeconomic status, or
familial status.
B.Appointments and Terms
Appointments are made effective May 1 of each year. The Council shall appoint regular members of the
Commission for three-year staggering terms. Youth members may be appointed for one, two, or three year
terms. The terms of Commission members shall be fixed and determined at the time of appointment by the
governing ordinance. City Council shall appoint the members of the Commission and to fill vacancies for
unexpired terms.
BYLAWS – PEACE Commission 3
Commissioners may serve up to two consecutive three year terms. Partial terms shall not be counted
toward this term limit. Former commissioners may be re-appointed for additional terms so long as they
have not been on the commission during the twelve months prior to the effective date of any subsequent
appointment.
C. Participation, Expectations & Sentiment
A Task Force of community members recommended the creation of the Police Employment,
Accountability, and Community Engagement (PEACE) Commission and were initially responsible for
drafting the Commission’s Mission and Bylaws. The Task Force worked together from November 2020 to
June 2021. The work of the Task Force was influenced by the social context of the murder of George
Floyd in the summer of 2020, as well as the civil unrest and subsequent trials of the involved officers.
In this complex social context, the Task Force worked hard to reconcile many different views of
community policing and systemic racism in public safety. In that spirit, the Task Force envisions this
commission and its members will accept the following sentiment as the foundation of their work:
Commissioners should approach their duties and responsibilities with a growth mindset. They should
create opportunities for mutual respect, listen to understand, and value the perspectives and opinions of
all stakeholders.
D. Officers
The Commission shall elect officers of Chair and Vice-Chair from the Commission membership by its voting
members at its regular annual meeting, (no later than the second meeting after May 1 in each year). The
Chair and Vice Chair positions rotate, and members may only serve two consecutive years as the Chair or
Vice-Chair. Should the office of Chair or Vice-Chair become vacant, the Commission shall elect a successor
from its membership at the next regular meeting and such election shall be for the unexpired term of said
office. Officers may also delegate the duties of their position to other Commissioners as deemed
appropriate by the Commission.
Chair responsibilities include:
(1) work with staff liaison to develop meeting agendas
(2) conduct and preside at all meetings in a productive and time-efficient manner
(3) ensure the Commission conducts its activities within the stated mission and bylaws of the
Commission
(4) appoint Commissioners to subcommittees
(5) monitor and ensure the progress of the Commission
(6) report to the City Council
Vice-Chair responsibilities:
(1) perform the duties of the Chair in the absence or incapacity of the Chair
(2) perform all other duties as prescribed by the Commission
Article III: Meetings and Attendance
A. Meetings
All meetings of the Commission shall be conducted in accordance with the Minnesota Open Meeting Law
and City code. This means all business and discussion occurs at a meeting that has been posted and is
open to the public.
The presence of a majority of all regular members currently appointed to the Commission shall constitute
BYLAWS – PEACE Commission 4
a quorum for the purpose of conducting its business and exercising its powers and for all other purposes.
In the event a quorum is not reached, a smaller number of members may meet to have informal
discussion, however, formal action shall not be taken and must be reserved for such time as when a
quorum of the Commission is reached. A quorum of the members should not discuss Commission business
by email, forms of social media, telephone, or informal meetings. If there are no items on the agenda, the
meeting shall be cancelled and the staff liaison shall communicate the cancellation to the commissioners.
The proceedings of meeting should be conducted using standard parliamentary procedure.
i. Regular Meeting
The regular meeting of the Commission shall be held on the second Thursday of the month at City Hall
at 6:30 pm. The Commission may, by a majority vote, change its regular meeting dates for any reason
provided proper public notice of the changed meeting is provided.
ii. Annual Meeting
The Annual Meeting of the commission shall be a regular meeting, typically the first meeting after May
1 of each year, at which time officer elections will be held.
iii. Special Meetings
A special meeting of the Commission may be called by the Chair or two commissioners, or by the City
Council, for the purpose of transacting any business designated in the meeting notice. The notice for a
special meeting shall be posted in compliance with the Minnesota State Statutes governing public
meetings. The staff liaison shall notify Commissioners at least three days prior to the meeting of the
date, time, place and purpose of the special meeting. A special meeting must also be posted in
accordance with the requirements of the Minnesota Open Meeting Law.
B. Attendance
Members are expected to attend all meetings, including the annual board and commission joint meeting. If
a member is unable to attend a meeting, they should contact the staff liaison, who will inform the chair. If
is known in advance that a quorum will not be attained, the meeting will be canceled. Staff liaisons will
track attendance at each meeting. Each April, the City Manager’s office will review attendance records for
the preceding calendar year (April-March) and send a standardized letter of warning to any member that
has missed:
• two consecutive or three total meetings for groups that meet once a month; or
• two consecutive or five total meetings for groups that meet twice a month.
Because attendance is so important to the work of the City’s boards and commissions, the City Manager
may ask the member to explain the reasons for their absences. If circumstances prevent the member
from committing to consistently attending future meetings, the member may be asked to step down. The
City Manager will not ask the member to step down if their inability to attend meetings is due to health
reasons. If the member’s attendance does not improve within 3 months after receiving a warning, the
City Manager or their designee shall ask the member to step down. If the member chooses not to step
down, the Council may take action to remove the member.
Article IV: Rules
A. Agenda
i. Preparation of the Agenda
The agenda for regular and special meetings of the Commission shall be prepared by the staff liaison.
Items to be placed on the agenda may be proposed by the Chair, a Commission member, the staff
liaison or at the request of the City Council. Residents, businesses, or other interested parties may
contact the staff liaison to request that an item be placed on the agenda for consideration. All agenda
topics presented by the City Council will be placed on an appropriate agenda; requests from other
parties will be placed on an appropriate future agenda at the discretion of the staff liaison.
BYLAWS – PEACE Commission 5
ii. Approval of the Agenda
The agenda shall be approved at each meeting prior to discussion of any item on the agenda. At the
time of agenda approval, items may be removed and the order of business may be modified by a
majority vote of members present at the meeting. No items shall be added to the agenda unless
deemed as urgent by the staff liaison.
iii. Future Agendas
At each meeting, the staff liaison shall provide a list of future agenda items. Commission members
present may communicate items recommended for inclusion on future agendas. All items must be
consistent with the Commission’s mission and annual work plan. The Commission may ask the Council
to amend its work plan if it wishes to add or remove items from its work plan during the year.
B. Records
All minutes and resolutions shall be in writing and shall be kept in accordance with City procedures,
Minnesota Statute and Rules regarding preservation of public records and the Minnesota Government Data
Practices Act. The following is an inexhaustive list of Commission records. The Commission may approve
any document or record not listed to be retained as an official record by a majority vote
• GVPD Organizational chart
• Anonymized recruitment and retention demographic report by position maintained by the Human
Resources Department
• Records of classification studies, actions and job descriptions (describing typical duties,
responsibilities and minimum qualifications)
• Documents produced as a result of commission work or relied on by the commission to carry out its
work
• All data published by the Golden Valley Police Department on the GVPD window or similar data
portal.
C. Work Plan
The Commission will draft an annual work plan that details activities and projected timelines for the
upcoming year.
• The Chair may appoint Commissioners to be primarily responsible for each work plan activity.
• The Commission may establish subcommittees to oversee work plan activities. The subcommittees
will be chaired by Commissioners appointed by the Chair.
• The Commission’s work plan will be submitted to the City Council, typically during the first quarter
of the calendar year. The Chair and/or Commissioners will attend a Council/Manager meeting to
discuss the annual work plan with the City Council.
• The Commission’s work plan must be agreed upon by the City Council.
D. Annual Report
The Commission shall submit an annual report to the City Council summarizing the past year's activities.
The report may highlight information the Commission finds appropriate to convey to the City Council.
• The Chair or Vice-Chair will prepare the report for approval by the Commission. Commission
members may submit signed addenda presenting alternative conclusions or perspectives.
• The report and addenda are submitted to Council with the current year work plan in the first
quarter of the calendar year or as soon thereafter as possible.
BYLAWS – PEACE Commission 6
E. Subcommittees
The Commission may create subcommittees to plan and direct activities related to the duties and
responsibilities of the Commission and to facilitate and implement work plan activities.
• Subcommittees will be chaired by Commissioners appointed by the Chair and shall not consist of a
majority or more of currently appointed Commission members.
• A majority of the subcommittee must be present to conduct business, including the subcommittee
chair.
• The Commission may consolidate or dissolve subcommittees at any time.
• The subcommittee chair may appoint other Commissioners and community members to the
subcommittee, provided that the subcommittee at no time consists of a majority or more of
currently appointed Commissioners.
• The subcommittee chair shall report back to the Commission about its activities as an agenda item
at regular Commission meetings.
• Subcommittee meetings shall be held at a date and time that does not conflict with the
Commission’s regular and special meetings. The staff liaison shall be notified of the date, time,
location and topic of all Subcommittee meetings.
F. Performance of Duties
Commissioners are expected to adequately prepare for meetings. Commissioners unable to complete an
assigned task should notify the commission chair or subcommittee chair as soon as possible. All
members are expected to actively participate in the substantive work or participate in a subcommittee.
The staff liaison may ask the City Council to review a Commissioner’s appointment based upon its
assessment of significant lack of performance.
Article V: Amendments and Revisions
The Commission will review these bylaws no later than the second meeting after May 1 every three years.
Members may present recommendations for changes and amendments. These bylaws can be altered or
amended at any regular monthly Commission meeting with a majority of members present, provided that
notice of the proposed changes and amendments is provided to each member at least 10 business days before
the meeting. The Council must review and approve any changes to, and has final authority regarding, these
bylaws.
Article VI: Definitions
For purposes of the of the PEACE Commission’s work, the following terms shall have the meanings given
below:
• Accountability: A range of actions to mitigate harm and to restore mutual respect, as defined by
impacted parties and the Commission.
• Community: Residents, visitors, businesses owners, workers and members of surrounding communities
that interact and utilize GVPD services.
• Community Engagement: Conversations and activities that promote reciprocal communication of
knowledge, perspectives and ideas to build trust and mutual respect between and GVPD.
• Data: Quantitative and qualitative information, including narratives from all perspectives, gathered,
synthesized and published by GVPD, the PEACE Commission or other organizations relevant to the
work of the Commission.
• Gender fluid: Individuals whose gender varies over time. A gender fluid person at any time may identify
as male, female, gender, or any other non-binary identity or some combination of identities.
BYLAWS – PEACE Commission 7
• Gender non-conforming: Individuals who do not adhere to the traditional gender expectations for
appearance and behavior of people of their assigned gender. Some identify as transgender, but others
do not.
• Historically harmed: Individuals and groups associated with social identities that have been historically
and presently harmed by the American system of policing (i.e. LGBTQ+, American Descendants of
Slaves (ADOS), Black, Indigenous and Latina/o/x community members, individuals with mental and
physical dis/abilities, immigrants, refugees, etc).
• Racism: The normalization and legitimization of an array of dynamics – historical, cultural, institutional,
and interpersonal – that routinely advantage Whites while producing cumulative and chronic adverse
outcomes for Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (racialequitytools.org).
• Transparency: A principle of institutional commitment to be open and forthcoming with data and
information.
Exhibit C: Community Input Report
Police Commission
Task Force Survey
COMMUNITY INPUT REPORT
Police Commission Task Force Survey Community Input Report Page 1
Contents
Overview………………………………………..……………………….………………2
Accountability……….…………………………………………………..………………4
Community………………………………………………………….…..………………7
Demographics…..……………………………………….……………………….…...13
Appendix A: Social Media Reach And Engagement……………..…………….…18
Police Commission Task Force Survey Community Input Report Page 2
Overview
Soliciting public input is a major component of the Golden Valley Police Commissions Task Force’s
(PCTF) work.
Staff solicited input from the community through an online survey regarding the following areas:
• police accountability
• police/community relations
• demographics of survey respondents
To promote the survey, the City published a podcast on the PCTF’s work and ways community member
can get involved. It also published social media posts on Facebook, Twitter, NextDoor, and Instagram.
The City further promoted the survey by providing Task Force members with a Communications Toolkit
of sample social media posts and newsletter stories to share through their own networks.
Online Survey
The survey asked for public input on each of the areas under consideration. It also asked five
demographic questions regarding housing status, gender identity, relation to Golden Valley, and more.
The survey was active from March 21–April 2, was limited to one response per IP address, and had
136 responses.
Podcast
PCTF members recording a 15-minute podcast introducing the task force and its work. It also included
information regarding community member engagement, including the survey and other methods.
As of April 6, 2021, the podcast had 106 views on Instagram and 21 views on YouTube.
Social Media Outreach
The City posted information and reminders about the the survey four times on Facebook, Twitter, and
NextDoor while it was active. See Appendix A for reach and engagement details for each post.
Police Commission Task Force Survey Community Input Report Page 3
Accountability
Police accountability looks like ________ to me? Please rank with one being most
important and three being least important.
Based on response averages, the highest ranked item is data-based department goals and decision-
making, and the lowest ranked item is the review of citizen complaints by a civilian review board.
Item 1 2 3 Weighted Avg
sharing demographic data about police
interactions (who is getting stopped and why)
38 58 40 2.01
data-based department goals and decision-
making
58 37 41 1.87
the review of citizen complaints by a civilian
review board
40 41 55 2.11
What else does police accountability look like to you? (optional)
This question was open ended and gathered no statistical data.
Open Ended Answers
It looks like the inability to get a job as a peace officer if you violated police rules in another
department.
It looks like independent third party investigations and reviews of officers.
Anti-domestic abuse training for officer's home lives.
Extensive police background checks and annual psychological examinations.
Fired if found to be in serious violation of civilian law. (Fraud, etc.)
Morality oaths.
Accountability is not only about review and tracking. It is also being able to take the feedback/review
(from internal and external stakeholders) and institute changes as needed.
Police also being able to hold other police accountable. No matter rank.
Everyone should have the same protection under the law.
holding each other accountable
Letting police do their job but allowing and requiring them to be accountable for their actions!
Regular and meaningful interaction with the community. A TRUE "service" mentality - they are here
to serve, but we rarely experience that. Making a true effort to get to know and to LISTEN to the
community they serve without defensiveness – this has been a big challenge with GV police. I've
attended "coffee with a cop" and they are NOT open to discussion about equity issues. Very
defesnives. They need a GROWTH MINDSET, and they need it now.
Transparency regarding policy, training, spending and decision making.
Removing the freedoms & protections blindly provided to police officers and further defining the 'fear
for your life' definitions. Civilian participation in the internal affairs/BCA processes for un-armed
deaths of civilians by police officers.
Police Department Administrators (those with the knowledge, experience, and paid to do so) holding
officers accountable for their actions
Police Commission Task Force Survey Community Input Report Page 4
CITIZEN control over our policies, practices, and penalties. Military control is in the hands of civilians
and that is supposed to hold them accountable. Similar process for police and policing.
Demonstrating unbiased responses to traffic stops & emergency calls
Having records of interactions with citizens available to be reviewed by citizens if they ask
transparency
Transperancy
No qualified immunity. Internal and external checks and balances aimed at ensuring that police carry
out their
duties properly and are held responsible if they fail to do so. Actual punishment for misconduct and
possible termination.
End Broken Windows Policing: decriminalize crimes that do not threaten public safety, end profiling
and stop and frisk policies, and establish alternative approaches to mental health crises.
Community Oversight: establish effective civilian oversight structures and remove barriers to report
police misconduct.
Limit Use of Force: establish standards and reporting of police use of deadly force, revise local police
force policies, end traffic-related police killings and high-speed chases, and monitor how police use
force and increase accountability for use of excessive force.
Independent Investigations and Prosecutions: lower the standard of proof in civil rights cases against
police, use federal funds for independent investigations and prosecutions, establish a State Special
Prosecutor's Office for police violence cases, and require independent investigations for all police
killing or serious injury cases.
Community Representation: recruit police officers who represent the demographic characteristics of
their communities and use community feedback to inform policies.
Film the Police: require police body cameras and legislate/uphold the right to record police.
Training: invest in rigorous and sustained training and consider unconscious/implicit bias testing.
End Policing for Profit: end police department quotas, limit fines and fees for low-income citizens,
forbid property seizure, and require police budgets to pay for misconduct fines.
Demilitarization: end the federal government's 1033 Program to supply military weaponry to local
police departments and institute local restrictions to prevent the purchase of military weapons by
police.
Fair Police Contracts: remove barriers to misconduct investigations and civilian oversight, keep
officer disciplinary history accessible to police departments and to the public, and ensure financial
accountability for officers and police departments that kill or seriously injure civilians.
Social service integration into policing. Collaboration with human services organizations to provide
services and address root causes of crime -poverty, housing, food insecurity, transportation and
systemic racism.
Not hiding your data 2 weeks after the murder of George Floyd. Dash and body cams. No choke
holds. Employing social workers.
independent reviews of complaints; transparency/published data; police accountability committee
Accountability looks like cops having each complaint in their files and not protected by the union and
then losing their jobs or going to prison when they have abused their positron of power.
Transparency, mitigation, de escalation, more communication, better community involvement.
Police Commission Task Force Survey Community Input Report Page 5
Reducing crime rates.
Wearing and turning on police cams during encounters with citizens.
No union political contributions accepted, period
Thorough independent review (by outside law enforcement agency, such as BCA and possibly
community members) of complaints or officer-involved incidents. Due process should be afforded to
the officer.
Sharing with the community the EVIDENCE BASED steps that the department is taking to reduce
bias.
more transparency about officer complaints and citations
Keep residents & property safe.
Treating every human being as an equal regardless of their appearance. No excessive use of force
especially on minority groups. 1. Creating awareness and communications where problems exist. 2.
Working with the community to resolve problems 3. Repeat
Protecting and serving the community and keeping everybody safe. Doing the job without worrying
about "political correctness."
Would like to see annual report with data on sex and race of those hired, arrested, prominent issues
and goals of department.
Robust POST Board licensing
every officer being committed to promoting community safety, even when that means confronting
other officers about their wrongdoings
It’s hard, but we all have implicit bias, and it would be great for police and citizens to figure out how
that affects our actions, to aim for equitable treatment of others.
Keeping citizens of Golden Valley safe. That should be the priority.
No qualified immunity. Local officers that have to look the community in the eye off duty
Police departments being critical of their own actions and owning when any one makes a mistake,
including disciplinary action and termination when warranted.
Not hiring officers with a know history of racial bias.
Transparency in what is happening in the community / number of crimes / what is being investigated
and progress on investigations. Believe this would be most effective through an email list that
residents can opt into vs postings on the website and Facebook.
Less police
Keeping citizens of Golden Valley safe. That should be the priority.
Body cams that can’t be turned off
Accountability for officers with prejudice or racist views provoking unnecessary interactions with
civilians.
Treating them like the professionals they are! They need to be accountable for their own behavior
just like we all do!!
Defunding the police. Getting police out of schools so that tax payers funding education do not
double fund police. Having someone outside the scope of police respond to mental health calls.
Having local police stop harassing and killing our community members.
Community engagement
Reponding to calls as quickly as possible. Courteous and respectful interactions with citizens.
Efficient and fair delivery of police services - controling crime and maintaining order fairly
showing up in the community and being seen around the city. I appreciate seeing the police drive by
our neighborhoods but it would be nice to have the ability to interact with them so they can get to
know people on a personal level. Maybe just walking the streets on warm days/weekends, etc.
Not enough emphasis is being placed on crime prevention via a robust police force. Ultimately the
police force is accountable to the taxpayers who expect safe communities. Expand the force.
Police Commission Task Force Survey Community Input Report Page 6
Are police visible patroling the streets? Do they meet with residents to discuss crimes in the areas
and what to keep an eye on? Do they connect and talk to residents informally so that residents feel
they know someone on police force they feel they can trust.
Less power of the union to influence outcomes. Chief and not mediators making discipline decisions.
I think that the contract with the officers’ union needs to be easily available on the city website. I think
that step-by-step instructions for things like complaining about an interaction, inquiring about an
officer’s actions, implementation of department policy, etc. need to be easy to find on the city’s
website. I think it needs to be clear exactly what the disciplinary steps are that can occur should
officer misconduct happen.
Clear policies and procedures, and strict following of these policies. I think GVPD already does this.
We have the best PD.
If a officer is in the wrong they are punished correctly
1. Sharing the FACTS; 2. Enforcing any laws that were broken; 3. Consequences for actions.
Transparency. Open communication and dialogue with the city. Regular training.
Body cameras on when on duty, unless taking a break or restroom break.
Looking at actions based on facts, not emotions
If a police officer is accused of wrongdoing there needs to be an outside entity that reviews it, not the
police themselves.
Supporting the police and recognizing they have to make rapid decisions under pressure out in the
real world, however, being realistic when very poor decisions are made and improvement is needed.
Keeping the public safe
Who What When WHY Whre How
Active Policing, investigating crimes, making arrests as needed and working with prosecutors to
make sure violent (especially repeat) offenders are actually convicted and jailed.
Priority on crime no mater what color, sexual preference or class.
Provides assistance/help in community goals. Such as interaction with community events, school
safety where needed. Also things that allow them to meet the people they support and inturn who
support the police.
Understanding what needs citizens have and not discounting them. Being proactive in problem
solving instead of saying "I can't".
Police who give all citizens the benefit of the doubt and prioritize protecting and serving said citizens
over material goods or power dynamics.
Having a community and police based overlook at complaints. 1/3 officers to provide experience and
explanation officer thinking and actions 2/3 unbiased community to determine if the officer is truly
violating a person in some manner
Na
Clear mission statements and accountability
Making sure the city provides sufficient resources to the department to attract top talent and provide
quality training to staff.
Keeping us safe while dismantling systemic racism in the police department
Establishing policing objectives that are more than merely asserting control and include de-escalation
and identification of the need for other professional involvement (such as mental health or crisis
management)
High standards for police officers that are expected to be met when it comes to interacting with the
general public and if they aren't met they are punished for it. Officers being aware of their own biases
and actively working to dismantle them.
Publishing raw data allowing analysis by homeowners:
Date of initiation of incident
Police Commission Task Force Survey Community Input Report Page 7
how interactions were initiated (911 calls, calls to non emergency number, etc)
How they were categorized at initiation
Who was sent out (sworn police officer, other) for each person sent out
Categorization of incident after call (could be multiple)
End result (arrest, warning, etc) Crime prevention strategies. What the plan is to be proactive vs reactive.
Change starts within. When police officers have conversations about bias within, and challenging
each other’s bias, we know we’re on the right track.
NA
Community
Community involvement in policing looks like _______ to me? (check all that
apply)
Of the 136 responses to this question, 90 (66 percent) answered communications of public safety
efforts by civilians (neighborhood watch and other groups), 83 (61 percent) answered a civilian review
board (review of citizen complaints and corresponding encounters), and 77 (57 percent) answered
communications for exemplary police work.
Other Answers
Affirmation of policing practices that set high standards so that all citizens will respect law
enforcement.
I do NOT feel there should be civilian watch groups.
Community hiring board, input on hiring that is real
Police who have a vested stake in Golden Valley, hopefully as residents as well as Civil Servants.
Police Commission Task Force Survey Community Input Report Page 8
Community Representation: recruit police officers who represent the demographic characteristics of
their communities and use community feedback to inform policies.
Cops that walk. Get out of your cars and interact with people
Cops need to be held accountable for their actions and behavior
police being a part of the community, not apart from it
Less militarized equipment
Where applicable, implement the findings of Chapter 11 of the 1968 Kerner Commission Report.
Communication of what’s happening in our community and what’s being done to address issues. As
well as communication on hiring and training for bias and how the department is holding offices
accountable.
Defunding police to increase other community supports
City Council and police leadership colloboratively setting community priorities for controlling crime
and maintaining order fairly and effectively
Citizen committee advising police leadership
I do not hold a degree in Law Enforcement and I may have questions, but I am not qualified t set
‘policy’ or ‘priorities’ for any law enforcement agency.
The role in training would to use civilian volunteers in situation training. Hospitals use volunteer as
patients to train for different patient responses.
Reporting in funding of personnel in the department and on availability of officers to respond to calls
immediately
I’d attend these types of events if sponsored by the GVPD or a City commission.
(check all that apply)
Of the 136 responses to this question, 81 (60 percent) answered bridge-building events and
conversations, 69 (51 percent) answered Coffee With a Cop, and 65 (48 percent) answered Public
Safety in the Parks.
Other Answers
Police Commission Task Force Survey Community Input Report Page 9
none
Police data deconstruction survey
Events sponsored with minority organizations as a white woman its not my voice that needs to be
listened to
Budget review
Conversation led by experts on racism, bias and how we can address in policing and our
communities. I see this as a meeting sponsored and attended by the GVPD that also includes
residents.
Dafuq. City commission maybe. GVPD nope. The timing on this entire survey is off.
Public Safety Open House, Night to Unite
It depends on my time. I would do all if I didn't have other things I had committed to doing.
Annual neighborhood watch meeting on my block, not a large community center, attended however
briefly by a police officer.
I have done ride-along with Hennepin County Sheriff’s office midnight to 6 am and it was very
enlightening and gave me a whole new respect for our officers who protect us 24/7!
None
Ways to allow the cop and the citizen to their views face to face with out raised voices.
Any type of DV awareness
Community diversity education training
Booths at local festivals (pride, farmers market, etc)
I’d like to see community members talk about _______. Please rank with one
being the most important and six being the least important.
Based on response averages, the highest ranked item is trust, experiences, safety, and concerns of
historically over-policed populations, and the lowest ranked item is enhanced and innovative hiring
practices (scholarships/loan forgiveness, etc).
Item 1 2 3 4 5 6 Weighted Avg
community support of police 51 15 11 7 18 34 3.21
trust, experiences, safety, and
concerns of historically over-
policed populations
41 19 17 21 22 16 3.09
mandated police training 20 25 27 28 18 18 3.39
strategies to connect residents with
the GVPD
14 41 20 27 20 14 3.29
the diversity of GVPD officers and
staff
4 22 28 27 30 25 3.97
enhanced and innovative hiring
practices (scholarships/loan
forgiveness, etc)
6 14 33 26 28 29 4.05
Police Commission Task Force Survey Community Input Report Page 10
I’d like to see ________ in an effort to improve police-community relations in
Golden Valley. (check all that apply)
Of the 136 responses to this question, 87 (64 percent) answered GVPD- or City-hosted community
conversations about different topics/events, 82 (60 percent) answered recognition of officers and
members of the public for contributions, and 74 (54 percent) answered prioritization of inclusion and
trust-building.
Other Answers
I support efforts to build understanding and respect for law enforcement and for residents as well as
for those visiting. Laws should be fair and enforced fairly.ose visiting
Hi
Community education for citizens to understand the police procedures
No answer
Police that live in Golden Valley
More direct communication with residents via email
Defunding of police
Community listening sessions hosted by the City Council in clloboration with GVPD
A city council tha is supportive of law enforcement
Prioritization of accountability for past misconduct and mistakes
Any communication building is wonderful, but civilians ‘watching over the shoulder’ is not positive.
None
Lose the unmarked squads. Don’t get to catch citizens. Be visible to help them.
Improved visible support by the Mayor and City Council. It is currently lacking.
Debphasize race as an issue in hiring and police interaction with the public. In a society that is
supposed to be color blind, there should be no willingness to prefer a candidate of color just because
is that candidate’s skin color. We want the most qualified candidates carrying guns.
Use social media. Have an officer “take over” for a day so we can get to know them.
Police Commission Task Force Survey Community Input Report Page 11
I’d be interested in learning more about ________. Please rank with one being the
most important and eight being the least important.
Based on response averages, the highest ranked item is understanding proactive policing, and the
lowest ranked item is the role of police unions.
Item 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Weighted Avg
understanding proactive
policing
42 24 19 12 10 10 10 9 3.29
police department operations 21 29 16 16 14 16 15 9 3.93
police training 22 24 28 15 20 16 6 5 3.62
hiring and efforts to recruit
diverse officers
10 13 17 22 20 20 15 19 4.79
the role of police unions 2 7 6 19 16 15 32 39 6
body cameras and data
collected
11 12 20 25 20 20 22 6 4.54
citizen complaints 17 14 15 10 22 21 19 18 4.73
sharing and using data and
improving collection and
analysis systems/procedures
11 13 15 17 14 18 17 31 5.11
I feel Golden Valley police do a good job of protecting me and my family.
Of the 133 respondents, 59 (44 percent) strongly agree the Golden Valley police do a good job of
protecting them and their family, 51 (38 percent) agree, 19 (14 percent) neither agree nor disagree, and
4 (3 percent) disagree.
Police Commission Task Force Survey Community Input Report Page 12
I feel safe and comfortable when I see an officer in Golden Valley.
Of the 133 respondents, 74 (56 percent) strongly agree they feel safe and comfortable when I see an
officer in Golden Valley, 33 (25 percent) agree, 14 (11 percent) neither agree nor disagree, 10 (8
percent) disagree, and 2 (1 percent) strongly disagree.
I feel the Golden Valley police do a good job of maintaining public safety in the
community.
Of the 133 respondents, 74 (56 percent) strongly agree they feel safe and comfortable when I see an
officer in Golden Valley, 33 (25 percent) agree, 14 (11 percent) neither agree nor disagree, 10 (8
percent) disagree, and 2 (1 percent) strongly disagree.
Police Commission Task Force Survey Community Input Report Page 13
Demographics
Age
Of the 133 respondents who answered this question, 46 (35 percent) are aged 41–56, 41 (31 percent)
are 57+ years old, and 40 (30 percent) are between the ages 25–40.
Police Commission Task Force Survey Community Input Report Page 14
Race & Ethnicity
Of the 133 respondents, 103 (77 percent) identify as White, 9 (7 percent) identify as Black, and 3 (2
percent) identify as Latino/a/x. Two (1 percent) answered a race/ethnicity not mentioned (please
specify). See answers below.
Other Answers
Bi-racial. White & Asian
Asian American
Police Commission Task Force Survey Community Input Report Page 15
Housing Status
Of the 133 respondents who answered this question, 114 (86 percent) own a single-family home, 9 (7
percent) rent in multi-family or attached home (duplex, apartment, townhome, etc), and 4 (3 percent)
own a multi-family or attached home (condo or townhome).
Police Commission Task Force Survey Community Input Report Page 16
Gender Identity
Of the 133 respondents who answered this question, 68 (51 percent) identify as female, 54 (41 percent)
identify as male, 3 (2 percent) identify as non-binary, and 8 (6 percent) prefer not to say.
Police Commission Task Force Survey Community Input Report Page 17
Connection To Golden Valley (check all that apply)
Of the 133 responses to this question, 92 (69 percent) answered long-term resident (7+ years), 31 (23
percent) answered short-term resident (less than 7 years), and 26 (20 percent) answered volunteer for
an organization in Golden Valley.
Other Answers
Follow Council and news articles
Meadowbrook Elementary Family
Have done some of all the above thru the years
worked and child attended school in golden valley
Travel through Golden Valley to get to work
GV resident for 48 years; all interactions with GVPD have been positive, helpful and constructive.
Rising TIDES Task Force
APPENDIX A
Social Media Reach And Engagement
Page 18
SOCIAL MEDIA REACH AND
ENGAGEMENT
Title
Reach = Number of people who saw the post
Engagement = Number of people who interacted with the post
March 22, 2021
PLATFORM REACH ENGAGEMENT LIKES SHARES/RETWEETS COMMENTS
Facebook 653 32 4 2 0
Twitter 1277 29 1 3 0
March 26, 2021
PLATFORM REACH ENGAGEMENT LIKES SHARES/RETWEETS COMMENTS
Facebook 398 3 1 0 0
Twitter 144 1 0 0 0
Comments
NAME COMMENT
Bob LinDell Yes. Let’s get going.
March 31, 2021
PLATFORM REACH ENGAGEMENT LIKES SHARES/RETWEETS COMMENTS
Facebook 393 10 0 0 0
Twitter 296 4 0 0 0
April 2, 2021
PLATFORM REACH ENGAGEMENT LIKES SHARES/RETWEETS COMMENTS
Facebook 335 4 0 0 0
Twitter 373 3 0 0 0
APPENDIX B
Questions 8–10 Breakdown By
Demographic
Page 20
Question 8
Demographics Of Respondents Who
Answered Strongly Agree Or Agree
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
1 / 6
53.64%59
46.36%51
0.00%0
0.00%0
0.00%0
Q8 I feel Golden Valley police do a good job of protecting me and my
family.
Answered: 110 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 110
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree
nor disagree
Disagree
Str ongl y
dis agr ee
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
St rongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor dis agree
Dis agree
St rongly dis agree
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
2 / 6
0.00%0
2.73%3
28.18%31
31.82%35
35.45%39
1.82%2
Q11 Age
Answered: 110 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 110
Under 1 8
18–24
25 –40
41 –5 6
5 7+
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Under 18
18–24
25–40
41–56
57+
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
3 / 6
0.00%0
0.00%0
5.45%6
1.82%2
0.00%0
76.36%84
14.55%16
1.82%2
Q12 Race & Ethnicity
Answered: 110 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 110
Amer ican
Indian or...
Asian
Bl ack or
African...
Latino/a/x
Native
Haw aiian or...
White
Prefer not to
say
A
r ace/ethnici...
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
American Indian or Alas k a Native
Asian
Blac k or African Americ an
Latino/a/x
Nativ e Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander
Whit e
Prefer not to s ay
A rac e/ethnicity not mentioned. (please spec ify )
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
4 / 6
6.36%7
3.64%4
0.91%1
85.45%94
0.91%1
0.91%1
0.00%0
1.82%2
Q13 Housing Status
Answered: 110 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 110
Rent in
multi-famil y...
Ow n in
multi-famil y...
Rent in single
famil y home
Own a single
family home
Live with
famil y or...
Group or
Transitional ...
Unshel tered
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Rent in mult i-family or attached home (duplex, apartment, townhome, etc)
Own in multi-family or attac hed home (condo or townhome)
Rent in single family home
Own a single f amily home
Liv e with family or friends
Group or Trans itional hous ing
Unsheltered
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
5 / 6
48.18%53
43.64%48
0.91%1
7.27%8
Q14 Gender Identity
Answered: 110 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 110
Female (w oman)
Male (man)
Non-binary
(t r ans)
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Female (woman)
Male (man)
Non-binary (trans)
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
6 / 6
21.82%24
70.91%78
17.27%19
2.73%3
22.73%25
19.09%21
17.27%19
5.45%6
Q15 Connection To Golden Valley (check all that apply)
Answered: 110 Sk ipped: 0
Total Respondents : 110
Shor t-t er m
r esident (l e...
Long-term
resident (7+...
Work in Golden
Vall ey
Visitor of
Gol den V all ey
V olunteer for
an or ganizat...
Worship in
Gol den V all ey
Attend/famil y
attends scho...
Other (please
specify)
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Short-term res ident (less than 7 years)
Long-term resident (7+ years)
Work in Golden Valley
Vis it or of Golden Valley
Volunteer for an organization in Golden Valley
Wors hip in Golden Valley
At tend/family attends school in Golden Valley
Other (please s pecify)
Question 8
Demographics Of Respondents Who
Answered Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
1 / 6
0.00%0
0.00%0
100.00%19
0.00%0
0.00%0
Q8 I feel Golden Valley police do a good job of protecting me and my
family.
Answered: 19 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 19
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree
nor disagree
Disagree
Str ongl y
dis agr ee
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
St rongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor dis agree
Dis agree
St rongly dis agree
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
2 / 6
0.00%0
5.26%1
42.11%8
42.11%8
10.53%2
0.00%0
Q11 Age
Answered: 19 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 19
Under 1 8
18–24
25 –40
41 –5 6
5 7+
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Under 18
18–24
25–40
41–56
57+
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
3 / 6
0.00%0
0.00%0
10.53%2
5.26%1
0.00%0
84.21%16
0.00%0
0.00%0
Q12 Race & Ethnicity
Answered: 19 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 19
Amer ican
Indian or...
Asian
Bl ack or
African...
Latino/a/x
Native
Haw aiian or...
White
Prefer not to
say
A
r ace/ethnici...
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
American Indian or Alas k a Native
Asian
Blac k or African Americ an
Latino/a/x
Nativ e Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander
Whit e
Prefer not to s ay
A rac e/ethnicity not mentioned. (please spec ify )
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
4 / 6
10.53%2
0.00%0
5.26%1
84.21%16
0.00%0
0.00%0
0.00%0
0.00%0
Q13 Housing Status
Answered: 19 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 19
Rent in
multi-famil y...
Ow n in
multi-famil y...
Rent in single
famil y home
Own a single
family home
Live with
famil y or...
Group or
Transitional ...
Unshel tered
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Rent in mult i-family or attached home (duplex, apartment, townhome, etc)
Own in multi-family or attac hed home (condo or townhome)
Rent in single family home
Own a single f amily home
Liv e with family or friends
Group or Trans itional hous ing
Unsheltered
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
5 / 6
63.16%12
26.32%5
10.53%2
0.00%0
Q14 Gender Identity
Answered: 19 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 19
Female (w oman)
Male (man)
Non-binary
(t r ans)
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Female (woman)
Male (man)
Non-binary (trans)
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
6 / 6
36.84%7
57.89%11
10.53%2
10.53%2
0.00%0
0.00%0
21.05%4
5.26%1
Q15 Connection To Golden Valley (check all that apply)
Answered: 19 Sk ipped: 0
Total Respondents : 19
Shor t-t er m
r esident (l e...
Long-term
resident (7+...
Work in Golden
Vall ey
Visitor of
Gol den V all ey
V olunteer for
an or ganizat...
Worship in
Gol den V all ey
Attend/famil y
attends scho...
Other (please
specify)
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Short-term res ident (less than 7 years)
Long-term resident (7+ years)
Work in Golden Valley
Vis it or of Golden Valley
Volunteer for an organization in Golden Valley
Wors hip in Golden Valley
At tend/family attends school in Golden Valley
Other (please s pecify)
Question 8
Demographics Of Respondents Who
Answered Disagree Or Strongly Disagree
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
1 / 6
0.00%0
0.00%0
0.00%0
100.00%4
0.00%0
Q8 I feel Golden Valley police do a good job of protecting me and my
family.
Answered: 4 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 4
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree
nor disagree
Disagree
Str ongl y
dis agr ee
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
St rongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor dis agree
Dis agree
St rongly dis agree
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
2 / 6
0.00%0
0.00%0
25.00%1
75.00%3
0.00%0
0.00%0
Q11 Age
Answered: 4 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 4
Under 1 8
18–24
25 –40
41 –5 6
5 7+
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Under 18
18–24
25–40
41–56
57+
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
3 / 6
0.00%0
0.00%0
25.00%1
0.00%0
0.00%0
75.00%3
0.00%0
0.00%0
Q12 Race & Ethnicity
Answered: 4 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 4
Amer ican
Indian or...
Asian
Bl ack or
African...
Latino/a/x
Native
Haw aiian or...
White
Prefer not to
say
A
r ace/ethnici...
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
American Indian or Alas k a Native
Asian
Blac k or African Americ an
Latino/a/x
Nativ e Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander
Whit e
Prefer not to s ay
A rac e/ethnicity not mentioned. (please spec ify )
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
4 / 6
0.00%0
0.00%0
0.00%0
100.00%4
0.00%0
0.00%0
0.00%0
0.00%0
Q13 Housing Status
Answered: 4 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 4
Rent in
multi-famil y...
Ow n in
multi-famil y...
Rent in single
famil y home
Own a single
family home
Live with
famil y or...
Group or
Transitional ...
Unshel tered
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Rent in mult i-family or attached home (duplex, apartment, townhome, etc)
Own in multi-family or attac hed home (condo or townhome)
Rent in single family home
Own a single f amily home
Liv e with family or friends
Group or Trans itional hous ing
Unsheltered
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
5 / 6
75.00%3
25.00%1
0.00%0
0.00%0
Q14 Gender Identity
Answered: 4 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 4
Female (w oman)
Male (man)
Non-binary
(t r ans)
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Female (woman)
Male (man)
Non-binary (trans)
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
6 / 6
0.00%0
75.00%3
75.00%3
25.00%1
25.00%1
25.00%1
0.00%0
0.00%0
Q15 Connection To Golden Valley (check all that apply)
Answered: 4 Sk ipped: 0
Total Respondents : 4
Shor t-t er m
r esident (l e...
Long-term
resident (7+...
Work in Golden
Vall ey
Visitor of
Gol den V all ey
V olunteer for
an or ganizat...
Worship in
Gol den V all ey
Attend/famil y
attends scho...
Other (please
specify)
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Short-term res ident (less than 7 years)
Long-term resident (7+ years)
Work in Golden Valley
Vis it or of Golden Valley
Volunteer for an organization in Golden Valley
Wors hip in Golden Valley
At tend/family attends school in Golden Valley
Other (please s pecify)
Question 9
Demographics Of Respondents Who
Answered Strongly Agree Or Agree
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
1 / 6
69.16%74
30.84%33
0.00%0
0.00%0
0.00%0
Q9 I feel safe and comfortable when I see an officer in Golden Valley.
Answered: 107 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 107
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree
nor disagree
Disagree
Str ongl y
dis agr ee
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
St rongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor dis agree
Dis agree
St rongly dis agree
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
2 / 6
0.00%0
3.74%4
26.17%28
30.84%33
37.38%40
1.87%2
Q11 Age
Answered: 107 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 107
Under 1 8
18–24
25 –40
41 –5 6
5 7+
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Under 18
18–24
25–40
41–56
57+
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
3 / 6
0.00%0
0.00%0
5.61%6
1.87%2
0.00%0
76.64%82
14.02%15
1.87%2
Q12 Race & Ethnicity
Answered: 107 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 107
Amer ican
Indian or...
Asian
Bl ack or
African...
Latino/a/x
Native
Haw aiian or...
White
Prefer not to
say
A
r ace/ethnici...
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
American Indian or Alas k a Native
Asian
Blac k or African Americ an
Latino/a/x
Nativ e Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander
Whit e
Prefer not to s ay
A rac e/ethnicity not mentioned. (please spec ify )
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
4 / 6
6.54%7
3.74%4
0.00%0
86.92%93
0.93%1
0.00%0
0.00%0
1.87%2
Q13 Housing Status
Answered: 107 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 107
Rent in
multi-famil y...
Ow n in
multi-famil y...
Rent in single
famil y home
Own a single
family home
Live with
famil y or...
Group or
Transitional ...
Unshel tered
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Rent in mult i-family or attached home (duplex, apartment, townhome, etc)
Own in multi-family or attac hed home (condo or townhome)
Rent in single family home
Own a single f amily home
Liv e with family or friends
Group or Trans itional hous ing
Unsheltered
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
5 / 6
48.60%52
42.99%46
0.93%1
7.48%8
Q14 Gender Identity
Answered: 107 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 107
Female (w oman)
Male (man)
Non-binary
(t r ans)
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Female (woman)
Male (man)
Non-binary (trans)
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
6 / 6
21.50%23
71.03%76
15.89%17
2.80%3
20.56%22
16.82%18
17.76%19
5.61%6
Q15 Connection To Golden Valley (check all that apply)
Answered: 107 Sk ipped: 0
Total Respondents : 107
Shor t-t er m
r esident (l e...
Long-term
resident (7+...
Work in Golden
Vall ey
Visitor of
Gol den V all ey
V olunteer for
an or ganizat...
Worship in
Gol den V all ey
Attend/famil y
attends scho...
Other (please
specify)
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Short-term res ident (less than 7 years)
Long-term resident (7+ years)
Work in Golden Valley
Vis it or of Golden Valley
Volunteer for an organization in Golden Valley
Wors hip in Golden Valley
At tend/family attends school in Golden Valley
Other (please s pecify)
Question 9
Demographics Of Respondents Who
Answered Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
1 / 6
0.00%0
0.00%0
100.00%14
0.00%0
0.00%0
Q9 I feel safe and comfortable when I see an officer in Golden Valley.
Answered: 14 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 14
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree
nor disagree
Disagree
Str ongl y
dis agr ee
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
St rongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor dis agree
Dis agree
St rongly dis agree
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
2 / 6
0.00%0
0.00%0
50.00%7
42.86%6
7.14%1
0.00%0
Q11 Age
Answered: 14 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 14
Under 1 8
18–24
25 –40
41 –5 6
5 7+
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Under 18
18–24
25–40
41–56
57+
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
3 / 6
0.00%0
0.00%0
0.00%0
0.00%0
0.00%0
100.00%14
0.00%0
0.00%0
Q12 Race & Ethnicity
Answered: 14 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 14
Amer ican
Indian or...
Asian
Bl ack or
African...
Latino/a/x
Native
Haw aiian or...
White
Prefer not to
say
A
r ace/ethnici...
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
American Indian or Alas k a Native
Asian
Blac k or African Americ an
Latino/a/x
Nativ e Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander
Whit e
Prefer not to s ay
A rac e/ethnicity not mentioned. (please spec ify )
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
4 / 6
0.00%0
0.00%0
14.29%2
78.57%11
0.00%0
7.14%1
0.00%0
0.00%0
Q13 Housing Status
Answered: 14 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 14
Rent in
multi-famil y...
Ow n in
multi-famil y...
Rent in single
famil y home
Own a single
family home
Live with
famil y or...
Group or
Transitional ...
Unshel tered
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Rent in mult i-family or attached home (duplex, apartment, townhome, etc)
Own in multi-family or attac hed home (condo or townhome)
Rent in single family home
Own a single f amily home
Liv e with family or friends
Group or Trans itional hous ing
Unsheltered
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
5 / 6
57.14%8
42.86%6
0.00%0
0.00%0
Q14 Gender Identity
Answered: 14 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 14
Female (w oman)
Male (man)
Non-binary
(t r ans)
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Female (woman)
Male (man)
Non-binary (trans)
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
6 / 6
42.86%6
57.14%8
21.43%3
0.00%0
14.29%2
14.29%2
14.29%2
0.00%0
Q15 Connection To Golden Valley (check all that apply)
Answered: 14 Sk ipped: 0
Total Respondents : 14
Shor t-t er m
r esident (l e...
Long-term
resident (7+...
Work in Golden
Vall ey
Visitor of
Gol den V all ey
V olunteer for
an or ganizat...
Worship in
Gol den V all ey
Attend/famil y
attends scho...
Other (please
specify)
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Short-term res ident (less than 7 years)
Long-term resident (7+ years)
Work in Golden Valley
Vis it or of Golden Valley
Volunteer for an organization in Golden Valley
Wors hip in Golden Valley
At tend/family attends school in Golden Valley
Other (please s pecify)
Question 9
Demographics Of Respondents Who
Answered Disagree Or Strongly Disagree
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
1 / 6
0.00%0
0.00%0
0.00%0
83.33%10
16.67%2
Q9 I feel safe and comfortable when I see an officer in Golden Valley.
Answered: 12 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 12
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree
nor disagree
Disagree
Str ongl y
dis agr ee
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
St rongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor dis agree
Dis agree
St rongly dis agree
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
2 / 6
0.00%0
0.00%0
41.67%5
58.33%7
0.00%0
0.00%0
Q11 Age
Answered: 12 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 12
Under 1 8
18–24
25 –40
41 –5 6
5 7+
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Under 18
18–24
25–40
41–56
57+
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
3 / 6
0.00%0
0.00%0
25.00%3
8.33%1
0.00%0
58.33%7
8.33%1
0.00%0
Q12 Race & Ethnicity
Answered: 12 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 12
Amer ican
Indian or...
Asian
Bl ack or
African...
Latino/a/x
Native
Haw aiian or...
White
Prefer not to
say
A
r ace/ethnici...
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
American Indian or Alas k a Native
Asian
Blac k or African Americ an
Latino/a/x
Nativ e Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander
Whit e
Prefer not to s ay
A rac e/ethnicity not mentioned. (please spec ify )
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
4 / 6
16.67%2
0.00%0
0.00%0
83.33%10
0.00%0
0.00%0
0.00%0
0.00%0
Q13 Housing Status
Answered: 12 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 12
Rent in
multi-famil y...
Ow n in
multi-famil y...
Rent in single
famil y home
Own a single
family home
Live with
famil y or...
Group or
Transitional ...
Unshel tered
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Rent in mult i-family or attached home (duplex, apartment, townhome, etc)
Own in multi-family or attac hed home (condo or townhome)
Rent in single family home
Own a single f amily home
Liv e with family or friends
Group or Trans itional hous ing
Unsheltered
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
5 / 6
66.67%8
16.67%2
16.67%2
0.00%0
Q14 Gender Identity
Answered: 12 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 12
Female (w oman)
Male (man)
Non-binary
(t r ans)
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Female (woman)
Male (man)
Non-binary (trans)
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
6 / 6
16.67%2
66.67%8
33.33%4
25.00%3
16.67%2
16.67%2
16.67%2
8.33%1
Q15 Connection To Golden Valley (check all that apply)
Answered: 12 Sk ipped: 0
Total Respondents : 12
Shor t-t er m
r esident (l e...
Long-term
resident (7+...
Work in Golden
Vall ey
Visitor of
Gol den V all ey
V olunteer for
an or ganizat...
Worship in
Gol den V all ey
Attend/famil y
attends scho...
Other (please
specify)
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Short-term res ident (less than 7 years)
Long-term resident (7+ years)
Work in Golden Valley
Vis it or of Golden Valley
Volunteer for an organization in Golden Valley
Wors hip in Golden Valley
At tend/family attends school in Golden Valley
Other (please s pecify)
Question 10
Demographics Of Respondents Who
Answered Strongly Agree Or Agree
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
1 / 6
54.72%58
45.28%48
0.00%0
0.00%0
0.00%0
Q10 I feel the Golden Valley police do a good job of maintaining public
safety in the community.
Answered: 106 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 106
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree
nor disagree
Disagree
Str ongl y
dis agr ee
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
St rongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor dis agree
Dis agree
St rongly dis agree
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
2 / 6
0.00%0
2.83%3
28.30%30
32.08%34
34.91%37
1.89%2
Q11 Age
Answered: 106 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 106
Under 1 8
18–24
25 –40
41 –5 6
5 7+
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Under 18
18–24
25–40
41–56
57+
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
3 / 6
0.00%0
0.00%0
5.66%6
2.83%3
0.00%0
74.53%79
15.09%16
1.89%2
Q12 Race & Ethnicity
Answered: 106 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 106
Amer ican
Indian or...
Asian
Bl ack or
African...
Latino/a/x
Native
Haw aiian or...
White
Prefer not to
say
A
r ace/ethnici...
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
American Indian or Alas k a Native
Asian
Blac k or African Americ an
Latino/a/x
Nativ e Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander
Whit e
Prefer not to s ay
A rac e/ethnicity not mentioned. (please spec ify )
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
4 / 6
7.55%8
3.77%4
0.94%1
83.96%89
0.94%1
0.94%1
0.00%0
1.89%2
Q13 Housing Status
Answered: 106 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 106
Rent in
multi-famil y...
Ow n in
multi-famil y...
Rent in single
famil y home
Own a single
family home
Live with
famil y or...
Group or
Transitional ...
Unshel tered
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Rent in mult i-family or attached home (duplex, apartment, townhome, etc)
Own in multi-family or attac hed home (condo or townhome)
Rent in single family home
Own a single f amily home
Liv e with family or friends
Group or Trans itional hous ing
Unsheltered
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
5 / 6
45.28%48
45.28%48
1.89%2
7.55%8
Q14 Gender Identity
Answered: 106 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 106
Female (w oman)
Male (man)
Non-binary
(t r ans)
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Female (woman)
Male (man)
Non-binary (trans)
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
6 / 6
21.70%23
71.70%76
16.98%18
2.83%3
23.58%25
17.92%19
18.87%20
5.66%6
Q15 Connection To Golden Valley (check all that apply)
Answered: 106 Sk ipped: 0
Total Respondents : 106
Shor t-t er m
r esident (l e...
Long-term
resident (7+...
Work in Golden
Vall ey
Visitor of
Gol den V all ey
V olunteer for
an or ganizat...
Worship in
Gol den V all ey
Attend/famil y
attends scho...
Other (please
specify)
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Short-term res ident (less than 7 years)
Long-term resident (7+ years)
Work in Golden Valley
Vis it or of Golden Valley
Volunteer for an organization in Golden Valley
Wors hip in Golden Valley
At tend/family attends school in Golden Valley
Other (please s pecify)
Question 10
Demographics Of Respondents Who
Answered Neither Agree Nor Disagree
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
1 / 6
0.00%0
0.00%0
100.00%20
0.00%0
0.00%0
Q10 I feel the Golden Valley police do a good job of maintaining public
safety in the community.
Answered: 20 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 20
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree
nor disagree
Disagree
Str ongl y
dis agr ee
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
St rongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor dis agree
Dis agree
St rongly dis agree
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
2 / 6
0.00%0
0.00%0
35.00%7
45.00%9
20.00%4
0.00%0
Q11 Age
Answered: 20 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 20
Under 1 8
18–24
25 –40
41 –5 6
5 7+
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Under 18
18–24
25–40
41–56
57+
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
3 / 6
0.00%0
0.00%0
5.00%1
0.00%0
0.00%0
95.00%19
0.00%0
0.00%0
Q12 Race & Ethnicity
Answered: 20 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 20
Amer ican
Indian or...
Asian
Bl ack or
African...
Latino/a/x
Native
Haw aiian or...
White
Prefer not to
say
A
r ace/ethnici...
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
American Indian or Alas k a Native
Asian
Blac k or African Americ an
Latino/a/x
Nativ e Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander
Whit e
Prefer not to s ay
A rac e/ethnicity not mentioned. (please spec ify )
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
4 / 6
0.00%0
0.00%0
5.00%1
95.00%19
0.00%0
0.00%0
0.00%0
0.00%0
Q13 Housing Status
Answered: 20 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 20
Rent in
multi-famil y...
Ow n in
multi-famil y...
Rent in single
famil y home
Own a single
family home
Live with
famil y or...
Group or
Transitional ...
Unshel tered
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Rent in mult i-family or attached home (duplex, apartment, townhome, etc)
Own in multi-family or attac hed home (condo or townhome)
Rent in single family home
Own a single f amily home
Liv e with family or friends
Group or Trans itional hous ing
Unsheltered
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
5 / 6
70.00%14
25.00%5
5.00%1
0.00%0
Q14 Gender Identity
Answered: 20 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 20
Female (w oman)
Male (man)
Non-binary
(t r ans)
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Female (woman)
Male (man)
Non-binary (trans)
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
6 / 6
30.00%6
65.00%13
15.00%3
0.00%0
0.00%0
10.00%2
10.00%2
0.00%0
Q15 Connection To Golden Valley (check all that apply)
Answered: 20 Sk ipped: 0
Total Respondents : 20
Shor t-t er m
r esident (l e...
Long-term
resident (7+...
Work in Golden
Vall ey
Visitor of
Gol den V all ey
V olunteer for
an or ganizat...
Worship in
Gol den V all ey
Attend/famil y
attends scho...
Other (please
specify)
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Short-term res ident (less than 7 years)
Long-term resident (7+ years)
Work in Golden Valley
Vis it or of Golden Valley
Volunteer for an organization in Golden Valley
Wors hip in Golden Valley
At tend/family attends school in Golden Valley
Other (please s pecify)
Question 10
Demographics Of Respondents Who
Answered Disagree Or Strongly Disagree
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
1 / 6
0.00%0
0.00%0
0.00%0
85.71%6
14.29%1
Q10 I feel the Golden Valley police do a good job of maintaining public
safety in the community.
Answered: 7 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 7
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree
nor disagree
Disagree
Str ongl y
dis agr ee
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
St rongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor dis agree
Dis agree
St rongly dis agree
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
2 / 6
0.00%0
14.29%1
42.86%3
42.86%3
0.00%0
0.00%0
Q11 Age
Answered: 7 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 7
Under 1 8
18–24
25 –40
41 –5 6
5 7+
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Under 18
18–24
25–40
41–56
57+
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
3 / 6
0.00%0
0.00%0
28.57%2
0.00%0
0.00%0
71.43%5
0.00%0
0.00%0
Q12 Race & Ethnicity
Answered: 7 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 7
Amer ican
Indian or...
Asian
Bl ack or
African...
Latino/a/x
Native
Haw aiian or...
White
Prefer not to
say
A
r ace/ethnici...
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
American Indian or Alas k a Native
Asian
Blac k or African Americ an
Latino/a/x
Nativ e Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander
Whit e
Prefer not to s ay
A rac e/ethnicity not mentioned. (please spec ify )
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
4 / 6
14.29%1
0.00%0
0.00%0
85.71%6
0.00%0
0.00%0
0.00%0
0.00%0
Q13 Housing Status
Answered: 7 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 7
Rent in
multi-famil y...
Ow n in
multi-famil y...
Rent in single
famil y home
Own a single
family home
Live with
famil y or...
Group or
Transitional ...
Unshel tered
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Rent in mult i-family or attached home (duplex, apartment, townhome, etc)
Own in multi-family or attac hed home (condo or townhome)
Rent in single family home
Own a single f amily home
Liv e with family or friends
Group or Trans itional hous ing
Unsheltered
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
5 / 6
85.71%6
14.29%1
0.00%0
0.00%0
Q14 Gender Identity
Answered: 7 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 7
Female (w oman)
Male (man)
Non-binary
(t r ans)
Prefer not to
say
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Female (woman)
Male (man)
Non-binary (trans)
Prefer not to s ay
Polic e Commission Task Forc e Community Engagement Survey
6 / 6
28.57%2
42.86%3
42.86%3
42.86%3
14.29%1
14.29%1
14.29%1
14.29%1
Q15 Connection To Golden Valley (check all that apply)
Answered: 7 Sk ipped: 0
Total Respondents : 7
Shor t-t er m
r esident (l e...
Long-term
resident (7+...
Work in Golden
Vall ey
Visitor of
Gol den V all ey
V olunteer for
an or ganizat...
Worship in
Gol den V all ey
Attend/famil y
attends scho...
Other (please
specify)
0%10%20%30%40%5 0%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Short-term res ident (less than 7 years)
Long-term resident (7+ years)
Work in Golden Valley
Vis it or of Golden Valley
Volunteer for an organization in Golden Valley
Wors hip in Golden Valley
At tend/family attends school in Golden Valley
Other (please s pecify)
APPENDIX C
Police Commission Task Force
Community Engagement
COMMUNITY INPUT REPORT
Police Commission Task Force Community Engagement Community Input Report Page 1
Contents
Overview…. ……………………………………………….………………2
Commission Membership…..……………………………………………3
Community Engagement Opportunities.………………..…………..…7
Access to Police Data…………………………….………….….……....8
Publication Frequency of Police Data..…………………………….….9
Types of Police Data……………………………..…………….………10
Commission Term Limits.....…………………………..………………11
Commission Record-Sharing……………………..……………..……12
Commission Bylaws………………………………..……………..…..13
Further Police Task Force Considerations…………………………15
Police Commission Task Force Community Engagement Community Input Report Page 2
Overview
Soliciting public input was a major component of the Police Commission Task Force’s consideration of
a new police commission.
Community Engagement Sessions
Staff solicited input from the community through interactive polls during two community engagement
sessions May 5, noon and 6:30 pm, regarding the following areas:
• Commission membership
• Golden Valley Police community engagement
• Police data
• Commission bylaws
To promote the two sessions, the City published multiple online news stories and social media posts on
Facebook, Twitter, and Nextdoor.
Police Commission Task Force Community Engagement Community Input Report Page 3
Membership
The Commission will have 11 members. How many members of the following
groups should be represented? Use numerals 0–11 when filling in each box.
Historically Harmed Populations
Noon Session 6:30 pm Session
4 5
4 3
2 1
2 3
7 2
3 6
At least 6 of the 11, keeping over 50% 6
2 3
7–8 3
2 3
4 Yes
4 3
3
Attorneys
Noon Session 6:30 pm Session
1 1
2 0
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
At least 2 0
0 1
1 1
1 1
1 0
1 Yes
2
1
Police Commission Task Force Community Engagement Community Input Report Page 4
Youth
Noon Session 6:30 pm Session
2 2
2 1
2 1
2 1
1 1
1 2
At least 3, keeping around 30% 2
1 1
1–3 1
1 2
1–2 Yes
2 3
Social Service Providers/Lived Experience (homelessness, chemical misuse, mental health)
Noon Session 6:30 pm Session
2 1
2 3
2 1
2 1
1 2
2 6
Ideally 6 or more, min 3 1
2 2
1–2 2
2 2
1–2 Yes
2 3
2
Renter/Association with multi-family/group housing
Noon Session 6:30 pm Session
1 1
2 1
1 1
1–2 1
1 1
1 4
2 1
2 1
1 2
2 Yes
1 3
2 1
Police Commission Task Force Community Engagement Community Input Report Page 5
Sworn Police Officers of the Golden Valley Police Department
Noon Session 6:30 pm Session
2 1
1 1
1 2
2 0
1 2
1 2
At least 3 1
1 Yes
1 2
1 1
1
1
Human Resources Professional
Noon Session 6:30 pm Session
1 1
1 1
0 1
1 0
1 1
1 1
Min of 1 1
2 1
1 Yes
1 2
0 1
Parents, Teachers, Administrators of a school that serves Golden Valley residents
Noon Session 6:30 pm Session
2 2
1 1
1 1
1–2 2
1 2
2 2
3 1
1 Yes
1 3
2 1
1
2
Police Commission Task Force Community Engagement Community Input Report Page 6
Are there any groups that should be represented on the Commission that were
missed?
This question was open-ended and gathered no statistical data.
Open-Ended Answers (Noon Session)
Those in residences like Dover Hills or seniors where they often have medical calls to police
Someone representing aging pop/dementia/alz/parkinsons/etc...
Experience with immigration, immigrant or first generation American
Elder
Business rep
Local business representative?
Elder population/ retirement home workers
Senior citizens or a representative that works in a seniors facility in GV
No one was missed.
Open-Ended Answers (6:30 Session)
No
perhaps in addition to multi-family homes, those who take public transit
Specifically aMental health professional
I think the mix previously identified is great.
It would be useful if we had more information about the powers and duties of the commission. I
apologize if you ran through this in the first 5 minutes of the presentation, which I missed.
at minimum 2 youth
Keep open future options
Regular members of the community
Seniors
Seniors
No
Police Commission Task Force Community Engagement Community Input Report Page 7
Community Engagement
Rank these community engagement opportunities from the most favorable (top)
to least favorite (bottom).
Based on weighted averages, the highest ranked community engagement opportunities for both the
noon and 6:30 pm sessions are Police listening sessions, Multicultural Advisory Council, and Bridge-
building events.
Noon Session
6:30 pm Session
Police Commission Task Force Community Engagement Community Input Report Page 8
Data
In what ways would you like to access Golden Valley Police data? (choose all that
apply)
Of the 11 responses at the noon session, 8 (32 percent) answered Weekly GVPD Window updates
(current practice), 7 (28 percent) answered Reports to city council, and 7 (28 percent) answered
Interactive database (build your own reports).
Of the 13 responses at the noon session, 9 (43 percent) answered Interactive database (build your own
reports) and 5 (24 percent) answered Weekly GVPD Window updates (current practice).
Noon Session
6:30 pm Session
Police Commission Task Force Community Engagement Community Input Report Page 9
How often should the Golden Valley Police Department publish data?
Of the 11 respondents who answered this question at the noon session, 7 (64 percent) believe the
Golden Valley Police Department should publish data monthly and 4 (36 percent) believe it should be
published weekly.
Of the 12 respondents who answered this question at the 6:30 pm, 8 (67 percent) believe the Golden
Valley Police Department should publish data monthly and 4 (33 percent) believe it should be published
weekly.
Noon Session
6:30 pm Session
Police Commission Task Force Community Engagement Community Input Report Page 10
What type of data should the Commission use for decision making? (choose all
that apply)
Of the 11 responses at the noon session, 10 (29 percent) answered Interaction data (traffic stops, calls
for service, arrests, results), 9 (26 percent) answered Racially disaggregated data, and 9 (26 percent)
answered Policies and practices.
Of the 14 responses at the noon session, 12 (33 percent) answered Interactive database (build your
own reports), 9 (25 percent) answered Hiring and retention data, and 8 (22 percent) answered Racially
disaggregated data.
Noon Session
6:30 pm Session
Police Commission Task Force Community Engagement Community Input Report Page 11
Yes/No Questions
Should the Commission have term limits?
Of the 12 respondents who answered this question at the noon session, 12 (100 percent) believe the
Commission should have term limits.
Of the 13 respondents who answered this question at the 6:30 pm session, 13 (100 percent) believe
the Commission should have term limits.
Noon Session
6:30 pm Session
Police Commission Task Force Community Engagement Community Input Report Page 12
Should the Commission share records beyond meeting agendas and minutes
(data from reports/case studies, City organizational chart, recruitment data, job
descriptions).
Of the 9 respondents who answered this question at the noon session, 9 (100 percent) believe the
commission should share records beyond meeting agendas and minutes.
Of the 13 respondents who answered this question at the noon session, 11 (85 percent) believe the
commission should share records beyond meeting agendas and minutes and 2 (15 percent) believe the
commission should not.
Noon Session
6:30 pm Session
Police Commission Task Force Community Engagement Community Input Report Page 13
Should the Commission bylaws express the social climate of its creation?
Of the 10 respondents who answered this question at the noon session, 6 (60 percent) believe the
Commission bylaws should express the social climate of its creation and 4 (40 percent) do not.
Of the 11 respondents who answered this question at the noon session, 7 (64 percent) believe the
Commission bylaws should express the social climate of its creation and 4 (36 percent) do not.
Noon Session
6:30 pm Session
Police Commission Task Force Community Engagement Community Input Report Page 14
Should the Commission bylaws provide definitions for shared vocabulary?
Of the 11 respondents who answered this question at the noon session, 11 (100 percent) believe the
Commission bylaws should provide definitions for shared vocabulary.
Of the 11 respondents who answered this question at the 6:30 pm session, 11 (100 percent) believe
the Commission bylaws should provide definitions for shared vocabulary.
Noon Session
6:30 pm Session
Police Commission Task Force Community Engagement Community Input Report Page 15
Is there anything you want the Police Commission Task Force to consider before
the Commission starts?
This question was open-ended and provided no statistical data.
Noon Session
THANK YOU ALL!!
The social climate should be part of the mission statement, rather than the text of the
bylaws. I envision the police commission as citizens interacting with the police and also
listening to citizen complaints that are not addressed by the police. I appreciate all the work
you have done on this.
Hire a community specialist
CSC commissioners should have some role with the new commission.
Where does the role of the old commission fit into the new one
Everyone who helped should get a pizza party
Nothing I can think of. I love the name PEACE!
6:30 pm Session
To collectively gain a thick understanding of the current data from the GVPD (i.e. percentages
and numbers of calls responded to, for what underlying purpose, with what degrees of force,
disaggregated by age/race/dis/ability, etc.)
Definitely consider adding mental/addiction health professionals for responding to those 911
calls that don't require a law enforcement response.
Designation of duties between police department and other areas of city services. Ex: traffic
and parking, animal control, social services, wellness checks, etc. Funding requirements and
recommendations associated with these support services.
How will you work with and train with other communities and researchers doing the very
serious work of community care outside of policing?
What accountability can the task force provide GVPD and what are the mechanisms for that
accountability?
Thank you commission members & staff!!!
Thank you
Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting
July 13, 2021
Agenda Item
3. Section 8 Anti-Discrimination Ordinance
Prepared By
Cherie Shoquist, Housing and Economic Development Manager
Summary
An identified City Council priority for 2021 is to enact a Section 8 Anti-Discrimination Ordinance
requiring Golden Valley rental property owners to participate in the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher
Program to increase housing options for low and moderate income earners.
Discriminatory acts are prohibited in Golden Valley under the Federal Fair Housing Act, the Minnesota
Human Rights Act, and the City’s Fair Housing Policy. These laws and policies protect people on the
basis of the following protected classes: race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, marital status,
status with regard to public assistance, creed, familial status, national origin, age, or disability. Status
with regard to public assistance does not include receipt of Section 8 vouchers. The City does not
enforce violations of the Federal Fair Housing Act or the Minnesota Human Rights Act. Those are
enforced by HUD and the Minnesota Department of Human Rights, respectively. The Golden Valley
HRA Fair Housing Policy directs staff to receive complaints about violations of the Federal Fair Housing
Act and Minnesota Human Rights Act and refer them to the appropriate enforcement authority.
Enacting a Section 8 Anti-Discrimination Ordinance in Golden Valley would specifically protect people
under City ordinance from being discriminated against based on receipt of Section 8 program
assistance. If the City were to enact such an ordinance, it would be responsible for enforcing the
ordinance.
Legal Review of Section 8 Housing Ordinances in Minnesota
The cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul recently enacted Section 8 Anti-Discrimination Ordinances. Both
ordinances were challenged in court with the following results and lessons.
1. History of Minneapolis Section 8 Ordinance
After several years of litigation that went to the Minnesota Supreme Court, the Minneapolis ordinance
was upheld. The ordinance prohibited rental property owners from not accepting applications from
renters who use Section 8 government housing assistance. Owners are still be able to screen applicants
as they normally would with credit and background checks. If found to unfairly discriminate against a
voucher holder, however, the property owner could be forced to pay a penalty. The ordinance
Council/Manager Meeting Executive Summary
City of Golden Valley
July 13, 2020
2
survived review because it contains exceptions for landlords who would face an "undue hardship" if they
were required to participate in the Section 8 program. The “undue hardship” exemption is what makes
the Minneapolis Section 8 anti-discrimination protections viable and replicable.
2. History of St. Paul Section 8 Ordinance
St. Paul’s ordinance was similar to the Minneapolis ordinance, but more specific. It was recently struck
down by a Ramsey County District Court. St. Paul’s ordinance prohibited owners from screening
applicants for certain eviction, conviction, credit, and rental history as well as excluding applicants with
income less than two-and-a-half times the rent. It also limited the security deposit amount and the
property owners’ ability to terminate leases or evict tenants due to just cause (non-payment of rent or
material noncompliance with the lease). Property owners claimed that the ordinance operates as a
per se taking because it singles out private landlords “to address a perceived, though vaguely
identified, societal problem” related to housing needs and the Court agreed.
3. Jurisdiction and Enforcement
Both the City of Minneapolis and the City of St. Paul included their Section 8 ordinance as part of a
larger Civil Rights section of City code. These cities have Civil Rights Commissions and dedicated Civil
Rights Department staff that are responsible for handling complaints, investigations, conciliations,
mediations and hearings to enforce their Civil Rights Ordinances. If the City of Golden Valley were to
enact a Section 8 ordinance, it would be responsible for enforcing the ordinance and would need to
consider adding staff or other resources to handle investigation and enforcement.
Options for Next Steps
Given the complicated legal context and resources required to enforce a Section 8 ordinance, staff
recommends the Council consider the following options for next steps:
1. The City could enact its own section 8 ordinance.
This approach could benefit the City by increasing housing options for low and moderate income
earners with Housing Choice Vouchers. It could also have the effect of increasing the number of
property owners in the City who accept Housing Choice Vouchers.
If the City wishes to pursue its own ordinance, staff recommends the ordinance contain an undue
hardship exemption for property owners who need it. Additionally, the City does not currently have
the infrastructure that would be required to enforce this kind of ordinance. In other cities similar
ordinances are enforced by either a Civil Rights review panel (for example, Minneapolis) or a staff
members whose sole role is code compliance. Golden Valley does not currently have either of these
options in place and, therefore, would need to consider adding additional resources to handle
enforcement.
2. The City could consider initiating a longer term project to develop an ordinance, policy, or plan
designed to fit its existing infrastructure.
Under this approach, staff could research how to create an ordinance, policy, or plan that benefits
Section 8 voucher holders but does not require the robust enforcement infrastructure required to
Council/Manager Meeting Executive Summary
City of Golden Valley
July 13, 2020
3
implement an ordinance like the one in Minneapolis. This approach would require staff time to
conduct research and develop community partnerships to identify the best way to achieve the desired
outcomes. Possible outcomes of this approach include: (1) a scaled down ordinance that can be
enforced without robust dedicated enforcement resources; (2) a policy or requirement tied to rental
licensing or other existing regulatory schemes that apply to rental properties in Golden Valley; or (3)
targeted investments in services or organizations that support Section 8 voucher holders. If the Council
wishes to proceed with this approach, staff recommends the City seek to partner with other suburban
communities and nonprofit organizations that serve Section 8 voucher holders, such as Minnesota
Housing Partnership, Homeline, Legal Aid, Metro HRA, LMC, PRISM, and Just Deeds partners.
3. Support Section 8 protections being advanced at the state level.
Rather than enact its own ordinance, the City could support similar initiatives at the state level. For
example, in the last legislative session there was a proposal to amend the Minnesota Human Rights Act
to add a prohibition on rental discrimination based on a tenant’s receipt of public housing assistance.
(HF 835) The City could consider adding support of this proposal to its 2022 legislative priorities.
Financial Or Budget Considerations
Not applicable at this time.
Recommended Action
Provide direction for staff regarding which of the above listed options Council would like to pursue.
Supporting Documents
NA
Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting
July 13, 2021
Agenda Item
4.Safe Tenant and Renter (STAR) Program Discussion
Prepared By
Cherie Shoquist, Housing and Economic Development Manager
Summary
An owner or property manager that owns or manages more than one rental dwelling in the city may
qualify for a discounted license fee by participating in the Safer Tenant and Rental (STAR) program
(or similar program) approved by the City Council. Based on recent changes to the City’s “crime free
housing ordinances,” staff recommends additional changes to the STAR program for multifamily
rental properties.
Background
On November 4, 2020 the City Council amended the City Code relating to the Crime Free and
Disorderly Conduct Sections of Chapter 16, Article III, Rental Housing Licensing or Ordinance No. 694.
On October 7, 2020 at the Council/Manager meeting, Council requested staff proceed with changes to
the City’s “crime free housing ordinances.” These changes included: removing references to the City’s
disorderly conduct ordinance; clarifying that multifamily property owners are eligible for a discounted
license if they participate in the Safer Tenant and Rental (STAR) program; no longer requiring property
owners to attend crime-free training, include a crime-free/drug-free addendum in private rental
agreements, or take action against tenants should they or their guests be recognized for disorderly
conduct; and, the city will no longer be able to take action against landlords based on their tenants’
conduct.
Staff from the Police, Fire (including Rental Property Inspections), and Physical Development
Departments as well as the City Attorney met to review the STAR program between April and July,
2021. The STAR program was also reviewed by property owners and managers at the June 10, 2021
STAR program meeting. General recommendations include that the STAR program will meet
quarterly, information will be shared by City Departments, and a wide variety of education and
training will be provided. A recommendation to consider a change in the name of the STAR program
from “Safe” to “Stable” Tenant and Renter program is supported by staff and STAR program
members.
City Council/Manager Meeting Executive Summary
City of Golden Valley
July 13, 2021
2
The review included a listing of education and training topics including: Fair Housing, Section 8,
Opening the Door: Tenant Screening and Selection, Tenant Protection Ordinance, Rental Housing
Rights and Responsibilities, Licensing and Inspections, Code Compliance, Tenant Safety, Environmental
Sustainability, Energy Efficiency, Recycling and Organics, Housing and Economic Development Project
Updates, Housing Market Reports and Trends, Resources for Maintenance, Health and Safety Repairs,
and Energy Efficiency, as well as other topics.
The review included a listing of the following STAR program purposes and/or goals: enrich the
relationship between the City and property managers and owners, provide continuing education for
property managers, promote professionalism among members, share solutions to common problems,
promote communication between apartment communities, protect the interests of property investors,
bring the highest standard of leadership and integrity to the profession, improve the image of Golden
Valley as a community, enhance the quality of life for residents, add value by preserving and building
rental housing assets in the city, provide a mix of housing options in the city, commit to equitable and
inclusive access to rental housing serving BIPOC and vulnerable individuals, families, youth, and
seniors, provide a range of housing at all incomes from extremely, very and low income to market rate,
and well maintained units, stable renters, and thriving communities.
In addition to the above, staff recommends consideration of revisions to the participation
requirements at each level of fee reduction. With no participation the fee is $35 per rental unit. The
more participation in the STAR program, the lower the fees.
The current participation requirements and fee reductions are:
Level 1: Participate in one meeting; fee reduced to $20
Level 2: Participate in two meetings; fee reduced to $12
Level 3: Participate in three meetings; fee reduced to $8
Level 4: Participate in 5 hours of multi-housing or property management continuing
education (provided through the Minnesota Multi Housing Association); fee
reduced to $0
Recommended participation requirements in addition to meeting participation for the existing levels
and fee reductions for consideration include:
Level 1: Commit to fair housing practices under the City’s Fair Housing Policy
Level 2: Host a National Night Out or similar gathering to engage community
Level 3: Commit to accepting Section 8 (Policy TBD)
Level 4: Participate in 5 hours of multi-housing or property management continuing
education, including 3 hours of fair housing
and/or
Provide or preserve affordable housing under the City’s Mixed Income Housing
Policy
or
Provide NOAH rents at up to 60% AMI for 50% of the rental units in the building
City Council/Manager Meeting Executive Summary
City of Golden Valley
July 13, 2021
3
or
Provide subsidized affordable housing at up to 60% AMI for 100% of the rental
units in the building as a non-profit organization
The next steps are for staff to incorporate the discussion from this meeting and further discuss the
program changes with STAR program property owners and managers at the next quarterly meeting
September 9, 2021, and review with staff including Finance to complete the list of education and
training, commit to purpose and goals, and finalize the STAR program requirements and fees at each
level. If necessary, the City Council would approve changes to the STAR program at the same time as
the fee ordinance in November.
Financial Or Budget Considerations
The rental licensing fee per unit is $35. There are 2,374 multi-family rental units in the city. Without fee
reductions through property owner or manager participation in the STAR Program, the total per unit
rental license fees would be $83,090.
Recommended Action
Discussion:
1. Do the requirements proposed for each STAR level make sense?
2. Do the fees for each STAR level continue to make sense?
3. Are there other goals or objectives for the STAR program?
4. Consider a change to the name of the STAR program from “Safe” to “Stable” Tenant and
Renter program?
Supporting Documents
NA
Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting
July 13, 2021
Agenda Item
5. Remote Meeting Attendance Policy
Prepared By
Kirsten Santelices, Deputy City Manager/Human Resources Director
Summary
Between March 2020-June 2021, to protect individual safety during the COVID-19 pandemic, the City
hosted all Board, Commission, and City Council meetings virtually. Though the City resumed in-person
meetings in July, the City continues to recognize the benefits of offering virtual meeting attendance
options. Offering remote meeting attendance eliminates barriers for individuals who have childcare
needs or travel for employment. The City believes that offering hybrid (in-person and virtual) meetings
will both increase the recruitment pool for appointed individuals and decrease absenteeism of
appointed members.
The proposed policy allows elected and appointed officials, including City Council members, boards,
commissions, and task force members to attend their meetings remotely under the provisions of MN
State Statute.
Financial Or Budget Considerations
Not applicable
Supporting Documents
• Remote Meeting Attendance Policy (2 pages)
Elected and Appointed Officials Remote Meeting Attendance Policy
Remote Meeting Attendance Policy
Purpose
The purpose of this Remote Meeting Attendance Policy (“Policy”) is to establish standards for
remote meeting attendance for City of Golden Valley elected and appointed officials. All remote
attendance must meet the requirements of Minnesota Statutes § 13D.02 and this Policy.
Policy
A. Applicability
This Policy applies to City of Golden Valley elected and appointed officials (collectively,
“Members”), including but not limited to members of the following public bodies:
1. The City Council
2. All commissions of the City of Golden Valley
3. All boards of the City of Golden Valley
4. All task forces of the City of Golden Valley
5. All other public bodies duly created by the Golden Valley City Council
B. Interactive Technology & Remote Attendance Defined
As used in this Policy, the terms Interactive Technology and Remote Attendance have the
following meanings:
• Interactive Technology means technology that allows all Members to hear and see one
another and all discussion and testimony presented at any location at which at least one
member is present.
• Remote attendance means attending a meeting by Interactive Technology from a
location that is not the regular meeting location.
C. Requirements
Elected and appointed officials may attend City Council, Board, or Commission meetings by
interactive technology so long as:
1. All Members of the body participating in the meeting, wherever their physical location,
can hear and see one another and can hear and see all discussion and testimony
presented at any location at which at least one Member is present;
2. Members of the public present at the regular meeting location of the body can hear and
see all discussion and testimony and all votes of members of the body;
3. At least one Member of the body is physically present at the regular meeting location;
4. All votes are conducted by roll call so each Member’s vote on each issue can be
identified and recorded; and
5. Each location at which a Member of the body is present is open and accessible to the
public.
D. Quorum
Each Member participating in a meeting by Interactive Technology is considered present at the
meeting for purposes of determining a quorum and participating in all proceedings.
E. Notice
If a Member attends a meeting by Interactive Technology, the City must provide notice of the
regular meeting location and notice of any site where a Member of the body will be participating
by Interactive Technology.
Elected and Appointed Officials Remote Meeting Attendance Policy
A Member wishing to attend a meeting remotely must request approval from the public body’s
staff liaison at least seven (7) calendar days prior to the meeting. The Staff Liaison will review the
request to ensure conditions of this policy are met. The Member’s request must include the reason
or reasons for the request and the description and street address of the proposed remote meeting
location.
F. Internet Connection
Members remotely attending a meeting must have a stable, consistent source of internet access.
G. Associated Costs
Members attending remotely are responsible for any associated costs and will not be reimbursed
by the City for remote meeting related expenses.
H. Public Monitoring of Remote Meetings
If Interactive Technology is used to conduct a meeting, to the extent practical, the City shall allow
members of the public to monitor the meeting electronically from a remote location.
I. Records
The minutes for all meetings conducted using Interactive Technology must reflect the names of
any Members appearing by Interactive Technology and state the reason or reasons for the
appearance by Interactive Technology.
J. Exceptions under State Law
This Policy shall not preclude members from participating remotely where they meet the
requirements of Minn. Stat. § 12D.02, subd. 1(b)(1)—(2), or 13D.021.
07/20/21 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING (CLOSED SESSION)
5:45 PM Closed Session to discuss threatened litigation
07/20/21 CITY COUNCIL
PRESENTATION
CONSENT LICENSES
CONSENT BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, & TASK FORCES
Accept Resignation from the Planning Commission
CONSENT BIDS, QUOTES, CONTRACTS
Approve Contract for Pavement Preservation
Approval of Golden Valley Fire Relief Association Bylaw Pension Amount
(Resolution)
Approve Purchase of Trash Compactor
(If necessary) Approve Revised MOU - Pilot Program for School and Public Safety
Partnership with Robbinsdale School District
CONSENT GRANTS & DONATIONS
CONSENT MISCELLANEOUS
Receive and File Previous Quarter's Financial Reports
PUBLIC HEARING
OLD BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
First Consideration of Ordinance - Changing Civil Service Commission to PEACE
Commission
1. Approve First Consideration - Repeal Current Ordinance
2. Approve First Consideration - Replacement Language for New Commission
08/04/21 CITY COUNCIL (WEDNESDAY MEETING)
PRESENTATION
CONSENT LICENSES
CONSENT BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, & TASK FORCES
CONSENT BIDS, QUOTES, CONTRACTS
Award Contract for Survey Benchmarks Update
Approve Residential Curbside Recycling and Organics Collection Contract
(Contractor TBD)
CONSENT MISCELLANEOUS
PUBLIC HEARING
MEETING DATE ITEM
MEETING DATE ITEM
Residential Street Light District Spring Valley Road
Overhead to Underground Utility Line Burial Spring Valley Road
OLD BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
PEACE Commission
1. Second Consideration of Ordinance - Repeal Current Ordinance
2. Second Consideration of Ordinance - Replace sections re changing Civil Service
Commission to PEACE Commission with language for officially disbanding Civil
Service Commission effective 9/8/2021
3. Resolution - Approve By-Laws
4. Resolution - Approve Summary Publication of Ordinance
First Reading of Ordinance re Modification to Sec 22-23. - Location of Containers -
Residential Zoning Districts
Second Reading of Ordinance re Modification to Sec 22-23. - Location of Containers
- Residential Zoning Districts
First Reading - Ordinance - Extending moratorium on Pawnshops, Precious Metal
Dealers, and Payday Lenders
08/10/21 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING (TENTATIVE)
5:00 PM Interviews for PEACE & DEI Commissions
08/10/21 HRA WORK SESSION
1 Housing Budget and Levy Discussion
08/10/21 COUNCIL MANAGER MEETING
1 Facilities Study Draft Report
2 2022-2023 Proposed General Fund Budget
3 Council Review of Future Draft Agendas
08/17/21 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING (TENTATIVE)
5:00 PM Interviews for PEACE & DEI Commissions
08/17/21 CITY COUNCIL
PRESENTATION
CONSENT LICENSES
General Business License - New & Used Vehicle Sales Licenses
CONSENT BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, & TASK FORCES
CONSENT BIDS, QUOTES, CONTRACTS
MEETING DATE ITEM
CONSENT GRANTS & DONATIONS
CONSENT MISCELLANEOUS
Resolution - Update overall City Crisis Communications Plan to include pandemic
messaging for future use
Resolution - Update CORR Plan - add pandemic info for future use
Resolution - leave extension for PD employees until 12/19 due to COVID
PUBLIC HEARING
OLD BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
Second Reading - Ordinance - Extending moratorium on Pawnshops, Precious
Metal Dealers, and Payday Lenders
Second Reading of Ordinance re Modification to Sec 22-23. - Location of Containers
- Residential Zoning Districts