Woodbury City Council
This page features direct responses to Woodbury Indivisible's questionnaire from the candidates running for Woodbury City Council. Voters can use these unedited statements to compare candidate positions on key issues. Select a name below to jump straight to their specific questionnaire block.
Timothy Brewington
Federal Enforcement & Local Government
What responsibility does local government have to ensure residents feel safe interacting with city services, public spaces, and law enforcement when federal enforcement activity occurs in the community? Would you vote yes on a resolution prohibiting ICE detention facilities in Woodbury, and do you believe city property or resources should be made available to ICE?
I believe every resident should feel safe interacting with City government, using our public spaces, reporting a crime, and seeking assistance from Woodbury Public Safety. Maintaining that trust is essential to keeping our entire community safe.
My position on the detention facility question is clear: Yes, I would vote for a resolution prohibiting an ICE detention facility, or any similar detention facility, from coming to Woodbury. I also would not support making City property or City resources available for federal immigration enforcement activities that are not the City's responsibility, while recognizing that the City must comply with applicable law and lawful court orders.
This issue is personal for me because I worked with community members to help formulate language for the resolution that residents brought forward for City Council consideration. While I have not reviewed the most current version of that resolution and therefore cannot endorse language I haven't seen, I remain supportive of its underlying goals of preventing an ICE detention facility in Woodbury and preventing the use of City property and resources for federal immigration enforcement activities that are not the City's responsibility.
For me, the principle is simple: Every resident should be able to interact with their local government and Public Safety without fear, and residents should have confidence that their City will use every lawful authority available to protect their safety, rights, and well-being.
Surveillance & Privacy
What is your position on Flock or other ALPR technology in Woodbury? What factors should guide decisions about adopting, expanding, limiting, or removing surveillance technology?
My position has been shaped by my experience as a member of the Woodbury Public Safety Multicultural Advisory Committee and by my own lived experience. I understand that concerns about surveillance, privacy, and how information may be used are not theoretical for everyone. For my community, those concerns are deeply personal.
I also want to make an important distinction. My concern is not necessarily with ALPR technology itself. I understand that this technology can be a useful public safety tool. My greater concern today is with Flock, the company providing the technology, and whether we have sufficient independent verification of how its systems and data protections are actually working.
The Flock cameras had already been installed when the program was presented to our committee. We asked tough questions about privacy, data sharing, access, and safeguards, while also recognizing the potential public safety benefits.
Since then, my concerns about Flock as a vendor have grown rather than diminished.
Based on what I know today, I believe Woodbury needs a meaningful independent review of its relationship with Flock and its use of the company's technology. I want independent verification that the safeguards we have been told are in place are actually in place, are working as intended, and are adequately protecting residents' privacy.
That review should examine who can access Woodbury's data, how and with whom it can be shared, how long it is retained, safeguards against misuse, auditing and accountability, Flock's compliance with Woodbury's requirements, and whether the technology is providing measurable public safety benefits.
Until that review is completed, I would not support expanding Woodbury's use of Flock. Once we have the results, we can make an informed decision about whether to continue with Flock, require changes or additional safeguards, consider another provider, or discontinue its use.
For me, the principle is simple:
Residents should not have to choose between public safety and personal privacy. We should demand both.
Oversight & Accountability
Do you support independent oversight of city departments, including law enforcement? What would meaningful oversight look like in practice?
Yes. I support appropriate independent oversight of City departments, including law enforcement.
Woodbury already has an important foundation for accountability through its resident-led advisory commissions and committees. These bodies give residents an opportunity to examine issues, ask questions, provide feedback, and make recommendations to the City Council and City departments.
I've experienced the value of that firsthand through two areas of City service. Through my service on the Public Safety Multicultural Advisory Committee, I've seen the value of having residents sit across the table from Public Safety, hear directly from them, ask difficult questions about policies and practices, and provide feedback.
I also served on the Parks and Natural Resources Commission, where we worked closely with City staff and advised the City Council on matters involving parks, recreation, and natural resources. That commission gives residents a formal opportunity to examine proposals, raise concerns, and make recommendations that reflect the interests of the community.
Those experiences have shown me that resident involvement is an important layer of accountability, but advisory committees and commissions are not the same as independent oversight.
When an issue involves privacy, civil rights, surveillance technology, public resources, or another matter where public confidence is particularly important, I believe additional independent review can be appropriate.
Meaningful oversight could include independent audits or reviews, regular public reporting, accessible complaint processes, measurable performance standards, and periodic Council review.
Transparency & Public Engagement
What will you do to give residents meaningful input into decisions before they're substantially finalized? What specific procedural changes would you support?
I regularly follow City Council meetings and workshops because I want to understand not only what decisions are being made, but how those decisions are reached.
One of my concerns is that by the time residents hear about some issues, much of the discussion has already taken place. Meaningful public input needs to happen early enough that it can actually influence the decision.
There are three specific procedural changes I would support.
First, record City Council workshops and make them available online. Workshops are where Council members often have the deeper conversations that shape future decisions. They are open to the public, but they aren't currently recorded. Minutes are available, but minutes don't tell the whole story.
Second, create a clear process for residents to request that an issue be considered for a City Council workshop or meeting agenda. Residents should know how to submit a request, how it will be reviewed, and what happens next.
Third, improve follow-up after public comment. If residents raise an issue, they should not have to wonder whether anyone followed up or what happened afterward.
My experience working with residents trying to bring the ICE resolution forward reinforced for me why this matters.
Public input is only meaningful if it happens early enough to matter. Transparency isn't just allowing residents to speak; it's creating a process where their input can actually help shape the decision.
Advocacy for Constituents
As one of several council members, how would you advance an agenda item that doesn't currently have council majority support if a substantial number of residents want it considered?
My years of community service have required me to work with people who don't always agree with me.
Whether serving on City commissions, Public Safety's Multicultural Advisory Committee, nonprofit organizations, or other community initiatives, I've learned that getting things done requires relationships, listening, and finding common ground.
One example came during my time on the Parks and Natural Resources Commission. There was discussion about recommending a parking fee at Carver Lake Park and Beach as a way to address some of the harmful activity occurring there.
I was the only commissioner who opposed the idea. My concern was that a parking fee could create a barrier for families who help support our parks through their tax dollars but might not be able to afford an additional fee every time they wanted to enjoy the park.
I listened to the concerns of the other commissioners, explained mine, and we continued the conversation. Ultimately, the commission removed the parking-fee recommendation.
That's how I would approach the City Council.
If residents brought forward an issue that did not initially have majority Council support, I would first make sure I understood what they were asking for. Then I would talk with Council members and staff, understand their concerns, look for common ground, and determine whether there was a path forward.
That's also where my proposal for a clear process for residents to request that issues be placed on a Council workshop or meeting agenda becomes important. If a request meets established criteria, there should be a defined path for it to receive Council consideration rather than residents having to figure out how to get their issue heard.
I cannot promise residents that I will always have the votes.
I can promise that I will do the work: listen, build relationships, have difficult conversations, and look for common ground that can move an issue forward.
Housing Affordability
What is your stance on prioritizing affordable housing development in Woodbury? What specific actions would you support to ensure teachers, first responders, healthcare workers, and other working families can afford to live in the community they serve?
Housing affordability is personal to me.
My wife and I purchased our first home here in Woodbury. We had good incomes, but I remember how difficult it was to find a home we could afford that also met our family's needs.
That experience makes me think about the teacher, firefighter, healthcare worker, young family, or senior facing that same challenge today.
People who work in Woodbury should have an opportunity to live in Woodbury, and seniors who have built their lives here should be able to afford to stay here.
That's why I support strategically using Local Affordable Housing Aid, land banking, first-time homebuyer assistance, partnerships, workforce housing, and creating a diverse housing supply that provides options at different stages of life.
Land banking can be particularly valuable because it gives the City an opportunity to acquire property for future affordable housing before rising land costs make those projects financially unrealistic.
But affordability isn't just about building more housing. We also need to look at the City's role in the cost of housing and make sure our policies, fees, and development requirements aren't unnecessarily making housing more expensive.
I was able to purchase my first home in Woodbury and build a life here. I want the families coming behind me to have that same opportunity, and I want the people who have already built their lives here to be able to stay.
Representation & Election Structure
Woodbury elects its Council entirely at-large from large candidate pools, and residents have questioned whether that structure still represents the city well. Would you support any of the following: moving to wards, expanding the council's size, or adopting a municipal primary? Please indicate your position on each of the three. For each you'd support, how would you work toward it?
As Woodbury grows and becomes more diverse, I believe we should periodically ask whether our system of government is still providing residents with the representation and access they deserve.
On wards, yes, I support seriously examining a ward system. Different parts of Woodbury can have different concerns, and geographic representation could give neighborhoods a more direct voice on the City Council.
On expanding the Council, yes, I believe we should consider it. Woodbury now has more than 80,000 residents, and I think it's reasonable to ask whether five elected officials are enough to provide the level of representation and accessibility our growing community needs.
On a municipal primary, I'm open to it, but I want to understand the consequences first. I would want to examine the impact on voter participation, cost, legal requirements, and the experiences of comparable cities before making that change.
Most importantly, these decisions shouldn't be made by elected officials alone. They affect how residents choose their government, so residents should have a meaningful voice in determining whether changes are made.
For me, this isn't about changing government for the sake of changing it. It's about making sure that as Woodbury grows, representation grows with it.
Data Centers
Data centers can bring economic development benefits, but place significant demands on energy, water, and infrastructure. What standards in both process and transparency should Woodbury use when evaluating data center proposals?
My concerns about data centers are connected to work I have already done around environmental stewardship, natural resources, infrastructure, and long-range planning.
After six years on the Parks and Natural Resources Commission, I learned that development decisions cannot be evaluated only by what they provide today. We also have to ask what they will require from our water, energy, infrastructure, natural resources, and taxpayers over decades.
Based on what I know today about data centers, I strongly oppose large-scale data centers coming to Woodbury.
If a proposal were brought forward, I would want clear answers about its water consumption, electricity demand, backup generation, noise and environmental impacts, infrastructure requirements, number and quality of jobs created, tax benefits, and who ultimately pays for the infrastructure needed to support it.
The process must also be transparent. Residents should receive this information early enough to actually influence the decision, not after the decision has essentially been made. There should be meaningful opportunities for public input, and I would not support NDAs that prevent residents from knowing what type of development is being proposed for their community.
No secret deals. Residents deserve to know what is being proposed, what it will cost, what benefits it will provide, and what the long-term impact will be before the City says yes.
Economic development matters, but responsible growth means considering the long-term cost as carefully as the short-term benefit.
Growth & Community Character
As Woodbury nears full buildout, what should guide its priorities for the next twenty years: continued growth, redevelopment, housing affordability, or something else? What's one thing you'd change about how the city currently manages growth (zoning, infrastructure approval, or otherwise)?
I've had the opportunity to think about Woodbury's growth from several perspectives as a resident, homeowner, parent, Parks and Natural Resources commissioner, and participant in long-range planning conversations.
Those experiences have convinced me that as Woodbury approaches full buildout, our definition of successful growth has to change.
For many years, the question was:
“How much more can we build?”
For the next twenty years, I believe the question needs to be:
“How do we protect, maintain, and improve what we've already built?”
That means prioritizing our aging infrastructure, protecting green space and natural resources, keeping housing affordable, supporting existing businesses, planning responsible redevelopment, and preserving the quality of life that made people want to live in Woodbury in the first place.
If I could change one thing about how we manage growth, it would be to put greater emphasis on the long-term cost of development before we approve it.
A development may generate revenue today, but we also need to ask: What will the roads, utilities, public safety, parks, water systems, and other infrastructure required to support it cost residents 10, 20, or 30 years from now? And does the long-term benefit justify the long-term cost?
Growth should pay its way and make Woodbury stronger—not simply make Woodbury bigger.
That's what I mean when I say:
Protect What We Love. Plan For What We Need.
Environmental & Natural Resource Stewardship
Some residents feel Woodbury's forestry and natural resource conservation efforts haven't kept pace with growth. What is your plan to build on or establish meaningful conservation and stewardship practices in the city?
My plan is to build on the work Woodbury has already done and make sure our environmental plans are actually implemented, adequately funded, and producing measurable results.
I served six years on Woodbury’s Parks and Natural Resources Commission, where environmental stewardship was a significant part of our work. During my time on the commission, we helped develop the Environmental Stewardship Plan, which was ultimately adopted by the City Council. That plan established specific goals to protect Woodbury’s environment and natural resources for generations to come.
I am also a member of the East Metro EcoFaith Collaborative, which brings people of different faiths together to protect the environment, educate our communities, and care for our natural resources.
We have strong plans. Now we need to turn those plans into action.
My priorities would include, addressing invasive species, restoring natural areas, protecting our water resources, preserving green space, and providing sustainable funding to maintain what we already have.
I also want accountability. Residents should be able to see what goals we've established, what progress we've made, how we're investing their resources, and where we still need to improve.
As Woodbury approaches full buildout, environmental stewardship becomes more important, not less. Once green space and natural resources are lost, they can be extremely difficult to restore.
My plan is straightforward: implement the plans we already have, adequately fund the work, measure our progress, and make environmental stewardship part of our decisions about Woodbury’s future.
The City will always have competing priorities, but I will work to make sure environmental stewardship remains one of Woodbury’s top priorities, not just in our plans, but in our decisions.
Campaign Finance
Do you accept campaign contributions from sources other than individuals (e.g. PACs, corporations, party committees)? If so, from whom, and why?
No. I only accept campaign contributions from individuals.
I want my campaign to be supported by people who believe in my candidacy and the kind of leadership I want to bring to Woodbury. I believe that helps me remain an independent voice focused on the residents I hope to serve.
Personal
What are you most passionate about, and why did you choose to run?
What I am most passionate about is making sure people have a voice and that our local government truly represents the community it serves.
For me, representation matters. Diversity of perspectives matters. And making room for voices that are too often overlooked matters.
Those aren't just political ideas to me. They come from my own life experiences, including being the parent of a child with special needs and understanding what it means when people and communities are underrepresented or misunderstood.
Those experiences have shaped how I serve. They have taught me to listen for the voices that aren't always the loudest in the room, ask who may be missing from the conversation, and make sure decisions aren't being made only by or for the people who already have access and influence.
That's also why I believe so strongly in our democracy. Democracy works when people participate, when different perspectives are welcomed, when government is transparent, and when elected officials remember that power ultimately belongs to the people.
I've spent approximately 13 years serving Woodbury in different capacities, but what matters more to me than where I've served is why I've served.
I want people to know that they matter, their experiences matter, and their voices belong in the decisions that shape their community.
That's why I'm running for City Council.
I don't just want a seat at the table. I want to make sure more people know they have a place at the table too.
Jory DeLoach
Federal Enforcement & Local Government
What responsibility does local government have to ensure residents feel safe interacting with city services, public spaces, and law enforcement when federal enforcement activity occurs in the community? Would you vote yes on a resolution prohibiting ICE detention facilities in Woodbury, and do you believe city property or resources should be made available to ICE?
A safe community is one where every person, regardless of their immigration status, can feel comfortable interacting with Public Safety, and other city services, when they need help. I don’t believe it is the role of the local government to participate in immigration enforcement or support immigration enforcement officials in their operations with property or resources.
An ICE detention facility is not welcome in Woodbury. The city should take whatever steps necessary and permissible - including passing a resolution - to prevent such a facility and protect all members of the community.
Surveillance & Privacy
What is your position on Flock or other ALPR technology in Woodbury? What factors should guide decisions about adopting, expanding, limiting, or removing surveillance technology?
The city administrator recently said that the city was considering an independent, third-party review of the Flock camera safeguards - I support this review, as well as a robust public conversation about the future of Flock cameras in Woodbury.
I work in software and often think about the difference between the ideal path of a tech product and what can go wrong. I believe when evaluating the technology, the city council should consider more of what can go wrong. The opportunity for unauthorized access by the private vendor or other government agencies to Woodbury Public Safety Data is my primary concern. If a review does not satisfactorily answer the concerns that exist regarding contractual and technological safeguards, I would support limiting or ending the program.
Oversight & Accountability
Do you support independent oversight of city departments, including law enforcement? What would meaningful oversight look like in practice?
Yes, I support independent oversight especially on complex matters where independence could be called into question, such as with law enforcement. This is why in the case of Flock cameras, I support a third-party review of Flock rather than an internal-only review.
In practice, I believe the most important part of the independent review process is what happens after the presentation of the findings. Too often, a report may be reviewed and never actioned. I think the City Council and City staff should be held to the expectation of publicly reviewing and responding to recommendations of such oversight within a reasonable timeframe.
Transparency & Public Engagement
What will you do to give residents meaningful input into decisions before they're substantially finalized? What specific procedural changes would you support?
For me, public engagement and transparency is about more than just publishing numbers or holding more meetings that the same people show up to. A successful city council member, in my view, is one who engages, and pushes the city staff to engage, more proactively in meeting people where they are at.
City outreach on projects that impact specific neighborhoods, parks, or other areas should include outreach closer to those locations - not just at city hall or Central Park. A great example of this was a recent meeting on the Powers Lake shoreline restoration project which was held at the Powers Lake shelter and at locations along the path around the lake. I will be a proponent for more outreach that is in the community and engaging with people who might not otherwise attend a city event.
Advocacy for Constituents
As one of several council members, how would you advance an agenda item that doesn't currently have council majority support if a substantial number of residents want it considered?
Politics is about building relationships and coalitions. There are only five people on Woodbury's City Council so it is important to maintain open conversation among colleagues. While I may vehemently disagree with a member on one issue, there may be an opportunity to work together on another. Writing off working with someone because of a disagreement on one issue only serves to limit your own ability to function on the council.
I also believe that more robust, broad public engagement as a councilmember strengthens the case when you are working in the minority on an issue. Bringing data, direct constituent feedback and working to build a strong coalition of residents to advocate on the issues are my tactics.
Housing Affordability
What is your stance on prioritizing affordable housing development in Woodbury? What specific actions would you support to ensure teachers, first responders, healthcare workers, and other working families can afford to live in the community they serve?
First, I believe Woodbury should continue to do its part in meeting the Metropolitan Council's projected allocation of affordable housing needs for the greater metro area. Housing affordability is a national and state challenge and the city should prioritize building a wide-variety of housing types to increase supply and keep up with demand.
Woodbury has achieved a balance of 50% single-family detached and 50% attached homes in the community. The community should maintain that balance so that Woodbury is a place where people can afford to live at all stages of life.
Representation & Election Structure
Woodbury elects its Council entirely at-large from large candidate pools, and residents have questioned whether that structure still represents the city well. Would you support any of the following: moving to wards, expanding the council's size, or adopting a municipal primary? Please indicate your position on each of the three. For each you'd support, how would you work toward it?
I’m open to a conversation on all three of these structural reforms. I do not have a settled position on any of the three - wards, council size, or municipal primaries. The best solution for the community may be in the adoption of one, two, or even all three of these options. I think this is an important conversation to have over the next year to consider if options should be presented to voters or adopted by the council prior to the next election.
I do strongly believe that any changes to the structure should be in service of making city government more effective in delivering for the community.
Data Centers
Data centers can bring economic development benefits, but place significant demands on energy, water, and infrastructure. What standards in both process and transparency should Woodbury use when evaluating data center proposals?
I've proposed modernizing our zoning code to formally define data centers and require a conditional use permit for them, which would include a mandatory public hearing, presentation of developer-funded water and utility impact data, and a council vote.
I also support a policy of no NDAs between the city and data center developers, and no public subsidies for their development.
Growth & Community Character
As Woodbury nears full buildout, what should guide its priorities for the next twenty years: continued growth, redevelopment, housing affordability, or something else? What's one thing you'd change about how the city currently manages growth (zoning, infrastructure approval, or otherwise)?
As a member of the 2050 Comprehensive Plan Task Force, I've been giving a lot of thought to how the remaining growth in Woodbury should occur. What is important to me is balance. Balancing new growth and development with the need to reinvest in older parts of the community. Balancing the construction of single-family homes with other housing types such as apartments, townhomes, and small home structures. And balancing residential areas with more opportunities for neighborhood commercial districts.
Specifically, I would like to open up the opportunity for more mixed-use zoning options to encourage development of more integrated neighborhood communities.
Environmental & Natural Resource Stewardship
Some residents feel Woodbury's forestry and natural resource conservation efforts haven't kept pace with growth. What is your plan to build on or establish meaningful conservation and stewardship practices in the city?
In 2024, the City Council adopted the Environmental Stewardship Plan and I am committed to seeing through that plan, achieving its goals and objectives, and making adjustments to further our efforts to protect the natural resources in our community.
Furthermore, as Woodbury continues to develop, it is vital that parks and greenspace remain a key priority. This means more than simply neighborhood parks, but investing in natural areas like the ongoing restoration of Prairie Ridge and La Lake, and preserving places like Tamarack Nature Preserve.
Campaign Finance
Do you accept campaign contributions from sources other than individuals (e.g. PACs, corporations, party committees)? If so, from whom, and why?
To date, every dollar my campaign has raised has come from individual contributions or my own self-funding.
Corporate PAC money can be a real problem in politics, especially when dealing with local issues that could impact a specific business, so I would not accept corporate PAC money in this campaign.
I believe that local organizations, non-corporate PACs, and party committees can play an important role in the campaign process so I would welcome contributions from those entities.
Personal
What are you most passionate about, and why did you choose to run?
I am passionate about making government work for the residents it serves. Too often, government is the punchline to a joke, or simply inefficient, but a well run city has the ability to make positive impacts in people’s lives. That is why I stepped up to serve the community on the Economic Development Commission and the 2050 Comprehensive Plan Task Force. Because it takes people who are willing to serve to make the government work well.
I am also passionate about Woodbury being a safe, clean, and affordable place to live, work, and raise a family. As a dad to two daughters in middle school, I know the challenges that Woodbury families face. And I will bring that passion, knowledge, and experience to the City Council with the focus on listening to residents and delivering a great community for all.
Todd Jakober
Federal Enforcement & Local Government
What responsibility does local government have to ensure residents feel safe interacting with city services, public spaces, and law enforcement when federal enforcement activity occurs in the community? Would you vote yes on a resolution prohibiting ICE detention facilities in Woodbury, and do you believe city property or resources should be made available to ICE?
Local government needs to continue to support residents and to strongly advocate that local government does not work with immigration enforcement, that is the sole direction of the federal government. Local law enforcement (Woodbury City Police) do not enfore immigration enforcement.
I would vote yes to prohibit a detention facility of any kind within city borders. (Currently there are no plans for a facility within Woodbury borders.) I do not feel that local government should prohibit the use of city property for federal agencies to gather when needed.
Example: If a hostage situation, or other life threatening event were to happen, it is often the role of federal authorities to use all resources they may have. The FBI may access immigration officers for back up in federal police activities. If prohibited, immigration officers would not be able to provide said support.
Surveillance & Privacy
What is your position on Flock or other ALPR technology in Woodbury? What factors should guide decisions about adopting, expanding, limiting, or removing surveillance technology?
I strongly believe that the use of Flock or other ALPR Technology is a needed tool for local law enforcement. I do feel that a better oversight of signed agreements should be thoroughly looked over prior to signing off. Storage or sharing of the material should be at the direction of local law enforcement.
Oversight & Accountability
Do you support independent oversight of city departments, including law enforcement? What would meaningful oversight look like in practice?
I do not support independent oversight of the city departments or law enforcement. I feel that’s what the city should be doing when questions arise. The city and local authorities should provide reports as needed when questions arise.
Transparency & Public Engagement
What will you do to give residents meaningful input into decisions before they're substantially finalized? What specific procedural changes would you support?
I would encourage local neighborhood town halls by City Council and the Mayor to hear about resident concerns before final votes are done.
This would look like a set place and time quarterly, or as needed per each neighborhood community, even if there are no specific events or changes happening.
Advocacy for Constituents
As one of several council members, how would you advance an agenda item that doesn't currently have council majority support if a substantial number of residents want it considered?
I would compel my fellow Council Members and Mayor to have difficult conversations about resident concerns within a closed door meeting prior to any votes. I personally can be a strong advocate with negotation skills.
Housing Affordability
What is your stance on prioritizing affordable housing development in Woodbury? What specific actions would you support to ensure teachers, first responders, healthcare workers, and other working families can afford to live in the community they serve?
I would strongly advocate to lower taxes on residents and rental property owners to lower the cost of housing.
Offering tax breaks to rental property owners would also be on my agenda to lower rents. By lowering taxes this would also support residents in looking into home ownership over renting.
Representation & Election Structure
Woodbury elects its Council entirely at-large from large candidate pools, and residents have questioned whether that structure still represents the city well. Would you support any of the following: moving to wards, expanding the council's size, or adopting a municipal primary? Please indicate your position on each of the three. For each you'd support, how would you work toward it?
Wards – I do not advocate adding wards at this time. This would only increase the size of local government and make any changes far more difficult.
Council Size – I would supporting adding two council seats over wards. Woodbury’s current resident count sits at approximately 83,000. Having six council seats plus the Mayor would leave it at about just under 12,000 residents per city council member and Mayor. I would also support term limits on these offices.
Municiple Primary – I would be in support of this to better thin out the resident choices come election day.
Data Centers
Data centers can bring economic development benefits, but place significant demands on energy, water, and infrastructure. What standards in both process and transparency should Woodbury use when evaluating data center proposals?
Prior to Woodbury allowing a data center there would need to be solid and written agreements on what public services the data center would pay for (electric, water, etc.).
With Woodbury’s current water concerns I would not support a data center at this time. In the future, if the water issue is more resolved, I may support it with the above contingencies.
Growth & Community Character
As Woodbury nears full buildout, what should guide its priorities for the next twenty years: continued growth, redevelopment, housing affordability, or something else? What's one thing you'd change about how the city currently manages growth (zoning, infrastructure approval, or otherwise)?
Housing affordability and maintaining existing green spaces. I would seek better public input into the infrastructure approval process. Possibly by having quarterly town halls in each neighborhood with up to two members of the council and possibly the Mayor.
Environmental & Natural Resource Stewardship
Some residents feel Woodbury's forestry and natural resource conservation efforts haven't kept pace with growth. What is your plan to build on or establish meaningful conservation and stewardship practices in the city?
I would take a personal invested approach in green spaces within Woodbury to maintain and provide better up keep to the existing environment.
Campaign Finance
Do you accept campaign contributions from sources other than individuals (e.g. PACs, corporations, party committees)? If so, from whom, and why?
I currently have not solicited for campaign contributions. I am solely supporting my campaign from my own resources.
Personal
What are you most passionate about, and why did you choose to run?
I am most passionate about lowering taxes and fees or freezing them at current levels. This is the biggest part of why I chose to run.
I have good common sense and listening skills. I may not have all the answers you agree with but I do listen and adapt my approach accordingly.
Soga William Mbilima
Federal Enforcement & Local Government
What responsibility does local government have to ensure residents feel safe interacting with city services, public spaces, and law enforcement when federal enforcement activity occurs in the community? Would you vote yes on a resolution prohibiting ICE detention facilities in Woodbury, and do you believe city property or resources should be made available to ICE?
The primary responsibility of local government is to ensure that every resident can safely access city services, parks, libraries, public meetings, and emergency services without fear or confusion. Local governments must communicate clearly, follow the law, and support public safety for all residents.
When it comes to federal immigration enforcement, the City Council's role is limited. Federal immigration policy is established and enforced by federal authorities, not municipalities. As a council member, my responsibility would be to ensure that Woodbury's policies comply with the law, protect residents' rights, and maintain public trust in local government.
Surveillance & Privacy
What is your position on Flock or other ALPR technology in Woodbury? What factors should guide decisions about adopting, expanding, limiting, or removing surveillance technology?
I approach technology the same way I approach financial investments: there must be a clearly defined benefit, measurable results, strong safeguards, and accountability.
If technologies such as Flock help law enforcement solve serious crimes, improve public safety, and operate within established legal standards, they deserve consideration. At the same time, residents have legitimate privacy concerns.
Any decision should be guided by transparent policies regarding data collection, retention periods, access controls, auditing, public reporting, and oversight. Before expanding any surveillance technology, I would want evidence that it is effective, financially justified, and balanced with appropriate privacy protections together with appropriate public engagement.
Oversight & Accountability
Do you support independent oversight of city departments, including law enforcement? What would meaningful oversight look like in practice?
Yes, I support strong oversight and accountability across all city departments, including law enforcement.
As someone who has spent much of my career in finance, audit, and risk management, I believe oversight works best when it is objective, transparent, and focused on continuous improvement rather than politics.
Meaningful oversight includes regular performance reporting, clear metrics, independent audits where appropriate, transparent public reporting, adherence to professional standards, and opportunities for residents to raise concerns.
Transparency & Public Engagement
What will you do to give residents meaningful input into decisions before they're substantially finalized? What specific procedural changes would you support?
Residents should have opportunities to be heard and provide feedback before major decisions are finalized, not after.
I would support expanding public engagement earlier in the process through town halls, online surveys, community listening sessions, and greater use of advisory committees. I would also encourage providing clear background information so residents understand both the benefits and tradeoffs associated with major decisions.
Advocacy for Constituents
As one of several council members, how would you advance an agenda item that doesn't currently have council majority support if a substantial number of residents want it considered?
As one council member, I cannot unilaterally set policy. However, I can listen carefully, bring issues forward, ask questions, and advocate for residents.
If a substantial number of residents supported an issue that lacked majority support, I would work to understand their concerns, gather facts, facilitate dialogue, and look for common ground. Sometimes progress comes through education, compromise, or phasing an initiative over time.
My job would be to ensure residents are heard and considered while respecting the council's collective decision-making process.
Housing Affordability
What is your stance on prioritizing affordable housing development in Woodbury? What specific actions would you support to ensure teachers, first responders, healthcare workers, and other working families can afford to live in the community they serve?
I believe housing affordability is an important component of a healthy community.
Woodbury benefits when teachers, first responders, young families, and seniors can find housing options that meet their needs. I support a balanced housing strategy that maintains community character while expanding opportunities across a range of price points.
Specific actions could include encouraging diverse housing types, supporting responsible redevelopment, streamlining appropriate approval processes, and working with developers to identify practical solutions. Any approach should be financially sustainable, infrastructure-ready, and aligned with community expectations.
Representation & Election Structure
Woodbury elects its Council entirely at-large from large candidate pools, and residents have questioned whether that structure still represents the city well. Would you support any of the following: moving to wards, expanding the council's size, or adopting a municipal primary? Please indicate your position on each of the three. For each you'd support, how would you work toward it?
I would be open to studying a ward-based system, council expansion or municipal primary if residents believe geographic representation has become a concern driven by growth or voter engagement. Before supporting a change, I would want robust community input and a thorough evaluation of pros and cons.
Data Centers
Data centers can bring economic development benefits, but place significant demands on energy, water, and infrastructure. What standards in both process and transparency should Woodbury use when evaluating data center proposals?
Data centers can provide economic benefits, but they must be evaluated carefully.
I would expect rigorous analysis of water usage, energy requirements, infrastructure impacts, environmental considerations, public safety requirements, tax revenues, and long-term community benefits.
Transparency is essential. Residents should understand the expected costs, benefits, risks, and any incentives being considered before decisions are made. As a finance professional, I believe major development projects should be evaluated using clear facts, objective analysis, and long-term thinking.
Growth & Community Character
As Woodbury nears full buildout, what should guide its priorities for the next twenty years: continued growth, redevelopment, housing affordability, or something else? What's one thing you'd change about how the city currently manages growth (zoning, infrastructure approval, or otherwise)?
As Woodbury approaches full buildout, I believe the focus should shift from growth alone to long-term sustainability, redevelopment, infrastructure stewardship, housing choice, and maintaining quality of life.
The next twenty years should be guided by thoughtful planning that preserves what residents value most about Woodbury - safety, high quality education, trails, parks & recs, etc while adapting to changing economic and demographic realities.
If I could improve one thing, it would be ensuring that major development decisions more clearly demonstrate how they align with long-term infrastructure capacity, financial sustainability, and community priorities before approvals are granted.
Environmental & Natural Resource Stewardship
Some residents feel Woodbury's forestry and natural resource conservation efforts haven't kept pace with growth. What is your plan to build on or establish meaningful conservation and stewardship practices in the city?
I believe environmental stewardship and growth can coexist when planning is intentional.
Woodbury's parks, open spaces, wetlands, trails, etc significantly to our quality of life - that is one of the key reasons that made me move to Woodbury and something I use and enjoy. I support continued investment in preservation, reforestation where appropriate, stormwater management, and protection of natural resources during redevelopment and future growth.
I would look for practical, measurable initiatives that balance environmental benefits with fiscal responsibility while preserving community assets for future generations - for our children and grandchildren to enjoy just as much as we have.
Campaign Finance
Do you accept campaign contributions from sources other than individuals (e.g. PACs, corporations, party committees)? If so, from whom, and why?
My campaign is primarily supported by family, individual residents and community members. I believe voters deserve transparency regarding campaign financing, and I support full disclosure of campaign contributions in accordance with Minnesota law.
I may consider contributions that are permitted under Minnesota law. However, no contribution would influence my independent judgment. Transparency is critical a the decisions I make as a council member would be based on what is best for Woodbury residents.
Personal
What are you most passionate about, and why did you choose to run?
My greatest passion is service and helping organizations make better decisions that positively impact people.
Throughout my career in finance, audit, risk management, and governance, I have helped organizations strengthen accountability, improve transparency, and manage resources responsibly. Outside of work, I have served on the Citizens Financial Advisory Committee for South Washington County School District, the African Development Center of Minnesota Loan Committee, participated in the Woodbury Community Foundation Citizens Academy, and volunteered through my church and other not-for-profit and community events.
I chose to run because Woodbury is the community my family and I call home. I want to contribute my professional experience and community involvement to help guide thoughtful decisions, promote transparency, maintain public safety, ensure fiscal responsibility, and preserve the outstanding quality of life that makes Woodbury such a great place to live.
Nicole Mitchell
Federal Enforcement & Local Government
What responsibility does local government have to ensure residents feel safe interacting with city services, public spaces, and law enforcement when federal enforcement activity occurs in the community? Would you vote yes on a resolution prohibiting ICE detention facilities in Woodbury, and do you believe city property or resources should be made available to ICE?
I would vote yes on prohibiting detention facilities. I do not support making any city resources available to ICE.
Under the 10th Amendment, cities are not required to assist in the enforcement of federal law, though there are times we can choose to, e.g., partnering with an agency on an issue of human trafficking. I feel strongly about this in the case of ICE, which often operates in a manner I consider unlawful.
Local government absolutely has a responsibility to make sure all citizens feel safe. In the case of ICE, I believe this should include ordinances to block agents from using city-owned property, such as buildings, parking lots, Central Park, and our parks and trails. We need to ensure city employees are not unnecessarily asking about or documenting immigration status when people use city services, and if we do have any of that data, we must never share it.
(I feel the same way about gender identification, given what the federal government is doing to erase gender identities.)
I also believe in partnering with community outreach if someone needs services but does not feel safe leaving their home.
Surveillance & Privacy
What is your position on Flock or other ALPR technology in Woodbury? What factors should guide decisions about adopting, expanding, limiting, or removing surveillance technology?
Part of having a safe community means residents can be part of their community without being constantly tracked by private vendors or government databases.
Specific to ALPRs (automatic license plate readers, including the Flock brand) in Woodbury, I do appreciate both why police find them valuable, including for their own safety, and Woodbury’s recent increase in safeguards for the data. However, from my legislative experience, I can firmly state that it is often impossible to adequately regulate technology, particularly AI, because it evolves and people find new ways to manipulate it faster than regulations can be enacted.
This is what I see in Woodbury: safeguards that are reactive after finding loopholes in our data sharing or after seeing how the data has been abusively used elsewhere, for example to stalk women. And that doesn’t even include errors with the readers that have caused innocent people to be accused of crimes and even jailed. There will always be some new abuse or problem with this technology that we will be playing catch-up on.
Flock itself has also been caught repeatedly lying to city councils and police departments regarding the true tracking capabilities of its company, and private companies having access to so much personal information raises civil liberties concerns. For these reasons and others, I do not support ALPRs in our community.
Future decisions about surveillance technology should start with the presumption of privacy. There should be a formal review process that includes a clear written policy, public input, a civil liberties assessment, data security, racial and social equity impacts, vendor practices, and the risk of misuse or mission creep.
Finally, for anything currently used or adopted in the future, residents must have clear information on what is being collected, who can access it, how long it is retained, whether it is shared with other jurisdictions or federal agencies, and what enforcement mechanisms exist if the rules are violated.
Oversight & Accountability
Do you support independent oversight of city departments, including law enforcement? What would meaningful oversight look like in practice?
Yes, I do, because accountability should not depend only on internal review. Good government requires systems that earn and maintain public trust, especially as the city continues to grow and budgets increase. I will also say, based on my experience both in the military and for the state of MN, that when agencies are allowed self-oversight, it rarely goes well. Major issues are more likely to be covered up than admitted.
Before I continue, I want to qualify that the new MN Office of the Inspector General will be operational later next year, which will include oversight of whether communities are properly using money from the state. Any plan should include this once it is clear exactly how that agency will interact with local governments.
Meaningful oversight should include clear public reporting, independent review of serious complaints, transparent performance measures, and regular audits of policies, spending, use-of-force incidents, surveillance technology, data practices, and major contracts. For law enforcement specifically, I would support a civilian review or advisory structure with real access to information, the ability to identify patterns, and the ability to make recommendations to the council and city administration.
This should be tied to publishing policies and data in a way residents can actually use, retaining public meeting videos and records, strengthening workshop transparency, and making sure major decisions are not effectively finalized before the public has a meaningful chance to weigh in. (More detail follows in the next question.)
Transparency & Public Engagement
What will you do to give residents meaningful input into decisions before they're substantially finalized? What specific procedural changes would you support?
In Woodbury, too many major issues seem to reach the public only after the city has already chosen a direction or even approved something that lacks community support. Public engagement needs to shift to a process that is built into decisions from the beginning. This should include a requirement that major policy changes or large financial commitments receive public discussion before they are placed on a final voting agenda. If an issue of widespread community concern arises, e.g., ALPRs, there should be a special informational forum created for the topic.
I also support ending the culture of closed decision-making. Woodbury held an illegal closed-door meeting in 2023, but when residents raised concerns, the city was dismissive. Even after a judge issued an advisory opinion against Woodbury, no policies were changed to improve transparency. Also, workshops, where many decisions are truly shaped, should be recorded and made available to the public, minutes should be useful and detailed, and the public should be able to understand what direction council members are giving staff.
Data retention is also a transparency issue, and Woodbury has one of the worst retention policies among large cities in MN. City council meeting videos are entirely deleted after only four months. Woodbury should retain meeting videos, workshop recordings, agendas, packets, presentations, public comments, contracts, policy documents, and related records long enough for residents, journalists, and future council members to understand how decisions were made. I suggest at least four years, so residents can go back one full term of office to see what elected officials said and did during meetings. Records should be searchable and easy to find without residents necessarily having to go through data requests.
Advocacy for Constituents
As one of several council members, how would you advance an agenda item that doesn't currently have council majority support if a substantial number of residents want it considered?
This is one area where I particularly think previous legislative experience is invaluable, because a perceived lack of initial council majority support should never be the end of the conversation.
And regardless of the issue, residents deserve clear public discussions, transparent explanations of the city’s positions, and a record of where elected officials stand.
I would start by helping residents understand the actual process: what authority the city has, what information is needed, and when the issue can be raised publicly—essentially, how to keep the pressure on. I would work to help residents with whatever support they needed to advocate for an issue because advocacy is stronger when it is organized, credible, and compelling.
As a council member, I would use any tool available to keep the issue moving. That could include requesting information from staff, asking for the item to be discussed at a workshop, raising it during council comments, asking that it be placed on a future agenda, or proposing a public forum. I would also meet with other council members individually to understand their concerns and look for areas of agreement.
I cannot promise I would win every vote, but I can promise I would not ignore residents simply because their concern was difficult, controversial, or not immediately popular with the council majority.
Housing Affordability
What is your stance on prioritizing affordable housing development in Woodbury? What specific actions would you support to ensure teachers, first responders, healthcare workers, and other working families can afford to live in the community they serve?
I believe housing affordability should be a deliberate priority in Woodbury, especially as the city approaches full buildout. A strong community should not become a place where only people who bought in years ago, or people at the highest income levels, can afford to stay. People at different income levels and stages of life should have realistic options to live in, remain in, and contribute to our community.
To me, affordability is part of responsible growth. It should be one of the standards we use to judge whether redevelopment and remaining development actually serve the public. I support partnerships with nonprofit and mission-driven housing providers, mixed-use housing, and prioritizing housing near jobs, transit, services, and existing infrastructure where it makes sense.
During my time in the legislature, I worked on missing-middle housing policies designed to reduce unnecessary barriers to more attainable homes. That included looking at ways to minimize overly restrictive lot size requirements and setbacks, allow duplexes in areas otherwise limited to single-family housing, and consider accessory dwelling units, or ADUs, where they fit. These kinds of policies support affordability because they expand the range of housing available without making every affordable option depend on a large apartment complex or a major new subdivision. They can create smaller and less expensive homes, give seniors more options to downsize, help adult children or caregivers live near family, and make better use of existing infrastructure while still respecting neighborhood character.
Representation & Election Structure
Woodbury elects its Council entirely at-large from large candidate pools, and residents have questioned whether that structure still represents the city well. Would you support any of the following: moving to wards, expanding the council's size, or adopting a municipal primary? Please indicate your position on each of the three. For each you'd support, how would you work toward it?
I support all three items. Woodbury has grown into a large and diverse city, but our election structure has certainly not kept pace with that growth.
Specific to wards, I first started working on this issue in 2023 while working on local government issues in the legislature. When I spoke with the mayor and city administrator about why Woodbury was the largest city in MN without ward representation, I was told the barrier was that Woodbury was not a charter city. In 2024, I helped change state law so that being a charter city was no longer required to have wards. Even with that change, the city has not been willing to seriously consider wards or even let voters decide through a ballot question.
I believe wards would lead to better representation because council members would be directly accountable to specific areas of the city, not only to the citywide electorate. That matters in a community where neighborhoods can have different concerns about growth, traffic, parks, schools, public safety, infrastructure, and redevelopment. Wards can also make campaigns more accessible by reducing the cost and scale of running for office, which can help bring more diverse voices and lived experiences onto the council.
I also support expanding the council’s size because Woodbury is simply too large for a small council to adequately represent the number and range of residents we now have. More council members would allow for more resident contact, more perspectives in decision-making, and a better distribution of workload and policy focus. If we expanded the council to, say, six members, there could also be flexibility to have wards and still one or two at-large council members if residents wanted that.
Finally, I support adopting a municipal primary. When many candidates run for a small number of at-large seats, voters can be overwhelmed and election outcomes may not clearly reflect majority support. A primary would help narrow the field, give voters a clearer general election choice, and create a more structured process for candidates to explain their positions.
Data Centers
Data centers can bring economic development benefits, but place significant demands on energy, water, and infrastructure. What standards in both process and transparency should Woodbury use when evaluating data center proposals?
Very respectfully, I think this question alone shows some of the confusion about the data center discussion and how the city of Woodbury has used that confusion to avoid being transparent on the issue.
Woodbury has had data centers going back to the late ’70s, what I call “traditional data centers” that were once large processors and are now predominantly storage, such as for website hosting or cloud storage.
A couple of weeks ago, I posted as a meteorologist about Woodbury’s current severe drought and my concern over AI data centers and water use, including corporations in Woodbury getting a lower water rate than residents. A sitting city council member attacked me on Facebook, saying my concern was a “newfound outrage” because data centers “aren’t new to Woodbury,” then provided a chart showing data centers being in Woodbury for decades. This is how the city is intentionally framing it in a misleading way.
AI data centers are a new phenomenon over the past few years. They do constant, massive processing, creating high heat. This requires high energy use and a constant way to cool the systems. To allow an existing data center to retrofit operations and have AI capability is not a mere business upgrade, as the city frames it, but instead a major business shift to something with a massive environmental footprint. If an AI data center doesn’t use “open loop” water cooling, then it uses “closed loop,” which often involves dangerous chemicals. In fact, Trump’s EPA just allowed more dangerous chemicals fast-track approval for this. PFAS appears to be one of the possible chemicals. Little data is available because Woodbury did no review on the change of these data centers, but it seems the AI data centers are closed-loop, which begs the questions: what chemicals are used, and where do they go when the systems are flushed out? This could be a groundwater concern.
So, I support an immediate moratorium on any additional transitions to, or new, AI data centers.
I believe there should be a public forum that addresses how large the current AI data centers are, how many we have, and what their exact environmental footprints are. Environmental questions include: how much energy is used, and if they are using chemical cooling, what chemicals are used and where do the chemicals go when the system is flushed?
No business should be allowed to operate in Woodbury under NDAs that keep the public from knowing what is in their own backyards.
Any business, data center or otherwise, should undergo a new review process if it changes operations in a way that significantly increases its environmental footprint.
Growth & Community Character
As Woodbury nears full buildout, what should guide its priorities for the next twenty years: continued growth, redevelopment, housing affordability, or something else? What's one thing you'd change about how the city currently manages growth (zoning, infrastructure approval, or otherwise)?
As Woodbury nears full buildout, I do not believe the next twenty years should be guided by growth for growth’s sake. When my family moved to Woodbury in 1986, there were three stoplights in the whole town and fewer than 20,000 people. The rapid growth over the past few decades brought amazing people and opportunities into Woodbury, but it has also increased pressure on roads, schools, parks, water, public safety, natural resources, and property taxes. At this stage, the question should not be “how much more can we build?” but “what kind of community are we for the people who already live here and for the next generation?”
I would like to see Woodbury shift from a growth mindset to a quality-of-life, affordability, and sustainability mindset. That means being much more selective about new development, especially projects that increase traffic, strain infrastructure—including water resources—remove mature trees, or create long-term public costs without clear community benefits.
This does not mean closing the door on affordability. Woodbury needs housing options that allow people at all stages of life and income levels to thrive in our community. Affordable options can often also be done with climate protection in mind, such as more mixed-use housing and housing near jobs, transit, services, and existing infrastructure where it makes sense.
One thing I would change is how Woodbury evaluates the true cost of growth. Before approving major developments or infrastructure expansions, the city should require clearer analysis of long-term costs, including roads, utilities, water demand, public safety, school impacts, stormwater, maintenance, and environmental loss. Residents should be able to see who benefits, who pays, and whether the project actually improves community well-being. Growth decisions should be transparent, evidence-based, and tied to affordability and livability, not just tax base expansion.
Environmental & Natural Resource Stewardship
Some residents feel Woodbury's forestry and natural resource conservation efforts haven't kept pace with growth. What is your plan to build on or establish meaningful conservation and stewardship practices in the city?
I agree that Woodbury’s conservation and natural resource practices have not kept pace with the speed and scale of growth. Woodbury’s trees, wetlands, prairie remnants, water resources, and open spaces are part of what make this community livable, but too often they are treated as obstacles to development rather than core public infrastructure that protects health, property values, climate resilience, and quality of life.
My plan would start with making natural resource protection a stronger part of every land-use decision, not an afterthought. Development proposals should be evaluated for tree loss, stormwater impacts, groundwater demand, wetland protection, wildlife habitat, heat-island effects, and long-term maintenance costs. If a project removes mature trees or disrupts natural systems, the city should require meaningful mitigation, not just minimal replacement that looks good on paper but does not restore what was lost.
Woodbury also needs a stronger urban forestry strategy. That means diversifying the canopy with climate-resilient native species, planning for pests like emerald ash borer, increasing tree planting in neighborhoods with less shade, and protecting mature trees whenever possible. I would support incentives and stronger standards for development that works around existing natural resources, especially mature trees, instead of clear-cutting first and replanting later.
Water must be central to conservation planning. As a meteorologist who served a two-year term on the MN Clean Water Council, I am especially concerned about drought, groundwater use, runoff, and the long-term impacts of climate change. Woodbury should strengthen stormwater practices, protect wetlands and recharge areas, expand native landscaping, reduce unnecessary turf and irrigation demands, and make sure high-water or high-energy users are evaluated transparently before approval.
Woodbury is nearing full buildout, so the choices we make now will shape the community for decades. We should protect what remains, restore what we can, and make sure future development strengthens rather than weakens the natural systems residents depend on.
Campaign Finance
Do you accept campaign contributions from sources other than individuals (e.g. PACs, corporations, party committees)? If so, from whom, and why?
I do not.
In full disclosure, I did for my previous state senate campaign, because that required a large investment to ensure the seat was not lost, especially after redistricting. Even then, I only accepted donations from groups I aligned with, such as “Women Winning” (a group to elect pro-choice women in MN).
Personal
What are you most passionate about, and why did you choose to run?
I am most passionate about people and making sure the members of the community I grew up in, people who have always been there for me, always have someone there for them. I care deeply about helping people solve problems, whether that means navigating government, understanding their rights, organizing around an issue, or simply making sure someone is willing to listen and take them seriously.
I chose to run because over the past few years I worked closely with the city on a number of issues, and I developed serious concerns about transparency, respect for all residents, and environmental protection. I saw too many moments where residents had legitimate questions or concerns and did not receive the openness, clarity, or dignity they deserved.
It was a difficult decision to put myself back into the political arena. But I believe Woodbury needs someone on the council who will get involved, do the homework, know the facts, work hard, show up for the community, and be a clear voice when things are not right. That is the kind of public servant I have tried to be, and I know I can bring that same commitment to the Woodbury City Council.
Chris Mog
Federal Enforcement & Local Government
What responsibility does local government have to ensure residents feel safe interacting with city services, public spaces, and law enforcement when federal enforcement activity occurs in the community? Would you vote yes on a resolution prohibiting ICE detention facilities in Woodbury, and do you believe city property or resources should be made available to ICE?
Yes to resolution prohibiting ICE detention facilities in Woodbury and no, city property or resources should not be made available to ICE.
Local government and local enforcement have a responsibility to make their residents safe. If there is a legitimate reason for federal enforcement to get involved in the community, there should be clarity about federal enforcement’s actions, especially when it comes to interaction with residents of this community. Federal enforcement has federal jurisdiction. It does not mean they can act with impunity and can disregard US citizens and legal immigrants’ rights.
My campaign platform starts with “Safe Streets” and include ICE-free zones exactly because I believe local government and local enforcement should stand by its community.
Surveillance & Privacy
What is your position on Flock or other ALPR technology in Woodbury? What factors should guide decisions about adopting, expanding, limiting, or removing surveillance technology?
I am against ALPR use in Woodbury.
Woodbury’s Police Dept has been using ALPRs since 2022. Yet it is only through recent news articles and residents’ concerns in local forums and at city council meetings that they are finding out how the system can be abused. I welcome some of their very recent changes (changing data sharing radius and decrease data storage to 7 days from 30 days). But this highlights how after 4 years, they are still not familiar enough with how the system can be misused. While they have made it clear that people with proper accreditations must sign off on data requests, they have not addressed how they would respond to a data request from federal enforcement. They have said the data would not be used for ICE purposes but if the data is requested by federal enforcement, they would have to provide it. Once the data is shared, how it is used is what many of us are apprehensive about.
Oversight & Accountability
Do you support independent oversight of city departments, including law enforcement? What would meaningful oversight look like in practice?
I have not previously considered this issue but I’d be open to independent oversight of city departments including law enforcement. I want people to be able to voice their concerns and have their grievances addressed, even if it means going around their local representatives, whether at the City Council level, the Police Department or the local courts.
In theory, the Founding Fathers designed a federal government system with 3 branches, with checks and balances for the express purpose of oversight. No one branch should be able to wield too much power or be able to unilaterally make decisions that would give them undue power. Except this current federal administration has shown that this system is not as foolproof as we’d like. At the local level, the city council, police department and local courts should be independent of each other to provide oversight over each other.
In practice, there is a lot of cooperation between these entities, making “checks and balances” not work. Oversight falls back on residents. When the people find themselves unable to get their elected officials to answer to them, having an independent body that is not connected to this local government may be the only way to have residents’ voices heard. For a start, I’d propose using the State Attorney’s office as an independent oversight and point of contact for individuals and groups that find themselves unable to get response to concerns at their local level. The hard part about having an independent party involved is they must also have the clout to influence City Council, the Police Department and the local courts. This means an independent body of individuals may nominally be designated but it may not be effective when needed. I would be open to hearing others’ views on this subject.
Transparency & Public Engagement
What will you do to give residents meaningful input into decisions before they're substantially finalized? What specific procedural changes would you support?
At my kickoff event, I took a vote from residents regarding a budget line item discussed during one of Woodbury’s City Council meeting workshops. The line item was for recycling/garbage bins for all the city parks. The price tag was steep at $500,000. I assumed that this would be a split vote. It turned out to be a landslide vote for recycling and garbage bins. This was a line item that had been turned down by the City Council.
At my Woodbury Days booth, I “gave” residents their property tax dollars back and asked them how they would allocate those dollars among school district, city, county and others. I made the exercise harder by listing the services and amenities covered under each. When I spoke with residents, I would point to specific parts. For people with young kids, I would point out Madison’s Playground under City amenities. Then I’d bring up Lake Elmo’s Pond under the County list. People realized rapidly that most everything listed under all these categories are indeed amenities and services they want to keep.
In my short time campaigning for city council, I have already shown that I believe in not just communicating with residents and getting their input but that I also like sharing my understanding of how the local government works.
If elected, I would continue exactly this way, by proposing city council allow input from the Woodbury community when it comes to budget line items that impact them directly. I’d continue sharing about what is happening in Woodbury. For ex: in the latest 7 hour long budget workshop on September 9th, city council went over the reason for the large levy increase. The largest portion of the general fund budget is due to labor costs and in this specific case is due to a significant 40-50% increase in health insurance costs for city employees. Public Safety Chief Posel spoke to how in his department alone, 12 of his personnels had babies this past year. Would Woodbury residents recommend city employees stop having kids? Would they want substandard health benefits for first responders? Clearly, residents care about Public Safety. We understand and sympathize with the need for good and comprehensive health benefits. If this information is not shared, the public might think that the levy is due to irresponsible spending. In fact, the city is being responsible for its employees.
A lot of today’s issues could be solved with effective and open communication from government entities to their constituents. This reluctance to share information is one of the first things I’d like to change if elected.
Advocacy for Constituents
As one of several council members, how would you advance an agenda item that doesn't currently have council majority support if a substantial number of residents want it considered?
1) I would remind council members that the responsibility of city council is to reflect its constituents’ concerns and interest, in private first and then in public if necessary
2) I would ask for a public forum to explore what the public’s concerns are and what possible solutions could solve those concerns
3) I would also like to introduce more disagreement among the city council. Not for “performative” reasons but because there should not be a negative connotation attached to disagreement. The ability to have differing opinions is exactly what makes this country what it is
4) In my short time campaigning, I have already built relationships at city, state and county levels. My financial skillset also will give me some leverage because I may be able to help Woodbury have more choices. I would use those relationships and my skillset to negotiate and influence the council as much as possible.
In short, I will use every available opportunity to advance an agenda item I see a substantial number of residents want to see addressed.
Housing Affordability
What is your stance on prioritizing affordable housing development in Woodbury? What specific actions would you support to ensure teachers, first responders, healthcare workers, and other working families can afford to live in the community they serve?
As someone who has lived in economic scarcity, affordable housing is extremely important to me. Owning a home provides a sense of security that is life-changing.
The issue with affordable housing in Woodbury is that income levels in Woodbury are high. Per the definition used by the City of Woodbury for “Affordable” housing, based on 110-120% Area Median Income, $450,000 and below is considered “affordable”.
Clearly, part of the issue is in the definition of “affordable”. Even if we changed the definition of “affordable”, the bigger issue is how we get that affordable housing to those who need it. For low-income housing, there are income restrictions. For affordable housing, no such restrictions exist. Providing affordable housing does not mean those in need of affordable housing will get access to it.
The City of Woodbury could negotiate further with developers to ensure priority was given to teachers, first responders, healthcare workers and other working families. But the City of Woodbury in fact relies on the development fees and permits for its General Fund. This is why the city does not have much negotiation power.
I do not have an answer for ensuring teachers, first responders, healthcare workers and other working families can afford to live in the community they serve. I have looked into the concept of “First Right of Refusal” but this would put the city in the middle of private transactions. The 21st century Road to Housing Act which recently passed shows this issue of access to affordable housing is one that impacts the entire country. The answer may lie in mortgage legislation (like VA loans). Of course, this leads to having to define what constitutes the right to priority to affordable housing and why certain groups would have priority over others. This shows the complexity of the issue.
Representation & Election Structure
Woodbury elects its Council entirely at-large from large candidate pools, and residents have questioned whether that structure still represents the city well. Would you support any of the following: moving to wards, expanding the council's size, or adopting a municipal primary? Please indicate your position on each of the three. For each you'd support, how would you work toward it?
In 2025, apart from Minneapolis and St Paul, the other cities that made up the top 7 largest cities in MN were: Bloomington (~90,000 residents), Duluth (~87,000 residents), Brooklyn Park (~83,000 residents), Plymouth (~81,000 residents) and Woodbury (~81,500 residents).
-
Bloomington had 6 council members, 4 council members based on 4 wards with 2 council members at large.
-
Duluth has 9 city council members, made up of 5 based on wards and 4 at large.
-
Brooklyn Park has 6 city council members, 2 from each of the three regions (East, Central and West districts)
-
Plymouth has 6 city council members with 2 at large and 4 representing their respective wards.
When first asked about my stance regarding wards by SD47, I was not familiar enough with the issue to make an informed decision. My fear at the time was based on the issue of Gerrymandering and who and how district/ward lines would be drawn and determined. Since then, I’ve learned just how concentrated the power in Woodbury is. I have also seen how specific areas of Woodbury feel underrepresented.
Looking at other cities, the mix of ward based and at-large council members provides the best solution, giving residents ward representative, but also allowing at-large council members who might represent specific skill sets like civil engineering, water treatment or even financial skillsets.
Based on all of this, I support moving to a ward system. I support increasing the size of the city council to allow for a mix of ward council members and at-large council members. Lastly, after a grueling night of 1 minute answers to the same question as 8 other candidates, I really support municipal primaries.
Data Centers
Data centers can bring economic development benefits, but place significant demands on energy, water, and infrastructure. What standards in both process and transparency should Woodbury use when evaluating data center proposals?
For discussion purposes, I will define Hyperscale data centers as those above 20 Megawatt as that is the definition used by several states for legislation/moratorium purposes. The negative impacts as reported by news and social media outlets refers to hyperscale data centers and this is the category of data centers that I oppose.
First, I want to address the issue of NDAs regarding data centers. This past March, state legislators tried to pass a bill to ban local officials from signing NDAs.
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2026/0/SF/4379/versions/latest/
The city of Chaska believes NDAs conflict with the state public records laws. In the private sector, NDAs are meant to keep sensitive information confidential. The nature of public office means that apart from not disclosing technical trademarked technologies, the use of NDAs should not be applicable to the question of whether city council members are engaged in discussions regarding data centers. I understand this is a grey area of the law. This is exactly how many municipalities find themselves in contract for a data center before residents are even aware such talks are going on. This is also some city councils get ousted out of office.
Because I understand the allure of the financial benefits of hyperscale data centers, I would like Woodbury to have a moratorium ready to sign, but to not sign it yet. I understand that Gen AI is a technological advance much like electricity and the internet. It is here to stay. We need data centers. But Woodbury with its water quality issues cannot afford the current consequences that hyperscale data centers bring with them. If the burden of solving the current negative impacts of hyperscale data centers falls back onto the investors and big tech companies that are banking on this technological advance, then they have an incentive to find a solution.
In the meantime, I am keeping an eye on the Rosemount META data center that is supposed to come online this year. If we sign a moratorium at the first approach of a hyperscale data center, we will have 12-18 months to observe first-hand how Rosemount’s quality of life is impacted. Note that since the Rosemount META datacenter was approved, Rosemount has in fact signed a moratorium against future data centers.
Growth & Community Character
As Woodbury nears full buildout, what should guide its priorities for the next twenty years: continued growth, redevelopment, housing affordability, or something else? What's one thing you'd change about how the city currently manages growth (zoning, infrastructure approval, or otherwise)?
Per the 2050 Plan, Woodbury is only 75% developed. The current city council is following this blueprint without considering changing circumstances. Be it data centers or changing demographics, the current city council seems to prioritize following the “plan” over what Woodbury residents want. What should guide Woodbury’s priorities for the next twenty years is what Woodbury residents need and want.
If I could change one thing, I’d change zoning rules. Currently, a data center is considered the same as any other commercial business, when data centers clearly do not behave like other commercial businesses. Their impact on the communities they dwell in cannot be categorized as resembling any other commercial business either.
Environmental & Natural Resource Stewardship
Some residents feel Woodbury's forestry and natural resource conservation efforts haven't kept pace with growth. What is your plan to build on or establish meaningful conservation and stewardship practices in the city?
During my door knocking efforts, I have met many residents who have shared this exact sentiment about Woodbury. I am a big fan of the work of the local watershed districts, promoting for more indigenous plant adoption. I have also wondered about adoption of low growing plant types like creeping thyme to replace some of the grass areas maintained by the city of Woodbury. Creeping thyme is drought resistant, grows low to the ground and does not require mowing. Additionally, it is deer resistant and smells minty. It is also attractive to bees and other pollinators. I’d like to tie environmental stewardship into economical city planning, whether that is through less mowing costs or maybe even in raising revenues through our environmental efforts. If we grew beautiful colorful creeping thyme fields in some of our parks, we could turn Woodbury into a photography destination, capturing tourism revenue.
As a mom of 2, I want to promote environmental stewardship because I want to leave an Earth that is more than concrete jungle for my children.
Campaign Finance
Do you accept campaign contributions from sources other than individuals (e.g. PACs, corporations, party committees)? If so, from whom, and why?
No campaign contributions from sources other than individuals.
Personal
What are you most passionate about, and why did you choose to run?
I would not be who I am today, if not for the specific set of opportunities this country provided. In no other country can one tell their children that they can be anything they want if they work for it. Only in the United States of America is that phrase true. The systematic and unrelenting dismantling of the America I know is what brings me to the table. That is why I am running for Woodbury City Council. I want to safeguard all that has made my life choices possible. I want to make sure many other generations get to experience the American Dream. Two years ago, prior to this Federal Administration, even in my wildest nightmares, I could not have envisioned and prepared for what has happened over that time frame. I fear how rapidly decades of forward thinking and movement have been erased. I am apprehensive of how “accepted” some of these notions pushed forward at the highest levels of government are becoming. DEI has somehow become discriminatory. Educated women are the reason why our national birthrate is so low when in fact the cost of healthcare insurance for women, families and children may be higher than it has ever been. The lack of affordable childcare also impacts family decisions. General affordability for families also makes large families an economic difficulty, even as this Federal administration is cutting SNAP benefits to the very groups that are in fact contributing to the birthrate. This top-down public rhetoric of division, exclusion and general chaos has changed the America I know. I believe in Democracy. I believe in meritocracy. I believe that united, we are stronger. That is why I am running for office.
Steve Morris (incumbent)
Federal Enforcement & Local Government
What responsibility does local government have to ensure residents feel safe interacting with city services, public spaces, and law enforcement when federal enforcement activity occurs in the community? Would you vote yes on a resolution prohibiting ICE detention facilities in Woodbury, and do you believe city property or resources should be made available to ICE?
A complicated question to answer. The City government as an entity has a obligation to protect the health, safety and welfare of all who live, work and visit the city. As such, we want to ensure that everyones rights are protected, and that in any case that calls for it, that any and all city resources are available (Police, EMS) to protect and serve and the residents and visitors feel safe in calling for that help. That means that if state or federal activity, regardless of the agency (ICE, DEA, ATF, FBI, IRS, or others) is performing their enforcement activities that they are doing so lawfully, and I committ to continuing and ensuring our community knows they can call on us to protect those rights. As I have said pubicly on the resolution on a detention center, the US constitution prohibits lower levels of government from such prohibitions and “commandeering” of state and local resources. Such a resolution prohibiting a detention center would not be enforceable. Additonally, the purchase of land is a private transaction, and sales of such are not under the purview or authority of the city government. All of this being said, I believe that the city should do everything in its ability to discourage such a facility. Candidates for office should ensure they work with legal experts and the city attorneys office to ensure answers to this question are viable and provide real solutions to the community. While I am not a lawyer, I have spoken at length with the City Attorney, city staff and others on the potential tools that could be available. The single most powerful tool will be the community voicing its opposition to such a use, and I support the requirement that ANY such facility requires a public hearing, and using our zoning authority to the extent possible withhin the restrictions of the Constitution and settled case law to discourage such a facility and create as many roadblocks and hurdles possibility to make such a facility difficult to develop.
Surveillance & Privacy
What is your position on Flock or other ALPR technology in Woodbury? What factors should guide decisions about adopting, expanding, limiting, or removing surveillance technology?
Flock, ALPR and other technology must be reviewed for security (data), access, transparency and value. This is not and should not be limited to Public Safety, but in all things the city does. The use of technology and AI can be a force multiplier and efficiency tool as well as an investigative tool, but must be measured not only its its value to aid in its intended uses, but exposure to misuse, bad actors and exposure of information. I do not diminish the concerns many have raised about the technology, and share several of those objections. The use of technology, and in paticular, Flock, has made a demonstrated impact in our community’s safety. The cases, the recovery’s, weapons and drugs taken off the street is substantial. The city must work to communicate to the community with facts and specificty the steps taken to protect data, and protect from misuse. This includes an indpendent 3rd party review (annually) of policies, procedures and use of these systems. The 3rd party auditor selection must be public and reviewed by the Audit and Investment Commission as well as the Multiculural Advisory Committee. The City council should not be part of the selection, so as to avoid even the appearence of inpropriety. The results of this audit and review should be made publiclly and available for review (website). I add to this, that Flock is just one example of technology. We must be mindful and transparent in all technology adoption and use, and I’m supportive ofthe creation of a “Community Oversight Commission” tasked with the review and recommendation of technology, policies, and audits. I’m not aware of any such group at a local government level, but this is an area I’d like to see Woodbury lead the way in. Protecting the trust the community has in its government is equally as important as is the actual protection of our community.
Oversight & Accountability
Do you support independent oversight of city departments, including law enforcement? What would meaningful oversight look like in practice?
I swear, I didn’t see this question before my previous answer. The answer is yes. I would say this shouldn’t JUST be law enforcement. Meaningful oversight should be a standing commission that includes the chair or vice-chairs of the other commissions, and additional at-large community members of not just residents, but of the business, faith, and non-profit communities as well. The commission should haveresponsibilty for reviewing and recommending changes or additions of policies, procedures and vendors the city uses. The commission should oversee the creation and public reporting of an annual oversight report and work with staff and other stakeholders to create performance measures and communications around the oversight. In my opinion however, this must be considered carefully as to not render the city council innefective or avoid the responsibilty or accountabilty
Transparency & Public Engagement
What will you do to give residents meaningful input into decisions before they're substantially finalized? What specific procedural changes would you support?
The premise of this question suggests residents don’t currently have meaningful input into decisions. I reject that premise, while concurring that more can be done. It’s also important to note, that not all stakeholders are residents. Woodbury must value all input, not just the residents. A thriving community exists where residents, vistors, businesses and entities work together and communicate for the collective good. As the incumbent candidate, I’ve witnessed first-hand how public input shaped decisions and policies. I’ve lived and worked in communities that ignore input because they’re “not a voter”. We must do better in Woodbury and I committ to continuing these efforts. During my time on the council, I worked with the mayor and council to create and expand the community engagement and equity team. One of the critical outcomes of this position and team was to create a set of policies and procedures to guide staff on how and when to effectively communicate to the community. I committ to continuing this work and consistently reviewing the public communications and engagement teams progress and evolution.
Advocacy for Constituents
As one of several council members, how would you advance an agenda item that doesn't currently have council majority support if a substantial number of residents want it considered?
Readers of this answer are not likely to like my response here.mThere’s a difference in not agreeing to something and not considering something. In my 7 years on council, I’ve not witnessed a situation in which an agenda item is not considered when the public has demonstrated a desire to review. Park reservation fees, street assessment policy, housing or commercial development applications, chicken and livestock ordinances, and many many others. To answer the question in the affirmative, what I’ve found to be successful is getting to know my fellow council members and understanding their approach and line of thinking. If I can then present the item in a way that addresses their priorities I’m more likely to gain traction in having the issue discussed.
Housing Affordability
What is your stance on prioritizing affordable housing development in Woodbury? What specific actions would you support to ensure teachers, first responders, healthcare workers, and other working families can afford to live in the community they serve?
Affordability and housing is an area I’ve been passionate about while on council. There isn’t a single lever to be pulled to answer the issue, but more so is a collection of multiple efforts. New ideas I hope to have the council consider are a requirement in zoning for all multi-family projects to have a certain numerical of 70% AMI (or better) units as a condition for approval. For larger single-family developments (a specific value/size to be determine a triggered level), I’d like to investigate a certain amount of acreage committed to 70% or better AMI products. I’ve advocated in previous budgets and will continue to, for the city’s HRA to maximise its funding for the maximum impact. This includes small programs and large impact projects at the same time. First time homeownership down payment assitance, First generation homeownership loans, as well as a committment to keeping folks in their homes with repair loans. Woodbury has ranked as 6th best in 197 metro area communities in new construction of affordable housing by using policies such as density bonuses. I’ve been appointed and served on the Met Councils Land Use Advisory Commission & on Metro Cities Transportation and Housing committee in addition to their board of directors. These positions, along with key staff members placed in similar positions in bodies outside the city, places Woodbury in a leading position to lead by example, and be at the forefront of the efforts. I support using the LAHA funds received for the city, and leveraging our HRA funding, while strategically reviewing other financial tools, such as acting as the conduit for financing, lending the City’s AAA credit rating, or in special cases, considering the use of Tax Incremental Financing (TIF) are all tools to be wielded in these efforts. It should also be noted that minding the overall budget, working to watch overall spending aids in affordabilty for everyone. Advocating on a state and federal level for additional funding support, targeted grants, for housing and for other areas, allows the budget allocated to property taxes or user fees to be reduced also aids in affordability efforts.
Representation & Election Structure
Woodbury elects its Council entirely at-large from large candidate pools, and residents have questioned whether that structure still represents the city well. Would you support any of the following: moving to wards, expanding the council's size, or adopting a municipal primary? Please indicate your position on each of the three. For each you'd support, how would you work toward it?
The question should be asked is what is the problem attempting to be solved? A pool of 9 candidates for 2 positions does present hurdles, and while moving to ward representation has merits, it has equal drawbacks to be considered. In the last 6 council elections, there is an average of 7 candidates for 2 positions, with 2 of those elections having only 4 candidates for 2 positions. The mayor went uncontested in 2 of the last 4 Mayoral races. We are 36 square miles, a 6x6 community. While I would agree that neighborhoods have unique personalities and sometimes, unique needs, ward represenation doesn’t necessarily solve for that. In fact, it can be the opposite. There are areas of the city that have not fielded a single candidate in 20+ years. The argument for more “local” representation is not necessarily solved by wards in such a geographically small city. In fact, by being entirely at large, each person has 5 representatives, all with the same exact job in representation. Expanding the size of the council to me has merit. While the Washington County board of Commissioners only has 5 elected commissioners, the same as the city, I could see that option being explored. A muncipal primary would take action to the state legislature to occur, but again, has merits worth exploring. An idea not offered in the question I’d like to see, is for statutory cities to have the ability to adopt ranked choice voting. Overall, what we do want, is to ensure we look exploring and understanding any potential barriers towards someone’s desire to run for elected office, Removing and reducing barriers such as filing fees, campaign expenses and fundraising requirements (that could be increased with the introduction of a primary) or the continued efforts of organized parties endorsing (or “supporting”) candidates that give those candidates financial and organizational advantages deters people from running for office. While I understand the desire of organized potlicial parties to educate their supporters on candidates running for office, the process for endorsements should be transparent, communicated and fair. In short, to answer this question, the City should first explore what the community’s position of the problem is, so solutions can be discussed and offered to address a specific and understood problem.
Data Centers
Data centers can bring economic development benefits, but place significant demands on energy, water, and infrastructure. What standards in both process and transparency should Woodbury use when evaluating data center proposals?
I would support, and have been in the process of, working with city staff and members of the council, to present the council an option of a moratorium on data centers to perform reserach and gather information on what the city can and should do for heavy resource users. Those considerations I’ll be recommending are not limited to Data Centers. The specificity on Data Centers should be expanded to include ANY large resource user, not just data centers. Any application of new building or existing use that results in a property or business being a large user of resources including but not limited to power, water, sewer, street/traffic, or other public infrastructure, AND/OR any property or business that places strain or lends concern to the city’s environmental stewardship plans through emissions, production or interactions should have limits placed on it, be required to mitigate such concerns, or be required to compensate for consideration for such needs. Such considerations and review should be required to follow the standard public hearing and discussion process through the Planning Commissionand city council. I also believe that no member of the city council be allowed to sign an NDA for projects and applications as it runs contrary to an elected officials obligations to their consitintuents.
Growth & Community Character
As Woodbury nears full buildout, what should guide its priorities for the next twenty years: continued growth, redevelopment, housing affordability, or something else? What's one thing you'd change about how the city currently manages growth (zoning, infrastructure approval, or otherwise)?
That’s difficult to answer as all of those issues and more, contribute to a community’s character and a city that only focuses on a singular focus in my opinion, is not effective. My answer to this is that the community will determine what it’s priiorities are through the comprehensive planning process. The council, while elected to represent the community, in questions as big as this, should listen first, then decide. This is a great question and timely with the comprehensive planning process getting started, but it shouldn’t be a council members opinion that drives this. I’ll also flip the question in answering that there is a key element that I wouldn’t change, and that’s the ability for the public to offer feedback on building applications. While the intent of the housing bill in the last session of the state legislature was true and necessary, there were elements in it that would hinder and take steps backwards in our growth and ability to grow systematically, effeciently and without putting burdon on existing taxpyaers. While we recognize there are communities that don’t share in our enthusiasm for housing development, removing public feedback as part of the process, isn’t good government in my opinion. The previous and current methods of growth management create a staggered and consistent approach that allows the city to grow geographically coordinated so as not to skip over sections and areas, which reduced the infrastructure requirements to be built out and paid for by existing taxpayers, and therefore requires and allows for the development to pay for its own infrastruture as its needed. Roads, water, sewer, storm water are all then paid for as necessary by the development and not the existing tax base. The previoius committment to 50/50 mixture of single-family and multi-family residential should continue, the committment to having a park within 1/2 mile should continue. The adoption of the Bike & Pedestrian plan lays out the commitment to bikers and pedestrians with street widths, trails, sidewalks and street engineering such as pedestrian refuges/islands, bump outs and raised crosswalks.
Environmental & Natural Resource Stewardship
Some residents feel Woodbury's forestry and natural resource conservation efforts haven't kept pace with growth. What is your plan to build on or establish meaningful conservation and stewardship practices in the city?
During my term on City Council, we’ve worked to engage the community to create and adopt the city’s first Environmental Stewardship plan. The first in our history, and provided a necessary evaluation of previous efforts and identified hundreds of future efforts suggested and available. The City has planted substantially more trees its removed (primarily removal of Ash tree’s due to EAB) for the last several years. In fact the 5 year average is 507 removed and 829 added each year for the last 5 years. In the 7 years I’ve served on council we’ve added 122 acres of parkland or natural space. We’ve secured funding to restore shoreland and open space around La-Lake, and added 14 miles of trails to our trail system. The city has added solar power system to public buildings, and made efforts and progress with its fleet of vehicles with hybrid and electric vehicles. Evidenced by this questions premise, it’s evident that the efforts and activities need to be better communicated and community engaged with to receive feedback as to where its felt these efforts have fallen short.
Campaign Finance
Do you accept campaign contributions from sources other than individuals (e.g. PACs, corporations, party committees)? If so, from whom, and why?
No. None. I respect the position and the community with the direction that the position is non-partisan, which not only means organized (or smaller non-recognized) parties, PAC’s or groups with financial contributions, but also of contributions such as access to voter information, lists, emails and members. While this does put me or any other candidate not choosing to share this committment at a disadvantage, I believe in following the intent our community has asked of its elected leaders to be non-partisan. While I do share the values and beliefs of some groups, my committment to the communities direction and policy to be non-partisan holds my committment.
Personal
What are you most passionate about, and why did you choose to run?
The Community. I’m passionate about the community and this comes across in my sometimes characterized rough demeanor. While anyone that’s worked closely will attest, I can be passionate and animated, my desire to do my very best for the community is at the heart of my intent. I chose to run for re-election as while I believe in term-limits, there’s a value to the institutional knowledge of a body. Losing both of the most tenured councilmembers in one term would be deterimental to the progress and efforts being made. With several large and impactful issues in front of the council in the next term, the impact to Woodbury taxpayers is substantial, and having the background and history during this time is critical. What’s also important to me, as I’ve been able to work with 6 different council members in 7 years to enact meaninful policy and staffing changes that help move our community forward, to continue those efforts with a new voice at the table.
Samantha Wolf
Federal Enforcement & Local Government
What responsibility does local government have to ensure residents feel safe interacting with city services, public spaces, and law enforcement when federal enforcement activity occurs in the community? Would you vote yes on a resolution prohibiting ICE detention facilities in Woodbury, and do you believe city property or resources should be made available to ICE?
Trust in city services and law enforcement is paramount to the success of a community. Our city resources have no place in civil federal enforcement activity, such as what occurred during the Twin Cities Metro Surge occupation. It has been proven over and over again that communities are less safe when people are afraid to call their local police. Woodbury PD has gone to great lengths to be a trusted resource in the community, and I denounce any federal cooperation that puts that trust in jeopardy. I would absolutely vote yes on a resolution prohibiting ICE detention facilities in Woodbury and city property and resources should not be made available to ICE.
Surveillance & Privacy
What is your position on Flock or other ALPR technology in Woodbury? What factors should guide decisions about adopting, expanding, limiting, or removing surveillance technology?
I support giving our public safety professionals the tools they need to keep Woodbury safe, but I also believe those tools need strong oversight. ALPR cameras raise legitimate concerns about privacy, data retention, and the potential for misuse. I am generally opposed to their use in Woodbury. I would need to see clear safeguards and limited data collection practices in place from Flock (Woodbury’s current ALPR supplier) in order to change my position on this. I support an independent review of the technology in Woodbury, and I have questions about why an independent review was not implemented immediately, before a contract was ever signed with Flock. I believe we can prioritize public safety without compromising the privacy and civil liberties of our residents.
Oversight & Accountability
Do you support independent oversight of city departments, including law enforcement? What would meaningful oversight look like in practice?
I support independent oversight of city departments, including law enforcement. Supporting public safety and providing oversight are not opposing values. They are both part of responsible leadership.
In practice, meaningful oversight means asking questions about how public dollars are being spent, whether policies are working, whether residents are being treated equitably, and whether city leadership is communicating clearly about those decisions. It means looking at outcomes, not just approving budgets and moving on. And when constituents come with concerns about city departments, they deserve the opportunity to ask their questions and receive clear, honest answers.
Transparency & Public Engagement
What will you do to give residents meaningful input into decisions before they're substantially finalized? What specific procedural changes would you support?
Residents deserve meaningful opportunities to participate in decisions before they are finalized, not simply the opportunity to comment after the fact. I’m committed to fostering an inclusive community where residents have the opportunity to share ideas and concerns about the future of Woodbury.
What this looks like:
-
Record city workshops, rather than simply streaming them. Residents shouldn’t have to keep their Wednesday nights free to know what their elected officials are discussing.
-
Establish regular office hours to create more opportunities for two-way conversations between residents and council members.
-
Support quarterly town halls where neighbors can ask questions, share ideas, and raise concerns in a public forum.
-
Oppose non-disclosure agreements for data centers and support efforts at the state level to prohibit them, because residents deserve access to information about projects that could significantly affect their community.
I have personally experienced how difficult it is to get something on the city council agenda, when advocating on behalf of 600 petition signers who wanted a backyard chicken ordinance in Woodbury. I am interested in determining how a well-meaning group of citizens can get something before council, while also ensuring that regular business can get completed in the limited number of yearly council meetings.
Advocacy for Constituents
As one of several council members, how would you advance an agenda item that doesn't currently have council majority support if a substantial number of residents want it considered?
I would first ensure that the residents who want the issue considered are well-informed. They deserve to understand the reasoning behind council decisions, including why an item may not have majority support. I would communicate openly, respectfully, and without judgement. I would work with concerned constituents to gather research, answer questions, and bring their perspectives forward. Ultimately, I would advocate for the issue based on the facts at hand and rejecting hyperbole. I commit to respecting my fellow council members and continuing to look for common ground. Even when we disagree, residents deserve to know they have been heard and taken seriously.
Housing Affordability
What is your stance on prioritizing affordable housing development in Woodbury? What specific actions would you support to ensure teachers, first responders, healthcare workers, and other working families can afford to live in the community they serve?
There is a housing shortage in the state of Minnesota and Woodbury must do their part, as should our neighbors. I would look for opportunities to combine HRA funds with federal HOME funds, Low-Income Housing Tax Credits, Metropolitan Council programs, and Minnesota Housing resources to expand affordable housing opportunities without further burdening the Woodbury tax base. I support mixed-use development in commercial districts, creating more accessible options for young people, first-time buyers, couples, seniors, and working families. Landbanking can also be a useful strategy that the city can use to impact affordable housing. Finally, if taxpayers provide an incentive for developers to build affordable housing, they deserve transparency and accountability. I would ask questions like: How many affordable units? Affordable to whom? For how long? And what happens if the project changes?
Representation & Election Structure
Woodbury elects its Council entirely at-large from large candidate pools, and residents have questioned whether that structure still represents the city well. Would you support any of the following: moving to wards, expanding the council's size, or adopting a municipal primary? Please indicate your position on each of the three. For each you'd support, how would you work toward it?
Woodbury is now the 8th largest city in Minnesota, yet we still use an at-large system for our city council. Moving to a ward system would ensure that every neighborhood has a direct voice at City Hall.
The Problem: As it stands, all city council members could legally reside in the same neighborhood, or even the same HOA. This causes blatant conflict of interest issues. Woodbury has many diverse neighborhoods with unique needs and characteristics, including lot size, HOA involvement, traffic concerns, and business development. To have a truly representative government, we need representatives who live throughout Woodbury, to speak to the unique needs of citizens in their ward.
I support a ward system for Woodbury but more importantly I believe that the citizens of Woodbury deserve to choose how they want to be represented. A ward system would go directly on the ballot, so that voters can decide whether or not they want wards.
I personally would advocate for 4 ward council members, 2 at large members, and 1 mayor. This increases the city council from 5 to 7 (including the mayor). This is in line with other cities of our size and increases representation.
If a ward system does not go into place, I believe a primary system should be established. There will be trade-offs because an extra primary election will cost the city money, but I believe we should seriously consider it. As it stands, there are too many people regularly running for city council positions, which is confusing to the voter and has too many people opting out of choosing local candidates altogether because the burden of researching 10 candidates for one non-partisan office is too great. So many candidates on the ballot also makes it more likely to have the majority vote AGAINST the person who ends up winning the election. In my opinion, that is not proper representative government.
Data Centers
Data centers can bring economic development benefits, but place significant demands on energy, water, and infrastructure. What standards in both process and transparency should Woodbury use when evaluating data center proposals?
When the current city council allowed two data centers to come into our community in 2025, they should have asked far more questions than they did. It has been well documented that data centers are extremely resource intensive, especially when it comes to clean water, which is a particular issue in Woodbury.
Woodbury’s clean water is precious, and residents know this. However, businesses currently pay $2.50 per 1,000 gallons for commercial water, while residential rates increase with usage. This includes the two data centers who are already here. Residents should not have to shoulder rising costs while approving water-intensive businesses without understanding their impacts.
I support a moratorium on new data centers while Woodbury develops standards for water, energy, infrastructure, and transparency. Residents deserve to know what is proposed, what it will require, and who will pay.
Growth & Community Character
As Woodbury nears full buildout, what should guide its priorities for the next twenty years: continued growth, redevelopment, housing affordability, or something else? What's one thing you'd change about how the city currently manages growth (zoning, infrastructure approval, or otherwise)?
I think we’ve got to get very serious about protecting our parks, trails, and natural spaces in Woodbury as we build out. Climate resiliency is going to be of utmost importance in the next 30-50 years, and we have the opportunity to strongly position Woodbury for that upcoming challenge. As it relates to zoning, when developers get variances for different reasons, I want real transparency and accountability baked into that decision. I want to encourage small and independent businesses to move into Woodbury, diversifying the business climate and increasing the opportunity for residents to keep their money local. I want to encourage things like: Public art, pollinator gardens, flexibility for backyard agriculture, food trucks and pop-ups, better walkability, mixed use development, and public gathering spaces for people to build community. I envision a Woodbury that is truly vibrant city, putting community connectedness at the forefront of our goals.
Environmental & Natural Resource Stewardship
Some residents feel Woodbury's forestry and natural resource conservation efforts haven't kept pace with growth. What is your plan to build on or establish meaningful conservation and stewardship practices in the city?
The city of Woodbury has an excellent Environmental Stewardship Plan that I will continue to advocate for. We are also a green step city, and I want to continue that process to keep that distinction and improve upon it.
Woodbury should be thinking not just about today when making decisions about growth and development. We need to be thinking about how our city can be positioned for climate resiliency 30-50 years from now.
I would support:
-
Exploring passive-house and energy-efficient building standards for new development.
-
Reducing emissions from city buildings and municipal vehicles.
-
Planting more shade trees in parks and along high-traffic trails.
-
Increasing the diversity of trees in Woodbury, preparing for the likelihood of our planting zones, winter temperatures, and tree-harming insects changing with warmer climates.
-
Using native, low-maintenance plants instead of turf grass where appropriate.
-
Reducing irrigation and protecting our water resources.
-
Maintaining strong environmental protections as Woodbury continues to grow.
-
Encouraging not just residents to do their part, but commercial owners as well.
I want our children to inherit a Woodbury that is prosperous, resilient, and environmentally responsible for decades to come.
Campaign Finance
Do you accept campaign contributions from sources other than individuals (e.g. PACs, corporations, party committees)? If so, from whom, and why?
I do not accept campaign contributions from corporations or PACs. I did accept a contribution from the local DFL Senate 47 District, as I know those funds are raised primarily from local residents, and I know the DFL party generally reflects my values. Everyone who helps on my campaign volunteers their time, and all funds are spent on material resources.
Personal
What are you most passionate about, and why did you choose to run?
My campaign for Woodbury City Council is dedicated to transparent, accessible leadership and community-first solutions. I believe in a local government that works for the people, led by the people.
My professional background is in nonprofit communications and grassroots organizing. This work has brought me in close contact with different marginalized communities. From working with adults with disabilities to helping women start small businesses, I have always found myself drawn to work that is meaningful, and work that makes a measurable difference in my community.
Throughout my career I’ve stepped into numerous leadership roles and organizing opportunities, including serving a two-year term on the board of the Minnesota Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities, advocating at the state level for disability rights. These roles shaped my understanding of effective state-level advocacy.
Recently, as an organizer with Minnesota United Parents, I championed policies designed to put families first at the state level. My work focused on securing universal childcare, defending paid sick and safe time, and ensuring our public schools remain fully funded.
I am prepared to bring this same energy and experience to the Woodbury City Council, advocating for a city that prioritizes transparency and the well-being of all its citizens. Together, we can build a stronger, more inclusive future for our home.