Loading...
072412completeagenda CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, JULY 24, 2012 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING RICHFIELD MUNICIPAL CENTER 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. AGENDA INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS Call to order Roll call Open forum (15 minutes maximum) Each speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for others. Comments are to be an opportunity to address the Council on items not on the agenda. Individuals who wish to address the Council must have registered prior to the meeting. Notes: Pledge of Allegiance Approval of minutes of(1) Special City Council Worksession of July 10, 2012; and (2) Regular City Council Meeting of July 10, 2012 COUNCIL DISCUSSION 1. Council discussion • Hats Off to Hometown Hits Notes: AGENDA APPROVAL, 2. Council approval of agenda CONSENT CALENDAR 3. Consent Calendar contains several separate items,which are acted upon by the City Council in one motion. Once the Consent Calendar has been approved,the individual items and recommended actions have also been approved. No further Council action on these items is necessary. However, any Council Member may request that an item be removed from the Consent Calendar and placed on the regular agenda for Council discussion and action. All items listed on the Consent Calendar are recommended for approval. A. Consideration of approval of Post-Issuance Debt Compliance Policy and updated Fund Balance Policy S.R. No. 127 B. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing prepayment and redemption of $750,000 Taxable G.O. Improvement Bonds, Series 1997, dated December 1, 1997 S.R. No. 128 C. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing refunding of$3,470,000 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds, Series 2003C, dated December 30, 2003 with $2,560,000 Taxable G.O. Tax Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 2012B S.R. No. 129 D. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing submittal of grant application to Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development for pedestrian access improvements in Lakes at Lyndale area S.R. No. 130 E. Consideration of approval of award of contract to Metro Elevator, Inc. for repairs to existing elevator at Richfield Community Center as required by State Code in amount of$35,335 S.R. No. 131 F. Consideration of approval of award of contract to Midwest Elevator and Drilling for installation of air conditioning unit to existing elevator at Richfield Community Center as required by State Code in amount of$15,317 S.R. No. 132 Notes: 4. Consideration of item(s), if any, removed from Consent Calendar Notes: PROPOSED ORDINANCE 5. Consideration of: • Second reading of ordinance amending Subsection 429.05 of Richfield City Code related to Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Stormwater Management Rule; and • Resolution authorizing summary publication of ordinance amendment Section 429 Staff Report No. 133 Notes: RESOLUTIONS, 6. Disciplinary hearing regarding resolutions imposing civil enforcement on establishments in Richfield that underwent alcohol compliance checks conducted by Richfield Public Safety and failed by selling alcohol to underage youth Staff Report No. 134 Notes: OTHER BUSINESS CITY MANAGER'S REPORT 7. City Manager's Report Notes: 8. Claims and payrolls Open forum (additional 15 minutes if more time needed after first Open Forum and by majority vote of the City Council) Each speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for others. Comments are to be an opportunity to address the Council on items not on the agenda. Individuals who wish to address the Council must have registered prior to the meeting. Notes: 9. Adjournment Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be made at least 96 hours in advance to the City Clerk at 612-861-9738. richfield:August 2012 Page 1 of 1 • City of Richfield Calendar Calendars Net Navigate: 2011 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Seo Oct Nov Dec 2013 August 2012 Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday 30 I Jul 31 1 I Aug 2 3 7:OOp Transportation 7:00p Arts Commission Commission @ 6335 Portland Ave 6 7 8 9 10 11:30a Tourism Promotion Board @ 6601 Lyndale Ave,Suite 106 6:30p Human Rights Commission 13 14 - 15 16 17 6:15p Special City PRIMARY ELECTION 7:OOp Friendship City 8:OOa Special City Council Worksession DAY Commission Council Meeting 7:OOp Regular City Council Meeting (rescheduled from Aug. 14) 20 21 22 23 24 5:30p Special HRA/City 7:OOp Community SATURDAY,AUG.25 Council/Planning Services Commission- 9:30 a.m.-10:30 a.m. Commission CANCELED Mayor's Hour-Farmer's Worksession Market 7:OOp Housing and Redevelopment Authority(HRA) 27 28 29 30 31 7:OOp Planning 7:OOp City Council Commission Regular Meeting CANCELED Display: Year Month Week pAy Block List Condensed, Abs Slide Calendars: Search Add Events: Daily Duration Periodic Administer: This Calendar All meetings held at City Hall (6700 Portland Avenue) unless indicated otherwise Calendars Net free online interactive web calendars http://www.my.calendars.net/richfield/d01/08/2012?display=M&style=B&positioning=A 7/19/2012 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Richfield, Minnesota #geqeeeld Special City Council Worksession July 10, 2012 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Goettel at 6:15 p.m. in the Bartholomew Conference Room. ROLL CALL Council Members Debbie Goettel, Mayor; Tom Fitzhenry; Pat Elliott; Fred Wroge; and Sue Present: Sandahl Staff Present: Steven L. Devich, City Manager; Mike Eastling, Public Works Director; Jim Topitzhofer, Recreation Services Director; Jeff Pearson, Transportation Engineer; and Cheryl Krumholz, Executive Coordinator Item #1 DISCUSSION REGARDING RENAMING OF 76T"/77T" STREET(COUNCIL MEMO NO. 79) Transportation Engineer Pearson discussed the information collected in 2009, possible resolutions to previously identified issues, and policy direction to staff on how to proceed. Transportation Engineer Pearson presented the options of keeping the official street name and add a "nickname", "nicknames" at only major intersections, and alternate street name because "Centennial" is too connected with Edina. He also reviewed some issues with the "nickname" option. The City Council was not supportive of the "nickname" option. Council Member Sandahl expressed strong support for renaming with an airport associated link, not Edina because it may encourage the underpass. She added that her discussions with Tim Carter, Richfield-Bloomington Honda, indicate support because the area is a regional draw. At the invitation of Council Member Sandahl, Larry Couture, ECOsmarte, 1600 East 78th Street, presented his views on the renaming of 77th Street, east of Portland Avenue, including support for consideration of Airport Parkway or MSP Airport Plaza. Mayor Goettel expressed support of renaming because it may help businesses. Council Member Fitzhenry suggested citizen-input on renaming the street. He said the renaming will give a clearer name for travel destinations. Special Worksession Minutes -2- June 26, 2012 Council Member Wroge stated he did not support an Airport Parkway through Richfield. He also did not support the renaming because there is already a street grid system and there is enough traffic getting off 1-494 to cut through Richfield. Council Member Elliott said he agreed with renaming but no further west than Nicollet to develop a commercial district identity. He did not endorse renaming all the way across the City. The City Council consensus was to not use the nickname option but rather an alternate street name and direct staff to develop a process to obtain citizen input and marketing impacts and return to the City Council with alternatives to gather options. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 6:50 p.m. Date Approved: July 24, 2012 Debbie Goettel Mayor Cheryl Krumholz Steven L. Devich Executive Coordinator City Manager CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES ee d Richfield, Minnesota G Regular Meeting July 10, 2012 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Goettel at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Members Present: Debbie Goettel, Mayor; Tom Fitzhenry; Pat Elliott, Sue Sandahl; and Fred Wroge. Staff Present: Steven L. Devich, City Manager; Mike Eastling, Public Works Director; John Stark, Community Development Director; Jim Topitzhofer, Recreation Services Director; Todd Sandell, Acting Public Safety Director; Chris Regis, Finance Manager; Jeff Pearson, Transportation Engineer; Corrine Heine, City Attorney; and Cheryl Krumholz, Executive Coordinator. OPEN FORUM None. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Goettel led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES M/Fitzhenry, S/Wroge to approve the minutes of(1) Regular City Council Meeting of June 12, 2012; (2) Special City Council Worksession of June 26, 2012; and (3) Regular City Council Meeting of June 26, 2012. Motion carried 5-0. Item#1 ANNUAL MEETING WITH ARTS COMMISSION Judy Goebel and Debra Caseroti, Arts Commission Co-Chairs, provided a report on the Commission's activities and goals. Council Meeting Minutes -2- July 10,2012 Item #2 COUNCIL DISCUSSION • HATS OFF TO HOMETOWN HITS Recreation Services Director Topitzhofer provided an update on the All Veterans Memorial. The City Council expressed their thanks to Police, Fire, and Public Works staff for their work at the July 4 celebration. Council Member Wroge suggested the housing policy discussion be held sooner rather than later with the City Council and invite the HRA and Planning Commission to attend. Mayor Goettel stated this discussion should include housing for the entire community and be on a date when all members of the City Council can be present. Community Development Director Stark suggested a facilitator be considered to assist with discussion. Item #3 COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AGENDA M/Fitzhenry, S/Wroge to approve the agenda. Motion carried 5-0. Item #4 CONSENT CALENDAR A. Consideration of approval of canceling public hearing on July 10, 2012 regarding preliminary and final plat approval for land located at 7641 Pleasant Avenue (former Public Works Garage property and former Gleason Mortuary at 211 West 76th Street); Pillsbury Commons S.R. No. 116 B. Consideration of approval of first reading of ordinance amendment related to Minnehaha Creek Watershed District's Stormwater Management Rule and scheduling second reading for July 24, 2012 S.R. No. 117 C. Consideration of approval of renewal of commercial lease with MnDOT for use of excess land along 1-494 adjacent to Best Buy Campus for continued use as parking lot and transit station S.R. No. 118 D. Consideration of approval of resolution providing for sale of$2,150,000 General Obligation Street Reconstruction Bonds, Series 2012A S.R. No. 119 RESOLUTION NO.10664 RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF $2,150,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION STREET RECONSTRUCTION BONDS, SERIES 2012A This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10664. E. Consideration of approval of resolutions pertaining to annual Lyndale/HUB/Nicollet (LHN) maintenance assessment process and scheduling public hearing for August 13, 2012 S.R. No. 120 Council Meeting Minutes -3- July 10,2012 RESOLUTION NO.10665 RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR LYNDALE/HUB/NICOLLET (LHN) MAINTENANCE FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 2011 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2011 This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10665. RESOLUTION NO.10666 RESOLUTION PROPOSING TO SPECIALLY ASSESS FOR THE COSTS OF CURRENT SERVICES PROVIDED WITHIN THE LYNDALE/HUB/NICOLLET (LHN) PROJECT AREA FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 2013 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2013 This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10666. F. Consideration of approval of resolutions pertaining to annual 77th Street maintenance district assessment process and scheduling public hearing for August 13, 2012 S.R. No. 121 RESOLUTION NO.10667 RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR 77TH STREET MAINTENANCE FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 2011 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2011 This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10667. RESOLUTION NO.10668 RESOLUTION PROPOSING TO SPECIALLY ASSESS FOR THE COSTS OF CURRENT SERVICES PROVIDED WITHIN THE 77TH STREET PROJECT AREA FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 2013 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2013 This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10668. G. Consideration of approval of resolution declaring costs to be assessed for removal of diseased trees from private property for work ordered in 2011 and scheduling public hearing for August 13, 2012 S.R. No. 122 RESOLUTION NO.10669 RESOLUTION DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 1, 2011 TO DECEMBER 31, 2011 This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10669. H. Consideration of approval of: • Revisions to West Connection and East Connection Bicycle Route Project Plans; and • Resolution authorizing amendment of MnDOT Agreement No. 99916 accepting additional funds in amount of$100,675 for additional engineering and construction changes for project; and • Resolution for"No Parking" on west side of Bloomington Avenue (between 66th Street and Diagonal Boulevard) and areas of Humboldt Avenue (between 69th and 75th Streets) S.R. No. 123 Council Meeting Minutes -4- July 10,2012 RESOLUTION NO.10670 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AMENDMENT OF AGENCY AGREEMENT NO. 99916 BETWEEN THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE CITY OF RICHFIELD ACCEPTING ADDITIONAL FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $100,675 FOR FEDERAL PARTICIPATION IN TWO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PILOT PROGRAM PROJECTS This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10670. RESOLUTION NO.10671 RESOLUTION RELATING TO TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNS "NO PARKING" ON BLOOMINGTON AVENUE This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10671. M/Goettel, S/Sandahl to approve the Consent Calendar. Transportation Engineer Pearson explained the advisory bike lanes on Bloomington Avenue and MnDOT requirements. Motion carried 5-0. Item #5 CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS, IF ANY, REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR None. Item #6 CONSIDERATION OF: • FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE GRANTING CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE TO COMCAST OF ARKANSAS/FLORIDA/LOUISIANA/ MINNESOTA/MISSISSIPPI/TENNESSEE, INC.; AND • FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE REPEALING RICHFIELD CITY CODE SECTION 726; AND • SCHEDULING PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES ON AUGUST 13, 2012 S.R. NO. 124 Mayor Goettel presented Staff Report No. 124. City Manager Devich explained the average Comcast customer will not notice a change, there will be no change in the collection of franchise fees, and the City will receive additional funds to upgrade and purchase cable equipment. M/Goettel, S/Wroge to approve first reading of ordinance granting cable television franchise to Comcast of Arkansas/Florida/Louisiana/Minnesota/Mississippi/Tennessee, Inc., first reading of ordinance repealing Richfield City Code Section 726, and scheduling public hearing and second reading of ordinances on August 13, 2012. Motion carried 5-0. Council Meeting Minutes -5- July 10,2012 Item#7 CONSIDERATION OF: • RESOLUTION AMENDING CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY CHANGING DESIGNATION OF 301 —77111 STREET WEST TO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL/OFFICE; AND • ORDINANCE REZONING PROPERTY AT 301 —77TH STREET WEST FROM MIXED USE—COMMUNITY TO PLANNED MIXED USE; AND • RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF AUTO BODY/MECHANICAL REPAIR SHOP AT 301 —77TH STREET WEST; AND • RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE REZONING 301 —77TH STREET WEST S.R. NO 125 Council Member Wroge presented Staff Report No. 125. Community Development Director Stark discussed the conditions required to be met in a revised site plan. He also explained the outstanding items related to a shared parking agreement. Candlewood's local and corporate offices have been kept informed throughout the process. Community Development Director Stark explained the proximity of the railroad tracks and the inability to move the existing driveway. He also explained the opaque screening to buffer the sight of vehicles waiting for repair. M/Wroge, S/Goettel that this constitutes the second reading of Bill No. 2012-8 approving rezoning property at 301 —77th Street West from Mixed Use—Community to Planned Mixed Use, that it be published in the official newspaper and that it be made part of these minutes, and that the following resolutions be adopted and that they be made part of these minutes: RESOLUTION NO.10672 RESOLUTION AMENDING THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHANGING THE DESIGNATION OF 301 WEST 77TH STREET TO "COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL/OFFICE" This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10672. RESOLUTION NO.10673 RESOLUTION APPROVING A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN AUTO BODY/MECHANICAL REPAIR SHOP AT 301 77TH STREET WEST This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10673. RESOLUTION NO.10674 RESOLUTION APPROVING SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX 1 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10674. Motion carried 5-0. Item #8 CONSIDERATION OF CONFIRMATION OF CITY MANAGER'S APPOINTMENT OF TODD SANDELL AS PUBLIC SAFETY DIRECTOR FOR CITY OF RICHFIELD S.R. NO. 126 Council Member Fitzhenry presented Staff Report No. 126. M/Fitzhenry, S/Goettel to approve confirmation of City Manager's appointment of Todd Sandell as Public Safety Director for City of Richfield. Council Meeting Minutes -6- July 10,2012 Motion carried 5-0. Item#9 CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager Devich reported on the Employee Wellness Program's recent award. Item #10 CLAIMS AND PAYROLLS M/Wroge, S/Sandahl that the following claims and payrolls be approved: U.S. Bank 07/10/12 A/P Checks: 214302-214550 $ 1,051,917.19 Payroll: 85018-85386; 41883—41885 $ 593,410.44 TOTAL $ 1,645,327.63 Motion carried 5-0. OPEN FORUM None. ADJOURNMENT The City Council meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 8:17 p.m. Date Approved: July 24, 2012 Debbie Goettel Mayor Cheryl Krumholz Steven L. Devich Executive Coordinator City Manager AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM# 3A REPORT# 127 IP STAFF REPORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 24, 2012 monwig REPORT PREPARED BY: CHRIS REGIS,FINANCE MANAGER &AME,TITLE _ DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: d 4 I I , -�_ice i aro i REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: / L i ir ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of approval of a Post-Issuance Debt Compliance Policy and an update to the City's Fund Balance Policy. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the Post-Issuance Debt Compliance Policy and updated Fund Balance Policy. H. BACKGROUND The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is responsible for enforcing compliance with IRS Code and Treasury Regulations with regard to the issuance of certain debt issuances made by governmental entities. The IRS and bond rating agencies encourage issuers of debt obligations to adopt and implement a post-issuance debt compliance policy to ensure compliance against post-issuance violations. It is a sound management and financial practice for the City to monitor their debt obligations to ensure compliance with the IRS Code and Treasury Regulations. The attached policy and procedures have been drafted to help ensure compliance. In addition, staff has reviewed and updated the City's Fund Balance Policy as an outcome of the 2011 annual audit. 0724Debt and Fund Balance Policies III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The IRS and bond rating agencies encourage governmental entities to adopt and implement a post-issuance debt compliance policy. • It is the practice of the City of Richfield to follow established financial policies governing the City's practices related to fiscal management and debt management. • B. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES • N/A C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • N/A V. ATTACHMENTS • City of Richfield Fund Balance Policy • City of Richfield Post-Issuance Debt Compliance Policy VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None 3�- I FUND BALANCE POLICY City of Richfield Financial Policy Date: July 24,2012 Subject: Fund Balance Policy Introduction The City of Richfield has a fiduciary responsibility to its citizens and taxpayers to carefully account for public funds,to manage its finances prudently and to adequately plan the financing of City services including the provision and maintenance of public facilities. The City is also responsible for its short-term and long-term financial stability. The City must insure that it is, and will continue to be, capable of adequately funding and providing City services needed by the community. Governmental funds report the difference between their assets and liabilities as fund balance. Fund balance is one method used to measure the availability of financial resources in a governmental fund. It is essential that the City maintain adequate levels of fund balance to mitigate current and future risks, such as revenue shortfalls,unanticipated expenditures, and emergencies and to ensure stable tax rates, service levels, and adequate cash flows. Fund balance levels are a crucial consideration in long-term financial planning. This policy supersedes the previous policy adopted April 18,2005. I. SCOPE This fiscal policy provides the framework for the overall fiscal management of the fund balances for the City's governmental funds. Governmental funds include the general fund, special revenue funds, debt service funds, and capital project funds. Enterprise funds and internal service funds are not within the scope of this policy since they are not governmental funds. II. PURPOSE The purpose of this policy is to (1) improve clarity and consistency of the fund balance information provided; (2) establish targeted fund balance for the General Fund; and(3) define and integrate the City's fund balance policy for its governmental funds in compliance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and Governmental Accounting Standards Board(GASB) Statement No. 54,Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions. 3�- a III. FUND BALANCE REPORTING Fund balance for governmental funds should be reported in classifications that comprise a hierarchy based primarily on the extent to which the City is bound to honor constraints on the specific purposes for which amounts in those funds can be spent. The classifications are as follows: Restricted: A. Nonspendable—includes amounts that can not be spent because they are either (a)not in spendable form or(b) legally or contractually required to be maintained intact. The"not in spendable form"criterion includes items that are not expected to be converted to cash, for example, inventories and prepaid amounts. It also includes long-term receivables and property held for resale which are not otherwise restricted, committed or assigned. B. Restricted—amounts that can be spent only for specific purposes stipulated by external resource providers or creditors, enabling legislation, or constitutional provisions. Effectively,restrictions may be changed or lifted only with the consent of the resource provider. Unrestricted: C. Committed—amounts that can be used only for specific purposes determined by a formal action of the City Council,the City's highest level of decision- making authority. Commitments may be changed or lifted only by the City Council taking the same formal action that imposed the constraint originally. The action to commit should occur prior to the end of the reporting period,but the amount,if any,may be determined in the subsequent period. D. Assigned—includes amounts constrained by the City's intent to be used for specific purposes but are neither restricted nor committed. The City's intent should be expressed by the City's Finance Manager. The City Council authorizes the Finance Manager to determine the Assigned fund balance reflecting the City Council's intent to include(a) all remaining amounts(except for negative balances)in governmental funds other than the general fund,which are not classified as nonspendable,restricted or committed and(b) amounts in the general fund that are intended to be used for a specific purpose. Assignments which result in a deficit to the unassigned fund balance are not allowed. E. Unassigned—residual amounts in the general fund which have not been classified as nonspendable,restricted, committed or assigned. It is also used for other governmental funds with a negative fund balance. IV. FUND BALANCE CLASSIFICATION HIERARCHY When both restricted and unrestricted resources are available for use in the same fund, it is the policy of the City to use the most restricted resources first, and then as needed use the unrestricted resources. When unrestricted resources are available for use,they will be used in the following order: (first to last) committed; assigned; and unassigned. V. GENERAL FUND TARGETED FUND BALANCE The unassigned fund balance of the General Fund will fluctuate from year to year depending upon the overall results of operations compared to the budget. Budgets may vary from one year to the next as well. As a result the unassigned amount of the fund balance may be more than adequate one year but deficient in the next. Reacting to each year's variance should be thoughtful and deliberate. A. In order to achieve its purpose,this policy has the following objectives for the level of unassigned fund balance in the General Fund: 1. Provide for adequate and effective cash-flows,reducing/eliminating the need for short-term internal borrowing. Both the revenue and expenditure streams should be considered while determining the appropriate amounts of fund balance. A number of the City's anticipated operating revenues are not evenly received throughout the year. The City will need sufficient beginning fund balance to pay expenditures until these revenues are received. For example,the City's General Fund relies very heavily upon property tax revenues. They are received about 6 months into the fiscal year and again at the end of the year. Sufficient financial resources must be maintained until the next property tax revenue collection cycle. 2. Provide for temporary revenue shortfalls, such as reductions in State Aid revenues and reimbursements. 3. Provide financial stability and a positive trend of fund balance levels which will be a positive factor in our bond rating analysis. 4. Generate investment earnings on the fund balances which will provide a revenue source to the General Fund and in turn reduce pressure on the general operating tax levy. B. Targeted balance 1. The fund balance of the City's General Fund will strive to maintain an unassigned fund balance of an amount not less than 40%of the current year end actual General Fund revenues. The dollar amount of the target may fluctuate with each year's actual results. C. Replenishing and reducing the targeted stabilization fund balance 1. Deficits are to be avoided. Elimination of deficits in fund balance shall be addressed during the budget process. It is the intent of the City Council and this policy to address deficits and balances below the targeted amount within three budget years. The subsequent year's budget should address the method to eliminate the deficit. Methods may include but are not limited to using annual budget surpluses,transfers in from other funds and adjustment of other resources and budgets. Care will be exercised to maintain the integrity of the City's long-term financial plans when determining the method to be used to bring the fund balance back into conformance with the targeted balance. 2. Amounts in excess of the targeted balance may be utilized in subsequent years' budgets and/or transferred to other funds. Subsequent years' budgets and/or transfers out of the General Fund must be approved by the City Council. 3. The City Council may assign portions of the fund balance for other items such as City projects and/or improvements, emergency or unanticipated expenditures, etc. VI.OTHER GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS A. Special Revenue Funds—funds used to account for and report the proceeds of specific revenue sources that are restricted or committed to expenditure for specified purposes other than debt service or capital projects. The term proceeds of specific revenue sources establishes that one or more specific restricted or committed revenues should be the foundation for a special revenue fund. Accordingly,the fund balances of City Special Revenue funds will be considered as committed or restricted. B. Debt Service Funds—funds used to set aside resources to meet current and future debt service requirements on long-term debt. GAAP permits the use of debt service funds to account for the accumulation of resources for, and the payment of, long-term debt principal and interest. Sound financial management requires that the City account for each debt issue separately in its accounting system. Balances in individual debt service funds will be considered as restricted until such time as each fund's respective debt is paid in full. At that time any surplus or deficit remaining in the fund will be closed out to the Closed Bond Fund. 1. The fund balance of the Closed Bond Fund shall be considered as assigned. 2. Fund balances in the Bonds of 1973 Fund,which originally funded permanent streets in the City, shall be considered as committed to provide supplemental 34-5 financing to the General Fund for street maintenance projects as needed on an annual basis. C. Capital Project Funds—funds used to account for and report financial resources that are restricted, committed, or assigned to expenditure for capital outlays, including the acquisition or construction of capital facilities and other capital assets. Capital Project Funds that are provided funding by external resource providers, the fund balance in those funds will be considered restricted. Balances in the Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund shall be used only as directed by resolution of the City.As such balances in the fund will be considered as committed. Fund balances in other Capital Project Funds where amounts remain,but are neither restricted nor committed will be considered as assigned, consistent with the purpose of that specific fund. VII. AUTHORITY The Finance Manager is authorized to assign amounts within the fund balance of the City's governmental funds to be used for specific purposes in conformity with GAAP and GASB pronouncements and to be consistent with this policy and the intent of the City Council. Approved: /s/Steven L.Devich City Manager snv (f Post-Issuance Debt Compliance Policy City of Richfield Financial Policy Date: July 24, 2012 Subject: Post-Issuance Debt Compliance Policy Introduction The City Council (the "Council") of the City of Richfield, Minnesota (the "City") has chosen, by policy, to take steps to help ensure that all obligations will be in compliance with all applicable federal regulations. This policy may be amended, as necessary, in the future. Background The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is responsible for enforcing compliance with the Internal Revenue Code (the "Code") and regulations promulgated thereunder ("Treasury Regulations") governing certain obligations (for example: tax-exempt obligations, Build America Bonds, Recovery Zone Development Bonds and various "Tax Credit" Bonds). The IRS encourages issuers and beneficiaries of these obligations to adopt and implement a post-issuance debt compliance policy and procedures to safeguard against post-issuance violations. Post-Issuance Debt Compliance Policy Objective The City desires to monitor these obligations to ensure compliance with the Code and Treasury Regulations. To help ensure compliance, the City has developed the following policy (the "Post-Issuance Debt Compliance Policy"). The Post-Issuance Debt Compliance Policy shall apply to the obligations mentioned above, including bonds, notes, loans, lease purchase contracts, lines of credit, commercial paper or any other form of debt that is subject to compliance. Post-Issuance Debt Compliance Policy The Finance Manager of the City is designated as the City's agent who is responsible for post-issuance compliance of these obligations. The Finance Manager shall assemble all relevant documentation;r€cord-s- and activities required to ensure post-issuance debt compliance as further detailed in corresponding.procedures (the "Post-Issuance Debt Compliance Procedures"). At a minimum, the Post-Issuance Debt Compliance Procedures for each qualifying obligation will address the following: 3A -1 1. General post-issuance compliance; 2. Proper and timely use of obligation proceeds and obligation-financed property; 3. Arbitrage yield restriction and rebate; 4. Timely filings and other general requirements; 5. Additional undertakings or activities that support points 1 through 4 above; 6. Maintenance of proper records related to the obligations and the investment of proceeds of obligations; 7. Other requirements that become necessary in the future. The Finance Manager shall apply the Post-Issuance Debt Compliance Procedures to each qualifying obligation and maintain a record of the results. Further, the Finance Manager will ensure that the Post-Issuance Debt Compliance Policy and Procedures are updated on a regular and as needed basis. The Finance Manager or any other individuals responsible for assisting the Finance Manager in maintaining records needed to ensure post-issuance debt compliance, are authorized to expend funds as needed to attend training or secure use of other educational resources for ensuring compliance such as consulting, publications, and compliance assistance. Most of the provisions of this Post-Issuance Debt Compliance Policy are not applicable to taxable governmental obligations unless there is a reasonable possibility that the City may refund their taxable governmental obligation, in whole or in part, with the proceeds of a tax-exempt governmental obligation. If this refunding possibility exists, then the Finance Manager shall treat the taxable governmental obligation as if such issue were an issue of tax-exempt governmental obligations and comply with the requirements of this Post-Issuance Debt Compliance Policy. Private Activity Bonds The City may issue tax-exempt obligations that are "private activity" bonds because either (1) the bonds finance a facility that is owned by the City but used by one or ' more qualified 501(c)(3) organizations, or (2)the bonds are so-called "conduit bonds", where the proceeds are loaned to a qualified 501(c)(3) organization or another private entity that finances activities eligible for tax-exempt financing under federal law (such as certain manufacturing projects and certain affordable housing projects). Prior to the issuance of either of these types of bonds, the Finance Manager shall take steps necessary to ensure that such obligations will remain in compliance with the requirements of this Post-Issuance Debt Compliance Policy. In a case where compliance activities are reasonably within the control of a private party (i.e., a 501(c)(3) organization or conduit borrower), the Finance Manager may determine that all or some portion of compliance responsibilities described in this Post-Issuance Debt Compliance Policy shall be assigned to the relevant party. In the case of conduit bonds, the conduit borrower will be assigned all compliance responsibilities other than those required to be undertaken by the City under federal 5 A-$ law. In a case where the Finance Manager is concerned about the compliance ability of a private party, the Finance Manager may require that a trustee or other independent third party be retained to assist with record keeping for the obligation and/or that the trustee or such third party be responsible for all or some portion of the compliance responsibilities. The Finance Manager is additionally authorized to seek the advice, as necessary, of bond counsel and/or its financial advisor to ensure the City is in compliance with this Post-Issuance Debt Compliance Policy. Adopted this date July 24, 20120 by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM# 3B REPORT# 128 STAFF REPORT kil l lFir>>D CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 24, 2012 REPORT PREPARED BY: CHRIS REGIS,FINANCE MANAGER NAME,Tint. DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: �, 111 Ala SIGNA ) REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Adoption of a resolution authorizing the prepayment and redemption of the $750,000 Taxable G.O. Improvement Bonds, Series 1997, dated December 1, 1997. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the attached resolution providing for the prepayment and redemption of certain outstanding general obligation bonds of the City. II. BACKGROUND In 1997 the City issued the $750,000 Taxable G.O. Improvement Bonds, Series 1997 for the purpose of financing improvements as part of the Meridian Crossing project. The principal and interest due on the bonds has been paid from special assessments levied against the benefited properties. Over the life of the bond, the debt service fund has accumulated a cash balance that would allow the prepayment and redemption of the debt. Staff has requested Ehlers and Associates to review outstanding debt issues to determine if refunding or defeasance of bonds is feasible. Upon review of the 1997 issue, Ehlers &Associates, Inc. recommends the redemption and prepayment of the 1997 issue. The outstanding principal and interest due on February 1, 2013 is $82,600. It is planned to call the bonds on August 29, 2012. 0724Defesance 1997 Bonds The end result of the prepayment and redemption of this bond issue is a net present value savings of$2,195.56 to the City. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • It is the policy of the City to seek to reduce principle and interest expenses of outstanding debt issues wherever possible. Most often this is accomplished by seeking refunding opportunities during periods of low interest rates. B. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES • The prepayment and redemption on August 29, 2012 will allow the City to take advantage of savings on interest costs. C. FINANCIAL • On the basis of Ehlers &Associates, Inc. review, it appears it feasible to prepay and redeem the bond issue. • There is sufficient cash in the debt service fund to call the bonds early. • The total principal and interest due on February 1, 2012 is $82,600.00. By calling the bonds on August 29, 2012 the City will realize a savings of$2,195.56. • The par amount of the Series 1997 bonds which will be callable on August 29, 2012 is 80,000 and with accrued interest to August 29, 2012 of$40444 the total call amount is$80,404.44. D. LEGAL • Legal counsel has reviewed the reviewed the prepayment and redemption of the 1997 bonds. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • None IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Disregard the current call option, continue to retire the bonded debt as presently scheduled, and forego the projected savings. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution Providing for the prepayment and redemption of the $750,000 Taxable G.O. Improvement Bonds, Series 1997. • Exhibit A Notice of Call for Redemption • Prepayment Redemption Report VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Representative from Ehlers &Associates, Inc. RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE PREPAYMENT AND REDEMPTION OF CERTAIN OUTSTANDING GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS OF THE CITY BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows: 1. The City has previously issued and sold its Taxable General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1997, dated December 1, 1997 (the "Bonds"), in the aggregate principal amount of $750,000, of which $80,000 in principal amount is currently outstanding. Bonds maturing on or after February 1, 2006, are subject to call for prior redemption on February 1, 2005, or on any date thereafter at a price of par plus accrued interest. Redemption may be in whole or in part, and if in part, at the option of the City and in such order as the City will determine and within a maturity selected by Wells Fargo Bank, National Association (as successor in interest to Norwest Bank Minnesota, National Association), Minneapolis, Minnesota, acting as the registrar for the Bonds (the "Registrar"). Prepayments will be at a price of par plus accrued interest. 2. It is determined that it is in the best interests of the sound financial management of the City that Bonds maturing on February 1, 2013, comprising all of the Bonds subject to redemption, be prepaid and redeemed on August 29, 2012 (or on the first date thereafter for which the Registrar of the Bonds can provide proper notice to the holders of the Bonds), and those Bonds are hereby called for redemption on that date in the aggregate principal amount of$80,000. 3. The Registrar is authorized and directed to mail notice of call for redemption of the Bonds in the form attached hereto as EXHIBIT A to the registered owners of the Bonds to be redeemed at the address shown on the registration books kept by the Registrar. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 24th day of July, 2012. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: e Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk 30-a- EXHIBIT A NOTICE OF CALL FOR REDEMPTION $750,000 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS SERIES 1997 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, by order of the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota (the "City"), there have been called for redemption and prepayment on August 29, 2012 all outstanding bonds of the City designated as the Taxable General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1997, dated December 1, 1997, having a stated maturity date of February 1, 2013, totaling $80,000 in principal amount, and with the CUSIP number 763325 C54. The bonds are being called at a price of par plus accrued interest to August 29, 2012, on which date all interest on said bonds will cease to accrue. Holders of the bonds hereby called for redemption are requested to present their bonds for payment at the main office of Wells Fargo Bank, National Association (as successor in interest to Norwest Bank Minnesota, National Association), in the City of Minneapolis, Minnesota, on or before August 29, 2012, at the following address: Wells Fargo Bank, National Association Attention: Corporate Trust Operations 625 Marquette Avenue MAC N9311-115 Minneapolis, MN 55479 In compliance with the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003, the City is required to withhold a specified percentage of the principal amount of the redemption price payable to the holder of any Bonds subject to redemption and prepayment on the Redemption Date, unless the City is provided with the Social Security Number or Federal Employer Identification Number of the holder, properly certified. Submission of a fully executed Request for Taxpayer Identification Number and Certification, Form W-9 (Rev. December 2011), will satisfy the requirements of this paragraph. Dated: , 2012. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL By /s/ Steven Devich City Manager City of Richfield, Minnesota 3 5-3 City of Richfield Proposed August 29, 2012 Cash Defesance of $750,000 Taxable G.O. Improvement Bonds, Series 1997 Table of Contents Report Sources&Uses l Debt Service To Maturity And To Call 2 Debt Service Comparison 3 2012 Def Ser 97$750K GO I SINGLE PURPOSE I 7/12/2012 I 229 PM • EHLERS LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE City of Richfield Proposed August 29, 2012 Cash Defesance of $750,000 Taxable G.O. Improvement Bonds, Series 1997 Sources & Uses Dated 08/29/2012 I Delivered 08/29/2012 Sources Of Funds Par Amount of Bonds $80,404.44 Total Sources $80,404.44 Uses Of Funds Deposit to Current Refunding Fund 80,404.44 Total Uses $80,404.44 • 2012 Def Ser 97$750K GO I SINGLE PURPOSE I 7/12/2012 I 2:29 PM 0 EHLERS LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE Page 1 313-9. City of Richfield $750,000 Taxable G.O. Improvement Bonds, Series 1997 Debt Service To Maturity And To Call Refunded Refunded Refunded Date Bonds Interest WS To Call Principal Coupon Interest WS 08/29/2012 80,000.00 404.44 80,404.44 - - - - 02/01/2013 - - - 80,000.00 6.500% 2,600.00 82,600.00 Total $80,000.00 $404.44 $80,404.44 $80,000.00 - $2,600.00 $82,600.00 Yield Statistics Base date for Avg.Life&Avg.Coupon Calculation 8/29/2012 Average Life 0.422 Years Average Coupon 7.6973684% Weighted Average Maturity(Par Basis) 0.422 Years Refunding Bond Information Refunding Dated Date 8/29/2012 Refunding Delivery Date 8/29/2012 . Ser 97$750K GO Taxable I I SINGLE PURPOSE I 7/12/2012 I 2:29 PM 111:411 EHLERS LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE Page 2 City of Richfield Proposed August 29, 2012 Cash Defesance of $750,000 Taxable G.O. Improvement Bonds, Series 1997 Debt Service Comparison Net New Old Net Date Total P+I D/S DIS Savinos 02/01/2013 80,404.44 80,404.44 82,600.00 2,195.56 Total $80,404.44 $80,404.44 $82,600.00 $2,195.56 PV Analysis Summary(Net to Nets Net PV Cashflow Savings @ 0.000%(Escrow Yield)... 2,195.56 Net Present Value Benefit $2,195.56 Net PV Benefit/$82,600.00 PV Refunded Debt Service 2.658% Net PV Benefit/ $80,000 Refunded Principal... 2.744% Net PV Benefit/ $80,404 Refunding Principal.. 2.731% Refunding Bond Information Refunding Dated Date 8/29/2012 Refunding Delivery Date 8/29/2012 2012 Def Ser 97$750K GO I SINGLE PURPOSE I 7/12/2012 I 2:29 PM leill EHLERS LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE Page 3 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM# 3C REPORT# 129 =Al STAFF REPORT R rc r rr i r i r) CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 24, 2012 REPORT PREPARED BY: CHRIS REGIS,FINANCE MANAGER NAME,TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: 4a) REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: i ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Adoption of a resolution authorizing the refunding of the $3,470,000 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds, Series 2003C, dated December 30, 2003 with the $2,560,000 Taxable G.O. Tax Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 2012B. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the attached resolution providing preliminary approval to the defeasance, redemption, and prepayment of the City's Taxable General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 2003C, dated December 30, 2003. II. BACKGROUND In 2003 the City issued the $3,470,000 Taxable G.O. Tax Increment Bonds, Series 2003C to refund the City's $4,840,000 Taxable General Obligation Temporary Tax Increment Bonds, Series 2003k The 2003A bonds were issued to provide financing for various public improvements within the Lyndale Gateway West Tax increment Financing District. With interest rates continuing to be at historical lows, staff has requested Ehlers & Associates, Inc. to review this bond issue to determine if refunding was feasible at this time. Upon review of this bond issue, Ehlers &Associates, Inc. recommends undertaking a bond refunding to take advantage of the low interest rates. 0724Refunding 2003C Bonds The type of refunding being presented is a crossover refunding. In a crossover refunding, bonds are issued in advance of a specified call date. The proceeds of the issue are invested in government securities and held in escrow. The money in the escrow account is used to pay interest on the new issue until the call date. At the call date, the funds in the escrow are then used to prepay the bonds to be called. The City would then begin to make payments on the newly issued "refunding bonds." Accordingly, the Series 2012B bonds are being issued to provide funds sufficient for a crossover refunding on February 1, 2014, of all of the City's callable Taxable G.O. Tax Increment Bonds, Series 2003C, dated December 30, 2003. The par amount of the Series 2003C bonds to be called on the call date is $2,400,000. Staff estimates that the result of this crossover refunding will be a reduction of $219,615 in principle and interest costs to the City. This represents a present value savings of 7.08% of the refunded principle. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • It is the policy of the City to seek to reduce principle and interest expenses of outstanding debt issues wherever possible. Most often this is accomplished by seeking refunding opportunities during periods of low interest rates. B. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES • The sale of the refunding bonds at this time will allow the City to take advantage of the low interest rates and realize savings. C. FINANCIAL • On the basis of Ehlers &Associates, Inc. review, it appears that the current interest rate climate makes it feasible to refund the bond issue. • The current outstanding principal balance of the 2003C bonds is $2,705,000. The City will continue to make the principal and interest payments up to and on the crossover refunding date. • The $2,560,000 Taxable G.O. Tax Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 2012B are being issued to provide funds for a crossover refunding on February 1, 2014, on all of the City's callable Taxable G.O. Tax Increment Bonds, Series 2003C. The par amount of the Series 2003C bonds which will be callable on February 1, 2014 total $2,400,000, which will have maturities on February 1 in the years 2015 through 2025. • It is estimated that this refinancing under current rates would reduce the principle and interest costs of paying this debt by approximately $219,615. • This savings expressed in present value terms is around 7.08% of the refunded principal. The minimum savings required by Minnesota state law for an advanced refunding is a present value savings of 3.00%. • It is the intent of the City to continue to use tax increment revenues from the Lyndale Gateway West Tax Increment Financing District to pay the debt service. • The bonds are being issued for a 13-year period; this does not extend the term of the original issue. The maturity date of the new refunding issue will be the same as the current outstanding issue. D. LEGAL • Only one crossover refunding of the Series 2003C bonds is legally allowed. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • None IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Disregard the current refunding option, continue to retire the bonded debt as presently scheduled, and forego the projected savings. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution Providing Preliminary Approval to the Defeasance, Redemption, and Prepayment of the City's Taxable General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 2003C. • Presale Report VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Representative from Ehlers &Associates, Inc. 3C- I RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION PROVIDING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO THE DEFEASANCE, REDEMPTION, AND PREPAYMENT OF THE CITY'S TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 2003C BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows: 1. It is hereby determined that: (a) The City and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield (the "Authority") previously established the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area (the "Project Area") pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 through 469.047 (the "Act"). The City has duly established Lyndale Gateway West Tax Increment Financing District (the "TIF District") within the Project Area pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 to 469.179 (the "TIF Act"). (b) On December 30, 2003, the City issued its Taxable General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 2003C (the "Bonds"), in the original aggregate principal amount of $3,470,000, pursuant to Section 469.178 of the TIF Act. Proceeds of the Bonds were used to (i) refund the City's Taxable General Obligation Temporary Tax Increment Bonds, Series 2003A, issued in the original aggregate principal amount of$4,840,000; and (ii) finance additional redevelopment costs related to the Project Area as set forth in the tax increment financing plan for the TIF District. (c) The Bonds are currently outstanding in the aggregate principal amount of$2,705,000, and Bonds maturing on or after February 1, 2015 are subject to optional redemption on February 1, 2014, or any day thereafter, at a price of par plus accrued interest. 2. The City Council hereby provides its intention to defease, redeem, and prepay the outstanding Bonds and shall meet at 7:00 PM on August 13, 2012, in order to adopt a resolution calling the Bonds for redemption and setting forth the terms of the defeasance, redemption, and prepayment of the Bonds. 3. The officers and employees of the City are hereby authorized to cooperate with Ehlers & Associates, Inc., the financial advisor to the City, and Kennedy & Graven, Chartered, as bond counsel, to the City in order to carry out the defeasance, prepayment, and redemption of the Bonds. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 24th day of July, 2012. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk _ Debt Issuance Services July 24, 2012 Pre-Sale Report for $2,560,000 Taxable General Obligation Tax . Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 2012B City of Richfield, Minnesota Prepared and Presented by Rebecca Kurtz RICHFIELD Financial Advisor, CIPFA And • Brian Reilly Financial Advisor, CIPFA www.ehlers-inc.com 0 E H L E RS Minnesota phone 651-697-8500 3060 Centre Pointe Drive LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE Offices also In Wisconsin and Illinois fax 651-697-8555 Roseville,MN 55113-1122 toll free 800-552-1171 3C _ _ Debt Issuance Services ~� Executive Summary of Proposed Debt Proposed Issue: $2,560,000 Taxable General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding Bonds,Series 2012B Authority: The TIF Bonds are being issued pursuant to Minnesota Statues, Chapter 469 and 475.Because the City paying for at least 20%of the project costs with TIF from the Lyndale Gateway West Tax Increment Financing District (Kennsington development), the Bonds can be a general obligation without a referendum and will not count against the City's debt limit. In the past, tax increment has paid 100 percent of the debt service, and based on current conditions, it is projected that the TIF District will continue to generate increment to support the debt service. Purposes/Funding Sources: The proposed issue includes financing for the following purposes: • Refunding the $3,470,000 Taxable General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds,Series 2003C for interest savings Interest rates on the obligations proposed to be refunded are 5.0%to 5.5%. The refunding is expected to reduce interest expense by approximately $219,615 over the next 13 years. The Net Present Value Benefit of the refunding is estimated to be $179,565, equal to 7.08%of the refunded principal. This refunding is considered an Advance Refunding as the new Bonds will be issued more than 90 days prior to the call date of the obligations being refunded. Term/Call Feature The Bonds are being issued for a 13 year term. Principal on the Bonds will be due on February 1 in the years through 2015 - 2025. Interest is payable every six months beginning February 1 2013. The term of the Bonds is not being extended. The Bonds maturing February 1, 2022, and thereafter will be subject to prepayment at the discretion of the City on February 1,2021 or any date thereafter. Because the Bonds are taxable obligations they will not be designated Bank Qualification as"bank qualified"obligations. Presale Report July 24, 2012 City of Richfield, Minnesota Page 1 _ Debt Issuance Services Rating: The City's most recent bond issues were rated"AA+"by Standard& Poor's. The City will request a new rating for the Bonds. If the winning bidder on the Bonds elects to purchase bond insurance, the rating for the issue may be higher than the City's bond rating in the event that the bond rating of the insurer is higher than that of the City. Method of Sale/Placement: In order to obtain the lowest interest cost to the City, we will solicit competitive bids for purchase of the Bonds from local banks in your area and regional underwriters. We have included an allowance for discount bidding equal to 1.2%of the principal amount of the issue. The discount is treated as an interest item and provides the underwriter with all or a portion of its compensation in the transaction. If the Bonds are purchased at a price greater than the minimum bid amount (maximum discount), the unused allowance may be used to lower your borrowing amount. Review of Existing Debt: We have reviewed all outstanding indebtedness for the City and find that there are no other refunding opportunities at this time. We will continue to monitor the market and the call dates for the City's outstanding debt and will alert you to any future refunding opportunities. Continuing Disclosure: Because the City has more than $10,000,000 in outstanding debt (including this issue) and this issue is over$1,000,000, the City will be agreeing to provide certain updated Annual Financial Information and its Audited Financial Statement annually as well as providing notices of the occurrence of certain "material events" to the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (the "MSRB"), as required by rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The City is already obligated to provide such reports for its existing bonds,and has contracted with Ehlers to prepare and file the reports. Arbitrage Monitoring: The Bonds are taxable obligations and are therefore not subject to IRS arbitrage and yield restriction requirements. 0 Presale Report July 24, 2012 City of Richfield, Minnesota Page 2 Debt Issuance Services Proposed Debt Issuance Schedule Pre-Sale Review by Council: July 24,2012 Distribute Official Statement: Week of July 24,2012 Conference with Rating Agency: Week of July 30,2012 City Council Meeting to Award Sale of the Bonds: August 13,2012 Estimated Closing Date: Mid-September 2012 Attachments Sources and Uses of Funds Proposed Debt Service Schedule Refunding Savings Analysis Resolution Authorizing Ehlers to Proceed With Bond Sale Ehlers Contacts: Financial Advisors: Rebecca Kurtz (651)697-8516 Brian Reilly (651)697-8541 Bond Analyst: Wendy Lundberg (651)697-8540 Bond Sale Coordinator: Alicia Aulwes (651)697-8523 Financial Analyst: Brian Shannon (651)697-8515 The Official Statement for this financing will be mailed to the City Council at their home address or e- mailed for review prior to the sale date. Presale Report July 24, 2012 City of Richfield, Minnesota Page 3 LP City of Richfield $2,560,000 Taxable G.O. Refunding Bonds, Dated: September 1, 2012 Proposed Advance Refunding of Taxable G.O.TIF Bonds, Series 2003C Current"AA"Taxable Rates Table of Contents Report Sources&Uses 1 Prior Original Debt Service 2 Debt Service Schedule 3 Debt Service Comparison 4 Crossover Escrow Fund Cashflow 5 10 xover Ser 03C$3.47M T 1 10 xover Ser 03C$3.47M T 1 6/28/2012 I 2:30 PM ,ree LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE City of Richfield $2,560,000 Taxable G.O. Refunding Bonds, Dated: September 1, 2012 Proposed Advance Refunding of Taxable G.O. TIF Bonds, Series 2003C Current"AA"Taxable Rates Sources & Uses Dated 09/01/20121 Delivered 09/01/2012 Sources Of Funds Par Amount of Bonds $2,560,000.00 Total Sources $2,560,000.00 Uses Of Funds Total Underwriter's Discount(1.200%) 30,7201)0 Costs of Issuance 45,0001)0 Deposit to Crossover Escrow Fund 2,482,505.15 Rounding Amount 1,774.85 Total Uses $2,560,000.00 10 xover Ser 03C$3.47M T I 10 xover Ser 03C$3.47M T 61282012 I 2:30 PM E -I LE R ► LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE Page 1 City of Richfield $3,470,000 Taxable G.O. Tax Increment Bonds, Series 2003C Prior Original Debt Service Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total 02/01/2013 150,000.00 5.000% 59,398.96 209,398.96 209,398.96 08/01/2013 - - 67,528.75 67,528.75 - 02/01/2014 155,000.00 5.000% 67,528.75 222,528.75 290,057.50 08/01/2014 - - 63,653.75 63,653.75 - 02/01/2015 165,000.00 5.000% 63,653.75 228 653.75 292,307.50 08/01/2015 - - 59,528.75 59,528.75 - 02/01/2016 175,000.00 5.000% 59,528.75 234,528.75 294,057.50 08/01/2016 - - 55,153.75 55,153.75 - 02/01/2017 185,000.00 5.125% 55,153.75 240,153.75 295,307.50 08/01/2017 - - 50,413.13 50,413.13 - 02/01/2018 195,000.00 5200% 50,413.13 245,413.13 295,826.26 08/01/2018 - - 45,343.13 45,343.13 - 02/01/2019 205,000.00 5250% 45,343.13 250,343.13 295,68626 08/01/2019 - - 39,961.88 39,961.88 - 02/01/2020 215,000.00 5.300% 39,961.88 254,961.88 294,923.76 08/01/2020 - - 34,26438 34,264.38 - 02/01/2021 225,000.00 5.375% 34,26438 259,264.38 293,528.76 08/01/2021 - - 28,217.50 28,217.50 - 02/01/2022 240,000.00 5.400% 28,21750 268,217.50 296,435.00 08/01/2022 - - 21,73750 21,737.50 - 02/01/2023 250,000.00 5.400% 21,73750 271,737.50 293,475.00 08/01/2023 - - 14,98750 14,987.50 - 02/01/2024 265,000.00 5.500% 14,98750 279,987.50 294,975.00 08/01/2024 - - 7,700.00 7,700.00 - 02/01/2025 280,000.00 5.500% 7,700.00 287,700.00 295,400.00 Total $2,705,000.00 - $1,036,379.00 $3,741,379.00 - Yield Statistics Base date for Avg.Life&Avg.Coupon Calculation 9/01/2012 Average Life 7.143 Years Average Coupon 5.3637022% Weighted Average Maturity(Par Basis) 7.143 Years Refunding Bond Information Refunding Dated Date 9/01/2012 Refunding Delivery Date 9/01/2012 Ser 03C$3.47M Taxable GO I SINGLE PURPOSE I 6/28/2012 I 2:30 PM EHLERS LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE Page 2 3c-9 City of Richfield $2,560,000 Taxable G.O. Refunding Bonds, Dated: September 1, 2012 Proposed Advance Refunding of Taxable G.O.TIF Bonds, Series 2003C Current"AA"Taxable Rates Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+i Fiscal Total 09/01/2012 - - - - - 02/01/2013 - - 26,612.50 26,612.50 26,612.50 08/01/2013 - - 31,935.00 31,935.00 - 02/01/2014 - - 31,935.00 31,935.00 63,870.00 08/01/2014 - - 31,935.00 31,935.00 - 02/01/2015 210,000.00 1.150% 31,935.00 241,935.00 273,870.00 08/01/2015 - - 30,727.50 30,727.50 - 02/01/2016 215,000.00 1.350% 30,727.50 245,727.50 276,455.00 08/01/2016 - - 29,276.25 29,276.25 - 02/01/2017 215,000.00 1.550% 29,276.25 244,276.25 273,552.50 08/01/2017 - - 27,610.00 27,610.00 - 02/01/2018 220,000.00 1.800% 27,610.00 247,610.00 275,220.00 08/01/2018 - - 25,630.00 25,630.00 - 02/01/2019 225,000.00 2.300% 25,630.00 250,630.00 276,260.00 08/01/2019 - - 23,042.50 23,042.50 - 02/01/2020 230,000.00 2.550% 23,042.50 253,042.50 276,085.00 08/01/2020 - - 20,110.00 20,110.00 - 02/01/2021 235,000.00 2.800% 20,110.00 255,110.00 275,220.00 08/01/2021 - - 16,820.00 16,820.00 - 02/01/2022 245,000.00 3.050% 16,820.00 261,820.00 278,640.00 08/01/2022 - - 13,083.75 13,083.75 - 02/01/2023 245,000.00 3.250% 13,083.75 258,083.75 271,167.50 08/01/2023 - - 9,102.50 9,10250 - 02/01/2024 255,000.00 3.450% 9,102.50 264,10230 273,205.00 08/01/2024 - - 4,703.75 4,703.75 - 02/01/2025 265,000.00 3.550% 4,703.75 269,703.75 274,407.50 Total $2,560,000.00 - $554,565.00 $3,114,565.00 - Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars $19,571.67 Average Life 7.645 Years Average Coupon 2.8335093% Net Interest Cost(MC) 2.9904709% True Interest Cost(TIC) 2.9850804% Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 2.8068630% All Inclusive Cost(AIC) 3.2513069% IRS Form 8038 Net Interest Cost 2.8335093% Weighted Average Maturity 7.645 Years 10'cover Se:03C$3.47M T 110'cover Ser 03C$3.47M T I 6/282012 I 2 30 PM .- E H LE RS Page 3 LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE 3c- ID City of Richfield $2,560,000 Taxable G.O. Refunding Bonds, Dated: September 1, 2012 Proposed Advance Refunding of Taxable G.O. TIF Bonds, Series 2003C Current"AA"Taxable Rates Debt Service Comparison Const Loan Date Total P+I Pmt Existing D/S Net New D/S Old Net D/S Savings 02/01/2013 26,612.50 (26,612.50) 209,398.96 207,624.11 209,398.96 1,774.85 02/01/2014 63,870.00 (2,463,870.00) 2,690,057.50 290,057.50 290,057.50 - 02/01/2015 273,870.00 - - 273,870.00 292,307.50 18,437.50 02/01/2016 276,455.00 - - 276,455.00 294,05750 17,602.50 02/01/2017 273,552.50 - - 273,552.50 295,307.50 21,755.00 02/01/2018 275,220.00 - - 275,220.00 295,82626 20,606.26 02/01/2019 276,260.00 - - 276,260.00 295,68626 19,426.26 02/01/2020 276,085.00 - - 276,085.00 294,923.76 18,838.76 02/01/2021 275,220.00 - - 275,220.00 293,528.76 18,308.76 02/01/2022 278,640.00 - - 278,640.00 296,435.00 17,795.00 02/01/2023 271,167.50 - - 271,167.50 293,475.00 22,307.50 02/01/2024 273,205.00 - - 273,205.00 294,975.00 21,770.00 02/01/2025 274,407.50 - - 274,407.50 295,400.00 20,992.50 Total $3,114,565.00 (2,490,482.50) $2,899,456.46 $3,521,764.11 $3,741,379.00 $219,614.89 PV Analysis Summary(Net to Net) Gross PV Debt Service Savin 1 s. 179 56455 Net PV Cashflow Savings @ 2.807%(Bond Yield).».. 179,56455 Contingency or Rounding Amount. 1,774.85 Net Present Value Benefit $181,33940 Net PV Benefit/$2,651,43142 PV Refunded Debt Service 6.839% Net PV Benefit/$2,400,000 Refunded Principal... 7.556% Net PV Benefit/$2,560,000 Refunding Principal.. 7.084% Refunding Bond Information Refunding Dated Date 9/012012 Refunding Delivery Date 9/012012 • 10 xover Ser 03C$3.47M T I 10 xover Ser 03C$3.47M T I 6/28/2012 I 2:30 PM 0 EHLERS LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE Page 4 II City of Richfield $2,560,000 Taxable G.O. Refunding Bonds, Dated: September 1, 2012 Proposed Advance Refunding of Taxable G.O. TIF Bonds, Series 2003C Current"AA"Taxable Rates Crossover Escrow Fund Cashflow Date Principal Rate Interest Receipts Disbursements Cash Balance 09/01/2012 - - - 0.15 - 0.15 02/01/2013 24,276.00 0.140% 2,337.10 26,613.10 26,612.50 0.75 08/01/2013 29,088.00 0.200% 2,846.74 31,934.74 31,935.00 0.49 02/01/2014 2,429,141.00 0.230% 2,793.51 2,431,934.51 2,431,935.00 - Total $2,482,505.00 - $7,97735 $2,490,48250 $2,490,482.50 - Investment Parameters Investment Model[PV,GIC,or Securities] Securities Default investment yield target Bond Yield Cash Deposit 0.15 Cost of Investments Purchased with Bond Proceeds 2,482,505.00 Total Cost of Investments $2,482,505.15 Target Cost of Investments at bond yield $2,395,209.98 Actual positive or(negative)arbitrage (87,295.17) Yield to Receipt 0.2293670% Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 2.8068630% State and Local Government Series(SLGS)rates for 6/272012 10 xover Ser 03C$3.47M T 110 xover Ser 03C$3.47M T 6/28/2012 I 2:30 PM EHLERS LEABERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE Page 5 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM# 3D REPORT# 130 STAFF REPORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 24, 2012 KAREN BARTON, COMMUNITY REPORT PREPARED BY: DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANT DIRECTOR j NAME,TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR E31 REVIEW: /L • rir e REVIEWED BY CITY 1 MANAGER: / it ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a resolution authorizing the submittal of a grant application to the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) for pedestrian access improvements in the Lakes at Lyndale area. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Adopt the attached resolution authorizing the submittal of a grant application to the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) for pedestrian access improvements in the Lakes at Lyndale area. II. BACKGROUND The Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) is currently accepting Redevelopment Grant applications from local governments to induce private development. The program is funded with $3 million and can include eligible private and public redevelopment costs. The applicant is required to pay for at least 50% of the eligible costs; however, the matching funds can come from private development associated with the project. The adjacent property developers (Michael Development and Lyndale Gardens LLC) have agreed to provide these matching funds. 07242012 Resolution authorizing DEED Grant Application Eligible grant-funded activities include acquisition, demolition, interior abatement, infrastructure improvements (i.e., water and sewer, sidewalks, lights, roads, etc.), ponding, and environmental infrastructure. Given the current development of the 94-unit Lyndale Plaza Apartments (6401 Lyndale Avenue) and the pending redevelopment of the former Lyndale Garden Center site (6400 Lyndale Avenue), staff has determined that improved pedestrian accessibility and safety at 64th Street and Lyndale Avenue is a priority. The proposed improvements would include improved pedestrian crossings, sidewalks, and lighting. Grant applications must be submitted by August 1, 2012 and must include a resolution from the City authorizing and supporting the submission. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • It is prudent to seek outside funding whenever practical. B. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES • The grant application is due August 1, 2012. • City resolution authorizing the application must be submitted with the application. C. FINANCIAL • A local match of 50% is required. Michael Development and Lyndale Gardens LLC have pledged this match. D. LEGAL • The program guidelines for this grant require the City Council to pass a resolution in support of the application. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Do not adopt resolution. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • N/A 3J- 1 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AFFIRMING AND RATIFYING CITY'S STAFF SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION AND COMMITTING LOCAL MATCH AND AUTHORIZING CONTRACT SIGNATURE TO THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (DEED) FOR REDEVELOPMENT GRANT FUNDS FOR THE LAKES AT LYNDALE AREA AT 64TH STREET AND LYNDALE AVENUE WHEREAS, the City of Richfield (the "City") is a city located within Hennepin County and is therefore eligible to access the Redevelopment Grant Fund; and WHEREAS,the City has the institutional, managerial and financial capability to ensure adequate project administration; and WHEREAS, the City certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws and regulations as stated in the contract agreements; and NOW, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Richfield act as the legal sponsor for the project contained in the Contamination Cleanup Grant Program submitted on August 1, 2012 and that the City Manager is hereby authorized to apply to the Department of Employment and Economic Development for funding of this project on behalf of the City of Richfield; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Richfield has the legal authority to apply for financial assistance, and the institutional, managerial, and financial capability to ensure adequate project administration; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the sources and amounts of the local match identified in the application are committed to the project identified; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Richfield has not violated any Federal, State or local laws pertaining to fraud, bribery, graft, kickbacks, collusion, conflict of interest or other unlawful or corrupt practice, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that upon approval of its application by the State, the City of Richfield may enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota for the above-referenced project(s), and that the City of Richfield certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws and regulation as stated in all contract agreements; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute such agreements as are necessary to implement the project on behalf of the applicant. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 24th day of July, 2012. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM# 3E REPORT# 131 A*, STAFF REPORT RICI Irl.u, CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 24, 2012 JIM TOPITZHOFER,RECREATION SERVICES REPORT PREPARED BY: DIRECTOR NAME,TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Ei AN / Uf � "�/ =ice REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: � ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of award of contract to Metro Elevator, Inc. to perform repairs to the existing elevator located at the Richfield Community Center in the amount of$35,335 as required by State code. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the award of contract to Metro Elevator, Inc. to perform repairs to the existing elevator located at the Richfield Community Center in the amount of$35,335 as required by State code. II. BACKGROUND The Community Center Elevator has been out of service since May 25. Metro Elevator suspended repairs shortly afterward when they discovered a faulty control board caused by water damage. The control board is obsolete which triggered an inspection by the State. The elevator and circuit board is original equipment and was installed 33 years ago as an addition to the Community Center when the City took possession of the building from the County. State code pertaining to elevators has changed significantly since the elevator was installed. Now that a new control board is necessary, State code required a renovation of the entire elevator including the following to be furnished and installed: 0724CommunityCenterElevatorContract • Car travel lantern with directional arrows • ADA compliant hand-set phone • Numbers on backside of entrance doors • Emergency signage • Instructions in Braille • Hydraulic control system • Battery lowering system • Solid state motor starter assembly • All electrical wiring • Pit stop switch and other electrical components Three quotes were received for the above work, with the lowest quote offered by Metro Elevator in the amount of$35,335. In addition to the above work, a dedicated air conditioning unit (HVAC) is required for the elevator pit which will be installed by a separate company. Midwest Elevator offered the lowest quote on this work in the amount of$15,317. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • Under the City's Purchasing and Spending Authority Policy, contracts or purchase from $25,000 to $100,000 must be approved by the City Council. • If the amount of the contract is estimated at$100,000 or less, the contact or purchase may be made either upon quotation or in the open market in the discretion of the governing body. If the contract or purchase is made upon quotation, it shall be based on at least two quotations. Three quotes were received and Metro Elevator offered the lowest price. • There are no publication or notification requirements that apply to this action. B. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES • The elevator is essential to the operation of the Community Center and is used on a regular basis by persons with mobility challenges. Renovation of the elevator should be accomplished before September 1 when Fall programming is in full swing. C. FINANCIAL • Funding for the renovation of the elevator will come from a residual balance of Special Revenue funds approved through the Capital Improvement Budget and Transitory Ordinance process for the purpose of park and recreation related projects. The residual balance is an outcome of prior year budgeted project costs being less than originally budgeted. • Quotes were received from the following companies: 1. Metro Elevator $35,335* 2. All City Elevator $45,211 3. Otis Elevator $60,249 * lowest quote and recommended contract • Other costs associated with this project which are not included in the attached contract include the installation of a dedicated HVAC system for the elevator in the amount of$15,317 and initial repairs to the control board in the amount of$3,175. D. LEGAL • The City Attorney has reviewed the attached contract and will be available for discussion at the meeting. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • None IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Council may choose to direct staff to seek additional quotes on the required elevator, or abandon the project. If the project is abandoned, the City will not be able to operate the elevator at the Community Center. V. ATTACHMENTS • Contract with Metro Elevator, Inc. . VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None I ELEVATOR,INC. DATE: July 3,2012 SUBMITTED TO: Mr.Jim'Breviu Richfield Community Center 7000 Nicollet Avenue South Richfield,MN 55423 EQUIPMENT TO One Hydraulic.Passenger Elevator BE COVERED: LOCATION OF Richfield Community Center EQUIPMENT: 7000 Nicollet Avenue South Richfield,MN 55423 As you are aware,the main controller printed circuit board and a few of the controller components were damaged by water,resulting in operational problems with the elevator.As you are also aware,we were informed by the manufacturer of the controller,Virginia Controls,that they no longer carry replacement boards or perform repairs to the boards for the controller installed at the Richfield Community Center. As agreed to,Metro Elevator:sent the board to an electronics company specializing in the repair of existing elevator printed circuit boards with the understanding that there was no guarantee in the outcome of the repairs made to boards as the testing facility has no means to test the boards after the repairs have been made. As it turns out,the visual damage on the board was successfully repaired.However,after placing the elevator back into operation,we observed other operational problems resulting from non-visual damage to the board making it very difficult,if not impossible,to repair. We are therefore, recommending that the complete obsolete control system and associated equipment be replaced. Below is a listing of the work we are recommending for the elevator in order to properly restore operation while reusing many of the other elevator system components.Please keep in mind that although the materials that are being retained appear to be in fair operating condition,much of the equipment has exceeded the average designed useful life of 20-25 years and consideration should be given for future replacement of those materials.The work we are recommending is as follows: 1721 Mainstreet Hopkins, MN 55343 • p 952.932.9868•f 952.935.4985 •www.MetroElevatorinc.com 3 -a CAR EQUIPMENT Furnish and install a new-car travel lantern fixture with directional arrows and the 1-2 stroke feature required by code. Remove the existing hand-set phone and install an ADA compliant hands free telephone in the existing telephone cabinet. Test and repair existing emergency light unit,as required. CARIROISTWAY DOOR EQUIPMENT Furnish and install numbers on backside of the entrance doors and fascia,per coder HOISTWAY EQUIPMENT Furnish and install Appendix"0"emergency signage at each landing adjacent to hall station fixtures. Furnish and install Braille on both sides of each entranceway frame at the required handicap height. MACHINE ROOM EQUIPMENT Furnish and install a new non-proprietary simplex,single automatic pushbutton collective solid state hydraulic control system including battery lowering software and the necessary features required by code. Remove the existing older style battery lowering device which is no longer working and replace with a newer style battery lowering system. Remove the existing mechanical starter and replace with a solid state motor starter assembly. Furnish and install car wining,machine room wiring,hoistway wiring, car top and bottom wiring and car traveling cable. Perform a full load safety test and complete safety test report. Install code data tag,per code. PIT EQUIPMENT Furnish and install pit stop switch. Furnish and install a code compliant ladder in.the elevator pit. CAR TOP EQUIPMENT Furnish and install cross head data tag. Furnish and install car top inspection station equipped with the required features,including GFCI outlet and car top light,with guard. Furnish and install hoistway selector package,including limit switches,leveling switches,door zone switches,directional switches,vanes and related hardware. Innstall electrical switch on existing car top emergency exit. CAR BOTTOM EQUIPMENT Furnish and install a code compliant platform toe guard assembly.. PRICING FOR ELEVATOR WORK DESCRIBEDABOVE All work listed above will be performed for the sum of Thirty-Five-Thousand,Three Hundred Thirty-Five and NO/100($35,335.00). Our price includes a 12-month of warranty on those materials installed under this partial upgrade. The above-quoted price does not include associated building work that will be required as part of this project. All work is to be performed during regular working hours of the elevator trade. PAYMENT TERMS FOR ELEVATOR WORK Payment terms are as follows: If the price exceeds$2,000.00 a down payment of 20%of price shall be paid 12-weeks prior to the start of project,25%due upon delivery of materials and start of project.Full payment shall be made on completion of the work if the work is completed within a thirty day period. If the work is not completed within a thirty day period,monthly progress payments shall be made based on the value of any materials ready or delivered,if any,and labor performed through the end of the month. Payments not received within thirty days of the date of the invoice shall be subject to interest accrued at the rate of 18%per year or at the maximum rate allowed by law,whichever is less; We shall also be entitled to reimbursement from you of the expenses,including attorney's fees, incurred in collecting any overdue payments. It is understood this Repair Order is submitted for acceptance within 30 days from date executed by us. Your acceptance of this Repair Order and its approval by an executive officer of Metro Elevator,Inc.will constitute exclusively and entirely the agreement for the service herein described. No other changes in or additions to this agreement will be recognized unless made in writing and properly executed by both parties. This proposal is hereby accepted: Management Company -4tif _...040111111 Olt*4Af Management Representative 'a a 41 Modernization Sales Specialist Title Title July 3.2012_ Date Date AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM# 3F REPORT# 132 STAFF REPORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 24, 2012 REPORT PREPARED BY: JIM TOPITZHOFER,RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR NAME,TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: 0 , /r_ / • uf REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: / ,,., ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of award of contract to Midwest Elevator and Drilling to perform the installation of an air conditioning unit to the existing elevator located at the Richfield Community Center in the amount of$15,317 as required by State code. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the award of contract to Midwest Elevator and Drilling to perform the installation of an air conditioning unit to the existing elevator located at the Richfield Community Center in the amount of $15,317 as required by State code. II. BACKGROUND The Community Center Elevator has been out of service since May 25. Metro Elevator suspended repairs shortly afterward when they discovered a faulty control board caused by water damage. The control board is obsolete which triggered an inspection by the State. The elevator and circuit board is original equipment and was installed 33 years ago as an addition to the Community Center when the City took possession of the building from the County. State code pertaining to elevators has changed significantly since the elevator was installed. Now that a new control board is necessary, State code required a renovation of the entire elevator including the 0724CommunItyCenterElevatorHVACcontract installation of a dedicated air conditioning unit(HVAC), related clean-up costs and electrical wiring. Two quotes were received for the above work, with the lowest quote offered by Midwest Elevator and Drilling in the amount of$15,317. In addition to the above work, a dedicated air conditioning unit, the following renovation work is also required for the elevator car and hydraulic system which will be installed by a separate company: • Car travel lantern with directional arrows • ADA compliant hand-set phone • Numbers on backside of entrance doors • Emergency signage • Instructions in Braille • Hydraulic control system • Battery lowering system • Solid state motor starter assembly • All electrical wiring • Pit stop switch and other electrical components Metro Elevator offered the lowest quote on this work in the amount of$35,335. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • Under the City's Purchasing and Spending Authority Policy, contracts or purchases from $1,000 to $25,000 must be approved by the division manager, department director, finance director and the City Manager. • If the amount of the contract is estimated at$25,000 or less, the contact or purchase may be made either upon quotation or in the open market in the discretion of the governing body. If the contract or purchase is made upon quotation, it shall be based on at least two quotations. Two were received and Midwest Elevator and Drilling offered the lowest price. • There are no publication or notification requirements that apply to this action. B. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES • The elevator is essential to the operation of the Community Center and is used on a regular basis by persons with mobility challenges. Renovation of the elevator should be accomplished before September 1 when Fall programming is in full swing. C. FINANCIAL • Funding for the renovation of the elevator will come from a residual balance of Special Revenue funds approved through the Capital Improvement Budget and Transitory Ordinance process for the purpose of park and recreation related projects. The residual balance is an outcome of prior year budgeted project costs being less than originally budgeted. • Quotes were received from the following companies: 1. Midwest Elevator $15,317* 2. Ultimate Construction Services $15,724 * lowest quote and recommended contract • Other costs associated with this project which are not included in the attached contract include renovation work on the elevator car in the amount of$35,335 and initial repairs to the control board in the amount of$3,175. D. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • None. E. LEGAL • The City Attorney has reviewed the attached contract and will be available for discussion at the meeting. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Council may choose to direct staff to seek additional quotes on the required elevator, or abandon the project. If the project is abandoned, the City will not be able to operate the elevator at the Community Center. V. ATTACHMENTS • Contract with Midwest Elevator and Drilling VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None 3F- I 5680 County Rd 10 N ` P#952.928.4202 ( DWEST+ELEVATQR Wacon ia,MN 55387 " E fax 866-429.5049 DS�ILLYT+iG: "� Elevator Modernization Related Work Quote To: Jim @ Richfield Community Center Date: 7.17.12 Quote: 20120244RW Project : Richfield Community Center, 7000 Nicollet Ave, Richfield, MN Description.: Related work for the modernization of one elevator with 2 stops. Midwest will supply all labor, materials, equipment and General contracting for any subcontractors needed to perform work related to mechanical, fire service or electrical as needed for this quote. We will use Local 9 union employees to perform all elevator related work. Work to be performed is based on elevator contractor specifications Hoistway/Pit Patch holes and voids inside h.oistway Tape all sheetrock as needed Fire rating for fixture penetrations Wire and install new GFI in pit on dedicated circuit Wire and install new florescent light with guard Move light switch, light or GFI No hoistway vent is included Machine room Signage as needed Door and hardware are acceptable for fire code Patch all holes, cracks and penetrations Install and wire a split AC unit that is thermostatically controlled Condenser unit to be Inside building and within 30' Wire temperature control Install phone wire piping to new controller connection and line service by others Wire and Install GFI Wire and Install new florescent lights with guards Wire and install dedicated circuit for elevator machine room Wire and install car light circuits with lockable disconnect Bonded ground for elevator controller to primary building ground Main line disconnect will meet code Remove all non-elevator related electrical from machine room ** Any low voltage wire to be removed by others ** HP of new motor to remain the same. If different there will be an Increase In price ** Add$500 for battery lowering 1 of 2 bid Richfield Community Center RW.xlsx 3F- a ** Add$700 to clean and seal machine room walls Lobbies ** Repair fixture openings to paint ready.status. All cutting and patching work assumes that there is no lead paint present. If lead paint is encountered there will be an increase in price Smoke detection system No fire or smoke systems is included in this bid Subject to approval by Fire Marshall No emergency power Is included in this bid Elevator company to supply all car top time for this project at no cost to Midwest. Midwest has calculated that our work within the hoistway will be about 4 hours. These are hours we will be working in the hoistway,but not necessarily what we need for car top time. The amount of car top time required will be based on the readiness of the elevator contractor to move the car periodically,haul materials,spot the car as needed or run the car continually to accomplish our work We would estimate car top time to be between 2 and 4 hours. Each elevator contractor must determine car top time based on company policy,their willingness to interrupt their elevator crews work schedule and industry standards. Midwest is a licensed elevator contractor and can perform car top time. if you choose to have Midwest perform all car top time, Add: $600.00 Elevator Contractor must allow Midwest's union employees time to run elevator for hoistway work Midwest will perform all work described above for: $13,517.00 * ` Exceptions and alternates Quote is good for 60 days from document date Acceptance of quote requires 25% down, signature and P.O. Percentage of work completed will be billed on a monthly basis all work must be completed by 12/31/12 To accept this proposal sign, date&add a P0. A down payment invoice will be sent upon receipt Thanks, Mark Stan:Bret Signature Date Company P.O Terms Net 30 2 of.2 bid Richfield Community Center RW.xisx AGENDA SECTION: ORDINANCES AGENDA ITEM# 5 REPORT# 133 , STAFF REPORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 24, 2012 Imminkw REPORT PREPARED BY: KRISTIN ASHER, CITY ENGINEER NAME,TIRE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR Er 4111"„ REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY / r MANAGER: ,�`; � �%ice __ _ ______ ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of,second reading of an ordinance amendment related to the enforcement of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District's Stormwater Management Rule. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: 1. Approve the second reading of an amended ordinance related to Minnehaha Creek Watershed District's Stormwater Management Rule. 2. Approve resolution for summary publication of an ordinance amendment to Section 429. II. BACKGROUND Maintaining Regulatory Authority Much of the eastern section of Richfield falls within the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). The City has sole regulatory authority within city boundaries with respect to MCWD's Erosion Control, Floodplain Alteration, Wetland Protection and Stormwater Management Rules. In order to maintain regulatory authority of the Stormwater Management Rule, the attached City Ordinance must be adopted by the City Council. Memorandum of Understanding The MCWD rules apply to properties within the watershed district boundaries even without the adoption of the proposed amendments. On July 14, 2009 the City 07242012StormOrdinance Council approved a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the MCWD and the City allowing the City to maintain exercising sole regulatory authority within City boundaries with respect to matters subject to regulation under MCWD's Erosion Control, Floodplain Alteration, Wetland Protection and Stormwater Management Rules. As part of the MOU agreement the City also agreed to update the City Ordinances and Zoning Code to comply with the Districts rules. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District's 2011 Rule The proposed code amendments support the following 2011 MCWD regulation changes within the area of MCWD's jurisdiction: • Required management activities are based on size and disturbance area (previously size and type of project) • Takes into count changes in impervious cover • Built upon non-degradation for phosphorus • Has added a volume control component in certain cases Subd. 5. Financial Assurance Staff is recommending that the proposed Financial Assurance subdivision be adopted citywide. The Financial Assurance subdivision allows the City to require a performance bond, letter of credit, or other financial assurance for any project that requires installation of a stormwater best management practice in order to assure proper construction and maintenance will be completed as part of the project. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The proposed ordinance amendments are consistent with the Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Richfield and MCWD. B. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES • In accordance with the MOU approved in 2009, the City agreed to amend and/or adopt ordinances to be consistent with the MCWD Rules within 180 days of adoption by the District.. C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL • The proposed ordinance amendments were prepared by the City Attorney. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • The MCWD strives to protect, improve and manage surface waters and affiliated ground water resources within the District. The proposed ordinance amendments support this mission. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • The Council may choose not to approve the second reading of the amended ordinance and direct staff on how to proceed. V. ATTACHMENTS • Proposed Amendment to Water Resource Management Ordinance Subsection 429.05. • Resolution for Summary Publication • Watershed District Map VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None anticipated. 5- I CITY OF RICHFIELD ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT; AMENDING SUBSECTION 429.05 OF THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. Subsection 429.05 of the Richfield City Code is amended as follows: 429.05. Stormwater Management for Land Altering Activities. Subdivision 1. Administration. The city council hereby designates the Director of Public Works as the administrator of this section. Subd. 2. Application. Stormwater management plans shall be reviewed and approved under the existing building permit review process. The applicant must include the requirements of this section in the plans submitted as part of the building permit review. Subd. 3. Activities Subject to Stormwater Management Regulations Outside of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. The following table I outlines those activities that require no permit and those activities that require permits for stormwater management as outlined in the city's comprehensive surface water management plan for various development and redevelopment activities outside of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District: Table I Requirements No permit BMPs Water Water Project quantity quality control control a) Single-family home X construction b) Construction on less X than 2 acres w/density of less than or equal to 2 acres c) Residential subdivision X between 2 and 8 acres d) Residential subdivision X X between 8 and 20 acres 400631v1 CLL RC145-364 1 Requirements No permit BMPs Water Water Project quantity quality control control e) Residential subdivision X X X greater than or equal to 20 acres f) Multi-unit residential X development w/ less than 8 units/acre g) Multi-unit residential X development greater than 2 acres and less than 5 acres h) Multi-unit residential X X development greater than or equal to 5 acres and less than 8 acres i) Multi-unit residential X X X development greater than 8 acres j) Commercial, industrial, X institutional, or mixed use development of less than %2 acre k) Commercial, industrial, X X institutional, or mixed use development of greater than '/ acre and less than 8 acres I) Commercial, industrial, X X X institutional, or mixed use development of greater than 8 acres m) Maintenance, X improvement, or construction of public or private road, street, highway, sidewalk, trail, other linear project or parking lot that does not result in net increase in impervious surface 400631v1 CLL RC145-364 2 Requirements No permit BMPs Water Water Project quantity quality control control n) Maintenance, X improvement, or construction of public or private road, street, highway, sidewalk, trail, other linear project or parking lot that results in net increase in impervious surface of less than 1 acre o) Maintenance, X X improvement, or construction of public or private road, street, highway, sidewalk, trail, other linear project or parking lot that results in net increase in impervious surface of greater than 1 acre and the project area is less than 5 acres p) Maintenance, X X X improvement, or construction of public or private road, street, highway, sidewalk, trail, other linear project or parking lot that results in net increase in impervious surface of greater than 1 acre and the project area is more than 5 acres a. Stormwater runoff discharge rates may not exceed the existing conditions for the 1-, 10-, and 100-year storm events. If the increase in imperviousness is 50% or greater, the discharge rate requirements must be based on pre-development conditions. 400631v1 CLL RC145-364 3 b. Stormwater runoff to a landlocked area that cannot handle the increased runoff must maintain runoff volumes to the existing conditions. c. Water quality control facilities must remove 50% of the phosphorous on an annual average removal basis. d. Stormwater ponds must have a 10-foot, 10:1 bench, two feet of freeboard, and must remove floatables from a 1-year event. e. Sidewalks and trails that do not exceed 10 feet in width and are bordered by a pervious buffer of at least 5 feet on each side are not included in calculations for net increase in impervious surface. f. Water quality and quantity provision requirements may be waived by the administrator if a downstream facility is in place or will be constructed and the facility is designed to accommodate the stormwater runoff from the project. g. The requirements of this ordinance may be waived by the administrator or board of adjustments and appeals if it is determined that meeting the requirements of this subsection on site is not feasible. Subd. 4. Stormwater Management Regulations in the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District ("MCWD"). In the area of the jurisdiction of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. no one may create new or replace existing pervious surface or chan•e the contours of a •arcel of land in a wa that affects the direction_•eak rate volume or water •uali of runoff flows from the •arcel or subdivide a parcel of one acre or more in size into three or more lots without first submitting a stormwater management plan to the city Director of Public Works and securing a permit from the city approving the plan. a. New development. redevelopment, subdivision of land and linear transportation projects must comply with ap•licable re•uirements of the MCWD Stormwater Management Rule. b. Activities that are exempt from the MCWD Stormwater Management Rule are exempt from this section. c. An a• •licant must meet the re•uirements of and •rovide a stormwater management plan that includes all information required by. the MCWD Stormwater Management Rule unless otherwise directed by the Director of Public Works. • 400631v1 CLL RC145-364 4 Subd. 5. Financial Assurance. The city may require a performance bond, letter of credit or other financial assurance for any project that requires installation of stormwater best management practices. The financial assurance shall be maintained until the stormwater best management practice has been constructed and stabilized. Subd. 6. Compliance with Plan and Maintenance of Facilities. a. Projects shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the approved stormwater management plan and any conditions imposed by the city. b. All stormwater management structures and facilities must be designed for maintenance access and proberl maintained in perpetuity to assure that they continue to function as designed. Permit applicants must provide a maintenance plan that identifies and protects the design. capacity and functionality of onsite and offsite stormwater management facilities: specifies the methods. schedule and responsible parties for maintenance; provides for the maintenance in perpetuity of the facility; and contains a satisfactory maintenance declaration. Subd. 47. Construction Standards. The design and construction criteria for stormwater management plans outlined in the city's surface water management plan and the MPCA "Protection Water Quality in Urban Areas" shall be utilized as the construction standards for these regulations. These criteria are on file in the city engineering office. Section 2. This ordinance is effective in accordance with section 3.09 of the Richfield City Charter. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk 400631v1 CLL RC145-364 5 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO SECTION 429 OF THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE WHICH PERTAINS TO STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS WHEREAS, the City has adopted the above referenced amendment to the Richfield City Code; and WHEREAS, the verbatim text of the amendment is cumbersome, and the expense of publication of the complete text is not justified. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield that the following summary is hereby approved for official publication: SUMMARY PUBLICATION BILL NO. 2012 AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS; AMENDING SUBSECTIONS 429.05 OF THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE. This summary of the ordinance is published pursuant to Section 3.12 of the Richfield City Charter. The purpose of this ordinance is to amend City Code to provide stormwater management guidance related to land disturbing activities consistent with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District rules. The code amendments support water quality protection requirements related to land disturbing activities of at least one acre in size within the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. The amendment also includes a citywide subdivision requiring financial assurance for any project that requires a best management practice to be completed. Copies of the ordinance are available for public inspection in the Public Works Department during normal business hours or upon request by calling Kristin Asher at 612- 861-9795. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 24th day of July, 2012. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk g S 5 3 a . ., a S S 5 5 �^r 3 5 n n ' O a XERXES b 4 XERXES WASHBURNt P y - WASHBURN O VINCENT VINCENT ' O UPTON y 2r'o UPTON N THOMAS f 1 THOMAS 0 O SHERIDAN EE RUSSELL ill SHERIDAN 0 O RUSSELL E ii- -. QUEEN 4 QUEEN PENN -i PENN OLIVER OLIVER NEWTON i€1 NEWTON Q MORGAN II MORGAN O O LOGAN u - $ ¢ LOGAN p N Mlil KNOX 7 � KNOX JAMES - g JAMES IRVING 7 < _ IRVING - 3711) HUMBOLDT IR RD O HUMBOLDT -• OGIRARD `� R¢3 _ GIRARD O FREMONT - K - 1 9 FREMONT EMERSON $ - '� v EMERSON DUPONT - DUPONT 2,O311..liliiip COLFAX COLFAX f/(//fin L BRYANT lJ yJ�n Ei IO BRYANT • 03 u � it O ALDRICH - - ALDRICH LYNOALE - Z 117 LYNDALE I� GARFIELD -- _ O if GARFIELD 77f i 3 a ` 'HP a. HARRIET - C - --- - -- i,-' i!3 HARRIET q -fi. GRAND 6 -.i - GRAND Y PLEASANT - - PLEASANT PILLSBURY - - - it PILLSBURY WENTWORTH qi 211 ¢ i± WENTWORTH BLAISDELL - ii ADO ill BLAISDELL CO NICOLLET NICOLLET 1st q g 1st STEVENS STEVENS CID 2nd 2nd IIIMS 3rd lit 3rd Cln CLINTON '41 CLINTON 4th ypi ,---../Tail 4th 5th , 13-0 5th CD PORTLAND t 51' PORTLAND OAKLAND 5 a. PARK L. 4 OAKLAND in i l : D PARK COLUMBUS L F Q COLUMBUS CHICAGO {�(1 CHICAGO ELLIOT /\ ELUOT 10th Gf/'VJ 10th • 11th iii 11th Cn 2th 12th rigaiM 13th 13th 14th 14th ■• 15th 2 s 15th 0 BLOOMINGTON BLOOMINGTON 1 ,8th a i1- •j4 a 16th 17th 'a a :12 17th Cin Nt Dm C C r K z 7J23 m 7 CD ai = o Z d m o CD CD x v iiiiiir.._" g s g n g s 5 n 18th CEDAR AR Z AGENDA SECTION: RESOLUTIONS AGENDA ITEM# 6 REPORT# 134 STAFF REPORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 24, 2012 REPORT PREPARED BY: BETSY OSBORN, SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER NAarE TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ,/ A r_ REVIEWED BY CITY V, _ �[ _ MANAGER: / � ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a disciplinary hearing and resolution regarding civil enforcement for several alcohol establishments in Richfield that recently underwent alcohol compliance checks conducted by Richfield Public Safety staff, and failed by selling alcohol to underage youth. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Conduct a disciplinary hearing for the licensed establishments who failed an alcohol compliance check and approve the attached resolution for first time violating establishments: • Suspending the license to sell alcohol for five (5) consecutive days, and; • Levying a fine against the establishments in the amount of $1000 and; • Requiring a meeting with the Public Safety Director to present an individual establishment plan to ensure eliminating any future actions of this kind, and; • Requiring a manager to attend an alcohol compliance and sales awareness presentation conducted by a private firm, approved by Public Safety with all costs to be paid by the establishment. 07/24/12ALCOHOL II. BACKGROUND On June 9, 2012, Richfield Public Safety staff conducted alcohol compliance checks at all of the establishment's in Richfield that sell alcohol. They were assisted by three underage youth that were all 19 years of age. These compliance checks were the first compliance checks conducted in 2012. The businesses that sold alcohol to underage youth on June 9, 2012 are: • El Jalapeno Market— 1430 East 66th Street • Patrick's French Bakery—2928 West 66th Street • Super America —7500 Lyndale Avenue South III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY ■ It is a violation of Minnesota State Statute and City ordinance to sell alcohol to underage youth. • Resolution 9511 specifies certain improper conduct of alcohol license holders and delineates the progressive discipline that can be expected when violations occur, such as the sale of alcohol to minors. B. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES • Staff recommends that the City Council suspend the license to sell alcohol for five (5) consecutive days and levy a fine against the establishments in the amount of$1,000 for the first violation. Staff is also proposing that the first time violating establishments attend a mandatory meeting with the Public Safety Director to present their individual establishment's plan to ensure eliminating any future actions of this kind. In addition, one staff member, preferably the manager, must attend an alcohol compliance and sales awareness presentation conducted by a private firm, approved by Public Safety, with all costs to be paid by the establishment. These requirements must be met by August 24, 2012. C. FINANCIAL • The fine being recommended at this time is intended to recover 100% of the costs for conducting the compliance checks and to penalize the businesses punitively. Compliance checks will continue to occur in the future. D. LEGAL • N/A E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • N/A N. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS) • The Council may consider taking more or less severe action against the establishments that sold alcohol to underage youth; however, that would deviate from the guidelines set for progressive discipline in Resolution No. 9511. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution for El Jalapeno Market. • Resolution for Patrick's French Bakery. • Resolution for Super America. • Summary information for alcohol compliance failures. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • A representative from the establishments is expected to be in attendance at the City Council meeting and have been notified in writing regarding the meeting date. RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION SUSPENDING THE OFF-SALE 3.2 MALT LIQUOR LICENSE FOR EL JALAPENO MARKET, 1430 EAST 66TH STREET, AND IMPOSING A CIVIL PENALTY FOR FIRST TIME ALCOHOL COMPLIANCE FAILURE WHEREAS, El Jalapeno Market ("Licensee") holds an Off-Sale 3.2 Malt Liquor License from the City of Richfield; and WHEREAS, on June 9, 2012 the City of Richfield Public Safety Department conducted a compliance check of the Licensee's establishment; and, during the compliance check, an employee of the Licensee sold alcohol to a minor and; WHEREAS, this is their first alcohol compliance check failure and; WHEREAS, the Licensee appeared before the Richfield City Council on July 24, 2012 and admitted the violation and stipulated to the penalty imposed by this resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield as follows: 1. The Licensee's Off-Sale 3.2 Malt Liquor License are hereby suspended for a period of five (5) consecutive days, commencing on a date to be determined by the Public Safety Director, but to take place within 30 days after their Council appearance. 2. A civil penalty of$1,000 is hereby imposed. On or before August 24, 2012, the Licensee shall deliver a check or money order payable to the City of Richfield in the amount of$1;000. 3. Meet with the Director of Public Safety by August 24, 2012 to present a written action plan to ensure future compliance. 4. One staff member, preferably the manager, must attend an alcohol compliance and sales awareness presentation conducted by a private firm, approved by Public Safety, with all costs to be paid by the establishment. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 24th day of July 2012. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk X RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION SUSPENDING THE ON-SALE WINE AND 3.2 PERCENT MALT LIQUOR LICENSE FOR PATRICK'S FRENCH BAKERY, 2928 WEST 66TH STREET, AND IMPOSING A CIVIL PENALTY FOR FIRST TIME ALCOHOL COMPLIANCE FAILURE WHEREAS, Patrick's French Bakery ("Licensee") holds an On-Sale Wine and 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License from the City of Richfield; and WHEREAS, on June 9, 2012 the City of Richfield Public Safety Department conducted a compliance check of the Licensee's establishment; and, during the compliance check, an employee of the Licensee sold alcohol to a minor and; WHEREAS, this is their first alcohol compliance check failure and; WHEREAS, the Licensee appeared before the Richfield City Council on July 24, 2012 and admitted the violation and stipulated to the penalty imposed by this resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield as follows: 1. The Licensee's On-Sale Wine and 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License are hereby suspended for a period of five (5) consecutive days, commencing on a date to be determined by the Public Safety Director, but to take place within 30 days after their Council appearance. 2. A civil penalty of$1,000 is hereby imposed. On or before August 24, 2012, the Licensee shall deliver a check or money order payable to the City of Richfield in the amount of$1,000. 3. Meet with the Director of Public Safety by August 24, 2012 to present a written action plan to ensure future compliance. 4. One staff member, preferably the manager, must attend an alcohol compliance and sales awareness presentation conducted by a private firm, approved by Public Safety, with all costs to be paid by the establishment. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 24th day of July, 2012. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk Lo -3 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION SUSPENDING THE OFF-SALE 3.2 MALT LIQUOR LICENSE FOR SUPER AMERICA, 7500 LYNDALE AVEUE SOUTH, AND IMPOSING A CIVIL PENALTY FOR FIRST TIME ALCOHOL COMPLIANCE FAILURE WHEREAS, Super America ("Licensee") holds an Off-Sale 3.2 Malt Liquor License from the City of Richfield; and WHEREAS, on June 9, 2012 the City of Richfield Public Safety Department conducted a compliance check of the Licensee's establishment; and, during the compliance check, an employee of the Licensee sold alcohol to a minor and; WHEREAS, this is their first alcohol compliance check failure and; WHEREAS, the Licensee appeared before the Richfield City Council on July 24, 2012 and admitted the violation and stipulated to the penalty imposed by this resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield as follows: 1. The Licensee's Off-Sale 3.2 Malt Liquor License are hereby suspended for a period of five (5) consecutive days, commencing on a date to be determined by the Public Safety Director, but to take place within 30 days after their Council appearance. 2. A civil penalty of$1,000 is hereby imposed. On or before August 24, 2012, the. Licensee shall deliver a check or money order payable to the City of Richfield in the amount of$1,000. 3. Meet with the Director of Public Safety by August 24, 2012 to present a written action plan to ensure future compliance. 4. One staff member, preferably the manager, must attend an alcohol compliance and sales awareness presentation conducted by a private firm, approved by Public Safety, with all costs to be paid by the establishment. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 24th day of July, 2012. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk SUMMARY INFORMATION FOR DISCIPLANARY HEARING FOR FAILED ALCOHOL COMPLIANCE CHECKS • Richfield Public Safety staff made arrangements for the minor to enter the establishments with undercover police officers. In three instances, an underage youth was served alcohol. In two instances identification was asked for and shown. In one instance it was not shown. • This is the first offense for El Jalapeno Market, Patrick's French Bakery and Super America. Their license will be suspended for five (5) consecutive days and they will be fined $1,000 for the first violation. • At no time did the minors consume any of the alcohol. The youth presented their ID and at no time attempted to convince anyone that they were of legal age. Establishments were visited at a variety of times, busy or not busy, in an effort to determine if busy times produced more successful buys. It doesn't appear to have made a difference at either time. • After each attempt, successful or unsuccessful, the officers identified themselves to the server and issued them a citation if they failed. If the underage youth was unsuccessful in securing alcohol, the clerk was congratulated by officers for doing a good job. The employee that sold alcohol will be charged criminally in court. The action being taken today is for civil enforcement and penalties against the business that holds a license to sell alcohol within the City. • Civil enforcement penalties taken in the past by the City Council against several establishments have been severe. This was done to send a message to the establishments and the community that the Council will not tolerate this type of violation to continue in the community and that Richfield youth and their well-being are highly valued. • Citizen representatives of the Richfield Advisory Board of Health support severe actions against establishments in an effort to protect the youth of the community and to send a message that youth and their well-being are a high priority in this City. • All costs of conducting compliance checks will be reimbursed through the fines that are levied against an establishment for failing an alcohol compliance check. to— Executive Summary for Alcohol Compliance Failures for June 9, 2012 Failed Business: El Jalapeno, 1430 E. 66th St. This is the first offense for El Jalapeno. Technically, it is a fourth offense, however due to the step back option (two consecutive compliance check passes) it is considered a first offense. Previous failures occurred on November 18, 1999, July 14, 2001 and June 8 2004. The server at El Jalapeno asked to see ID and ID was shown by the underage youth. Failed Business: Patrick's French Bakery, 2928 W. 66th St. This is the first offense for Patrick's French Bakery. Technically, it is considered a second offense, however due to the step back option (two consecutive compliance check passes) it is considered a first offense. A previous failure occurred on October 9, 2009. The server asked for ID and ID was shown. The server at Patrick's French Bakery asked to see ID and ID was shown by the underage youth. Failed Business: Super America, 7500 Lyndale Avenue South This is the first offense for Super America. Technically, it is the third offense, however due to the step back option (two consecutive compliance check passes) it is considered a first offense. Previous failures occurred on November 18, 1999 and May 24, 2005 . The server did not ask to see ID. The server at Super American did not ask to see the ID of the underage youth and, therefore the ID was not shown.