Video of Dean Zimmermann Lying to Landlord Group

Convicted felon Dean Zimmermann tells a bunch of landlords that he is innocent... and they believe him. Compare what he says in the video with the notes of the trial. Links to all 8 days of the trial are on the sidebar.

Zimmermann Sentenced to 2 1/2 Years for Bribery Conviction.

The Strib:

U.S. District Judge Ann Montgomery, in handing down the sentence, said that Zimmermann, 64, can have his sentence reduced by seven months if he completes a drug treatment program. Montgomery said Zimmermann admitted to being a regular user of marijuana and drinking beer.

She said Zimmermann must report for prison on Jan. 28 and that she will recommend that he serve his time at the federal facility in Yankton, S.D.

Loosestrife comments:

I doubt seriously whether anyone will really push Zimmermann to consider the contradiction of his sleazy games with a shady developer and his professed leftist passion for social justice. No one will bemoan the damage that Zimmermann has done to to Minneapolis left as he arrogantly flaunted his power as a cynical elected official.

Links to notes of all 8 days of the Zimmermann trial on the sidebar.

Star Tribune :Zimmermann convicted in federal bribery case

Randy Furst filed this report minutes after the verdict.

Zimmermann, who represented the city's sixth ward from 2001 to 2005, was charged in a federal indictment with four counts, three involving allegations that he took $7,200 in cash bribes from a property developer, Gary A. Carlson. He was convicted on three of the charges.

The last count that was dismissed was about the retaining wall.

Jury Finds Zimmermann Guilty on 3 Counts Out of 4

Details later....

While we wait for the release of the FBI videos... a look back (and forward) by Loosetrife at Mpls Upside Down.

Wednesday - Closing Arguments

Liz McLemore and I were at the final day of the trial. Liz will have detailed notes on today's closing arguments soon.

The jury continues its deliberations. When they deliver their verdict, we'll post it.

MPR Trial Coverage: Zimmermann Had $35,000 in Credit Card Debt.

MPR's Brandt Williams has a good story HERE.

I'll be at the courthouse today with Liz McLemore for the closing arguments.

While you're waiting for the verdict, read Liz McLemore's detailed notes on Day 5.

Guilty or not guilty?... Stay tuned!

City Pages on Last Day of Testimony

Paul Demko in the City Pages Blotter:

During the morning session, the prosecutor attempted to browbeat Zimmerman into admitting that he had repeatedly lied to FBI investigators when they initially interviewed him. The pair repeatedly jostled over exactly what constitutes a lie. "A lie," Zimmeraman stated at one point, "would be something like your opening statement to the jury."

We hope to get the FBI videos up on this blog soon so people can decide for themselves who is a liar.

Strib: Zimmermann Accuses Prosecutor of Lying

The Strib's Randy Furst on the Zimmermann's cross-examination this morning:

In his cross-examination, Docherty led Zimmermann through the transcript of an interview two FBI agents conducted with him Sept. 8, 2005.

In relentless detail, Docherty attempted to show that Zimmermann repeatedly lied to the agents, first denying that he had taken any cash payments from Carlson, then gradually admitting that he did, then claiming all the cash was at home in his desk. Then he acknowledged that he had spent most of it.

Zimmermann testified that he panicked during the FBI interview which was why he misled the agents, but denied that he considered the payments payoffs for trying to help Carlson win a zoning change and get a shopping mall built for Somali immigrants.

At one point Zimmermann claimed that Docherty had lied in his opening statement, causing Docherty to object to his characterization.

What I heard Zimmermann had said was "At least my lies aren't scripted."

Update: Zimmermann actually said to the prosecutor that a lie " "would be something like your opening statement to the jury."

Closing arguments tomorrow.

Zimmermann Under Cross-Examination

We'll have details later.

The prosecutor questioned Zimmermann about the $5,000 mystery check that was introduced by the defense yesterday. Zimmermann was also questioned about the missing $1,000 and apparently, he admitted spending most of it. Zimmermann was also asked about the sorry state of his finances at the time he accepted the cash from Carlson.

Does not look good for Zimmermann.

Strib: "Zimmermann 'surprised' at getting cash"

Article in today's Star Tribune Star Tribune about Zimmerman's testimony Monday.

There appears to be a few minor errors in this article (Thompson instead of Taylor).

I am grateful that the Star Tribune has assigned Randy Furst full-time to the trial. Furst has done a good job covering the trial. Here are links to his articles at Yahoo News Search. MPR has a reporter at the trial, but I haven't heard his reports or found a link on the MPR web site.

It's too bad that other publications haven't sent reporters to cover the trial full-time. Perhaps they are waiting for the tapes and transcripts.

Today, the government will cross-examine Zimmermann and there may be closing statements.

Liz McLemore will be at the trial today. Read her notes on Day 4 HERE.

Zimmermann Takes the Stand

The Star Tribune on the morning session:

Minneapolis defense attorney Joe Friedberg, who isn't involved in the Zimmermann case, said today that it wasn't risky for Zimmermann to testify.

"It seems to me when in fact you have pictures and recordings of someone taking money that the government alleges is a bribe, there is no such thing as high risk," Friedberg said. He said in order for Zimmermann to be acquitted, he needs to explain his conduct.

Closing arguments tomorrow.

Notes from the Zimmermann Trial-Day 3

Another cautionary note from the author, Liz McLemore: despite the length and detail of these notes, I’m certain that I’ve missed portions of the testimony. I’d advise anyone interested in details to consult the transcripts once they’re released. These are notes, not transcripts.

Once again, I’ve inserted my comments within square brackets [ ] throughout the text.

Day 3: Wednesday, August 2, 2006

[The trial resumed at around 9:40 today, with a thin crowd of observers in the courtroom (not uncommon for the morning). I’m amused: before the judge or jury arrived, the prosecutor complimented the defense attorney on his suit.]

The trial picked up where it left off yesterday: Carlson is again sworn in on the witness stand, and the prosecution resumes the videotape of Zimmermann and Carlson having lunch at the Baja on June 14, 2005; at this point, the bill has been paid and the two of them are chatting. Carlson says something about his company being 8A in federal defense, then says he’ll start locating friends and relatives, telling Zimmermann “you start pushing” on the zoning. Zimmermann says Chicago Commons is actually in Lilligren’s ward, will be in Schiff’s ward after redistricting (it borders the 9th ward now). He adds something about Schiff not being a real favorite, “not with the Sabris.” Zimmermann says we’ll have to figure out how to dissociate ourselves from them, adding “you think he [Azzam Sabri] switched the documents?” Carlson again insists that “danna” company is owned by “Julie and I.” He then talks about the Village Market and criminal activity. One of them [I’m not sure which] says “it’s hard to know what’s a shop there and what’s not,” and Carlson says “each one is twice as sleazy as the next.” One of them says, “Azzmir [sp? Sabri] is the one in Jordan…Did they arrive here with money?” Carlson says, “They sure figured out how to assemble a lot of money in a hurry…except Azzam. He’s got no money.” Carlson then lists the names of Azzam’s children, with one of them being “Danna.” Carlson says he [Azzam, maybe the Sabris in general] doesn’t pay taxes, doesn’t care about the neighborhood, doesn’t care about America.

Once they’re outside the restaurant, Carlson offers Zimmermann a ride. Zimmermann declines, and Carlson says something like, “I guess you can’t be seen riding in Hummer.” Carlson adds, “Now Lilligren’s riding a bicycle, too. DWI’ll do that.” Zimmermann says, “I want to deny categorically that I’m calling for his resignation.”

At this point, the prosecution decided to replay the beginning of the videotape for the jury because technical issues made it difficult to catch the first part yesterday. Once again we see Zimmermann and Carlson be seated at a table at the Baja; they chat for a few minutes about the weather; Carlson decides to order a “Bacardi coke,” and Zimmermann decides to have the same. [I believe they also ordered food at this time.] Carlson hands Zimmermann an envelope and says, “This is for that attorney thing…use it what you want…Be careful with that money….” Zimmermann checks the envelope and then pockets it. Carlson examines a computer printout of an email that Zimmermann said he had printed off right before he came.

The prosecution stopped the tape. The prosecuting attorney, Docherty, asked Carlson how much lunch cost that day; Carlson said about $28. Carlson then asked him who had picked up the bill, and he replied that he had. Carlson said he contacted Zimmermann the next day, June 15th: One of the agents (Kukura or Bisswurm) was present when Carlson made the call. The audio tape is presented to the jury as Government Exhibit 19.

Third audiotape: phone conversation with Zimmermann on June 15, 2005 (recorded with Agent Kukura or Agent Bisswurm)

Zimmermann begins the conversation by saying he had talked with Schiff: the zoning for Chicago Commons was OR2 now, and he thought OR2 was better for what Carlson wanted. Carlson replies by saying that zoning classification allows for only two businesses, and he wants more retail…He says he’s trying to get more businesses [into Chicago Commons]. He adds something like, “Got to get on that agenda” [I’m assuming he means the full Council here, but it wasn’t clear]. Carlson asks about the relation to the Planning Commission; at this point, Carlson wonders if the issue would go to the full City Council regardless of the Zoning and Planning/Planning Commission vote. Zimmermann says if Carlson’s zoning application were to be turned down, he’d have 10 days to appeal the decision. Carlson asks, “could I then be on the agenda?” Zimmermann says he doesn’t know, then asks Carlson to email him a list of businesses…he says he wants the right zoning.

Carlson says again, “get me on the agenda,” and adds something like, “remember the Baja conversation and those campaign workers?” Zimmermann says “uh huh,” then adds, “if what Schiff says is true, the best zoning is OR2; I don’t think it’s true only two businesses.” Zimmermann then explains that as head of the Zoning and Planning committee, Schiff also sits on the Planning Commission. Carlson says he needs to talk to Shirley [Heyer], and Zimmermann says he might have her cell phone number. He offers to get it to Carlson and “get them [the neighborhood] behind you.”

The prosecution then turned back to Carlson on the witness stand, asking if Carlson had sent Zimmermann a list of the types of businesses he wanted. The prosecution entered the email as Exhibit 20, dated June 16, 2005. The email was shown on the screens; the list included a restaurant, a dry cleaners, a sandwich shop, a health food store, and a coffee shop—all neighborhood businesses that local residents might frequent without having to drive.

Carlson called Zimmermann later that day (at Zimmermann’s Council office). The audio tape of that conversation is entered as Government Exhibit 21. Like the previous call, this one was made at the request and in the presence of an FBI agent.

Fourth audiotape: phone conversation with Zimmermann on June 16, 2005 (recorded with Agent Kukura or Agent Bisswurm)

A Council aide answers the phone and transfers the call to Zimmermann. It sounds as though Zimmermann is reading from printed material. He says, “I don’t see a problem with C2, I mean OR2. Two businesses is only one part…bunch of crap here, OK, Natalie, my aide, did a bunch of research…it’s saying…OR2 zones, different categories: office by matter of right, bed and breakfast…conditional use, neighborhood services…maximum 2000 sq. ft., skip past that to ‘planned community development.’ If we do all this with ‘planned community development,’ there are no restrictions (OR2), so it’s just what you call it…I’ve got a call in to Lonnie Nichols.” Carlson tells him the Planner working on the application is Michael Orange. Zimmermann says, “we looked it up and it said Lonnie.” Carlson explains that’s no longer true [Michael Orange is now working on the application].

Zimmermann then asks Carlson about the emailed list of businesses, wondering if the list is complete. Carlson says it is, adding that the dry cleaning will not be done on site, but is just a drop off and pick up business. Zimmermann says, “I just think we’ve got a winner here.” Carlson replies, “god, you’re doing a good job.” Zimmermann says, “I’ll call Orange…I think we stop using the words ‘neighborhood serving retail’ and call it ‘planned commercial development.’” Carlson asks if he still needs to appeal. Zimmermann says, “I don’t know, I’ll call Orange.” Carlson then asks Zimmermann if he’s available for lunch, and Zimmermann says, “Why don’t we put that off and get this project figured out, then we’ll get together later.”

The prosecution then turned to Carlson and asked, “Was that your most detailed conversation?” He said yes. Another recorded call, this one on June 20th, is introduced as Exhibit 22.

Fifth audiotape: phone conversation with Zimmermann on June 20, 2005 (recorded with Agent Kukura or Agent Bisswurm)

Carlson says something about an appeal, says they’re on for the July 14th Zoning and Planning committee [he then says something about getting on the agenda and what happens after the Planning Commission’s denial]; he adds that he’s “still confused.” Zimmermann says that for planned commercial development he’d need two acres. Carlson says he has only 1.5 acres, and says “they’ll only allow us two retail” [businesses]. Zimmermann says “the current zoning is OR2…you’re applying for C2 with a pedestrian overlay.” Carlson says Lonnie [in Planning] had started working with them, followed by Graham, a consultant. He repeats that he’s confused; Zimmermann says “join the crowd.” Zimmermann asks if there’s no retail planned on Elliott, and Carlson says “no, none.” Zimmermann asks if Michael Orange is working on this, and says a lot of people have had their fingers in it.

Carlson says “the problem is the Sabris, they’re poison.” Zimmermann adds, “it’s like grabbing a tar baby if you touch them.” Carlson says “Michael’s never around.” Zimmermann mentions Steve Poor [another Planning staffer?] and the pedestrian overlay, then says there’s no drive-up restaurant…this is pedestrian overlay, not housing overlay…tell me again how many units? Carlson says he has 81, with 33,000 sq. ft.; he says the city will allow two businesses of 2800 and 1300 sq. ft. for retail.

Zimmermann asks him if he’s spoken with Shirley Heyer; Carlson says no, not since he and Lilligren met with the neighborhood and they told him Chicago Commons was basically an extension of the Village Market; he says he tried to tell Shirley that he wasn’t with the Sabris and was on their [Midtown Phillips’s] side. Carlson explains that Lilligren said he had to have other people approve a meeting with Shirley, “whatever that means.” He reiterates that the meeting with Zoning and Planning was scheduled for July 14th. Zimmermann says he’ll make a few calls and call him back.

After playing the tape, Docherty asked Carlson if Zimmermann was harder to reach before the meeting at Baja; Carlson said he was, adding that Zimmermann was very accessible after Baja. The next phone call, on June 28th, is entered as Exhibit 23.

Sixth audiotape: phone conversation with Zimmermann on June 28th, 2005 (recorded with Agent Kukura or Agent Bisswurm)

Carlson begins the call by asking Zimmermann, “where do we stand? Any news?” Zimmermann says not really, saying he hasn’t really counted the numbers yet [presumably this is number of Council Members voting to approve], but adds that “we’re still on for two weeks.” The two of them then discuss dental work for awhile [root canals, I think] and Zimmermann says “we’re getting together at some point—you and I, Lilligren, and staff?” Carlson says he finally got the neighborhood to send an email, and Zimmermann coaches, “don’t oversell yourself” [presumably with the neighborhood]. More discussion ensues about the Village Mall and the attitudes of the neighborhood. Zimmermann says he talked a bit with Schiff, explaining that he [Zimmermann] has it on his calendar, and adds that there’s no need to get together right now. Carlson asks Zimmermann to call him back when he can set a meeting with Schiff. Zimmermann says he’ll call later.

The prosecution then discussed the Zoning and Planning meeting on July 14, 2005; Carlson’s application for a zoning change was denied. In response to questioning Carlson said he was not present at the committee meeting and said he didn’t think Zimmermann had showed up, either. Carlson made a follow-up phone call about the meeting to Zimmermann on July 18th, 2005; the audio tape of that meeting is entered as Exhibit 24.

Seventh audiotape: phone conversation with Zimmermann on July 18th, 2005 (recorded with Agent Kukura or Agent Bisswurm)

Zimmermann appears to answer this phone call [Carlson appears to have called him at Zimmermann’s home]. Carlson asked him, “what happened Friday?” Zimmermann says he wasn’t able to get there [to the Zoning and Planning meeting], Carlson’s application was put first on the agenda, and he didn’t have the votes necessary to “put that through.” He says there’s always room for amendments. He then says something about Carlson having C2 zoning now, and Carlson says “no, OR2.” Zimmermann asks if it’s a coffee shop and something else for the retail. He says the problem is there’s so much commercial [development] already in the area.

Zimmermann again mentions the perception that Carlson is linked with the Sabris. Carlson says, “the Sabris have nothing whatsoever to do with our project.” Zimmermann tells Carlson he’ll try to get the item [of Carlson’s zoning application] sent back to committee before Council takes a final vote on it. He asks if Carlson has had an opportunity to sit down with Lilligren. Carlson says Lilligren is listening to the neighborhood group and won’t return his calls. [There’s then a reference to Lake and 27th, crime, and drug activity.] Carlson says, “these people just take advantage of immigrants…can you explain the process to me?” Zimmermann says to talk to people on the committee and “so will I. Get them to reconsider, get the neighborhood people ‘buy in’ and get them to call Lilligren. Let’s talk this afternoon.”

The prosecution then turned back to Carlson to discuss what happened at the full City Council vote on July 22, 2005. Carlson’s rezoning application was one of several items grouped together as “consent items,” meaning the Council would vote to approve the Zoning and Planning committee’s decision on these items. Zimmermann voted to approve the consent items and therefore voted with the rest of the Council in denying Carlson’s rezoning application. Zimmermann left a voicemail for Carlson on July 26th; this voicemail was presented by the prosecution as Exhibit 25.

Eighth audiotape: voicemail message left by Zimmermann on July 26th, 2005 (audiotape given to Agent Kukura or Agent Bisswurm)

Zimmermann explains the vote on Carlson’s project, saying he couldn’t even find anyone to second a motion to return the item to committee. He says he’s not sure where to go with it from here, says he knows Carlson wants more retail, and adds that they’re “up against Lilligren” as Council Member of the ward. He asks Carlson to call him and “let’s see where we can go.”

The prosecution asked Carlson to clarify an earlier point regarding the Baja restaurant conversation. Docherty mentioned that at the Baja, Zimmermann had left three bills on the table. Carlson explained that Zimmermann had originally left four $1 bills [presumably the tip], but then took $1 back and left only $3.

Docherty then returned to July 26th, 2005. Carlson returned Zimmermann’s phone call later that day [since Zimmermann answered the phone, I assume Carlson had called Zimmermann at home]. The ensuing conversation is entered as Government Exhibit 26.


Ninth audiotape: phone conversation with Zimmermann on July 26th, 2005 (recorded with Agent Kukura or Agent Bisswurm)

Zimmermann explains that he’s frustrated, saying he couldn’t find any support to second a motion to return Carlson’s item to committee. Carlson tells Zimmermann that Zoning and Planning told him he cannot appeal the decision now. He says he has written proof that there’s no association between him and the Sabris, that Chicago Commons is not a Sabri property. Zimmermann asks Carlson who he’s working with, and Carlson tells him Orange. He then explains that “Donald” [Carlson’s brother] tried to appeal, but Steve Poor [Planning staff?] said no. Carlson says he needs approval for two more shops. Zimmermann says Carlson can still open for two shops, and Carlson replies that they’ll need to be 2800 and 1300 sq. ft. maximum. Zimmermann replies that those are “pretty small in and of themselves,” and wonders if Carlson can amend his application and make those spaces bigger. Carlson says bigger, or two more shops. Zimmermann says Carlson can always put in a plan to do something else, and ends the conversation by saying he’ll call Michael [presumably Michael Orange].

The prosecution then presents another voicemail tape recorded on July 26th; it is Exhibit 27.

Tenth audiotape: voicemail message left by Zimmermann on July 26th, 2005 (audiotape given to Agent Kukura or Agent Bisswurm)

Zimmermann explains that he spoke to Orange, and “we’ve run out of options”; he says Carlson cannot apply for rezoning again for another year. He asked Carlson about his idea of using part of the space to provide rooms for people whose children were being treated at Children’s Hospital nearby. He asked if Carlson could perhaps use the space for doctors’ offices, massage therapy, etc. He asked Carlson if he had sold any of the housing units yet, adding that Chicago Commons was a good location for doctors. He asked Carlson to call him back.

The prosecution again returned to the June 14th. meeting at the Baja, where the topic of an alternative mall for the Somalis had come up. Exhibit 28 was then introduced; it is a phone conversation between Zimmermann and Carlson on August 1, 2005.

Eleventh audiotape: phone conversation with Zimmermann on August 1, 2005 (recorded with Agent Kukura or Agent Bisswurm)

Carlson calls Zimmermann and says he thinks he has a solution for everybody, and he asks to meet with Zimmermann (evening, have a beer, etc). Zimmermann says he’ll have to call Carlson back after he’s finished at the office.

Zimmermann returned the call later that day. It is recorded as Exhibit 29 dated August 1, 2005. An agent with not present with Carlson when the call was made, so the recording began with the conversation already in progress (Carlson had to plug in the equipment himself, so it took a few minutes).

Twelfth audiotape: phone conversation with Zimmermann on August 1, 2005
(first part of conversation not recorded; FBI agents not present)

Carlson discusses the problems with the Village Market, saying the Somalis keep coming to him; he refers to Hamoudi [Sabri] as “out of control.” He tells Zimmermann that finding a location for a new Somali mall will “make you a hero, help rid the neighborhood of crime, help the neighbors and help the Somalis.” He says he wants Zimmermann’s help finding the Somalis a building to relocate in [diverting business from the Village Market], adding that he wants no financial part in it—he says the Somalis themselves should own it, so they’ll get away from the “terrorism over there,” and says something about getting a Weed and Seed program in. He asks if Zimmermann has time tomorrow. [The next day is apparently National Night Out, and Zimmermann mentions that he has a busy schedule.] Carlson says something about meeting on site [at Chicago Commons?] for a beer. Zimmermann mentions the next morning as a possibility, and a meeting is scheduled for 9:30 the next morning; Carlson says he’ll give Zimmermann a tour of Chicago Commons and they can sit and talk.

The prosecution questioned Carlson again; apparently the meeting scheduled for August 2nd never took place. Carlson said he waited for Zimmermann an hour or so and then tried to reach him. Exhibit 30, a phone conversation with Zimmermann at about 10:30 on August 2nd, is presented to the jury.

Thirteenth audiotape: phone conversation with Zimmermann on August 2, 2005 (recorded with Agent Kukura or Agent Bisswurm)

Zimmermann says, “I fucked up. I’m OK, I totally spaced this out.” Carlson attempts to reschedule. Zimmermann says, “not today, I’m not going into the office today, it’s National Night Out and I’m gonna be all over the place.” Zimmermann suggests they meet on Thursday at 9:00, but Carlson says he’ll be out of town, and suggests Wednesday evening or anytime. They agree to meet at 12:30 the next day, Wednesday.

The prosecution asked Carlson if that meeting took place, and he said it did. Carlson explained that the meeting actually took place at around 1:00. In response to questioning, Carlson said there were no other face-to-face meetings with Zimmermann in the interval between the meeting at the Baja and this August 3rd meeting. Carlson was “wired” by the FBI with audio and video equipment for this meeting at Chicago Commons on August 3rd, 2005. This videotape is Government Exhibit 31. A portion of the videotape (DVD) was played for the jury.

Second videotape: meeting with Zimmermann at Chicago Commons on August 3rd, 2005

The scene is a construction area; we hear a few people’s voices as Zimmermann and Carlson tour the building. Apparently there was a stabbing that occurred in the area about “20-25 minutes ago,” prompting a discussion about drug deals, a situation “out of control” at the Village Market, and a reference to an incident in which a woman had been shot in the neck. Someone [Carlson or an employee on the site] says a bystander had approached a policeman with the license plate number of someone involved in the crime, but the police refused to investigate since no one was killed. Warren Whitman, the third precinct sergeant, is mentioned; Dave Esplund [sp?], the project superintendent on the site, is also introduced.

Carlson tells Zimmermann that Lilligren won’t do anything and won’t return Carlson’s phone calls. [As he and Zimmermann walk, he points out the drainage system and the landscaping, noting that the run-off from the parking lot is captured on the site.] Carlson refers to an old man that Hamoudi [Sabri] had “beaten up badly”; Hamoudi had bragged to Carlson about it, saying “I’ll show you how to run these fuckin’ people.” He then points out to Zimmermann two dedication plaques on the site, one to his father and the other to the father of his project supervisor.

Carlson explains that the Somalis are looking to get away from the Sabris, and he says they need to search for a location that could be owned by the Somalis; he suggests the warehouse district might be good. Zimmermann agrees that they need to find a place and he asks Carlson how much square footage they’d require. Carlson says lots of it, for retail space. Zimmermann suggests the old arsenic triangle location, saying Ryan Companies owns it and it’s rehabbed and waiting, there’s nothing on it now. Carlson asks if there is a location available with an existing building that could be used that’s empty. He explains that at the Village Market, inspectors come, but they simply waive the code violations. He says tenants have been beaten up when they complain about not having a working toilet. [He also says something about the Sabris raising the rent on a whim; when the tenants mention the lease agreement, the Sabris threaten them.] Carlson mentions Mohammed Mohammed, saying he is trying to organize the Somalis. Carlson mentions that the Certificates of Occupancy will be done this month [presumably for Chicago Commons].

Carlson says Zimmermann should take credit for relocating the Somalis and finding them a new mall. The topic of Carlson’s zoning application comes up, and Carlson tells Zimmermann, “I know you tried. I’ll help you out, I know you had lots of opposition [on City Council].” Zimmermann mentions a place near the light rail station on the west bank and says he thinks Sherman and Associates own it, near the Baja Riverside. Zimmermann says Carlson would have to build on it. Carlson explains that he can’t do that financially…he says something about “another guy” who started a Somali mall in St. Paul, and Basim [Sabri] gave him lots of trouble. He says he thinks there would be less chance of problems with a large developer like Sherman involved.

Carlson says it would be great if they could get this location established before the election. He says he’s trying to sell housing units [at Chicago Commons] with stabbings in the area every week. He says people are dealing drugs out of the souk, and they don’t even try to disguise it. He says there are five big crack houses on 10th. Avenue, and drug dealings above the Skyway Market. He says the police raided the area but raided the wrong residence. He adds that Zimmermann would be a “hero” if he could relocate the mall. He says there are five major gangs on this corner, and all want a piece of the Somali drug market. Zimmermann says “so survival of this place depends on that market changing.” Carlson says there are 146 shops and a mosque at the Village Market. He says they need to look for a warehouse site, or another commercial area, with no residential housing in the area for crack dealers.

Carlson then says, “we did the five grand…I know you tried. What happened?” Zimmermann says the vote was mostly a result of reactions to the Mall and the desire for no more retail in the area. He says Schiff and Lilligren were hostile. Carlson says he met with Lilligren and proved it [the Sabris’ lack of involvement] to him, saying “we tried to pay $20,000 to put in a Weed and Seed, then suddenly he [Lilligren] wouldn’t talk to me.” Carlson says “Azzam and I used to be friends. He gave my wife his word....” He then says something about murders taking place in the area in the middle of the afternoon. He says something about Hamoudi [Sabri] doing the “typical Arab” thing, adding that Hamoudi owed him money and then threatened him when he didn’t pay Carlson. He asks Zimmermann, “how do Schiff and these guys get stuff through?”

Court recessed for lunch until 1:30

Before the jury returned to the courtroom, the judge mentioned that there had been requests from the media for transcripts of the audio and videotapes and for the tapes themselves [the jury, the prosecution, and the defense all received transcripts as the audio and videotapes were shown; these were not made available to anyone in the audience]. The judge mentioned a couple of judicial cases involving transcripts of tapes (one being the 1996 case with James McDougal). When asked, the prosecuting attorney said he didn’t want the tapes or transcripts released until the trial was over; the defense attorney objected to the release of the tapes (the video was too easy to cut out, he said) but he had no objection to the release of the transcripts. The judge exercised her discretion to deny access to the transcripts and all tapes until the case was over.

Once the jury entered the room and Carlson again took the witness stand, the prosecution returned to the issue of finding the Somalis a new mall. The prosecuting attorney started the videotape where it had left off before lunch recess.

Zimmermann says he’ll talk to the guys at Ryan, think about the arsenic triangle location, and says he knows the Somalis will need plenty of parking. Carlson asks if a new Somali mall would require Council approvals “and stuff.” Zimmermann says yes. He says most Somalis would get there [to the new mall] by car. Carlson says there’s no place to put them. Zimmermann says he’ll call Chuck Lutz and Ryan and tell them where the money is here. Carlson says he can show them documents that he owns 77% of the company and that his brother, Donald, owns 23%. He says Azzam [Sabri] was offered a share in the ownership initially, but he never came up with the money.

Zimmermann says he’s “gotta run,” and Carlson asks how the campaign is going. “Gonna win?” he asks. Zimmermann says it’s hard to know, then says something about Carlson being “maxed out” on donations. Carlson says he’ll find someone else [to donate to Zimmermann’s campaign]. Zimmermann gives Carlson more campaign donation envelopes. Carlson says, “we gotta get the Schiffs and Lilligrens out, you can’t run a city like that.” On the way out of the building Carlson tries to give Zimmermann the vest he’s wearing [I believe he said something about Zimmermann being able to use it on his bicycle]. Zimmermann declines and leaves.

In response to questions from Docherty, Carlson explained that Zimmermann had given him three campaign envelopes that he turned over almost immediately to the FBI. [Carlson had to have the FBI remove the recording equipment after each session with Zimmermann, but the equipment was on at all times between the meetings with Zimmermann and the meetings with the FBI to remove equipment.] The next meeting with Zimmermann was August 15, 2005. It was preceded by a phone call that was recorded and presented as Government Exhibit 32.

Fourteenth audiotape: phone conversation with Zimmermann on August 15, 2005 (recorded with Agent Kukura or Agent Bisswurm)

Carlson calls Zimmermann and mentions the site by the Baja as well as the site at 28th. and Cedar [I assume this is the arsenic triangle location]. He tells Zimmermann he’d like to see the Baja site. He says his family has some campaign contributions, but says he’d like to view the site. Zimmermann explains that the site is owned party by Sherman, says it’s a tough one but it would make sense to do something there, since a lot of the Somalis live near there. Zimmermann also mentions another place near light rail but says it would require lots of money. He says it’s by the Cedar Box Company. Carlson hints that he could be enticed to invest there if he could “see a return and the city will allow me to do it with all this trouble.” He mentions something about the “Lilligren shit” and Zimmermann suggests they look at the west bank site. They agree to meet at the Baja at 1:00.

The prosecution then turned to Carlson on the witness stand and asked him to recall who had the idea for the Somali mall. Docherty asked Carlson how much was his idea and how much came from Agents Kukura and Bisswurm. Carlson said he was instructed by the FBI about what to say to Zimmermann. Carlson then indicated that the FBI gave him back the campaign envelopes [originally given to him by Zimmermann at their August 3rd meeting] immediately before he was wired for the August 15th face-to-face meeting with Zimmermann. A videotape of that meeting was presented to the jury as Exhibit 33.

Third videotape: meeting with Zimmermann near the light rail station on west bank on August 15th, 2005

Zimmermann and Carlson arrive at the front door of the Baja, only to discover the restaurant has been closed [since early July, I believe]. Shortly thereafter, Zimmermann receives a phone call from Jenny [presumably Heiser, his wife]: during the call he refers to Natalie, a list, and endorsers. He says, “Give her a call and make sure you both agree on what’s going out.” Carlson’s cell phone also rings, and he says something like “go head, Don…” The two get off their respective cell phones and the conversation between them begins. Zimmermann says something about George Sherman hanging out with Bartlett [not sure if this is correct]. Carlson says the Somalis are “tired of being terrorized.” Zimmermann mentions a bigger area at another location, next to the light rail station on Cedar. [I believe Carlson walked there while Zimmermann biked.]

Zimmermann tells Carlson this is Old Cedar Avenue, and he points out the bridge. He says the Cedar Box Company isn’t there for any real reason, except it’s always been there. Carlson points out that there’s no room for parking. Zimmermann says something about Amble’s and an “old junkyard thing.” Zimmermann points out that the “whole area is zoned for intense development” and says Carlson could fill the whole thing with underground parking….Carlson says it would need to be “structurally tough.” He says the Village Market is 70,000 square feet, and he estimates there to be about 44,000 square feet in an acre. Carlson says a two-story warehouse site would be good and adds “we’d need help getting zoning.”

Zimmermann then tells Carlson about the Roof Depot site, which he says is half empty. He says it’s “deceptively big,” and Carlson says “beautiful!” Zimmermann says “except parking,” and mentions that the Re-Use Center had some interest in the site. He said the parking might not be adequate for the Somalis’ needs. Zimmermann says all three sites are in his ward until the first of the year, when the ward will lose all of them due to redistricting. Carlson suggests Zimmermann could “get it through beforehand.”

Carlson then says “before I forget…these” and hands Zimmermann the campaign envelopes.

At this point the prosecuting attorney stopped the tape and turned to Carlson on the witness stand. In response to questioning, Carlson explained to the jury that he had handed Zimmermann four envelopes containing $100 bills, for a total of $1200 in cash.

Docherty resumed the videotape.

Carlson then mentions something about the names of relatives, cousins…he says they’ll identify. He says he gave them each a “little extra” and added that he needed more envelopes.

Again the prosecution stopped the tape, this time showing Carlson four envelopes. Docherty asked him if he recognized the names on the envelopes. The last names were identified for the jury as “Warsam,” “Ali,” “Mohamed,” and “Al-Kasim.” The envelopes were presented as Exhibits 34, 35, 36, and 37.

The prosecution then asked Carlson if he had a cousin by the name of Warsam and if he had given x a “little extra.” Carlson replied that the names on the envelopes had been supplied by the FBI.

Docherty resumed the videotape.

Carlson tells Zimmermann they need to look at whatever they can get the fastest, what they could buy up and get approved. He asks Zimmermann if the latter could cut parking in his ward near the Village Market, just to help [the idea here, I think, was to encourage patrons to come to the new Somali market Carlson is proposing]. He asks Zimmermann if he could get approval for that in his ward. Zimmermann suggests they could get the leases and move quickly.

Carlson then asks if Zimmermann knows Basim’s [Sabri’s] wife, Rochelle. Zimmermann says he does, and gossip follows [I believe something was said about Rochelle dating another Sabri brother and “not being a virgin.”] Carlson ends the conversation by saying he’s going to check out the Roof Depot site and see if the other half is available to rent. Zimmermann boards the train with his bike.

Docherty turned back to Carlson on the witness stand and asked him if he would have built the Somali mall he and Zimmermann were discussing, and Carlson said “probably not.” The defense attorney was offered an opportunity for questioning but replied “the conversation speaks for itself.”

After the meeting at light rail, Carlson left a voicemail message for Zimmermann on August 26th. The audiotape was introduced to the jury as Exhibit 38. Rather than play the audiotape, the judge recessed until a little after 2:30pm.

Fifteenth audiotape: voicemail message left by Carlson on August 26th, 2005 (recorded with Agent Kukura or Agent Bisswurm)

Carlson asks Zimmermann to call him back, saying he had looked at the Roof Depot site. He added that the Somalis were anxious to get out [of the Village Market] and mentioned something about the campaign and ideas for parking.

This voicemail message was followed by a phone conversation between Carlson and Zimmermann on August 31st, 2005. The audiotape of this conversation is presented to the jury as Exhibit 39.

Sixteenth audiotape: phone conversation with Zimmermann on August 31st, 2005 (recorded with Agent Kukura or Agent Bisswurm)

Carlson appears to have called Zimmermann at home. He begins the conversation by saying he has worked 16 hours a day on the Chicago Commons site, but it’s almost finished. He tells Zimmermann he brought some of the Somalis over to the Roof Depot site, and they love it. He then talks awhile about the problems with the Village Market, saying someone let the dogs loose in the market [presumably this was a canine police unit], scaring many Somalis “to death.” He says the Somalis think Zimmermann is a hero. He tells Zimmermann that Karmel [another Sabri property] is having some of the same problems as the Village Market. He says the new Somali mall will be a good opportunity for Zimmermann’s campaign, and he arranges to meet Zimmermann at 2:00 that day at Zimmermann’s house at 2200 Clinton Avenue South.

Docherty then asked Carlson on the witness stand if Mohammed Mohammed was a real person. Carlson said yes; he worked for Wells Fargo, had difficulties with the Sabris, and had tried to organize the Somali shopkeepers. Carlson then explained to the jury that a “souk” was a type of open shopping mall with small vendors’ shops, much like those the Somalis had in their homeland.

The prosecution then introduced a videotape of the meeting at Zimmermann’s home on August 31st, 2005. It is introduced as Exhibit 40; a portion of it is played for the jury.

Fourth videotape: meeting with Zimmermann at his home at 2200 Clinton on August 31st, 2005

Zimmermann is talking to someone on the phone when the videotape begins. He says something about figuring out ways “we’re not too oppressive with city regulations” and figuring out “limits on the size of sign you can have,” adding that it’s “nice looking” and he loves the picture. He says he’ll try to remember [something the caller and he have discussed], but if he “spaces it out…” He ends the phone call by saying “good luck in your business.”

Carlson begins speaking with Zimmermann, referring to Mohammed Mohammed and saying the situation “is accelerating over there. Somalis are desperate and frightened, they need someplace to go of their own, something Somali-run and managed.” He adds that he had “pumped you [Zimmermann] up about 20 knots” when he had last spoken with the Somalis.

Zimmermann says something about Lilligren “hiding out and knocking on doors and stuff.”

Carlson says he’s been getting phone calls from Somalis interested in renting space in the new Somali mall he and Zimmermann have been discussing. He refers to the canine incident and recent shootings in which two people had been wounded; he says the Somalis are scared to death. Carlson asks how big the space is, and Zimmermann says he doesn’t know [Zimmermann could have asked here—my notes aren’t entirely clear on this point].

Carlson says Zimmermann needs to meet with the shop owners and campaign. He says he told them they’ve got to keep Dean in. He says he can get together 150 Somali shop owners and Zimmermann can campaign [to them]. Zimmermann replies that the primary is scheduled for two weeks from yesterday.

Carlson says they need to get Zimmermann elected, then hands him an envelope and says “that’s for getting us the zoning over there.” [This envelope contains $1000 in the form of 10 $100 bills, given to Carlson by the FBI.]

Jenny Heiser, Zimmermann’s wife, comes in and Carlson asks for a campaign t-shirt. Carlson has a discussion with Heiser about line-drying their t-shirts and Heiser exits.

Zimmermann tells Carlson, “this guy down here [in the 9th. ward] is running against Schiff, Dave Bicking…[Schiff is a?] significant obstacle, this’ll be in his ward. He [Bicking] could use a little promotion, he’s got an uphill battle, but he’s got no relation with Hamoudi and those guys,” even though he met with the Sabris. One of them [I don’t recall if it was Zimmermann or Carlson] mentions Sheila Delaney, a candidate Hamoudi [Sabri] and his friends promoted, who withdrew from the race.

Carlson then says he thinks there are three people running in Zimmermann’s ward. Zimmermann replies by saying the “other guy” [other than Lilligren] is a “straw man we put up so there’ll be a primary.” He says the campaign wanted to have a primary to see “where we stood.” [I believe he also said something about his whole campaign knowing about this “straw man,” James Gorham.]

Carlson says he’s investing time and money; he mentions the $1000 he just gave Zimmermann, and says “this shouldn’t be too hard, it’s an industrial area…keep a low profile until we can get the zoning through.” Carlson says he will ask Mohammed Mohammed to meet with Zimmermann, perhaps at their OR2 office space. Zimmermann suggests they meet at the Coyle Center on west bank, and says something about it being a Park Board building. Carlson mentions something about Dave Esplund [sp?], a friend who has rented to Somalis and helped them with housing. They talk about meeting at 12:30 the next day. Carlson asks Zimmermann if he sees any obstacles to zoning in that area, and Zimmermann says “we’ll sell it by referring to the problems with the Sabris…this is delicate stuff…”

Carlson says “if this guy [Bicking] needs campaign money, you tell me. We’ve got to support people like that in this city.”

Someone named “Lee” [a campaign worker?] enters at this point. Zimmermann asks Carlson about the “scuttlebutt” about Karmel [owned by Azzam Sabri, located around Lake Street and Pillsbury]. Carlson says a Sabri sister came in drunk, broke stuff up with a baseball bat. Carlson says something about Hamoudi being “a little on the criminal side” [I think Carlson said Hamoudi once killed someone], and more gossip follows. Zimmermann says “I’d better write that down, I might forget” [I think he was referring to the comment about Hamoudi, but I could have this out of context.] Carlson then complains that Lilligren won’t get back to him, saying he’s left him six messages. Zimmermann says that they [the Somalis] thought Carlson had helped the Sabris with that Market, telling Carlson “you’ve gotta let them know.” Zimmermann asks Carlson if he knows Shukri Aden [not sure if spelling is correct, and I don’t remember the details].

At this point the prosecution stopped the tape and showed the jury Exhibit 41, a Green Party sample ballot. Shukri Aden’s name has been written on the ballot and a rectangle has been drawn around Dave Bicking’s name. In reply to questioning, Carlson told the jury that he had written Aden’s name on the ballot and Zimmermann had drawn the rectangle around Bicking’s name.

The prosecution resumed the tape.

At this point, Zimmermann breaks for a conversation with Heiser about someone named Hutchinson; they discuss campaign donations and the spelling of someone’s name. Once Heiser leaves, Carlson and Zimmermann resume the conversation about the Somalis. Zimmermann says “the problem is you don’t know who you’re talking to” [presumably referring to supporters of the Sabris]. Carlson says “Lilligren said he always voted against Sabri.” Zimmerman replies: “the problem is you’re seen as voting against the Somalis [when you vote against a Sabri project]. The problem is racketeering, it’s like they issue script and the script is good only at the company store. The question is, should the IRS be brought into this.” Carlson says that’s a good idea, since there’s lots of cash involved. He adds that if Zimmermann does this, he’ll “be seen as a big hero.” Zimmermann says “I supported the Somalis by getting these malls up and running; now I’ll do so by getting ‘em out from under this.”

Zimmermann then turns to Carlson and says “if you could get Dave Bicking a couple of checks, it would be helpful. I don’t know if he’s prepared to take an envelope full of cash. You know, if you and your wife each gave him $300 each….” Carlson adds, “maybe a cousin?” Zimmermann says “I don’t know where he stands…” [I believe it was during this conversation that Zimmermann put a rectangle around Bicking’s name on the sample ballot, but I’m not certain.]

The prosecution ended the tape and turned to Carlson on the witness stand. The next meeting with Zimmermann was at the Chicago Commons on September 8th; the purpose of that meeting was for the FBI to confront Zimmermann. In response to questioning, Carlson explained that he had a total of three untaped face-to-face encounters with Zimmermann before going to the FBI [one was at a groundbreaking ceremony at Portland and Franklin; one was at the Shriner’s; and I didn’t note the third, but I think it was when Azzam Sabri introduced Zimmermann and Carlson]. There were no untaped phone calls; Carlson had received instruction in how to connect the equipment in case Zimmermann called unexpectedly. Carlson explained that the rezoning of Chicago Commons was denied; to date he has sold only four condominiums and is in the process of returning ownership of the property to the bank.

The court recessed until 3:40 or so.

The defense began its cross-examination of Carlson by presenting several drawings of Chicago Commons: Exhibits 34 (showing the elevation of Elliott Avenue); 33 (showing the elevation and two facades); 32 (an overhead view of the street and alley); and 31 (an overhead, schematic view of the project). Carlson agreed with the defense’s description of each exhibit as a document prepared by “danna” or by the city for Chicago Commons. In response to Scott’s questions, Carlson agreed the project was “more European,” a mixed-use project containing retail and office space on the ground floor, with residential spaces above. Scott said “outside of downtown, you don’t see much of that,” except maybe at “Grand Avenue in St. Paul.” He added that Carlson thought he could “pull it off” economically because it was so close to Children’s and Abbott Northwestern, and Carlson said he thought the project was a good idea.

Scott asked Carlson if he thought the design for Chicago Commons was good for the city, and Carlson said he thought it was. Scott added that if anything, the project looked better than the drawings. He then asked if the building came right up to the sidewalk. Carlson said no; on Elliott, he said, there was 10-15 feet of lawn, with a small amount (4-5 feet) on Chicago. Scott asked if that was a different setback than the homes on Chicago Avenue, and Carlson said he didn’t think so.

Carlson said Chicago Commons encompasses 1.4 acres, about 70,000 square feet, with 81 condo units. The first floor was 33,000 sq. ft. of office space, and the condos were one or one plus bedrooms. He said they were designed for “urban people,” maybe those working at the hospitals nearby. The price of the condos would allow for those without medical degrees to live there (about $200,000 per unit).

Scott then referred to Defense Exhibit 32, which showed a building on site that was demolished to make room for Chicago Commons. He asked Carlson if the latter thought the property was “ripe for development,” adding that it looked lousy as it was. Scott then showed Exhibit 31, which had a rectangle at the center; Carlson explained that the rectangle was underground parking, with some green space at the center (“modernized courtyard”).

In response to questioning, Carlson agreed that he had been primarily a suburban builder prior to Chicago Commons. The defense then turned to the issue of zoning, showing Exhibit 10 dated May 4, 2004. This exhibit showed the original zoning as R2B; Carlson was requesting that the new project be zoned OR2, for high density. Scott asked Carlson if on May 3rd any old people were left in the nursing home [the old building that remained on the site when Carlson purchased it]; Carlson said he did not think so, but wasn’t sure. In the original zoning request, Carlson had asked for 17,860 feet of retail; the defense asked if his original plan wasn’t to have two retail shops. Carlson said they didn’t get that; instead he got approval for two sites facing Chicago (2800 and 1400 sq. ft.), about 1/6th. of his original request.

Carlson explained that Craig Poor (a city Planner) had initially helped with the project zoning request (Carlson said at the time he was told he could secure two and then ask for more—so his plan all along was to ask for more later). Carlson said he thought his project, with “corner store” businesses, would improve the neighborhood. Scott then asked, “So the neighborhood association should have been able to see its value? Including Lilligren? So the fact you sought Zimmermann’s help was inherently a good thing for you and the city?” Carlson said he thought it was a good project.

Scott then provided some background for the jury, saying the Village Market was built on the site of the old Tasty Bread factory building, an industrial site located in the middle of a residential area. He asked Carlson if the Village Market had been up and running for a year or two when Carlson broke ground on Chicago Commons; he said there were only about 30 shops at the Village Market at the time (he and Azzam Sabri were friends then). Scott asked, “so it was over there even before you bought your first property?” and Carlson said yes. Scott then asked him if the Village Market had become a problem for him in particular, with parking all over the neighborhood. Carlson explained that there was no parking allowed at 24th. and Chicago anyway, and since his plan allowed for plenty of onsite parking, the parking issue didn’t pose a problem for him. Scott then asked if the “uptick in crime” and the area crowded with “foreigners” didn’t pose a problem for Carlson, making his customers nervous. Carlson said no, but he acknowledged that the Village Market, with all those people, might be perceived as “threatening.” Carlson referred to drug dealers and gang members in the area. Scott then asked him “so you decided, for the good of your project, to get the Village Market out, and it would be better for the neighborhood?” Carlson said no; he said he wanted more control exercised at the Village Market, over inspections and zoning issues, etc.

Scott asked Carlson if he had complained before May 2005 to Lilligren to get help with inspections and crime. “That’s their job [as City Council members], right? Would there be something wrong with contributing to the campaign of someone who did that for you?” Carlson replied no and referred to a fundraiser he had conducted at his home for Norm Coleman.

Scott told Carlson, “So you had a horrific experience with Building Inspections,” and Scott referred to the fact that Carlson had invited the mayor and some Metropolitan Council people to the groundbreaking ceremony for Chicago Commons. Carlson explained that neither the mayor nor the met council person had spoken at the groundbreaking. Scott said, “so you didn’t give money to the mayor, but you’re aware of how much money it takes to run a campaign, how important that is. By spring or summer 2005, you’d decided Lilligren was an impediment and not a help. Also Schiff was someone without a ‘vision’ for the future of Minneapolis. So nothing is inherently wrong in supporting someone who’d replace them; in fact, it would be the right thing to do to get those people out.” Carlson basically concurred.

The defense attorney continued, saying that most of what happened in August [2005] was that you were trying to find another place for the new Somali mall, moving the souk to an area with less impact on the residents. Carlson explained that it was a theme drawn up by the FBI, but he still thought it was a good theory. Scott said so the idea of the development at Franklin and 15th (Cedar Box) or the Sherman site on west bank, if you could finance one of those, it was a good idea. Carlson agreed, but reminded the jury that he had told Zimmermann he couldn’t finance the project. Scott said, so the Roof Depot site—you actually looked at it and decided it was ok, though there wasn’t enough parking. The Somalis would no longer be under exploitative landlords, the management would all be internal, and the souk would look much like the culture they had left in Somalia. Carlson agreed. Scott then said one of the reasons Carlson couldn’t tell how many people were renting at the Village Market, however, was because it did look like the culture the Somalis had left. “When you suggested the Somalis would love Zimmermann and vote for him if he could do that, that was truthful?” Carlson agreed.

Scott then asked Carlson to explain his characterization of his company as “8A”; Carlson said it meant a minority disadvantaged contractor. He explained that the company “did” security for Army Reserve stations, and as of 2004 they were moving out of residential and into commercial projects. Chicago Commons was their biggest project to date.

Carlson explained that he used to help finance housing (he had helped Azzam Sabri and had known him before 2001), but said they were out of that business by 2001. He said he bought the property at 2401 Chicago for $1.4 million, put some of his own money down.

The defense returned to the May 4 letter indicating Carlson had a purchase agreement in May but did not close until July. Prior to closing, however, he had his zoning application into the city; Carlson explained this was because he didn’t want to throw all that money into the project until he was sure the zoning would go through. Scott then asked if there was a connection between the name of the company (“danna”) and the name of Azzam Sabri’s daughter. Carlson said there was no connection.

Scott asked if Carlson had put the company in his wife’s name in order to secure privileged status as a minority contractor, and Carlson said the company was already in his wife’s name before then. Chicago Commons is a separate company from “danna,” one that was set up just for the purpose of acquiring and developing the property at 2401 Chicago Avenue South. Carlson said that was a normal practice for developers; he also said he and his brother, Don, owned the Chicago Commons company. He said Azzam Sabri was initially offered part ownership as a shareholder in the company, with an interest amounting to 23.5% ownership. Carlson said he secured a note from Azzam to pay; Scott asked him if they had brought Azzam in because “you thought he was able to get things done in Minneapolis, to maneuver through a complicated Minneapolis system. So he was accurate if he was saying he was a partner. To some degree, you didn’t want to know how he greased the skids.” Carlson denied that, saying he wanted to learn.

Scott then said that Azzam would say, “’I own these people.’ Did you take some of this as puffing, as part of the Middle Eastern personality? Is it fair to say you ‘let him loose’ on the details, delegating lots of authority to him?” Carlson suggested this might have been true in the beginning.

Scott then indicated that Carlson’s plan by the middle of July 2004 was to apply for OR2 zoning but put in more retail. The process of applying for rezoning was begun as early as January 2005; they were four months into construction when they wanted to change the zoning classification, and it took another three months before they got something “acceptable.” They closed on the property on June 8, 2004; by mid-July, they had zoning approval designs for OR2 (because the Planning department requires detailed plans before you can build). They started building during the first week of September—they started digging the hole. Scott suggested to Carlson that they had failed to secure a permit to block the city sidewalk or to vacate the alley, and had only one demolition permit. Carlson denied that. Scott then said isn’t it true that you had to go to the mayor’s office to get permits. Carlson said they never blocked the sidewalk, so that permit wasn’t needed; Scott countered by saying the city didn’t agree. Carlson explained they had had a construction trailer on the street for awhile; Scott said isn’t it true that the fire department said you needed a permit for that? Carlson said he didn’t know about the fire department. Scott suggested to Carlson that as a suburban builder, he really didn’t know how many hoops he had to jump through to build in the city. Carlson agreed that every day you’re not building costs you money, so it’s important to get a project built as soon as possible.

Scott asked Carlson if the project had incurred lots of penalties, and Carlson said no. Scott said didn’t a lawyer have to come in on February 3rd, 2005 and meet with people in the city (Licensing; David Helmuth, an attorney; Zoning and Planning staff). Carlson explained that the meeting was designed to “straighten the air,” saying the city staff had told him “’you Republicans think you’re going to get everything you want.’” Carlson said they would follow the process; someone else would come in and tell them they needed to change it. He said he told them, “just tell us what you want”; he then said that someone in the city had come to a meeting wearing a Wellstone shirt over a Hawaiian shirt, and had orange hair spray.

The defense then presented Exhibit 12, a sign-in sheet for a meeting with the city held on February 3, 2005. The prosecution objected to page 2 of this Exhibit, saying he didn’t know whose notes were written on page 2. (Only page 1 was admitted.) Among those list in attendance that day were Azzam Sabri, Carlson’s lawyer, and Carlson (he said they had come together); Fred Abadi (Planning), someone from Inspections, Tiffany Green (Lilligren’s aide), Lonnie Nichols, and Steve Poor. Scott explained that the meeting was requested by their lawyer, partly in response to a $20,000 bill they had received from the city. Carlson explained the bill included costs for trees on the site that the city assumed would be taken down (they weren’t); sidewalk usage/day (he suggested they didn’t need to block off the sidewalk); fees for the location of their sales trailer [I believe Carlson said it wasn’t parked on the street, which was what the city charge was for]; and a permit to remove a retaining wall (Carlson said they were “shoring up” the area; he said no permit was required to take out the wall, only to put one it—which they weren’t doing). Scott referred to Carlson’s approach to the removal of the alley as “loosey goosey,” and Carlson replied by saying the “process in Minneapolis is extremely dysfunctional.”

Court recessed until 9:30 Thursday, August 3, 2006

Once the jury was dismissed, the judge suggested she and the attorneys had some “housekeeping” to do: apparently the defense objected to the prosecution’s introduction of further evidence surrounding the “straw man” candidate the Zimmermann campaign had run in the primary. [Zimmermann admits in Government Exhibit 40 (the videotape recorded at Zimmermann’s house on August 31st, 2005) that his campaign had deliberately and knowingly run a “straw man” candidate, James Gorham, for the sole purpose of requiring a primary.]

The prosecution and the defense argued for and against the evidence based on their interpretations of “404B”; the judge said she’d rule on the issue in the morning. [Note: 404B relates to evidence that the defendant has committed a crime that s/he is not being charged for—“Proof of Uncharged Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts.” It was unclear to me whether running a fake candidate is actually a crime; the defense argued that additional evidence relating to the “straw man” was unrelated to the case. The prosecution seemed to argue that such evidence was relevant because it spoke to “intent” on Zimmermann’s part.]

Day 5 of the Zimmermann Trial- The Prosecution Rests (and so do I)

In today's session, an FBI agent took the stand. U.S. Attorney John Docherty played an audio tape of the two agents assigned to the case questioning Zimmermann about receiving cash from Carlson. At the beginning of the tape the agent clearly explains to Zimmermann that he doesn't have to talk. They explain that they are investigating corruption at City Hall and Zimmermann had become a part of that investigation. They tell him that he is not under arrest, that he won't be arrested that day and that he was free to go at any time. Zimmermann chose to stay and talk with the agents.

The tape runs for one hour and forty-five minutes and it is edited from nearly two and and a half hours of tape.

The best description I can give is that Zimmermann sounded like a kid caught with his hand in the cookie jar. Every time he lied, the FBI agents showed him videotape or audio tape with him accepting money or asking for money or instructing Carlson on how to contribute above the legal llimits to his campaign.

In the end it becomes clear that Zimmermann spent the cash.

When the FBI asks Zimmermann where a one thousand dollars cash contribution went, Zimmermann replies, "All over the place".

We will have detailed notes later and transcripts eventually .

The Star Tribune has the story here.

A personal note: For several years, I have felt like Don Quixote, Ishmael from "Moby Dick" and the Ancient Mariner combined. I have told my tale of a Green Party gone bad to everyone who would listen. Very often, people would react by telling me that Dean Zimmmermann was a good friend and good person. Some people went even further to question my motives. Rumors were spread by Ziimmermann's supporters that I was "out to get Dean" and worse.

When this trial is over, whether he is found innocent or guilty, the tapes and the transcripts will reveal the real Dean Zimmermann.

This blog will be continued by others as an archive of material for anyone who wants to learn the truth about Dean Zimmermann.

As for me, I rest my case.

Day Four of the Zimmermann Trial

It was a nice day, so I took a break from watching videos of Dean Zimmermann drinking rum and cokes, wolfing down Buffalo Wings while stuffing hundred dollar bills into his pockets.

The Strib has an article about the cross examination of Carlson that took place in the morning. In the afternoon, there was a parade of City Hall politicos that included Robert Lilligren, Lisa Goodman and Gary Schiff.

Liz is still putting her notes together from yesterday and today, so we'll have those on the blog by next week.

Friday, the prosecution is scheduled wind up with more video and witnesses.

Check back here Friday night.

Notes From Day Two of the Dean Zimmermann Trial

(Posted on behalf of Liz Mclemore)

Caveats of the author, Liz McLemore: these are my notes of the trial (not a complete and accurate transcript), so I’m responsible for the errors here—and there are likely to be many, despite my best efforts. Although I
strive to be as correct as possible, please keep in mind that no two people ever view an event the same way. I’ve tried to indicate my comments and hesitations in square brackets [ ]; my personal perceptions are included in brackets at the end of the document.

Please note, too, that the audio or video recordings presented during the trial were especially challenging to record: I’ll readily admit that key moments in the conversations may be missing from my account. I’ve recorded what I could understand and whatever I could take down quickly—not necessarily a complete or even an accurate report, but it’s what I could get.

Judge Montgomery suggested that the audio and videotapes would likely be released once the trial is over; I’d urge readers to consult those whenever they become available.

Additional caveat here: in the interest of recording as much information as possible, I have occasionally neglected to indicate whether the witnesses were responding to questions from the prosecution (Docherty) or the defense (Scott).

Notes from the Zimmermann trial

Day 2: Tuesday, August 1, 2006

Second witness for the prosecution: Kathryn Wetzel-Mastel
The trial started promptly at 9:30 this morning as the defense attorney (Scott) resumed his cross-examination of Kathryn Wetzel-Mastel, a project manager for Powderhorn Residents Group (PRG). Scott showed Wetzel-Mastel two exhibits, both photos of 17th. Avenue South, and asked her to identify three homes: a property owned by Zimmermann’s ex-partner, Lynne Mayo; Mayo’s home; and Zimmermann’s house. She did so, explaining in the process that she may have misidentified the homes behind the trees in the photos on Monday. In response to Scott’s questions, Wetzel-Mastel explained that in her role as project manager at PRG she served as the primary contact for neighborhood groups, a role that could sometimes be complicated, with lots of voices at the table. She indicated it was important to have neighborhood groups on her side and present “a united front before the city.”

During Phase 1 of Franklin Station, Wetzel-Mastel was responsible for acquiring properties and for determining which ones could be acquired. Scott presented Exhibits 18, 25, 22A, and 22, all maps of 17th Avenue and 24th. Street. One showed the landscaping behind the townhomes (15 foot setback). The entrance to the back of the buildings was the east-west alley. As part of the project, PRG eliminated one of the alleys; the residents of Franklin Station townhomes then had two entrances into their property: one on 17th. Avenue and another on 24th.

Scott asked Wetzel-Mastel whether she was involved in negotiations to purchase the property on the corner, at 2410 17th. Avenue South (Parcel B on the maps). She said no, but indicated the negotiations took place during her employment with PRG. PRG acquired the property because it was a substandard size lot and quite rundown. In response to Scott’s questions, Wetzel-Mastel admitted the main reason for the acquisition was aesthetics. Apparently the project had a setback problem; Scott asked Wetzel-Mastel if it could have been solved by removing a unit; she said yes, but doing so would have eliminated an affordable housing unit (since PRG is a nonprofit, the issue wasn’t a loss of revenue).

Once PRG acquired Parcel B on the alley, it removed the building and the retaining wall on the site. Parcel A belonging to Lynne Mayo was then exchanged for Parcel B (Mayo would “come out ahead,” suggested Scott; the exchange also allowed PRG to resolve its setback dilemma). In response to Scott’s questions Wetzel-Mastel admitted that Mayo was sometimes difficult to work with (often changing what she wanted), and the negotiations regarding the exchange took time. A neighborhood petition was circulated, requesting that PRG not tear down the house. The petition contained both Mayo’s and Zimmermann’s signatures, but Wetzel-Mastel said she did not recall seeing Zimmermann’s.

On August 23, 2003 the agreement with Mayo was signed. Before that there were a number of “loose ends” that needed to be resolved, such as what to do about the appearance of the lot (Wetzel-Mastel said she and her supervisor at the time, Michele Wiegand, were only tangentially involved in this issue). Wetzel-Mastel was shown Exhibit 22, the final result of negotiations with Mayo. Scott asked the witness when the final grading of Mayo’s lot was done, and Wetzel-Mastel said she didn’t remember. Sandra Loescher, a real estate broker for PRG, was involved in the final negotiations.

A string of emails dated Wednesday, August 13, 2003 is presented as Exhibit 21; Wetzel-Mastel received the missives as a “cc.” The messages were from Mayo, but they included an email to Mayo from Wiegand [or to Wiegand from Mayo?] saying she [Mayo] only needed to consult with her advisor, Council member Zimmermann, and asked Mayo to reply by Aug. 18. The August 18 email contained several handwritten entries penned by Wetzel-Mastel:

“1st sign”;
“2nd minor subdivision, need cooperation”;
“3rd final grading”

Wetzel-Mastel suggested these were notes she wrote in discussion with Mayo (intended as a list of to-do items). An email from Mayo to Loescher on August 18 contained similar handwritten notations: next to Mayo’s request for “tree care and removal” a handwritten note by Wetzel-Mastel said “ok,” as did a reference to “grading”; a mention of “sod” had a note next to it saying “negotiate,” and the words “retaining wall and fence” had notes saying “neg. if need” and “no other.”

Next the defense showed Wetzel-Mastel a photo of a house, with a tree leaning away from the home at an angle. Scott explained to the jury that Mayo’s request for “tree care and removal” involved this tree; Wetzel-Mastel explained that a trained arborist had determined that the tree didn’t need to be removed, so Mayo’s request was denied. PRG also decided that “in the long run” the retaining wall on the property wasn’t needed, and it was removed.

Government Exhibit 1, an addendum to the purchase agreement dated August 22, 2003, was then displayed. The language says “get grading of PRG lot if possible” before October 15, 2003 so it could be seeded before winter. Wetzel-Mastel explained that she was not present at the closing, but the grading still needed to be done when the lot was sold to Mayo.

A year later, in October 2004, the project was almost finished and Wetzel-Mastel was beginning to secure the Certificates of Completion. She did not supervise the final grading of the lot. In response to Scott’s questions Wetzel-Mastel said PRG had installed retaining blocks or walls around the project parking lot and on one side of Mayo’s property (because of the grading). The grading did not necessitate a retaining wall on the other side of Mayo’s property, so PRG did not install one.

The next Exhibit showed a house with a railroad tie placed along the alleyway; Wetzel-Mastel explains that the tie was not put there by PRG. Scott referenced an email from Zimmermann saying the “entrance looks a little ratty,” and asked the witness if she agreed. She said it was not up to the standards of the rest of the project, adding that “it’s an alley in south Minneapolis.”

Government Exhibit 2 is shown (email from Wetzel-Mastel to Zimmermann requesting Certificates of Completion). In response to questioning, Wetzel-Mastel indicated she knew, but had forgotten, that Zimmermann was involved in the negotiations with Mayo; she had also forgotten that issues with the conditions of Mayo’s property remained unresolved at the project’s completion. The defense reminded Wetzel-Mastel that Zimmermann’s first response to Wetzel-Mastel’s request was to say “will do” [meaning he’d sign the Certificates]; congratulate PRG on the project; and ask for names of people to welcome them to the neighborhood. After that, Zimmermann suggested PRG finish the retaining walls around the block and offered to do the work himself, saying the entrance looked ratty. He asked for Wetzel-Mastel’s “thoughts” on the issue in closing.

In an email dated October 21, Wetzel-Mastel informed Zimmermann that PRG would not comply with the retaining wall request. On October 29, Zimmermann followed up and asked if Wetzel-Mastel had any leftover bricks, would she put them in his yard and he’d build the wall. [Wetzel-Mastel also refused this request.] Later, at an open house, Wetzel-Mastel offered to research the type of bricks used and get the information to Zimmermann (assuming he wished to match the materials and purchase them himself). In response to the defense attorney’s questioning, Wetzel-Mastel said Zimmermann was “polite and friendly” and “easier to get along with than Mayo.” Wetzel-Mastel also admitted that PRG had trouble getting one or two of the Certificates of Completion; the difficulty was due to city staff, not Zimmermann.

The prosecutor (Docherty) asked Wetzel-Mastel to clarify several issues in her testimony, including the dates of events (mostly late 2002 and into 2003). Docherty asked if Zimmermann had attended any of Wetzel-Mastel’s meetings with Mayo; she said no, adding that there were no phone calls, either—only an indirect reference in the email about Zimmermann’s involvement as Mayo’s adviser. Docherty then referred to the comment about the “ratty appearance” of the alley area, asking Wetzel-Mastel if it was her understanding that Zimmermann was requesting a retaining wall on only one side of that alley [on Mayo’s property only]. She said yes.

The defense then asked if a retaining wall was built on the other side of the alley, across from Mayo’s property [on property owned by a neighbor]. Wetzel-Mastel said no. Scott then asked if PRG still had some responsibilities to Mayo left at the closing, including the grading of the property. She said yes.

Court recessed from 10:30-10:45.

Third witness for the prosecution: David Rubedor
The prosecution began its questioning by asking Rubedor for details about his responsibilities with PRG (he was executive director starting in June 2004) and his background. He was then asked if Wetzel-Mastel [his employee] had consulted him about her email response to Zimmermann’s request on October 21, 2004 for a retaining wall for Mayo. He said yes; in fact, he consulted PRG’s attorney, Angela Christy (Faegre and Benson). He said he wanted to make sure PRG’s response was appropriate; clearly, he said, what was requested was “outside the scope” of the project. He estimated the value of the retaining wall at $2000-$3000. Government Exhibit 1 was then presented, an exchange agreement with MLM [I’m assuming that MLM is Mayo’s company] in which PRG agrees to pay $5000 in addition to the exchange of property.

In response to cross-examination by Scott, Rubedor explained that he was not working for PRG in August 2003, when the land swap took place, nor was he involved in the grading of the lot in June 2004. He said in October of 2004 after PRG had relinquished title, PRG was still performing actions on the land. However, he said he hadn’t considered that when he helped compose Wetzel-Mastel’s response to Zimmermann’s request. Scott asked if the grading was done after PRG relinquished the property, and Rubedor said he didn’t know.

Fourth witness for the prosecution: Michael Orange
Orange is a retired city planner—“principal planner” when he retired after 30 years with the city; he was one of two staff assigned to prepare the planning report for the property at 2401 Chicago Avenue South (known as Chicago Commons). Orange began his testimony by supplying background information for the jury on principles and terminology of planning. Zoning, for example, was defined as an enforcement tool used by the city to encapsulate how it wants the city to look, as specified in the Comprehensive Plan. Cities zone, he said, to control offsite impacts such as the vibration, noise, and pollution of trucks in residential areas. Zoning is part of the code of ordinances. Orange then explained two zoning classifications used for Chicago Commons: C2 (zoned as commercial; the number represents intensity) and OR2 (used for a combination of office and residential space). An “overlay,” such as a pedestrian overlay, is used to span districts.

Because one of Zimmermann’s indictments involves promises of help with zoning changes at Chicago Commons, Orange explained the process of changing a project’s zoning: once the application is submitted by the developer, the city’s planning staff manage the process and write a report for the Planning Commission and the City Council (the chair of the Zoning and Planning committee sits on the Planning Commission). After the application has cleared the Planning Commission, it goes to the Zoning and Planning committee and then to the full Council )after which the mayor may still veto it). The developer at Chicago Commons had apparently attempted to change the property’s zoning on two separate occasions.

Government Exhibit 9 was then presented, a petition by the developer (Gary Carlson) for rezoning 2401 Chicago Avenue South from OR2 to C2 with a pedestrian overlay. Orange’s response to Carlson’s application was to write a report; based on that report, the Planning department recommended denial of Carlson’s application. Zoning and Planning also denied it, as did the full Council (the mayor did not veto their decision).

On June 16, 2005, Orange had a conversation with Council member Zimmermann over Carlson’s application (Zimmermann was a member of the Zoning and Planning committee; Chicago Commons is not located in what was then Zimmermann’s ward). Orange said he recalled the conversation took place after the Zoning and Planning denial, but he could not recall the date (he said the conversation could have taken place after the full council denial). Zimmermann asked Orange what Carlson could do after his application had been denied. Orange said (1) Carlson could sue the city (but unless the city’s decision had been “arbitrary and capricious,” success was unlikely); (2) he could wait a year and try again; (3) he could apply for a different zoning classification. Orange indicated that most of his contact with Zimmermann’s office involved Natalie Collins, Zimmermann’s aide (a common occurrence).

Scott then questioned the witness, asking if staff’s recommendation to Zoning and Planning could be overturned by the Council; Orange said yes. On larger projects, it is not uncommon for zoning to change as different developers propose different projects (e.g, the different proposals for the Sears renovation). Orange also discussed the history of 2401 Chicago Avenue South: Lonnie Nichols had worked on the project before Orange; prior to zoning as OR2, it was R2B (medium-density residential). The property had 81 condo units, with first floor office and commercial space on less than two acres.

Exhibit 9 was presented, a petition from Carlson for zoning changes. There were two previous applications, with the first submitted in early 2005: both were denied by the city attorney as “inadequate applications for zoning.” Zoning changes also require the signatures of two-thirds of the property owners within 100 feet of the property in question; Carlson’s second application contained a duplicate of the signatures used for his first request—a problem, since the two requests involved different zoning classifications. On April 28, 2005, the city attorney said the application met the minimum criteria, so the petition could go forward. Orange said he dealt with both Azzam Sabri and Carlson. The next Exhibit (the defense’s) contained three business cards for “danna” company: two were for Don and Gary Carlson, and the third was Azzam Sabri’s. All contained the same contact information.

Because Carlson was requesting a change from OR2 to C2 with a pedestrian overlay, Orange explained terminology for the jury. OR2 allows a maximum of two small (2000 sq. ft.) commercial businesses, but its primary designation is residential and incidentally office space. C2 on the other hand is broad and permissive, allowing auto-oriented businesses (service stations, convenience stores) and commercial/retail uses as large as 30,000 sq. ft. (large restaurants serving alcohol are also permitted). A pedestrian overlay prohibits auto-oriented business, but the designation can be used to provide constraints on broader zoning. When asked if C2 with a pedestrian overlay was appropriate for the area at 2401 Chicago Avenue South, Orange said the recommendation from Planning was no. The defense then asked him when he had laid out the three options for Carlson to Zimmermann. Orange said he couldn’t recall, but explained that a 4th option—the Council overriding a staff recommendation—wasn’t given. The prosecution then presented a CPED tracking sheet as Government Exhibit 8.

The court recessed for lunch from 12:00 until 1:30pm.

Fifth witness for the prosecution: Randall Morris-Ostrom
Morris-Ostrom was an attorney in the redistricting lawsuit (he worked with Larry Leventhal, the lead attorney. Other attorneys involved were Mark Hager and David Garlick—sp?). Zimmermann, Natalie Johnson-Lee, and a number of Green Party members were plaintiffs in the lawsuit. Morris-Ostrom was initially contracted full-time at the discounted rate of $12/hour, but he later dropped down to part-time work on the case. Morris-Ostrom eventually quit after working 6 months to a year on the case: he said he couldn’t make his monthly mortgage and money was coming in irregularly. Unlike most lawsuits, clients weren’t paying for the case; instead, a group called FREE (Friends for Redistricting Evenly and Equitably) was created to fundraise. Morris-Ostrom said most of the 16 plaintiffs never fundraised: he remembers some efforts by Cam Gordon, Natalie Johnson-Lee, Bruce Shoemaker, Zimmermann, and perhaps some by Jenny Heiser and Tom Taylor. He said he was still owed $3000-$3500, and didn’t expect to collect. In response to questioning he said he could not remember learning of $5000 being raised in June 2005, at least for attorneys’ fees.

During the defense’s cross-examination Morris-Ostrom said he received more checks for his work in the beginning, and most fundraising was done then. Morris-Ostrom said Jenny Heiser had helped recruit him from the Quaker community of Friends; Heiser had hired him initially to collect evidence for the case, a “civil-rights” style lawsuit.

Sixth witness for the prosecution: Bruce Shoemaker
Shoemaker is a freelance consultant for humanitarian causes in Southeast Asia who met Zimmermann in 1998 when Zimmermann served as a contractor on his home. [The judge referred to Shoemaker’s “colorful” and interesting life: Shoemaker had just returned from a houseboat on the Ohio River and planned to go back there after testimony.] In 2002 he became a major plaintiff in the redistricting lawsuit. Initially Shoemaker got involved as a result of working for Shane Price’s campaign in northeast Minneapolis; he believes he was asked to join the lawsuit as a resident of the third ward.

Shoemaker said there was a fundraiser for FREE in late 2002, but not much effort was put into fundraising: there was no decision-making structure in place, so nothing was really coordinated. Originally there was a central bank account for donations, as well as a website and PayPal; money collected could go into that account or it could go directly to the lawyers to help reduce the debt. The treasurer was Dayne Walling (who worked for the Urban Coalition). When asked if anyone ever gave money directly, Shoemaker said he gave $500 directly to Leventhal, but he didn’t know the specifics of other direct contributions. He had understood that the plaintiffs would make a good-faith effort to raise money for the attorneys. When the depositions came out, legal and other fees became an issue. Shoemaker said people signed onto the lawsuit like it was a petition; he tried several times to coordinate the group, since his career allowed him periods of free time.

The prosecution then presented Exhibit 11, an April 4, 2005 invoice to FREE from Leventhal for legal services, etc. (mailed to Shoemaker’s home). The total was $101,753.36 for legal costs [the original total shown was $107, 902.01; however, several itemized payments were listed between January ’04 and January ’05, reducing the balance to $101,753.36. There were no itemized payments of $5000.].

Shoemaker was then asked if he was aware of a $5000 payment in June of 2005. He replied, “that sounds right.” [This was a very odd moment, I thought: the Exhibit under discussion covered payments from January 2004 to January 2005, so a June payment would not have appeared on this invoice.] Shoemaker then explained that since FREE was not a 501c3, contributions were not tax-deductible; Walling helped set up an account with the Urban Coalition so people could write checks to FREE and receive a tax deduction through the Urban Coalition’s 501c3 status. This situation didn’t last long: the Urban Coalition went bankrupt and Walling left, so it became hard to get FREE’s money out. Shoemaker said over $1000 of FREE’s money was lost. The other FREE account was closed in early 2005: Walling had more responsibilities and simply burned out. The redistricting case was still on appeal in early May 2005; Shoemaker left town until late September.

Shoemaker was then asked, “You did get some money in last Fall?” Shoemaker said yes; he learned Zimmermann had received $5000 plus another $1000 for the redistricting lawsuit. Shoemaker discussed with plaintiffs the need for a bank account, but he said it was more difficult to do that under Homeland Security legislation. He said money was put in a separate bank account in northeast Minneapolis and out of that, the plaintiffs paid Leventhal and a partner $1000 and kept $5000 in the account to see if the city would charge them for liability. The city had 90 days to appeal (they didn’t); the city had 90 more days to claim expenses (they didn’t; the window for doing so is now over). Money is still available to pay lawyers. The plaintiffs never signed an agreement to pay lawyers themselves, though Shoemaker made a number of contributions to FREE (his father and friends gave several thousand dollars). FREE also prepared a direct mailing to raise funds; he said he couldn’t remember if Zimmermann had helped, but Joe Barisonzi did.

Docherty then asked Shoemaker if Zimmermann had discussed any contributions with him on May Day 2005: Shoemaker said no. The prosecution then presented Exhibits 64 and 65, invoices from Leventhal dated September 6, 2005 and August 20, 2005. As with Exhibit 11, Exhibit 64 (September 6, 2005) showed a balance owed of $101,753.36. [The Exhibit showed no itemized payment of $5000 for June 2005.]

Seventh witness for the prosecution: Dayne Walling
Walling came to Minnesota from Michigan in July 2002 and worked as a policy advocate (primarily on state-level issues, some metro) for the Urban Coalition. [I’ve omitted his educational background.] The President/CEO of the Urban Coalition assigned Walling to the 2001 redistricting committee to be helpful. Walling became treasurer, and the Urban Coalition offered fiscal sponsorship for awhile. Walling served from summer 2003 to May 2005, opening a Wells Fargo business account and funds to the Urban Coalition (Walling monitored the reports). Between $14,000 and $15,000 were raised when Walling worked as treasurer.

The prosecution presented Exhibit 10, a printout of an email from Leventhal to Walling dated June 23, 2004; the email listed fees totaling $106,013. When Walling closed the FREE account in May 2005, only a few thousand dollars remained. He remembered only two fundraising events: one that took place before he was treasurer and one during that period. He thought Zimmermann had done some fundraising but Walling said he never witnessed Zimmermann’s fundraising efforts.

Scott then asked Walling whether fiscal sponsorship disappeared with the demise of the Urban Coalition; Walling said yes. Some money (under $2000, maybe $1500-1700; he told the FBI $1071) was lost then; FREE also lost its 501c3 tax deduction for contributions. Between summer 2003 and 2005, Walling dealt with a few members of FREE: Zimmermann, Jenny Heiser, Tom Taylor. The email from June 23, 2004 from Leventhal to Walling suggested Walling pay Leventhal $1500 (despite the much larger total debt owed). Walling said he never felt any pressure from Leventhal that the latter would sue for the money. Walling closed the account in May 2005 and wrote a check to Leventhal on May 27, 2005; after the check was written, only $1.63 remained in the account.

Court recessed from 2:50-3:00


Eighth witness for the prosecution: Gary Carlson
Gary A. Carlson has been a builder since 1986 or ’87; he is President of “danna” (a general contracting company) and Chicago Commons (a company created for the project at 2401 Chicago Avenue South). Chicago Commons, Carlson explained, was meant to be a mixed-use project, with retail on the ground level and condos (81) on the upper floors.

The prosecution presented Exhibits 13 and 14, aerial photos of Chicago Commons (nearby landmarks Abbott Northwestern and Children’s Hospital were pointed out for the jury). Exhibit 15, an architectural drawing, was also shown.

Carlson explained that the existing building on the site was torn down; Carlson financed Chicago Commons partly with his own money, putting in $1 million in cash and re-mortgaging his own home. The initial zoning for Chicago Commons was OR2 in summer 2004; the groundbreaking took place in October 2004, and construction was completed in September or October 2005. The zoning designation of OR2 allowed for two planned retail businesses, one (a coffee shop) of 2800 square feet and the other (a small grocery store) on 1300 square feet; zoning required that both be sited on Chicago. As Carlson tried to sell the condos, he discovered problems: in order to market the condos to those who worked in the area, he needed local businesses like dry cleaning. Carlson wanted to add those businesses to his site plan.

Carlson first met Zimmermann in October or November 2004 at City Hall; Azzam Sabri, whom Carlson had known for 4-5 years (he considered him a friend and helped Azzam with his mortgage), introduced Carlson to Zimmermann. He met Zimmermann casually a second time. His first one-on-one meeting with Zimmermann took place at a groundbreaking on Franklin and Portland (Carlson was invited to the event by Sabri); there the issue of money came up. Carlson asked Zimmermann, “What can I do to help you get elected?” Zimmermann walked him away from the event and told him about the redistricting lawsuit and the accompanying debt of over $100,000. Zimmermann asked Carlson for a $40,000 donation to help defray the legal fees. Carlson suggested the amount was quite high [I didn’t record the exact words here]. Carlson offered to speak with the lawyers in the case [it sounded like the goal here was to lessen the debt, but again, I didn’t record the wording]. Azzam is the one who initially suggested Zimmermann could help Carlson with his zoning problems: Chicago Commons was Carlson’s first multi-unit project and his first in Minneapolis.

In May 2005 Azzam invited Carlson to a Shriner’s function for African-American businesses (Azzam had told him it was the Sierra Club on Park Avenue). Carlson had a private conversation with Zimmermann outside when Carlson took a cigarette break. Carlson mentioned he had recently had a fundraiser for Norm Coleman at his house; Zimmermann chided Carlson for not inviting him. Carlson replied by saying he didn’t think Zimmermann [as a Green] would want to attend a Republican fundraiser. Zimmermann responded by saying, “Liberals, Greens, Democrats, Republicans…it’s all money.” [I may have mixed up the order of items in the list here; my account isn’t verbatim.] Carlson said he didn’t recall if he discussed zoning with Zimmermann.

Carlson promptly told the FBI (Agent Tim Bisswurm); after this, all encounters with Zimmermann were recorded.

Meanwhile, Carlson’s rezoning application with the city (Michael Orange) wasn’t going well. The prosecution introduced Exhibit 13 showing the Village Market retail mall (“kitty corner” from Chicago Commons). Carlson explained the Village Market was giving him “marketing problems” as he tried to sell his condos (his target population was staff at the hospitals and Wells Fargo—area workers). The area was an “evolving neighborhood” on the upswing; the Village was originally approved for 38 Somali shops, but the number was increased to 146 shops, with no extra parking (only 20-27 spaces total) and no zoning changes. Soon there were shootings, stabbings, and drug dealing. Carlson said there was a “cause and effect” relationship between the increase in crime and the Village Market.

For Chicago Commons Carlson sought a zoning classification of C2 with a pedestrian overlay (the overlay restricts C2 to neighborhood, walkable businesses). Carlson felt the crime around the Village Market might be discouraging prospective tenants, since the lack of parking increased activity in the surrounding neighborhood.

The FBI had previously asked Carlson to cooperate: apparently Carlson was being investigated by the Justice Dept. for a $15,000 investment he had made in East Bank [not sure if this is correct name], then divested in 2002 or 2003. In response to questioning, Carlson said the government had asked him to come in to talk with them about the issue if something came up; Carlson said he never had that conversation with the Justice Dept., and he couldn’t recall whether he was promised that the bank issue wouldn’t be used against him.

In June 2005 Carlson met Zimmermann at the Black Forest Inn; Carlson was wearing an FBI “wire.” [Each time the prosecution or defense presented audio or video tape, the witness was asked whether he had listened to the material since it was recorded, whether it was accurate, etc.] Carlson understood the event was a birthday party for Zimmermann but said he did not know it was a fundraising event. At this point, the prosecution introduced Exhibit 16, an audio tape. Members of the jury were given a transcript of the recording; the judge cautioned them to consider the audiotape as evidence, not the transcript.

First audiotape: Black Forest Inn (June 2005)
[Music, laughter, voices.] Zimmermann says something about four or five jerks on the neighborhood committee in the context of discussing a vote with Carlson; Zimmermann tells Carlson to send him an email. Carlson asks Zimmermann, “What can I do to help you?” and Zimmermann replies “Money, money, money.” The issue of the redistricting suit comes up, and Zimmermann says something about $90,000. Carlson (?) suggests it wouldn’t hurt if he gave them $4,000-5,000. He asks Zimmermann to keep quiet about it to Azzam. The Village Market, crime, and drug dealing are discussed. [Much of the tape was unintelligible here.] Carlson tells Zimmermann if you want me to do more, that’s fine; you need money in this campaign. Zimmermann asks if “you’ve got a cousin or something, you can give in their name” (when Carlson donates). Carlson then mentions something about having several (cousins).

The prosecution resumed its cross-examination of Carlson. Exhibit 12, a Ward map containing a handwritten phone number, is presented. Zimmermann had given the map to Carlson and jotted his home phone number on the map. Chicago Commons is not in Zimmermann’s ward but across the street from it. The Village is owned by Azzam and Azi [sp?] and another person; Carlson explained that his friendship with Azzam had dissolved over the problems with the Village.

In response to questioning Carlson explained that he really has no cousins (only himself, his wife, brother, and mother). He also explained that he did not attend the June 13, 2005 Zoning and Planning Committee meeting where his zoning application was denied (he said he thought staff had recommended denial but he wasn’t sure). The prosecution introduced Exhibit 17, a taped phone conversation with Zimmermann.

Second audiotape: phone conversation with Zimmermann on June 14, 2005 (recorded with Agent Kukura or Agent Bisswurm)
Zimmermann asks Carlson what happened at the Zoning and Planning meeting the previous day. Carlson explains that his application was denied and asks to meet with Zimmermann at lunch today, around 1:00 (somewhere they won’t be “too bothered”). Zimmermann says that’s what he’s thinking, and they agree to meet at Baja Riverside.

The prosecution resumed its questioning of Carlson, asking him whether Azzam had a connection with “danna,” Carlson’s company. Carlson responded by saying Azzam and his brothers had many projects in the city and had never had problems getting their projects approved; Carlson offered Azzam a minority shareholder agreement, calling him a vice-president, even though Azzam never officially became a shareholder. Azzam offered Carlson a note but never paid. The association between them ended in January, February, or early March and Carlson tried to dissociate himself from Azzam Sabri.

Court recessed until 4:15

In response to questioning, Carlson explained that he didn’t think the issue of zoning had arisen when he met Zimmermann at the Shriner’s. Carlson is shown a copy of the FBI report of his conversation with Zimmermann at the Shriner’s and asked if it was correct; he said it was. The prosecution then asked Carlson if the subject of zoning had come up at the May 20 meeting with Zimmermann, and Carlson said he had brought it up; Zimmermann responded by saying he needed cash, and quick. Zimmermann gave Carlson his phone number. Carlson took $5000 (50 $100 bills) to his meeting with Zimmermann at the Baja. The prosecution then introduced Exhibit 18, a videotape.

First videotape: meeting with Zimmermann at Baja Riverside June 14, 2005
Jokes and banter [in part about not being bothered at the Baja, since the place was virtually empty]. They order chicken or buffalo wings and Bacardi cokes. Carlson hands Zimmermann an envelope and explains, “This is for that attorney thing or whatever you talked about…use it what you want…Be careful with that money…” Zimmermann checks the envelope and slips it in his pocket.

Carlson says, “I can’t believe last night,” and they discuss the Zoning and Planning decision, the neighborhood group [Midtown Phillips], the Village Market, and Shirley Heyer. Carlson brings up Azzam, the Sabri reputation, adding that Azzam has no money. Carlson says he needs Zimmermann’s help and explains that Chicago Commons is a good project. He explains that Midtown Phillips thinks Azzam is still associated with the project (Azzam had authority to speak on behalf of the corporation; however, Azzam was given a document by Carlson’s brother that Azzam altered and then re-notarized). Carlson explains to Zimmermann that the neighborhood thought Carlson was associated with the Village Market and assumed Chicago Commons was simply an “expansion” of the Village Market. Zimmermann tells Carlson he should appeal the Zoning decision and indicates the staff report mentioned the importance of preserving the residential character of Chicago. Zimmermann says that argument isn’t tough to counter: Carlson could use the Eye Institute and other businesses in the area and argue that the area isn’t residential at all but rather part of the “biomedical corridor.” Zimmermann says the area should be more of a commercial corridor anyway, not residential. Carlson refers to the need for dry cleaning and local grocery stores, etc. in the area. [Zimmermann orders another drink.] Carlson says he’s got a Council member there who “just doesn’t get it,” who never had a real job, “like us,” and therefore the Council member will never understand business.

Carlson then explains that Chicago Commons has 81 condo units and more than enough parking [he’s contrasting his project to Village Market]. Carlson says those who come to the Village Market don’t live in the area. He says “we need to clear up this Sabri thing” [the neighborhood’s perception that he’s still involved with Azzam]. Carlson tells Zimmermann, “We need people like you to get elected, and we need this zoning.” He then mentions Shirley Heyer and says the documents that Azzam changed were those that went to Michael Orange [city planner]. Carlson asks Zimmermann, “Who can you get on your side, ‘cause I know you can override it” [the zoning decision]. Zimmermann then explains, “what my campaign needs is 4-5 young people…slip them $100 a week, they don’t need much, can’t run it through the campaign.” Carlson says “I’ve got 8 million riding on this project, so whatever you need.”

Robert Lilligren’s name comes up in conversation. Carlson says he tried to set up a meeting with Lilligren, but Lilligren didn’t show up. Carlson then repeats the story about Shirley Heyer and the neighborhood association’s objections to the project [based on his presumed association with Azzam Sabri]. Carlson talks about there being 146 shops at Village Market but zoned for far fewer, saying “we need to create a space for the Somali community like what we have there.” [This is the first time this suggestion/proposal is mentioned.]

Conversation ensues, with one of them saying, “the Sabri boys are really putting those Somalis in a tough place.” Carlson says something about Zimmermann having staff he could hire for his campaign [no suggestions of names here]. Zimmermann says he’s up against a dilemma: “Should I help the Sabris so these [Somali] businesses can just stay in business?” [More discussion…Carlson steers the conversation back to his zoning issue, saying there aren’t a lot of votes involved.] Carlson explains that the city needs Council people who understand growth in the city; he then refers to the upcoming elections, saying “Lilligren thinks he has it sewed up.” Zimmermann replies, “that’s what we want him to think.” Zimmermann says Lilligren’s problem is he thinks all you need is people active in the neighborhood and the DFL. Carlson says campaigns take money, adding that “all you ever hear from is the activists.” He says Zimmermann is a good name, like Carlson; Lilligren is not. Folks understand that, he says.

Carlson says, “we’ve got to beef up your campaign, strong, and I’ve got to get this project through.” Zimmermann discusses strategy with the neighborhood group, saying “you’ve got to get to Shirley” [Heyer]. Carlson asks how many are on Council; Zimmermann says 13, with about 6 on Zoning and Planning, including Lilligren. Zimmermann advises Carlson to talk to Shirley and counteract impressions of the Village Market. Zimmermann says, “if Sabri goes belly up…” Carlson says, “the Sabris and the neighborhood, what they pull and do, it’s only a matter of time…” Carlson then refers to the “Arab mentality,” which he describes as a “bragging thing, ego, they know you and so then they say you’re partners…” He adds that “when it comes down to it, I’ve gotten screwed by about 99% of them.”

He says, “Dean, I need you to push and do certain favors for me, but you need to get elected first.” He says something about having cousins, but there being a $300 per person campaign contribution limit and adds, “how do I do it?” Zimmermann advises him to go to his friends and cousins, give them $300 each to donate, but give each of them a check for $350. Carlson explains that he has lots of employees and contractors working for him; he says he’ll get started on his employees. Zimmermann cautions him, saying “you’ve got to be careful, you don’t want them all showing up [on Zimmermann’s campaign finance records] as all working for you.” Carlson says he’s got lots of friends. Zimmermann tells Carlson to “give them money, have them write a check to me…I don’t want to know about it.” Zimmermann explains that the campaign contribution limit is $300 for an individual, $600 for a couple/family. He says Carlson could make up names or give money to people and have them write a check (says Carlson could give them $350, write a check for $300). Zimmermann adds that you’ve got to list their occupations. Carlson asks if they need to live in the Ward. Zimmermann says no, adding that his Ward is a poor Ward, and he can’t rely on people in his Ward for all his campaign donations. Carlson mentions the benefit he hosted for Coleman, mentions his own home in Florida, and discusses deep-sea fishing (inviting Zimmermann, who says he’s never been). Carlson pays for lunch. Zimmermann puts a little cash on the table then withdraws some, saying something like, “in all honesty, I can say I left money on the table. See, we split the bill.”

Court recesses until 9:30 Wednesday, August 02, 2006